why did God kill the first born of the Eqyptians?
-
Originally posted by hasene:
Pepper, since you are new, it would be good to explore and find out about other religions as well. I did not find out more about Christianity and simply jumped into it and was brainwashed. It was much later then I realised that there are too many contradictions in the teaching and promises.I hope you will use your intellect to understand and not just merely follow blindly to comply to not use intellect to understand God. This is a major mistake which I made in the past. It is easy prey on human beings to not use intellect so that they can go on to brainwash and people just accept whatever that come along.
No exploring of other religion for me now. Only related to christian I have interest in.
-
Originally posted by hasene:
Good luck to you. What you just posted to me reminded me of myself when I was a christian then, I said the same words.
No way to other religions. -
Originally posted by ~PEPPER~:
No way to other religions.
Yes, I said the same when I was a christian. Good luck to you. hahahah
-
Originally posted by hasene:
Yes, I said the same when I was a christian. Good luck to you. hahahah
I am sure I wont change my religion. Gd luck to u too. -
Originally posted by googoomuck:
If he fraternize with you, he'll ruin his own reputation!
You stay in crapbox where you can be prince! The crapbox!
we are already fraternizing
u dont need to suck his balls
hehe
-
Originally posted by laurence82:
we are already fraternizing
u dont need to suck his balls
hehe
no need to say much on him lar lol. his reputation here preceded him.
-
Originally posted by laurence82:
we are already fraternizing
u dont need to suck his balls
hehe
hehe you are the one who suck his balls. Did he respond to you? You have no friends., only cretins ....hehehehe
-
Originally posted by googoomuck:
hehe you are the one who suck his balls. Did he respond to you? You have no friends., only cretins ....hehehehe
it doesnt matter if he respond to me or whoever ah...why you so uptight over it?
-
A friend of mine pointed out something the other day, and bear in mind he himself is not a member of any religion (although he is into football and some call it a religion. He said that the concept and idea of God or Gods transcends good and evil. That if there be any beings of such sort, they are beyond the morales that humans have set for themselves. Morales themselves are established by man to a certain extent.
Can't say that is my own personal view, but just for thought.
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
No problem with what you said here, of course, being Christian you have to study His Word and use your reasoning abilities. No mystic will tell you to stop using your reasoning abilities in life, this is not going to a state of pre-rationality (like the realm of babies or animals): but something that is 'trans-rational', in other words, you still continue to use rationality, but you also go one step further... after which you can still fully make use of your intellect as a God-given tool.
I did not say that through mystical union you will discover God's plan and secrets, etc. This is not what I mean. I do not mean you can 'access God's personhood'. No creature can do that. God continues to be a mystery in union, just that you let go of your self, and 'Christ lives in you', in other words, you will feel an utter conviction of Christ and you are being 'lived' by Christ. You may not know 'how' Christ will live you, but you have no doubts that you are lived by God and there is no more 'you' at the center of your life. You may not know where God's will is going to lead you, but nevertheless you have submitted to God's will (like 'Thy will be done' (Matt. 26:42)). You will have no doubts about it when you experience it (of course, 'you experience' is just a figure of speech because by then it is no longer 'you' who lives). It is obviously not 'you' as a false self that has to put in effort here, that false self only needs to be 'crucified' and surrendered to Christ - it need not put in effort to gain entry to salvation. The only 'effort' (which is a non effort) is to have faith, love God, and submit to God.
I did not think he is literally crucified obviously. I meant that he is submitting his being to God, such that he no longer feels 'he' is at the center of his life and living his life (the crucifixion), but he is being 'lived' by the higher power. Christ now 'lives him'.
1) I must admit I do not claim to understand Christian mysticism well enough because I am not a Christian (and therefore I am just sharing the extremely limited knowledge that I know and hence people would do well by doing their own research).
But according to Wikipedia,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_mysticism
Within the broad spectrum of religious groups, it is believed that the spirit of man lost its original connection with God. The spirit of man longs to find this connection again and to intimately experience God. Christian orthodoxy teaches that this connection can only be restored via the blood of Jesus Christ through His sacrificial death (Heb 10:19,20), orthodox Christian mysticism likewise has always maintained the necessity of Christ the One Mediator for a graced experience of God. The depth of this experience depends though on the Christian's purification and works of love, done through the grace of Jesus Christ, and on God's initiative in Christ and His Spirit to reveal Himself in special contemplative graces. Christian mysticism finds much biblical support for its practices and teachings. Though some forms of mysticism might disregard the blood of Jesus, especially those influenced by New Age Spirituality, this is not true of the classical Christian mystical tradition, whether Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant.
As to your 2): Mystics do not reject the Word of God, in fact if you read my posted article about Protestant Mystics and Catholic Mystics - you'll see that mystics are very informed by scripture.
No, I'm not talking about a god within, but the ground of our being that belongs to no one (and thus isn't confined to 'within anyone'), but from which springs 'everyone and everything'. If God is only 'within me', then that is not God. No mystics talk about a God that is 'me based' or 'self centered'.
Adolf Deissmann, in his classic treatment of the subject of Paul's mysticism, Paul: A Study in Social and Religious History, distinguishes between what he calls 'union mysticism' and 'communion mysticism'. It is a useful distinction. Union mysticism, says Deissmann, involves being absorbed into God or discovering divinity in ourselves—the current fashion with New Age religion. In the process we lose our identities. Communion mysticism, in contrast, involves a relationship in which we experience the gracious paradox of 'I, yet not I' in our experience of the presence of the risen Christ. Paul says in his letter to the Galatians, "I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me" (Galatians 2:20). Paul is saying that the old independent 'I', in rebellion against God and out of fellowship with him, no longer exists. It received its death sentence through identification with Christ on the cross. However, in experiencing the presence of the risen Christ in his life, through the Spirit, the 'I' of the real Paul, created by God as an autonomous individual with God-like qualities, is more alive than ever. So we discover our true identity in the context of communion with Christ. Because Paul believed and experienced Jesus in communion mysticism rather than union mysticism, he was more concerned with ethics than ecstasy, a transformed life rather than an emotional experience. It is a loving relationship—and friendship—which leads to doing the will of the Father.
Mystics I know are not self-centered, and also emphasize the importance of other people. There is no such contradictions.
No problem with what you said here, of course, being Christian you have to study His Word and use your reasoning abilities. No mystic will tell you to stop using your reasoning abilities in life, this is not going to a state of pre-rationality (like the realm of babies or animals): but something that is 'trans-rational', in other words, you still continue to use rationality, but you also go one step further... after which you can still fully make use of your intellect as a God-given tool.
I did not say that through mystical union you will discover God's plan and secrets, etc. This is not what I mean. I do not mean you can 'access God's personhood'.No creature can do that. God continues to be a mystery in union, just that you let go of your self, and 'Christ lives in you', in other words, you will feel an utter conviction of Christ and you are being 'lived' by Christ. You may not know 'how' Christ will live you,but you have no doubts that you are lived by God and there is no more 'you' at the center of your life.
A lack of doubt indicates confidence and awareness, which is something that cannot exist without the person. “I think therefore I exist.” Even if one doubts his own existence, the fact that he thinks is proof that he exists because at the very least, there is an “I” who is doing the thinking. In this case, even if I don’t doubt, the “I” still exists. You cannot eradicate one’s personhood, no matter how hard you try.
You may not know 'how' Christ will live you,but you have no doubts that you are lived by God and there is no more 'you' at the center of your life. You may not know where God's will is going to lead you, but nevertheless you have submitted to God's will (like 'Thy will be done' (Matt. 26:42)). You will have no doubts about it when you experience it (of course, 'you experience' is just a figure of speech because by then it is no longer 'you' who lives)
It sounds like a contradiction here. If there’s no ‘me’, who’s aware of the (non)experience then? Who “realizes” there’s no doubts? I find it hard and untenable that this can be true due to its incoherence. Truth is a property of propositions. It’s hard if not impossible to conceive a state which no propositional statements can be made (hence no truth claim can be made about it) – again if you choose to claim that it is a “something” that is one step further than rationality, unable to be described, I would question your epistemology –
(1) how do you know that it exists and is as you’ve described?
(2) How would you know what a fellow practitioner is “experiencing” is identical to your “experience”?
(3) Why is the revelation of this “something / state of being / self-(non)existence” unique to your belief? Note that I asked about the revelation not the “state of being” that you’re describing
(4) Is this revelation a truth claim?
It is obviously not 'you' as a false self that has to put in effort here, that false self only needs to be 'crucified' and surrendered to Christ - it need not put in effort to gain entry to salvation. The only 'effort' (which is a non effort) is to have faith, love God, and submit to God.
I did not think he is literally crucified obviously. I meant that he is submitting his being to God, such that he no longer feels 'he' is at the center of his life and living his life (the crucifixion), but he is being 'lived' by the higher power. Christ now 'lives him'.
Acts 17:28, “In him we live and move and have our being”. From the offset, it must be noted that even though the Apostle Paul quotes pagan Greek writers with approval, this does not necessarily imply that he approves of other things that these writers said or wrote. Note, in this verse that even when we are “living in Christ”, our “being” still exists. No evidence of mysticism in the first two words, as demonstrated in this article. Our personhood remains intact, we are submitted to God but still “have our being”. Nowhere is our self(s) “not existing”.
1) I must admit I do not claim to understand Christian mysticism well enough because I am not a Christian (and therefore I am just sharing the extremely limited knowledge that I know and hence people would do well by doing their own research).
But according to Wikipedia,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_mysticism
Within the broad spectrum of religious groups, it is believed that the spirit of man lost its original connection with God. The spirit of man longs to find this connection again and to intimately experience God. Christian orthodoxy teaches that this connection can only be restored via the blood of Jesus Christ through His sacrificial death (Heb 10:19,20), orthodox Christian mysticism likewise has always maintained the necessity of Christ the One Mediator for a graced experience of God. The depth of this experience depends though on the Christian's purification and works of love, done through the grace of Jesus Christ, and on God's initiative in Christ and His Spirit to reveal Himself in special contemplative graces. Christian mysticism finds much biblical support for its practices and teachings. Though some forms of mysticism might disregard the blood of Jesus, especially those influenced by New Age Spirituality, this is not true of the classical Christian mystical tradition, whether Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant.
As to your 2): Mystics do not reject the Word of God, in fact if you read my posted article about Protestant Mystics and Catholic Mystics - you'll see that mystics are very informed by scripture.
I beg to differ. Misunderstandings occur to form the basic tenets of Christian mysticism because of poor understanding of scriptures and its harmonization.
You cite wikipedia’s Christian mysticism and I noticed 3 of their commonly used verses. Galatians 2:20, I’ve refuted for you already – the language used for figures of speech not literal. The context is forensic not metaphysical.
1 john 3:2 has to be understood from 1 John 2:28-3:3 which exists as a “chunk”. John encourages believers to persevere till Christ returns again and urges them to strive for the ethical integrity and sense of urgency appropriate to their spiritual identity. He gives a bit of a glimpse into what the new heavens and new earth will be like (Revelations). In eternity, Christians will be morally without sin, intellectually without falsehood or error, physically without weakness or imperfections, and filled continually with the Holy Spirit. But pls note that “like” does not mean “identical to” in Greek. Again, no grounds for the mystic to claim unity of human spirit with God’s spirit.
2 Peter 1:4 “Partakers” means “sharers”. When you partake of food / share food, you don’t become the food that you eat right? When we share of the divine nature, we don’t become part of God, we share in his nature by becoming increasingly like him. True Christians reflect Christ’s image – the mirror reflects your image, but you wouldn’t say the mirror becomes you or becomes part of you.
None of their recurring theme verses support their ideas.
No, I'm not talking about a god within, but the ground of our being that belongs to no one (and thus isn't confined to 'within anyone'), but from which springs 'everyone and everything'. If God is only 'within me', then that is not God. No mystics talk about a God that is 'me based' or 'self centered'.
The contradiction between Christianity and mysticism is something that mysticism shares with other similar religious practices and can be described in Isaiah 14:12-15, ““How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn! How you are cut down to the ground, you who laid the nations low! 13 You said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to heaven; above the stars of God I will set my throne on high; I will sit on the mount of assembly in the far reaches of the north; 14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.’ 15 But you are brought down to Sheol, to the far reaches of the pit.
The serpent to Eve in the garden of Eden in Genesis 3:5, “and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
In presuming that they can “achieve a unity of the human spirit with the spirit of God” or “to experience God ‘as he is’” (or whatever superfluous language used to describe identical concepts), they have set themselves up for condemnation and failure, as the examples of Eve and Lucifer (Day Star) have shown.
I cannot emphasize to you enough mysticism contradicts orthodox Christianity. Any religious practices similar to mysticism in this aspect prove likewise. Other arguments outlined in my previous posts suggest the same. There are other materials that can support the case but I believe these should be enough.
For further info if interested, consult “Is Eastern Orthodox Christian?” by Dr. Robert A. Morey.
-
Originally posted by 24/7:
<!--StartFragment-->A lack of doubt indicates confidence and awareness, which is something that cannot exist without the person. “I think therefore I exist.” Even if one doubts his own existence, the fact that he thinks is proof that he exists because at the very least, there is an “I” who is doing the thinking. In this case, even if I don’t doubt, the “I” still exists. You cannot eradicate one’s personhood, no matter how hard you try.
You need to define what 'personhood' means first.
If it is the separate, egoic identity, that feels like it is at the center of life, experiencing and creating and controlling life/things, then that sense of separate self is merely a fabrication of mind, it is not real, and its illusion can be removed through mystical union. If you be still and quiet for a moment, if you search for where this separate egoic self is, it cannot be found simply because it is mere fabrication. The lies perpetuated by this fabricated self is the source of all sins and needs to be 'crucified'. The problems that this fabricated, false, egoic self causes is being described by Father Thomas Keating in my post in bolded text (http://christians.sgforums.com/forums/1381/topics/400671?page=4)
If however you are refering 'personhood' to the personality or personal conditioning which affects how he behaves and so on, then I do not think that mystical union actually removes that individuated personality. Mystics all have different personalities and continue to do so after 'union'.
I also do not mean that once you have union, there is no more existence or life - existence still continues, Paul did not say "There is no longer life" or "There is no more existence" or "You are annihilated", he simply said "I no longer live, but Christ lives in me" which in other words means that existence and life continues without the fabricated, false self center. He did not deny 'living' or existence. Just that the false fabricated 'I' is being replaced by the true, 'Christ I'.
It is just that now he no longer feels like the separate ego controlling or living life, it is no longer "he who lives, but Christ who lives in me" as Paul said.
Without this false fabricated 'I' in function, life continues to be lived effortlessly, but you clearly see it is not this 'you' who lives, but this higher power who is living and 'creating' and 'powering' your life from moment to moment, like the same energy source (electricity) is powering the different electrical appliances and the TV sets. It is clearly seen that we are all different expressions of the One Source.
In that same analogy, the electrical appliances (an analogy for all the billions of people here on this planet) by itself has no ability to create life or live Life, it is the Source that creates life, that 'empowers' life, that gives Life to all the various 'expressions'. Without life we are just corpses.
It sounds like a contradiction here. If there’s no ‘me’, who’s aware of the (non)experience then? Who “realizes” there’s no doubts? I find it hard and untenable that this can be true due to its incoherence. Truth is a property of propositions. It’s hard if not impossible to conceive a state which no propositional statements can be made (hence no truth claim can be made about it) – again if you choose to claim that it is a “something” that is one step further than rationality, unable to be described, I would question your epistemology –
It is the separate fabricated 'me' that is the source of all doubts.
Without that false fabricated 'me' that the source of all sins, life continues to flow and function effortlessly by the power of the Source, and there is no longer a single doubts - only pure certainty because there is no longer a sense of division and separation.
This is a life lived not by the false fabricated self (belonging to the mind which is the source of all doubts), but life lived without a self-center, but by the universal Source.
It is not that this cannot be explained rationally, but that no rational explanation can be a substitute to the real thing just as explaining the colour 'red' to someone who is blind is not going to be very effective ultimately.
(1) how do you know that it exists and is as you’ve described?
(2) How would you know what a fellow practitioner is “experiencing” is identical to your “experience”?
(3) Why is the revelation of this “something / state of being / self-(non)existence” unique to your belief? Note that I asked about the revelation not the “state of being” that you’re describing
(4) Is this revelation a truth claim?
(1) Because if it is not 'me' who lives and creates and controls life, then it is the universal Source who is living and creating our lives, in every moment. Even this is a mere complication of matters - in direct experience there is no need for reasoning, there is simply that direct experience and deep clear seeing which leaves no doubts.
(2) If what is described is exactly the same then yes.
(3) Beliefs are many, even within Christianity and its various denominations, there are many contradictory beliefs. See bolded text by Father Thomas Keating http://christians.sgforums.com/forums/1381/topics/400671?page=4
(4) This is a personal revelation and there can be no doubts about it, but I do not know what you mean by 'truth claim'.
Acts 17:28, “In him we live and move and have our being”. From the offset, it must be noted that even though the Apostle Paul quotes pagan Greek writers with approval, this does not necessarily imply that he approves of other things that these writers said or wrote. Note, in this verse that even when we are “living in Christ”, our “being” still exists. No evidence of mysticism in the first two words, as demonstrated in this article. Our personhood remains intact, we are submitted to God but still “have our being”. Nowhere is our self(s) “not existing”.
Acts 17:28 is a perfect example of what I am trying to say.
You must read the whole sentence in context.
Acts 17:28, “In him we live and move and have our being”.
It does not mean there is no more life and existence.
It means our life and existence is lived by the Source. Life is simply referring to the "being", the "existence" that is naturally there. Nothing I am saying is refering to a nihilistic non-existence. It is only the false self that needs to be crucified, not life, not existence. This is not life-denying at all. It is in fact more life-affirming than anything else, because we see and appreciate our life as the manifestation of the divine Source.
What is impeding people from this realization of being lived by the Source is that false, fabricated 'I' that Paul has 'crucified'.
You need to understand what these words refer to, they all refer to different things, and once it is understood you will see no contradictions at all.
The contradiction between Christianity and mysticism is something that mysticism shares with other similar religious practices and can be described in Isaiah 14:12-15, ““How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn! How you are cut down to the ground, you who laid the nations low! 13 You said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to heaven; above the stars of God I will set my throne on high; I will sit on the mount of assembly in the far reaches of the north; 14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.’ 15 But you are brought down to Sheol, to the far reaches of the pit.
The serpent to Eve in the garden of Eden in Genesis 3:5, “and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
In presuming that they can “achieve a unity of the human spirit with the spirit of God” or “to experience God ‘as he is’” (or whatever superfluous language used to describe identical concepts), they have set themselves up for condemnation and failure, as the examples of Eve and Lucifer (Day Star) have shown.
I cannot emphasize to you enough mysticism contradicts orthodox Christianity. Any religious practices similar to mysticism in this aspect prove likewise. Other arguments outlined in my previous posts suggest the same. There are other materials that can support the case but I believe these should be enough.
For further info if interested, consult “Is Eastern Orthodox Christian?” by Dr. Robert A. Morey.
You are completely misunderstanding what 'union' or 'communion' that I mentioned earlier.
It is not that you become God-like. It is not that you become God in person. This becomes an egoic position which is 100% opposite of what true mysticism is about.
It is that you crucify that false self so that you realize and see and experience that you are being lived by God.
It certainly does not mean you become omniscient like God (as I said, God remains to be a mystery, but one thing remains without doubt is that it is no longer 'you' who lives, but Christ lives in you). This is the kind of realization that causes great humility, for mysticism is the path of humble surrender, not great pride and arrogance.
The Mystic Heart - Part 1- The Supreme Identity
Also refer to my explanation in http://christians.sgforums.com/forums/1381/topics/400671?page=6#post_9823095
-
I havent ask my pastor abt christian mysticism yet.
But as far as I know in singapore not much christian mystics here.
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
You need to define what 'personhood' means first.
If it is the separate, egoic identity, that feels like it is at the center of life, experiencing and creating and controlling life/things, then that sense of separate self is merely a fabrication of mind, it is not real, and its illusion can be removed through mystical union. If you be still and quiet for a moment, if you search for where this separate egoic self is, it cannot be found simply because it is mere fabrication. The lies perpetuated by this fabricated self is the source of all sins and needs to be 'crucified'. The problems that this fabricated, false, egoic self causes is being described by Father Thomas Keating in my post in bolded text (http://christians.sgforums.com/forums/1381/topics/400671?page=4)
If however you are refering 'personhood' to the personality or personal conditioning which affects how he behaves and so on, then I do not think that mystical union actually removes that individuated personality. Mystics all have different personalities and continue to do so after 'union'.
I also do not mean that once you have union, there is no more existence or life - existence still continues, Paul did not say "There is no longer life" or "There is no more existence" or "You are annihilated", he simply said "I no longer live, but Christ lives in me" which in other words means that existence and life continues without the fabricated, false self center. He did not deny 'living' or existence. Just that the false fabricated 'I' is being replaced by the true, 'Christ I'.
It is just that now he no longer feels like the separate ego controlling or living life, it is no longer "he who lives, but Christ who lives in me" as Paul said.
Without this false fabricated 'I' in function, life continues to be lived effortlessly, but you clearly see it is not this 'you' who lives, but this higher power who is living and 'creating' and 'powering' your life from moment to moment, like the same energy source (electricity) is powering the different electrical appliances and the TV sets. It is clearly seen that we are all different expressions of the One Source.
In that same analogy, the electrical appliances (an analogy for all the billions of people here on this planet) by itself has no ability to create life or live Life, it is the Source that creates life, that 'empowers' life, that gives Life to all the various 'expressions'. Without life we are just corpses.
It is the separate fabricated 'me' that is the source of all doubts.
Without that false fabricated 'me' that the source of all sins, life continues to flow and function effortlessly by the power of the Source, and there is no longer a single doubts - only pure certainty because there is no longer a sense of division and separation.
This is a life lived not by the false fabricated self (belonging to the mind which is the source of all doubts), but life lived without a self-center, but by the universal Source.
It is not that this cannot be explained rationally, but that no rational explanation can be a substitute to the real thing just as explaining the colour 'red' to someone who is blind is not going to be very effective ultimately.
(1) Because if it is not 'me' who lives and creates and controls life, then it is the universal Source who is living and creating our lives, in every moment. Even this is a mere complication of matters - in direct experience there is no need for reasoning, there is simply that direct experience and deep clear seeing which leaves no doubts.
(2) If what is described is exactly the same then yes.
(3) Beliefs are many, even within Christianity and its various denominations, there are many contradictory beliefs. See bolded text by Father Thomas Keating http://christians.sgforums.com/forums/1381/topics/400671?page=4
(4) This is a personal revelation and there can be no doubts about it, but I do not know what you mean by 'truth claim'.
Acts 17:28 is a perfect example of what I am trying to say.
You must read the whole sentence in context.
Acts 17:28, “In him we live and move and have our being”.
It does not mean there is no more life and existence.
It means our life and existence is lived by the Source. Life is simply referring to the "being", the "existence" that is naturally there. Nothing I am saying is refering to a nihilistic non-existence. It is only the false self that needs to be crucified, not life, not existence. This is not life-denying at all. It is in fact more life-affirming than anything else, because we see and appreciate our life as the manifestation of the divine Source.
What is impeding people from this realization of being lived by the Source is that false, fabricated 'I' that Paul has 'crucified'.
You need to understand what these words refer to, they all refer to different things, and once it is understood you will see no contradictions at all.
You are completely misunderstanding what 'union' or 'communion' that I mentioned earlier.
It is not that you become God-like. It is not that you become God in person. This becomes an egoic position which is 100% opposite of what true mysticism is about.
It is that you crucify that false self so that you realize and see and experience that you are being lived by God.
It certainly does not mean you become omniscient like God (as I said, God remains to be a mystery, but one thing remains without doubt is that it is no longer 'you' who lives, but Christ lives in you). This is the kind of realization that causes great humility, not great pride and arrogance.
Refer to my explanation in http://christians.sgforums.com/forums/1381/topics/400671?page=6#post_9823095
we are talking past each other. you seem to find your place in the abstract and subjective but for me, i think that no amount of language can reconstitute reality and posit another "ultimate reality", for which there is no logical or verifiable basis and cannot comport with reality. in other words, there is no check & balance, it all depends on the individual's experience. In this way, what you're describing lies beyond the realm of truth.
secondly, if as you wrote, "The lies perpetuated by this fabricated self is the source of all sins and needs to be 'crucified'" - then isn't it contradictory to claim that the "separate, egoic identity" is an illusion because after all, it is a lie that this "fabricated self" of yours had constructed this idea too. In other words, that "fabrication of mind" you claim to be unreal is the very same one that is giving you the illusion that it is an illusion.
To be sure, if all of it were an illusion and a fabrication of your mind, how could you know it? Could that illusionary mind of yours be fabricating yet another illusion? This concept contradicts the idea that one can have knowledge that it is an illusion, the contradiction renders this concept incoherent and not epistemically defensible.
(1) positing experience over reason - i disagree.
(2) seems dogmatic and open to subjectivity and endless interpretations, not to mention equivocation (like we think we mean the same thing but we're not).
(3) i looked but i dont see contradictions mentioned there. maybe you could extract them? Anyway, i indicated in an earlier post that he got the definition of faith wrong.
(4) why can't your (or anybody else's) personal revelation be doubted? maybe it's an illusion that i'm having or you are.
About Acts 17:28, in my earlier reply to you, i already posited that "No evidence of mysticism in the first two words, as demonstrated in this article." If you click on that link, the writer explains why the first 2 words of that verse, "in him" or "in Christ" cannot be used mystically.
When we "have our being", we are still unique and differentiated from God and we do not enter into a "union" with Him of any sorts. As in my earlier post, the 3 verses (Gal 2:20, 2 Peter) do not indicate support for mystic ideas.
Thanks for the sharing, AEN. But i think where rationality doesnt exist, the laws of logic don't apply. for example, if the law of non contradiction doesn't apply, if you claim that "level of existence" (for lack of a better word to suit what you've described) exists, it wouldn't be wrong for me to claim that it doesn't exist too.
-
anyone wanna share wads christian myticism? I wanna hear from the christians veiw of christian myticism.
-
secondly, if as you wrote, "The lies perpetuated by this fabricated self is the source of all sins and needs to be 'crucified'" - then isn't it contradictory to claim that the "separate, egoic identity" is an illusion because after all, it is a lie that this "fabricated self" of yours had constructed this idea too.
No, it is not a lie, it is an experiential insight. Lie means it's false. The notion that a separate self is at the center controlling, living, experiencing, creating life is false because such a 'self' entity simply cannot be found anywhere. Once this is exposed and surrendered to the higher power, there can be no more doubts about this point. This is not an idea, the absence of such separative self is a living experiential truth.
To be sure, if all of it were an illusion and a fabrication of your mind, how could you know it? Could that illusionary mind of yours be fabricating yet another illusion? This concept contradicts the idea that one can have knowledge that it is an illusion, the contradiction renders this concept incoherent and not epistemically defensible.
I did not say 'all is an illusion', I said that the separate self sense is an illusion. Life, existence, God, isn't an illusion.
(2) seems dogmatic and open to subjectivity and endless interpretations, not to mention equivocation (like we think we mean the same thing but we're not).
This may require discussion and clarification but it is true that many are having the same experience and insights.
(4) why can't your (or anybody else's) personal revelation be doubted?
Because there is only directness, no room for doubt. It is not an ideological belief, it is a direct experience. Doubts appear when a separate self sense is functioning.
About Acts 17:28, in my earlier reply to you, i already posited that "No evidence of mysticism in the first two words, as demonstrated in this article." If you click on that link, the writer explains why "in him" or "in Christ" cannot be used mystically.
I like someone's reply on the net on this article:
I looked over Robbins’ essay, “In Christ”. Although he is well to the point as regards Gaffin’s assault on Biblical (& Reformed) doctrine, particularly Justification, as well as blurring the “order of salvation”, I find it a bit strained when explicating the uses of the term, en Christou. As though there were an aversion to anything that was not exclusively rational.
Like the peace of God which passes all understanding (Phil 4:7), so the love of God passes our knowledge of it (Eph 3:19). Without doubt I can talk rationally about the union of a husband and wife, depicting the oneness of their flesh and the relations of their hearts as they abide in the Word of God, but I think it is beyond my ability – even as a poet – to put my finger on the quality of the affection they have for one another, and how this ineffable quality, which is, after all, the spirit that quickens the flesh of their bond, as it were….how this intangible could be captured in language I do not know. Is this intangible invalid because it cannot be completely depicted by reason?
When Paul says, “…we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones” what is he saying? And when, after saying in the next verse, of the husband and wife, “they two shall be one flesh”, he declares, “This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church” (Eph 5:30-32), what is he talking about?
We know that in the New Testament, “mysteries” are unpacked. How would you unpack that?
Or in Ephesians 1:4, when the apostle says, “he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world”, it will not do to translate en as “by” or “through” as Clark prefers in other places. We were chosen in Christ. What does that mean? In Christ? Are we in some sense in Him? This pertains to something God has done, and not our experience. Can you do justice to the explication of this verse, this concept?
Steve -
Originally posted by -StarDust-:
anyone wanna share wads christian myticism? I wanna hear from the christians veiw of christian myticism.
what's your view?
from what i've read from AEN, i think there're many areas of non-conformity to orthodox Christianity and misuses verses. It also logically leads to ecumenism (google for the meaning) which again runs contradictory and nullifies the atoning significance of the cross of Christ.
I suspect it might be seen as a bridge that misleads other religions to perceive as common ground between them, which is neither being honest and forthright to other faiths, nor to its own.
a good read would be "Is Eastern Orthodox Christian?” by Dr. Robert A. Morey.
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
No, it is not a lie, it is an experiential insight. Lie means it's false. The notion that a separate self is at the center controlling, living, experiencing, creating life is false because such a 'self' entity simply cannot be found anywhere. Once this is exposed and surrendered to the higher power, there can be no more doubts about this point. This is not an idea, the absence of such separative self is a living experiential truth.
I did not say 'all is an illusion', I said that the separate self sense is an illusion. Life, existence, God, isn't an illusion.
This may require discussion and clarification but it is true that many are having the same experience and insights.
Because there is only directness, no room for doubt. It is not an ideological belief, it is a direct experience. Doubts appear when a separate self sense is functioning.
I like someone's reply on the net on this article:
I looked over Robbins’ essay, “In Christ”. Although he is well to the point as regards Gaffin’s assault on Biblical (& Reformed) doctrine, particularly Justification, as well as blurring the “order of salvation”, I find it a bit strained when explicating the uses of the term, en Christou. As though there were an aversion to anything that was not exclusively rational.
Like the peace of God which passes all understanding (Phil 4:7), so the love of God passes our knowledge of it (Eph 3:19). Without doubt I can talk rationally about the union of a husband and wife, depicting the oneness of their flesh and the relations of their hearts as they abide in the Word of God, but I think it is beyond my ability – even as a poet – to put my finger on the quality of the affection they have for one another, and how this ineffable quality, which is, after all, the spirit that quickens the flesh of their bond, as it were….how this intangible could be captured in language I do not know. Is this intangible invalid because it cannot be completely depicted by reason?
When Paul says, “…we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones” what is he saying? And when, after saying in the next verse, of the husband and wife, “they two shall be one flesh”, he declares, “This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church” (Eph 5:30-32), what is he talking about?
We know that in the New Testament, “mysteries” are unpacked. How would you unpack that?
Or in Ephesians 1:4, when the apostle says, “he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world”, it will not do to translate en as “by” or “through” as Clark prefers in other places. We were chosen in Christ. What does that mean? In Christ? Are we in some sense in Him? This pertains to something God has done, and not our experience. Can you do justice to the explication of this verse, this concept?
SteveAEN, why you even bother. dun waste your time here lar. why bother replying to people who are trapped in dogma. their comments I really dunno what to say lol.
-
Originally posted by 24/7:
what's your view?
from what i've read from AEN, i think there're many areas of non-conformity to orthodox Christianity and misuses verses. It also logically leads to ecumenism (google for the meaning) which again runs contradictory and nullifies the atoning significance of the cross of Christ.
I suspect it might be seen as a bridge that misleads other religions to perceive as common ground between them, which is neither being honest and forthright to other faiths, nor to its own.
a good read would be "Is Eastern Orthodox Christian?” by Dr. Robert A. Morey.
I dunno christian myticism but my pastor told me not to dwelve into christian myticism.