Arminian Calvinist Universalist: Right ways to teach these vs Wrong ways inconsistent with the Bible

[emilynghiem]

Dear MaxGrit PostmodernProph ninja007 emilynghiem and mediating friends
instead of the threads trying to condemn whole teachings or groups merely by label or parts in opposition,
I am starting this thread for each person to lay out their OWN belief systems so we can see the points,
and to explain their objections to the other systems point by point.

I will start with some observations I have made about my beliefs
and the different denominational splits, where SOME ways of teaching
this may be wrong, but SOME ways may be right. And we can go through
and eliminate conflicting points, and just agree on the Consistent points
that match what we see as truth in the Bible and Christianity.

I believe there are good teachings within these systems that help
us clarify and enforce what we should follow by the Bible,
while we are all concerned about conflicting teachings that appear to contradict the Bible.

So let's compare both, for the purpose of CREDITING the good points that we all agree
are consistent and true, while correcting the errors or conflicts where we agree something is amiss.

the purpose is to uplift each other and restore faith in the truth
and use the different ways to help enforce these like a secondary witness
to the same truths. the more witnesses we have to the same truths this helps build consensus.

I will start by posting what I believe and have observed,
both right wrong conflicting or consistent
with
Constitutional beliefs
Buddhism
Universalism

and ask you to do the same
first starting with your OWN beliefs
and systems so you can explain what you believe
and how this helps to clarify and enforce truths
in the Bible Christianity and betterment of humanity.

thank you please post freely here
Yours truly,
Emily

 

[emilynghiem]

Constitutional beliefs

I believe the Constitutional laws reflect natural laws given by God that actually apply
universally to all people, but the Constitutional version literally only applies to US.
The concepts are universal and apply to human nature in general which is given by God.

every person inalienable has free will or free exercise of religion or beliefs,
with the limit being to respect the same freedom and peace of others so there
is equal justice under laws. so that's why free exercise of religion is stated
within the same law as the right of the people peaceably to assemble
to petition for redress of grievances. Everyone has equal rights to
freedom and peace/security provided we respect the same for others,
and only where we violate these and commit crimes or abuses we
may suffer losses of liberty to pay debts or damages we incur to others to restore justice.

Three approaches I have seen to Constitutional laws
A. depending on only Congress and Courts to decide the laws
and whatever they decide is automatically Constitutional
until Courts or Congress change otherwise

some people believe the Constitution itself only has
authority where they consent to it, so unless they are
stopped by force of law they can pass anything by
majority rule or by judicial ruling and this is counted as law
because it went through the legal channels

B. putting the Constitution first as the default
similar to the Bible, where unless it is expressly
stated there, federal govt does not have authority
unless Amendments are passed to change the Constitution

this is like the fundamentalists who may even believe
certain past acts or agencies are not Constitutional and
should be revoked by proper actions by the people

some people hold these beliefs so religiously as inherent,
that imposing certain laws or acts they believe were never
authorized, amounts to religious discrimination by creed
to punish or force people to recognize such laws against their beliefs

C. anarchists and other people whose spiritual beliefs in putting God
first may transcend either A or B and see all people as under God's
spiritual laws or natural laws first, and God may override either A or B.
these people are still under either the spiritual laws of God or the
natural laws of God, and can still be held to respect consent of
others under "free exercise of religion" so neither of these groups
excludes each other or imposes their ways on each other.
Some of the immigration reform church ministries believe in
this level and end up overriding the laws under A and B.

I believe in consensus on laws so we can accommodate
all these ways without disrespecting someone's beliefs.
But we must respect consent of others equally.

So I believe in mediation and conflict resolution
to use free speech, free press, and right to petition
to resolve grievances and disputes to form
consensus on laws that include protect and
represent people of all these views without discrimination.

laws I recommend for public education and mediation assistance:
ethics-commission.net
Bill of Rights plus Fourteenth AMendment
code of ethics for govt service 10 articles
local police procedures and local
homeowners and civic association
ordinances so all districts work out
their own conflicts and make decisions
together include procedures for law
enforcement, conflict resolution,
screening and counseling for
criminal issues to reduce civil and criminal violations and abuses
that otherwise violate equal protection of laws.

 

[emilynghiem]

Universalist beliefs

Wrong ways I have seen this taught
1. I have seen universal salvationists teach that hell is nonexistent
because they don't believe in God's punishment or as eternal. Carlton
Pearson is probably the most tragic example, because I
believe he is right in spirit what he is TRYING to say
that hell can be overcome, but saying hell does not exist
is the worst way to say it, because it alienates people
by contradicting the Bible instead of clarifying it.

2. I have seen people saying that all religions
and paths will lead to God's truth WITHOUT
specifying how Christ Jesus is still key
unique critical and universal to fulfill these paths.
So this is what causes the rejection by confusing
it with teaching that anything will get you there.

3. The Unitarian Universalists attempt to
spell out the common truths and principles
that unite and cover humanity regardless of religion,
but curiously enough they reject the Trinity.
So how can you expect to be universal
and reject the Trinity that people believe in.
this makes no sense to me especially when
I foudn the Trinity represented in the UU creed
(as well as in Buddhism and presented this
to a UU fellowship as a presentation, even
pointing out the UU principles include
laws that follow the Trinity) see http www.houstonprogressive.org

Ways I teach Universality that I believe
are more consistent with the Bible
and include all beliefs and laws
as governed by and fulfilled in Christ Jesus

1. the Trinity is universal
and found in all beliefs and systems of law
even philosophy and psychology.
See list I made for a presentation
that is outdated and not perfect
but shows a basic outline I was working on
and have since refined from this old draft:
Dear Friends Please help spread the following ideas the outline ends at III.D.3. . ACTUA

since man is made in the image of God
then man's laws are made in the image of God's laws
they reflect the same trinity of body/mind/spirit

so it is both true
that man made up images and laws
to try to define God and God's laws,
and that God's spiritual and natural laws
INSPIRED the laws of man as the Source.

both are true, not either or

both secular gentiles are right
and the believers in sacred scripture are right
and the point is for us to join in agreement
by Christ or by conscience to establish
one truth, by consensus and harmony
between God's laws and man's laws

Christ Jesus is authority of Equal Justice
fulfilling both laws of God and of man as one in spirit and accord.

2. how is salvation universal and still fills description in the Bible

Although I am not God and cannot explain the mechanics of the whole process of
how salvation and redemption works through Christ to save souls

I agree with the description in the Bible of
how "the devil beast and false prophet"
are thrown into the lake of fire and burned forever.

I believe this removes the evil from the souls
that are saved in Christ Jesus, so the process
in the Bible is still fulfilled.

in both Buddhism and Christianity there is an understanding
of generation curses, sins or karma passed down from
the father unto the fourth and fifth generations.

what one person doesn't forgive and give to Christ
causes a chain reaction of suffering that passes
down and affects future generaitons.

so several souls can be trapped by the same
sins and the sin of unforgiveness added on top.

when the final generation in this chain
does receive Christ and submit to prayer
all the sins on their conscience, then through
prayers Christ Jesus can witness to souls
across time and space and reach out to save them.

All the people I have heard of being saved from
demonic sickess addiction and curses first
got help because a family member or friend
prayed first, then God created an oening to
reach that person, and then their whole
generational past was also prayed for to
be given to Christ.

So even though the sins past down,
Christ authority can still remove these
and take them away. So the souls
are freed but the responsibility for the
sins is either taken on by Christ or
by the future generations who prayed.

The souls can still suffer proportionally
to what they contributed to the sins
and the chain of karma, but eventually
are freed by Christ Jesus authority
given permission to intervene by
future generations carrying the cross.

i trust in God through Christ to complete
this salvation process, and fulfill the
descriptions and stages in the Bible,
in whatever timeframe or manner God
means by these symbolic patterns
and steps, and trust that God will get
his way that not a soul be lost but
that all will be saved in Christ Jesus.

the evil will be removed and the evil
will be destroyed, but man made in the
image of God is not evil but good, so
God will separate out the evil and
remove that so the souls will be
rejoined in Christ and saved.

3. I also believe that forgiveness is spiritual
but restitution for physical wrongs and damages
is still owed. it is not a condition for forgivness
but a consequence.

so another wrong way to teach salvation
is that it magically removes responsibilty
to follow laws that require restitution.

spiritual forgiveness and grace is given freely
and salvation is not earned by conditions or works.

but if in the process of making peace with
neighbors, wrong has been done that
requires restitution to restore justice,
that may be involved.

forgiveness comes first, and correction
and restitution follow.

so what i see going wrong with some of the
criticisms and rejection of how different people
teach salvation, is we are confusing what steps
occur as a condition BEFORE or AFTER receiving
Christ for salvation. because there is a spiritual
process of growth and recovery from past setbacks
or conflicts, some corrections happen AFTERWARDS.

I think what is really happening here
is we need to agree on what are the corrections
in advance, but not necessarily follow them
until AFTER we agree what is needed.

And some people are fighting over rejection
because they want to see corrections FIRST
BEFORE agreeing that people are saved.

because I believe that all humanity is going
through the spiritual process of salvation
through Christ, and it is just a matter of time,
who receives what when and where,
then I do not judge where these steps occur.

I seek agreement and then the steps will naturally follow.

 

[PostmodernProph]

your error in #1
"since man is made in the image of God
then man's laws are made in the image of God's laws
they reflect the same trinity of body/mind/spirit"

the reality is man's laws can just as easily be disobedient, sinful and therefore non-"reflective"........

 

[emilynghiem]

your error in #1
"since man is made in the image of God
then man's laws are made in the image of God's laws
they reflect the same trinity of body/mind/spirit"

the reality is man's laws can just as easily be disobedient, sinful and therefore non-"reflective"........

Thank you PostmodernProph

What I mean is the image does not have to be perfect to be made in the image of God
and yes the image can be corrupted and flawed
and still made in God's image.

[I don't mean to imply the image is as perfect as God although that is the goal
to be perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect. To achieve that goal of human perfection
in terms of wholeness and maturity, it would take all systems reaching maturity and checking each other in perfect balance and harmony. God's laws would still be greater.]

Laws of science are still not perfect, but much is up for debate, and have been
marred by terrible flaws in the past that needed to be corrected,
but these still "reflect" or are made in and inspired by the
existing laws of God and nature that man did not create.
we are merely attempting to document them, so we are
trying to 'image" our language to reflect the laws already out there
to establish true understanding and to correct any errors against these laws.
Note: even the laws of motion come in a set of three
one on the source of change coming from a FORCE
one on the Relationship between FORCE and MASS
and one on the equal reaction between two actions in physical practice.

Man was created in God's image BEFORE the fall and sin was added later.
So that is added on top, but underneath
the original spirit of man as created by God is pure
and that is what Jesus Christ restores.

He makes things new.
So the old ways are made new.
We can take the RAW blueprints that align with God's spirit and laws
and make the "new wineskins" to pour in the new wine.

Please see my thread on Buddhism for example,
The Bible Tells Us When Jesus Returns - Between Tisha B Av and Day of Atonement 2029 Page 57 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
or I will copy it again here. If you take just the BLUEPRINT
of Buddhism, the Three Refuges which align with the Holy Trinity
and the Two Promises which align with the Two Great Commandments,
then if you agree this is the image of God you can pour in
God's truth into this framework and fulfill the laws
of Buddhism with the spirit of Christ Jesus.

if you hold on to any laws that do not fit,
the wineskin will burst and those laws that are not
perfect will either be eliminated or changed in
interpretation so they reconcile with Christ.

for example the teachings of karma, o fcause and
effect, align with the generational curses taught in Christianity.

But it is not the SOULS that reincarnate but the
KARMA or sin that is passed from one generaitno to the
next. So this is true if you interpret it correctly,
but false if you teach it inconsistently.

so interpreted correctly Buddhism can align
with Christianity and be fulfilled equally
as scripture is.

So you only take the parts that align
and you can see the root blueprint
or image is still intact and matches God's laws.

I can do this for Buddhism, Constitutionalism
and Christian laws and show they align,
complement and reconcile in Christ.

with UU the principles align so this idea
that it rejects the Trinity must be resolved.

with Jehovah's witness the issue of the
Trinity and also rejecting spiritual healing
needs to be resolved or they clash.

with Islam I would see about adding Buddha and
Buddhism as recognized as sent by God
and also Constitutional laws and due process
as natural laws given by God, and also fully
reconcile with Jewish and Christian, in order to
complete that teaching where it isn't taken
out of context and abused beyond repair.
I think the Bahai have this right, as a later
stage of development that came out of
the Muslim countries and culture.

the Muslims I know who are true to God
respect these other laws and beliefs
so that should be included, and some
Muslims reject this and aren't taught it.

the Bahai and Buddhists are very close with the
UU, but the only thing missing is they don't focus
enough on unity specifically through Christ as the
center.

 

[September]

I do not "object" to other peoples' belief systems... in regards to religion or the Law. I feel no need to.

Christianity teaches that they will be rewarded or tortured in one of two possible afterlives. I disagree with that, but I don't object to people embracing that perspective.

Believe what you Will.

Sometimes, "believing in a religion" does not mean embracing everything literally as concrete facts and as a system free of negative manipulation. Sometimes, "believing in a religion" means that you have recognized a profound level of wisdom and power in its systems, teachings, and culture that can be harnessed and put to great use. Sometimes, believing in a religion means that you believe it can do something magnificant for yourself and others.

From that perspective, and beyond any of my own personal theological beliefs, I believe in all religions, even the seemingly silly ones like Mormonism. I believe Joseph Smith "conned" a bunch of people, yes, but I also believe that he had his reasons, and if you see what Mormons have done with their religion, many of them have found great success in their pursuits in Life by embracing it. So, safe to say, I believe in Mormonism.

And I believe in Islam. I believe in Christianity, and Judaism, O9A Satanism, Luciferianism, Hinduism, Theravada Buddhism, Paganism, etc.

There are those who say, "Oh hey Ash, you know you can't believe in Christianity and also believe in Hinduism, or Luciferianism lol, they contradict each other and just aren't compatible." To that I say "Hell yes I can!"

The Essence is not the Outer Form. Religion is but the Outer Form. I strive to experience the Essence of every religion I can.

Law is another matter.

I am morally balanced. Within America, I recognize that the Law is there for great reasons, and the Police are certainly a necessary part of the Machine. America's laws, on average, tend to be more "just" than most places.

However

Some might call me a "criminal". For many reasons.

I find that those who are mindlessly subservient to the Law, and those who never defy "authority", are generally followers rather than leaders, and experience far less freedoms than those of us who choose to carefully explore our freedoms outside of what the Law permits. There is excitement to be found and great opportunities to be taken advantage of, beyond the Law.

There is much to experience on the other side.

But just as the "dark side of the Moon" isn't actually any "darker" than the side that faces us, and is only called such because it is never seen by most people and thus understood less... "Crime" can be viewed as very similar, especially when considering that "Good" and "Evil" are always subjective.

But I am balanced. There are times when I feel compelled to go about my business without doing the illegal, and there are times when I say "fuck it". It is my Life, after all. As long as I am prepared to deal with any potential consequences, yeah, I'll defy Uncle Sam. What, did he think he was my God? That his every wish was my command? Think again, Sammy boy.

Plus, many of my friends are also "criminals". We have our own culture, and great loyalty to each other. We've spilled blood for each other! We've had each others' backs when confronted with adversity.

Things are not always what they appear to be. A battle hardened criminal might be the one who saves your life one day.

Or they might be the one to help you "get to Heaven"...

lol

"Good" and "Evil"... terms that describe some collective subjective perspective on what is generally considered to be positive and negative behavior, primarily abused for social control. As with religion... I choose to experience the Essence of both of these, of both sides of our inherent human Nature, so that they are in harmony and synergize with each other... thus unlocking a new "side", one that is neither Light nor Dark.

​

 

[emilynghiem]

I do not "object" to other peoples' belief systems... in regards to religion or the Law. I feel no need to.

Christianity teaches that they will be rewarded or tortured in one of two possible afterlives. I disagree with that, but I don't object to people embracing that perspective.

Believe what you Will.

Sometimes, "believing in a religion" does not mean embracing everything literally as concrete facts and as a system free of negative manipulation. Sometimes, "believing in a religion" means that you have recognized a profound level of wisdom and power in its systems, teachings, and culture that can be harnessed and put to great use. Sometimes, believing in a religion means that you believe it can do something magnificant for yourself and others.

From that perspective, and beyond any of my own personal theological beliefs, I believe in all religions, even the seemingly silly ones like Mormonism. I believe Joseph Smith "conned" a bunch of people, yes, but I also believe that he had his reasons, and if you see what Mormons have done with their religion, many of them have found great success in their pursuits in Life by embracing it. So, safe to say, I believe in Mormonism.

And I believe in Islam. I believe in Christianity, and Judaism, O9A Satanism, Luciferianism, Hinduism, Theravada Buddhism, Paganism, etc.

There are those who say, "Oh hey Ash, you know you can't believe in Christianity and also believe in Hinduism, or Luciferianism lol, they contradict each other and just aren't compatible." To that I say "Hell yes I can!"

The Essence is not the Outer Form. Religion is but the Outer Form. I strive to experience the Essence of every religion I can.

Law is another matter.

I am morally balanced. Within America, I recognize that the Law is there for great reasons, and the Police are certainly a necessary part of the Machine. America's laws, on average, tend to be more "just" than most places.

However

Some might call me a "criminal". For many reasons.

I find that those who are mindlessly subservient to the Law, and those who never defy "authority", are generally followers rather than leaders, and experience far less freedoms than those of us who choose to carefully explore our freedoms outside of what the Law permits. There is excitement to be found and great opportunities to be taken advantage of, beyond the Law.

There is much to experience on the other side.

But just as the "dark side of the Moon" isn't actually any "darker" than the side that faces us, and is only called such because it is never seen by most people and thus understood less... "Crime" can be viewed as very similar, especially when considering that "Good" and "Evil" are always subjective.

But I am balanced. There are times when I feel compelled to go about my business without doing the illegal, and there are times when I say "fuck it". It is my Life, after all. As long as I am prepared to deal with any potential consequences, yeah, I'll defy Uncle Sam. What, did he think he was my God? That his every wish was my command? Think again, Sammy boy.

Plus, many of my friends are also "criminals". We have our own culture, and great loyalty to each other. We've spilled blood for each other! We've had each others' backs when confronted with adversity.

Things are not always what they appear to be. A battle hardened criminal might be the one who saves your life one day.

Or they might be the one to help you "get to Heaven"...

lol

"Good" and "Evil"... terms that describe some collective subjective perspective on what is generally considered to be positive and negative behavior, primarily abused for social control. As with religion... I choose to experience the Essence of both of these, of both sides of our inherent human Nature, so that they are in harmony and synergize with each other... thus unlocking a new "side", one that is neither Light nor Dark.

​

Thank you Goddess_Ashtara
So glad to hear you share here and sorry if other people missed it.
I think it really helps to compare yours and my approaches to
"universal" acceptance and concerns for addressing limits on relativity.

Knowing you from the spiritual quality/character of your replies,
I sense you would not violate the consent of others, and if conflict occurs
you seek to resolve it freely with respect for consent and without coercion.
In order to commit a crime or abuse, some violation of consent must occur,
so your spirit does not go there.

However, someone else can take all the things you say,
and justify overriding the consent of others to violate natural laws.

I would need to see a bit stronger statement
about respecting consent of others and how to resolve conflicts
as these arise.

If you just leave it to God "after the fact,"
then the 9/11 attackers can say what they did was not causing harm
but was doing good by God's will, and God can sort it out after the fact.

So this does not do enough to EMPHASIZE the idea of
not imposing on the will or consent of others.

This is why I find people object to some of these more open
ways that don't try to distinguish "dark from light" and leave it open to accept all.

Forgiveness and acceptance is one thing
but there must be agreement on CONSEQUENCES for violating
consent if there are differences in values. Differences are fine
but not to ACT on them that violate the other person's values and consent.

Islam also scares people when it states that it is okay to
kill when justice calls for it, because that is EXPLAINING
why govt has this authority or EXPLAINING why laws of self-defense are natural,
but it DOESN'T explain that not just "any person" can interpret when it is
just to take justice into your own hands.

Only if you teach either Christian laws about resolving trespasses by agreement
in truth, or Constitutional laws about due process of laws and not carrying OUT
judgment without a prescribed process that people agree to MUTUALLY,
or something like that do you "check" your own belief system.

If your belief system does NOT have this self-check built in,
then it is INDIRECTLY relying on Constitutionalists or Christians
or other people to provide that process if your belief system doesn't check itself.

GA is there something you teach within your system
that either points to resolving conflicts peaceably, or respect for due process so nobody
imposes a judgment on someone else BEFORE there is consensus between them?

Is there something that serves as a natural deterrent against
violating the values of others even if these are "relative" and not absolutely the same for each person?

This is why people fear universal views that get TOO liberal
and don't emphasize some rules enough.

Wicca has "do as you will but harm none"
but what is the process if harm is threatened or committed,
then what is the process for correcting the conflict between "relative values"
so it doesn't repeat, escalate or turn into violent retribution?

NOTE: the way I explained to a friend who said some Satanists believe people do have the right to kill,
is I said that by religious freedom people with that belief can kill each other if it is by informed consent.
But it can't be by mental illness, by duress (such as fearing that terminal illness cannot be cured), or
other incomplete information or lack of access to help or to other alternatives, or else it is not fully informed consent.
And there must be a legal way to confirm this, so other people don't murder and claim it was consensual.
So all the responsibility for such an act to be permitted must be met so there is no abuse or harm,
and anyone with this belief takes responsibility for it.

If you teach this is your right, and someone else abuses that to commit murder against someone's consent
(ie not someone who AGREES to be killed and that killing them is okay)
then you are indirectly responsible for influencing and causing someone else to commit a crime
if you taught them it was okay and didn't specify what the conditions were to prevent it from violating rights and laws.

So if people REALLY want to have freedom to kill, we'd have to agree on the laws, the conditions
and circumstances, and the responsibility for if that law gets abused, then who is going to pay for what damages caused
by abusing it. Or else people will not agree to such a law if it is too easily abused and nobody wants that responsibility.

Right now, even though our criminal justice laws are imperfect,
and they don't respect consent (unless you practice Restorative Justice in ways that does),
there are Christians and other people willing to accept responsibility and pay
for the messes made by our imperfect system, even death row.
If the people opposed to the current system AGREED to take financial
responsibility for alternatives, we could start changing it to OFFER Restorative Justice options.
And let people choose which systems they want to apply per case, and what to pay for
or what to make the wrongdoers pay for, which is what I recommend.

Just because you are forgiven spiritually
does not mean you don't owe a debt for damages done
"in proportion" to the crimes or abuses you commit that harm others.

So there are consequences in the real world that need to be agreed upon.

And the way Islam and Christianity allow for this is to teach that
followers are to submit to civilian authority of the govt or country they are subject to.
(and you can see where this goes wrong, where religionists try to take over civil
govt so they can dictate through civilian law and govt and make it mandatory to follow)

Buddhism does not specify a process for actively engaging and resolving conflicts
with other people, so it also depends on either Christianity or Constitutional principles
of democracy and due process to handle grievances. For Islam, many have pointed
out that principles of democratic govt are given by Mohammad; and the problem
remains that people are not following this, similar to not following the Islamic teaching
to include Christianity in their faith and laws. The laws are there, but not taught or
practiced in full, so many people believe that's where the reform should focus.

Do you have specific principles or advice in your belief system
that explains what to do in case of conflict, in case there is
a trespass or violation, and how to establish and restore peace and justice
after a transgression? Or better yet, if it teaches these things to the
point of DETERRING violations and where the correctional process of
resolving differences helps promote greater respect for relative values of others.
The Bahai teach methods of healing racial and cultural differences,
and actively promote the teachings of justice in society; so this is more proactive
and not just an assumed value that people should automatically respect; they
actually teach the process of how to REACH that goal by working through
relationships and conflicts we encounter in life, relations and society.

 

[PostmodernProph]

your error in #1
"since man is made in the image of God
then man's laws are made in the image of God's laws
they reflect the same trinity of body/mind/spirit"

the reality is man's laws can just as easily be disobedient, sinful and therefore non-"reflective"........

Thank you PostmodernProph

What I mean is the image does not have to be perfect to be made in the image of God
and yes the image can be corrupted and flawed
and still made in God's image.

but that is illogical....in effect you are saying that laws which are so corrupted and flawed that they do not reflect the same trinity of body/mind/spirit can still reflect the same trinity of body/mind/spirit...some man made laws are simply fucked up laws......

 

[emilynghiem]

your error in #1
"since man is made in the image of God
then man's laws are made in the image of God's laws
they reflect the same trinity of body/mind/spirit"

the reality is man's laws can just as easily be disobedient, sinful and therefore non-"reflective"........

Thank you PostmodernProph

What I mean is the image does not have to be perfect to be made in the image of God
and yes the image can be corrupted and flawed
and still made in God's image.

but that is illogical....in effect you are saying that laws which are so corrupted and flawed that they do not reflect the same trinity of body/mind/spirit can still reflect the same trinity of body/mind/spirit...some man made laws are simply fucked up laws......

You still correct them the same way:
by comparing with consistent standards of truth and justice
and either correcting them, or if like you say the whole system is too FU,
then the parties agree what laws to use as the basis and start from there.

So if I think your religion is FU and you think my political beliefs are FU
then we start with natural laws or universal laws we have in common,
find out what points and principles we agree on,
and then have to figure out do we use the given system(s) or what?

And this is how the UU principles were drawn up,
or the natural laws and democratic process/principles
were written into the Founding documents, Constitution and Bill of Rights.

You agree on the content first (using whatever precedents or sources
you agree communicate those laws) then either fix the existing laws and systems
or change and write new ones.

With govt we'd likely have to agree on what the policies solutions or reforms
SHOULD be that include and satisfy everyone's principles and beliefs,
and then go through our state and federal systems and find WHERE
to go through WHAT process to apply these agreed reforms and solutions
INTO the given structures we have now.

What we do wrong is take the given structures and try to force
change through them WITHOUT agreeing in advance what and how to change it.
So we fight over the principles and process at the same time.

If we resolve conflicts first in content,
then fix the language of how to express this without imposing bias that excludes or imposes or offends,
then after that we can figure out how to use the GIVEN laws process and structures
to APPLY those changes, so the whole thing is AGREED upon from content to language to implementation.
If we have to divide the budgeting and jurisdiction to reach agreement, that is included also.

We start with agreement first, and then find how to fix the laws or system to ACCOMMODATE
what we agreed to change or implement.

 

[emilynghiem]

Should be a reality show for this:
Who wants to start a World Religion?
have contestants compete to show how their religion
does the most good, and then the prize is setting up a church
location for them to fund whatever outreach is voted the most beneficial and all inclusive
with the least conflicts or shortcomings that impose on other people to correct.

Top 10 Religions You Never Knew Existed - Listverse

Of this list above
I thought everyone heard of Falun Gong!

I have met people in Houston who were
* Unification (I volunteered for some peace building events)
* Eckankar (one woman I met, probably at a UU church)
* Jainist (an Indian woman I met with the police outreach and advisory council)
and I have heard of Cao Dai
but don't know anyone who practices that. (This was recommended to me
to look into since the Vietnamese have both Buddhist
and Christian/Catholic in community traditions and cultural heritage.)

I'm surprised
IDMR and Urantian didn't make the list.
Those are a lot of fun, and I've met people
who were into those things too. I guess Houston has a wide range of diversity
both politically religiously and culturally so I am used to running into people of different systems.

Interacting here on USMB was the first time I ever ran into Arminian.

My favorite subcult satire religion I ever ran into
was BOB and the church of the subgenius. That was lots of fun and very Zen.

the Jedi stuff is a pretty cool cult following too, but who's really in charge of that?
7 Really Weird Religions You Haven t Heard Of - Page 2 of 2 - Matador Network
Maybe that could be a reality show, to come up with a head Jedi and council of nerds....

 

[teddyearp]

emily (that's my grandmother's name), you invited me to comment in this thread from your other thread, so I figured I wouldn't snub you. However, I must say that your posts are way long and prattle on and on and are hard to follow sometimes, lol.

I do not believe, nor belong to any denominations. Denominations are not in my Bible. Therefore I will not approve nor condemn anyone who claims affiliation with such.

You see, when I was very young in Christ, I did take out to 'attack' _all_ the Jehovah's Witnesses as they were very prevalent in my town. Not to go to them to discredit, but one time when they came to my door, we went round and round in the Bible. I was actually acting kind of like Parture. I figured _all_ Mormans were a cult as well and should be condemned as well. But I was only feeding on milk. I did my share of preaching and stuff, but I also had a thorn in my side that kept me from being a good (worldly) example; and then I also grew up.

Now I keep my religion and relationship with Jesus Christ kind of close to the belt. I pretty much let others believe what they want. But when the subject comes up, I speak to it. When it comes to the denominations, who am I to paint them with a broad brush as I now know that there are saved people everywhere. That is why it is called a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

But when it comes to this board and someone comes along and needs a bit of help, I am there, albeit with words not always my own. When Parture came along with his thread, I was led to say something at first because his 'prediction' was not scriptural. Then when he kept up with condemning all to Hell that hit a bone as that was me years and years ago before I realized that only one can condemn, Jesus Christ. But the deeper and deeper I got into it with him in that thread and yours, again I found that the words flowed through me and not always from me.

So there you have it.

 

[PostmodernProph]

your error in #1
"since man is made in the image of God
then man's laws are made in the image of God's laws
they reflect the same trinity of body/mind/spirit"

the reality is man's laws can just as easily be disobedient, sinful and therefore non-"reflective"........

Thank you PostmodernProph

What I mean is the image does not have to be perfect to be made in the image of God
and yes the image can be corrupted and flawed
and still made in God's image.

but that is illogical....in effect you are saying that laws which are so corrupted and flawed that they do not reflect the same trinity of body/mind/spirit can still reflect the same trinity of body/mind/spirit...some man made laws are simply fucked up laws......

You still correct them the same way: .

that doesn't change the error of your argument...you didn't say the laws we fixed reflect the image of God, you said the laws we have do.......

 

[emilynghiem]

your error in #1
"since man is made in the image of God
then man's laws are made in the image of God's laws
they reflect the same trinity of body/mind/spirit"

the reality is man's laws can just as easily be disobedient, sinful and therefore non-"reflective"........

Thank you PostmodernProph

What I mean is the image does not have to be perfect to be made in the image of God
and yes the image can be corrupted and flawed
and still made in God's image.

but that is illogical....in effect you are saying that laws which are so corrupted and flawed that they do not reflect the same trinity of body/mind/spirit can still reflect the same trinity of body/mind/spirit...some man made laws are simply fucked up laws......

You still correct them the same way: .

that doesn't change the error of your argument...you didn't say the laws we fixed reflect the image of God, you said the laws we have do.......

Well thats what I mean
Sorry it wasnt clear.
I thought it was just plain understood and assumed man's knowledge and expression. Are limited finite and BIASED and only God is universal and all encompassing. We arent.
I thought that was a given. Sorry!.thanks~

 

[emilynghiem]

HI teddyearp you and ninja007 inspired me to catch up where I left off with similar
issues, addressing JW and also my friend D2 recovering from IDMR cult abuse that I forgot makes him react.
I jumped online, looked up references for posting on a different thread on religious abuse, and ran across another JW community site where I posted this:

Hi

After working in depth to analyze key points that if resolved with JW can reunite people instead of further divide,

the 4 areas I came to focus on as a campaign with JW are

1. to prove Spiritual Healing is natural universal and in keeping with Christ and with medicine, is NOT spiritism but casts out demons, and clashes with occult energy in witchcraft and voodoo/sorcery which JW also oppose

See sources for scientific research to prove this not only for JW but all secular scientists and atheists as well.

I listed 3 or 4 sources at freespiritualhealing Resources for Healing and Forgiveness Therapy to focus on this topic as uniting faith science and others

2. to reconcile views of the "Trinity" in all major religions and all systems of laws and beliefs

The way I normally resolve this with JW is to

A. agree to stick to the EXACT places in the BIBLE WE AGREE ON:

"to baptize all nations in the name of the Father Son and HolySpirit"

B. to agree that even Jesus said the Father is Greater, and that he and the Father are ONE

in the same passage: JOHN 10:29-30 so BOTH are true at the same time. End of argument.

C. to compare the Christian "Trinity" with "Trinity" in other religions and laws to show these

are all attempts or reflections made in the image of God's laws that are universally inspiring all of them

in structure, since they all are based on the "Trinity" connecting God/Christ/Holyspirit with human spirit/mind/body

3. for religious organizations to agree on Constitutional and civil laws of DUE PROCESS and not obstructing it but respecting equal protection of the laws (so there is no censorship and suppression by abusing authority). Similar to how govt is required to protect due process and defense, large collective groups should be trained to do the same to prevent similar abuses of collective authority that the Bill of Rights and natural laws govern. So to protect due process and equal interests of all people, I recommend teaching conflict resolution, mediation and consensus building by applying scripture (Matthew 18:15-20) and Constitutional principles of petitioning to redress grievances with respect to people's beliefs and consent that should not be forced, bullied or overridden.


4. to request a partnership campaign to offer alternatives at Halloween to educate the public on the dangers of occult, witchcraft and ritual cult abuse, and go door to door with handouts on free spiritual healing to break curses and free people from abuse, addiction, mental and physical illness.

By focusing where we AGREE there should be spiritual reform,

families with both Christian, JW and nonJW or exJW members can collaborate on a positive education and life saving campaign to help people avoid or remove demonic curses and sickness and be healed through the free, natural and effective methods that can be proven by science (and are not the FALSE kind of "faith healing" that denies science or manipulates spiritually to cause harm)



Those are my proposal points.

And on the Trinity and Spiritual healing, I know the JW reject both, but the Church of Christ agrees on the Trinity but rejects Spiritual Healing.

I was told it must be proven by science and accepted as nonreligious and not against God nature or the Bible in order for JW to accept it is as natural and in keeping with God's law and will, and not dictating it by demons.

So if we could ask the ELDERS to come together in Christ and agree to address, rebuke and correct these issues, then all other denominations could join in and benefit from the knowledge needed to reconcile.

Thank you

 

[PostmodernProph]

I thought it was just plain understood and assumed man's knowledge and expression. Are limited finite and BIASED and only God is universal and all encompassing. We arent.
I thought that was a given. Sorry!.thanks~

but you see that is the problem.....I don't know anyone here well enough to take anything as an assumption....you started this thread to tell us what you believed and that is what I thought you believed, so I argued with it.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

2. to reconcile views of the "Trinity" in all major religions and all systems of laws and beliefs

do you mean within all major Christian denominations or all world religions, because I believe you will be hardpressed to find the Holy Trinity in most.......

 

[emilynghiem]

I thought it was just plain understood and assumed man's knowledge and expression. Are limited finite and BIASED and only God is universal and all encompassing. We arent.
I thought that was a given. Sorry!.thanks~

but you see that is the problem.....I don't know anyone here well enough to take anything as an assumption....you started this thread to tell us what you believed and that is what I thought you believed, so I argued with it.....

I think as Christian believers we agree in spirit. Our words and perceptions may hold conflict and need correction or clarification.

Whats crucial is to agree in spirit first, then yes we can correct the other two levels of perception and how we communicate this so it is consistent between us. I laid out very general points and then we can use that as a roadmap to find the twists and turns or discrepancies as you point out that arevwrong orvsound wrong and need attention.

Thanks fir that, which is exactly what to do.

Now you ask about uniting Christian denominations or trying to align all other laws and systems. I find both are necessary,so whoever responds and wants to participate, whatever they prioritize to reconcile first lets add that to start.building a consensus. I find trinity principles in even secular philosophies so it is everywhere. If you seek to align you can find ways to help, if you seek to divide there is much more ammo to choose from to go to war. I prefer the challenge of making peace, and have found peacemakers among the Jews Christian Muslim Buddhist Bahai Atheist feminist anarchist etc. So nothing surprises me anymore or it shouldnt. That last surprise of having a door slammed in my face was a humble reminder to watch out for those types. Im willing to start with people with open doors open hearts and minds. After we agree on the approaches, then we can knock on harder doors to open. I agree with you to start with addressing fellow Christians with denominational differences willing to do rebukes and corrections mutually. After ppl see this can be done, we can take on more challenges. But Christians should be more united first so we start with a solid foundation not divided or split apart. Not too wise to build a house on a cracked foundation. Repair that first and build from there.

 

[PostmodernProph]

Now you ask about uniting Christian denominations or trying to align all other laws and systems.

actually no, that wasn't what I asked......you seemed to imply that all major religions have a view of the Trinity to be reconciled.......obviously that is an absurd assumption if you are talking about religions, but perhaps could be understood if you are merely talking about major Christian denominations......

 

[emilynghiem]

Now you ask about uniting Christian denominations or trying to align all other laws and systems.

actually no, that wasn't what I asked......you seemed to imply that all major religions have a view of the Trinity to be reconciled.......obviously that is an absurd assumption if you are talking about religions, but perhaps could be understood if you are merely talking about major Christian denominations......

????
I have a whole list of the different religions that all have a FORM or reflection of the Trinity in their structure. So by aligning the same three levels that keep appearing as a universal pattern, you can show that God/Christ/HolySpirit fulfills these laws, too.

Just like the Golden Rule, the natural Law of Reciprocity is found in all major Religions and Christ Jesus fulfills that law.

The one place I am MOST concerned doesn't come out and teach this equally is Constitutional laws don't require the people to follow the same standards we hold govt to. This has to be learned and taught by example, or people don't get it.

So unless people already practice "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" or "love and forgive one another as Jesus has for us" then people go around demanding freedom for their beliefs while excluding others. And declaring others wrong or guilt first, and issuing punishments such as exclusion of equal rights and rejection of equal beliefs Without going through due process and defense first which occurs after, often with obstruction. They don't like being bullied this way, but continue doing it to others. And it is not policed by Constitutional laws. In Courts and Congress you only have to defeat the other side, you are not required to respect the consent or beliefs of the others unless they prove their points to you and you agree to include them, such as by having equal respect for First Fourteenth and now Tenth Amendment Rights. Private citizens are not required by law to follow this for other people, only if they get sued and Courts order them. And when Govt officials start acting as private citizens with political beliefs and agenda, now Govt is having to get sued to hold them to laws. Reciprocity or equal respect for laws is not required for Citizens, and when people sue, the courts are not equally accessible and favor one side over the other, so this causes more problems fighting for equal protection of the laws.

If you prefer the Golden Rule to the Trinity argument, it is much faster and easier to show where the Golden Rule is found in every major Religion, as a natural law universal to all humans by nature. and then explain how Christ Jesus fulfills that central law with the New Commandment in John 13:34, uniting all these tribes and humanity as one.

The Golden Rule in World Religions
Versions of the Golden Rule in 21 world religions

 

[PostmodernProph]

Now you ask about uniting Christian denominations or trying to align all other laws and systems.

actually no, that wasn't what I asked......you seemed to imply that all major religions have a view of the Trinity to be reconciled.......obviously that is an absurd assumption if you are talking about religions, but perhaps could be understood if you are merely talking about major Christian denominations......

????
I have a whole list of the different religions that all have a FORM or reflection of the Trinity in their structure. So by aligning the same three levels that keep appearing as a universal pattern, you can show that God/Christ/HolySpirit fulfills these laws, too.

can you give me even one that has a single god with a divine aspect, a human aspect, and a spiritual aspect.....having three "somethings" isn't a reflection of the Trinity of Christianity.....I mean, Odin might have owned three goats but that doesn't mean its a parallel to the Christian religion......