Religion / Theology

[Tom Mazanec]

On what basis do you believe this or make these claims?

I am making my position clear based on a number of sources, most notable of which are:

Mosheim’s “Ecclesiastical History”. He was an eminent theologian from the early 1700's and did extensive research on the history of early Christianity.

Gibbon's "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire". He was an eminent historian from the mid 1700's.

Joseph Milner’s "History of the Church of Christ". He was another eminent theologian, from the late 1700's and also did extensive research on early Christianity.

All 3 were considered brilliant minds and had a detailed understanding of what went on in early Christianity.


Unfortunately, we are already at the point that someone is declaring someone else a "heretic" or a "non-Christian". I understand that what I am stating is not the mainstream. Yet, as I have stated, I believe in God the Father and his son Jesus Christ. I believe that Christ is our Savior and Redeemer, and the literal son of God the Father. Therefore, I believe that I am indeed Christian.

And what I am talking about is based both on the scriptures themselves, and on the research of people who were among the greatest minds of history.

BTW, even Isaac Newton, probably the greatest mind in history, spent most of his time trying to figure out what the lost truths of the Gospel were, and when Christ was coming again to restore them (as he also believed that the Christian doctrine of his day had definitely deviated from what Christ had taught).

All three eminent scholars you cited lived 1700 years after Jesus and all three doubtless had their own axes to grind.

[Tom Mazanec]

You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.

Exodus 20:5

John,

What are your thoughts? The Fourth Turning was spoke of long before Strauss and Howe created their theory.

S&H in their FT book go into millennia long background of these patterns.

[Cool Breeze]

On what basis do you believe this or make these claims?

I am making my position clear based on a number of sources, most notable of which are:

Mosheim’s “Ecclesiastical History”. He was an eminent theologian from the early 1700's and did extensive research on the history of early Christianity.

Gibbon's "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire". He was an eminent historian from the mid 1700's.

Joseph Milner’s "History of the Church of Christ". He was another eminent theologian, from the late 1700's and also did extensive research on early Christianity.

All 3 were considered brilliant minds and had a detailed understanding of what went on in early Christianity.


Unfortunately, we are already at the point that someone is declaring someone else a "heretic" or a "non-Christian". I understand that what I am stating is not the mainstream. Yet, as I have stated, I believe in God the Father and his son Jesus Christ. I believe that Christ is our Savior and Redeemer, and the literal son of God the Father. Therefore, I believe that I am indeed Christian.

And what I am talking about is based both on the scriptures themselves, and on the research of people who were among the greatest minds of history.

BTW, even Isaac Newton, probably the greatest mind in history, spent most of his time trying to figure out what the lost truths of the Gospel were, and when Christ was coming again to restore them (as he also believed that the Christian doctrine of his day had definitely deviated from what Christ had taught).

You are free to do whatever you want, but you know what I'm saying is true, because it can't be denied. I appeal to the apostles and those literally taught by the apostles. You appeal to guys from the 1700s. If you don't think that is bizarre, I won't be able to convince you of anything, in any case. I just feel that this has to be stated at least once, since it is so clear and indisputable. The "greatest mind" doesn't necessarily mean anything to Christianity, since it's not based on rationale or the ego of the mental processing unit we have, rather it has to do with the heart which then can orient the mind properly. Any cursory reading of the Gospel, and St. Paul's letters in particular, makes this evident.

[Cool Breeze]

On what basis do you believe this or make these claims?

I am making my position clear based on a number of sources, most notable of which are:

Mosheim’s “Ecclesiastical History”. He was an eminent theologian from the early 1700's and did extensive research on the history of early Christianity.

Gibbon's "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire". He was an eminent historian from the mid 1700's.

Joseph Milner’s "History of the Church of Christ". He was another eminent theologian, from the late 1700's and also did extensive research on early Christianity.

All 3 were considered brilliant minds and had a detailed understanding of what went on in early Christianity.


Unfortunately, we are already at the point that someone is declaring someone else a "heretic" or a "non-Christian". I understand that what I am stating is not the mainstream. Yet, as I have stated, I believe in God the Father and his son Jesus Christ. I believe that Christ is our Savior and Redeemer, and the literal son of God the Father. Therefore, I believe that I am indeed Christian.

And what I am talking about is based both on the scriptures themselves, and on the research of people who were among the greatest minds of history.

BTW, even Isaac Newton, probably the greatest mind in history, spent most of his time trying to figure out what the lost truths of the Gospel were, and when Christ was coming again to restore them (as he also believed that the Christian doctrine of his day had definitely deviated from what Christ had taught).

All three eminent scholars you cited lived 1700 years after Jesus and all three doubtless had their own axes to grind.

Yes, this isn't a coincidence. It's actually comical in the way I pointed out, which you of course picked up.

[Navigator]

The reason I start with the idea that God the Father and Jesus Christ are separate individuals is that most can understand where this is coming from. If you look at the New Testament in this light, it makes a lot more sense.

Another reason I started with this concept is that it leads directly to the next one. The reason he is called God the Father. I believe that it is because he is the literal Father of our spirits. Hence, he is the Father of every spirit that has ever or will ever inhabit a body on this earth. (Hebrews 12:9 states: Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?)

This is how he knows each of us intimately. And, how he was able to design the history of this world before it was created. (In Job 38, God describes about the creation of the world: 4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?)

I believe that we lived with our Heavenly Father prior to our births, prior even to the creation of this world.

I believe that he created this world to both gift us with a physical body, and to allow us to prove ourselves worthy of him by being tested outside of his presence.

Let me know point out some of the implications of this concept that Heavenly Father is literally the father of our spirits, as well as a completely separate individual from Jesus Christ, and who exists as a perfected and glorified being (meaning like Christ after his resurrection).

I believe that we lived with our Heavenly Father for a long long long time. So long that he knew each of us intimately as individuals. He knew us so very well that he knew how to design history around us interacting with each other.

Each of us existed as an individual. We had different talents and personalities. We were taught by our Heavenly Father, and we learned, progressed and matured. This is alluded to in God’s interaction with the prophet Jeremiah (ch1:4-5):
4 Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, 5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

To me, this means that Heavenly Father knew Jeremiah perfectly well, BEFORE he was born, and that Jeremiah had stood out from among his peer spirits, so much so that he was chosen by Heavenly Father for the specific mission he was given in mortality.

At some point, we had progressed as far as we could as purely spiritual beings. To progress further, and to prove worthy of becoming an heir of our Heavenly Father (as preached by Christ), we would need to experience physical existence.

Furthermore, in this physical existence, we would be subjected to trials and temptations. It would be our choice how we would react to these.
Heavenly Father recognized that all of us, except one, would at some point give in to temptation and sin. The only one who would not was Jesus. I believe, like Jeremiah, Jesus was chosen for his particular mission, which was to provide all of us with a means to be able to be forgiven of our sins, so that we could return to our Heavenly Father. I believe that Jesus fulfilled his mission, and was the sinless sacrifice that pays for our sins if we will let him.

In order for us to go through the trial of life, we would need to have our memories blocked of our pre-existence. This way we are required to search for truth, to exercise faith, and to prove ourselves. Like little children, we often act very differently when our parents aren’t around. We need to prove ourselves in a similar way to our Heavenly Father.

Our lives and our circumstances in mortality are different because we are different individuals. We progressed differently, had different talents, strengths, weaknesses and even different personalities, even before we were born. Our lives are designed specifically for us based on what we did in the pre-existence, what our talents and interests are, and what Heavenly Father felt would be the appropriate test for us.

This has a number of significant implications, some of the primary ones being:

1. Mortality’s experiences for people are vastly different for good reasons.

2. We are NOT taking the exact same test. Our lives are designed to test each of us individually. What is a proper test for me in mortality can be vastly different from the proper test for someone else.

3. Mortality is NOT the utmost of our concerns. It is a very small fraction of eternity. What matters is what we DO in Mortality, do we follow Christ's example in doing good, or not.

4. Bad things can happen, even to very good people. It may be that what is happening is part of their test, or of the test of those they interact with.

5. In the end, each of us will be judged (by Christ) on how we did on our test. The results will be fair, and this will be acknowledged by all participants. The results of the test will determine our fates, rewards, and punishments for the eternities to come.

[Navigator]

When we come into this life, we are taking the test our Heavenly Father prepared for us.

The test is if we will do what is expected of us when we are on our own.

To me, the test has two basic parts. Faith and Obedience.

The faith part is about my willingness to exercise faith in God, or not. God will never prove himself to anyone. Direct knowledge is just that, proof. With it, there is no need for faith.

It would be impossible for God to test us “on our own” if he provided proof of his existence and his overwatch. Many think that because there is no proof, there is no God. And therefore, unfortunately, they believe there are no consequences (or very light ones) for their bad actions. This is getting at the second part of life’s test, obedience to God’s laws.

The most basic of God’s laws are the Ten Commandments. But we also know, through Christ’s teachings, that loving each other (even our enemies) and taking care of each other is of the utmost importance. We are responsible to take care of widows, orphans, the disabled, the poor and downtrodden should we have means to do so.

God will never force or compel someone to keep his commandments, to obey his laws, or even to have faith. It is all voluntary. Many believe that God’s laws are “restrictive” and prevent them from “having fun”. I personally have found that God’s laws are the equivalent of “don’t touch a hot stove”, “don’t stick your fingers in an electric socket”, or “don’t cross the street before looking both ways”. They are all meant to protect us from pain and harm.

God also asks us to make specific covenants with him. The most important is baptism. Baptism by immersion is symbolic of death and rebirth. In being baptized we are promising to lay aside our sinful selves and be reborn as someone who strives to follow Christ and God’s laws. In return, our sins are forgiven, and we are prepared to receive the Holy Ghost, who can provide us with additional guidance and comfort in our lives. I believe that we can only make such a covenant with God when we are old enough to know what sin is, that is, to recognize the difference between right and wrong.

Our most important responsibilities in this life are towards our families. I believe that the family unit was instituted of God. It is how we best take care of each other. Strong families are not only a source of strength to individuals, but they are also the bedrock of society. Without strong families, any society will degenerate and crumble into anarchy.

Parents have many experiences similar to our Heavenly Father’s. We have children enter our lives and we are responsible to care for them, teach them, and prepare them. We want them to grow up to be like us, or better.

I believe we will be judged more about how we handle our family responsibilities than almost anything else we do in this life. I also believe that the bonds and relationships we have in our families can last past this life, if we want them to.

[Bob Butler]

The most basic of God’s laws are the Ten Commandments. But we also know, through Christ’s teachings, that loving each other (even our enemies) and taking care of each other is of the utmost importance. We are responsible to take care of widows, orphans, the disabled, the poor and downtrodden should we have means to do so.

God will never force or compel someone to keep his commandments, to obey his laws, or even to have faith. It is all voluntary. Many believe that God’s laws are “restrictive” and prevent them from “having fun”. I personally have found that God’s laws are the equivalent of “don’t touch a hot stove”, “don’t stick your fingers in an electric socket”, or “don’t cross the street before looking both ways”. They are all meant to protect us from pain and harm.

If you take the Two Commandments seriously, God's commandments are to love God and to love one’s fellow man. Theses are commandments to love, not to avoid hot stoves and electric sockets and other harm.

This is also the opposite of tribal thinking. Tribal thinking suggest putting yourself as superior to those unlike you and indulge in prejudice, oppression and violence. Tribal thinking is a failure of God’s test. It reflects accurately what many humans practically do, but is the opposite of what Christianity suggests we should do.

This has me scratching my head about conservative Christians. The two philosophies seem pretty much in opposition, loving all rather than hating some.

Not that I would argue from Christianity. Truth IMHO comes from observing the world rather than any particular religious truth.

[Navigator]

But we also know, through Christ’s teachings, that loving each other (even our enemies) and taking care of each other is of the utmost importance. We are responsible to take care of widows, orphans, the disabled, the poor and downtrodden should we have means to do so.

The bit about loving each other and taking care of each other is "of the utmost".

I am not sure what you are disagreeing with.

I think you are wrong to say all conservatives are full of hate. If they proclaim to by Christian, it is hypocritical. I have never espoused any kind of hatred. I certainly see plenty of hate and especially hypocrisy on the other side.

It is a gross misrepresentation to classify "all" as "being a certain way". This certainly leads to misunderstanding and conflict.

[Bob Butler]

But we also know, through Christ’s teachings, that loving each other (even our enemies) and taking care of each other is of the utmost importance. We are responsible to take care of widows, orphans, the disabled, the poor and downtrodden should we have means to do so.

The bit about loving each other and taking care of each other is "of the utmost".

I am not sure what you are disagreeing with.

I think you are wrong to say all conservatives are full of hate. If they proclaim to by Christian, it is hypocritical. I have never espoused any kind of hatred. I certainly see plenty of hate and especially hypocrisy on the other side.

It is a gross misrepresentation to classify "all" as "being a certain way". This certainly leads to misunderstanding and conflict.

True enough. Some Christian conservatives are indeed Christian. Assuming they all are is incorrect too. The philosophies conflict.

[jdcpapa]

I would like to introduce a theoretical model of reality based on quantum physics. My wife is a devout Christian. I follow Christianity. She has pointed me to references in the Bible in support of this model of reality. Over time, I have come to terms with "belief systems". I am not a "believer" in this model but "accept" it with open minded skepticism as a probable alternate reality. Tom Campbell and his book My Big Toe (theory of everything) is one source among many others.

The reason I start with the idea that God the Father and Jesus Christ are separate individuals is that most can understand where this is coming from. If you look at the New Testament in this light, it makes a lot more sense.

According to some quantum physicists Consciousness is all and all is consciousness. God is Consciousness. Christ is a subset of Consciousness. A sentient being. God can manifest as a sentient being or remain as consciousness (a particle, wave or both).

The reason he is called God the Father. I believe that it is because he is the literal Father of our spirits. Hence, he is the Father of every spirit that has ever or will ever inhabit a body on this earth. (Hebrews 12:9 states: Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?)

Consciousness is the creator of individual units of Consciousness (IUOC) An IUOC is a metaphor for spirit. Hence God is the father of the spirit.

This is how he knows each of us intimately.

He knows us intimately because we are made in his image and that image is consciousness.

I believe that we lived with our Heavenly Father prior to our births, prior even to the creation of this world.

IUOCs (spirits) are sentient beings. They are consciousness. They existed prior to the creation of earth.

I believe that he created this world to both gift us with a physical body, and to allow us to prove ourselves worthy of him by being tested outside of his presence.

The earth was created so we as spirit (not the you you know as you) could experience physical reality to advance the evolution of Consciousness.