Religion / Theology

[Navigator]

My previous post on Gnosticism was an elaboration of just one source of error introduced into Christianity during/after the life of the Apostles. Another is Platonics (or Platonism), which I will describe now, and the last I will elaborate on is Paganism.

The reason I am delving into these is that I believe, strongly, that the basic and simple truths about the Nature of God, the meaning of life on earth, and the understanding of the hereafter, were lost and obscured by these philosophies/practices. I also believe that many are “non-believers” due to rejecting these philosophies and practices. (of course there are many other reasons, but I just said “many”, not “all”).

Gnosticism, I believe, was the source of many of the beliefs and practices of roman/middle-age monks and monasteries / orders.

Platonism, I believe, is the source of the Nicene Creed that obscures the true nature of God the Father, and of his Son. I believe them to be two separate and distinct individuals.

Platonism believes that all matter in the universe is eternal, and that it was organized by an eternal God. God’s intelligence and will is similarly eternal, and is referred to as the Logos. Believers in Platonics believed that Christ was the incarnation of the Logos. So they believed the “word” described by John was Plato’s Logos.

I believe that this philosophy corrupted original Christianity with the concept of the Nicene Trinity, where one God has many forms. God the Father is some kind of meta-being “so big he can fill the whole universe, yet so small he can fit within our heart”, who has no physical presence. Christ is God the Father made physical, and the Holy Spirit is yet another form of the same “god substance”.

Again, this incomprehensible (in my belief) creed on the nature of God has almost completely obscured the basic and simple truths about the Nature of God, the meaning of life on earth, and the understanding of the hereafter.

[Navigator]

Gnosticism and Platonics were not the only sources of change to early Christian teachings and practices. Paganism was both accommodated and introduced into the practice of early Christians. I enjoyed reading Gibbons volumes on the decline and fall of Rome (although they are difficult reading, I find them engrossing and extremely insightful). He wrote extensively on changes to Christianity due to the things I have been writing about.

Mosheim is rather more direct. He wrote of changes to practices in the early 2d century: “In this century many unnecessary rites and ceremonies were added to Christian worship… These changes, while they destroyed the beautiful simplicity of the gospel, were naturally pleasing to the multitude, who are more delighted with the pomp and splendor of external institutions than with the native charms of rational and solid piety…”. This, I believe, explains the rationale for many of the changes.

Many feast and practices common to Roman paganism were changed to “Christian” celebrations and practices. By the 4th century, the worship of martyrs, the burning of incense, adoration of images & effigies, and other previously foreign practices were introduced.

Fundamental Christian ordinances doctrine concerning them also changed.

Baptism was changed from immersion to sprinkling in the 3rd century, as advocated by Cyprian, bishop of Carthage. This removed the symbolic nature of death, burial, and rebirth by being placed (by immersion), below ground level and being raised again.

Gold and other precious materials began to be used with the sacrament. The doctrine of transubstantiation appears, according to Milner, sometime in the 9th century.

I am again attempting to point out my belief that the original teachings and practices of Christ and his Apostles were increasingly deviated from over time.

[Cool Breeze]

My previous post on Gnosticism was an elaboration of just one source of error introduced into Christianity during/after the life of the Apostles. Another is Platonics (or Platonism), which I will describe now, and the last I will elaborate on is Paganism.

The reason I am delving into these is that I believe, strongly, that the basic and simple truths about the Nature of God, the meaning of life on earth, and the understanding of the hereafter, were lost and obscured by these philosophies/practices. I also believe that many are “non-believers” due to rejecting these philosophies and practices. (of course there are many other reasons, but I just said “many”, not “all”).

Gnosticism, I believe, was the source of many of the beliefs and practices of roman/middle-age monks and monasteries / orders.

Platonism, I believe, is the source of the Nicene Creed that obscures the true nature of God the Father, and of his Son. I believe them to be two separate and distinct individuals.

Platonism believes that all matter in the universe is eternal, and that it was organized by an eternal God. God’s intelligence and will is similarly eternal, and is referred to as the Logos. Believers in Platonics believed that Christ was the incarnation of the Logos. So they believed the “word” described by John was Plato’s Logos.

I believe that this philosophy corrupted original Christianity with the concept of the Nicene Trinity, where one God has many forms. God the Father is some kind of meta-being “so big he can fill the whole universe, yet so small he can fit within our heart”, who has no physical presence. Christ is God the Father made physical, and the Holy Spirit is yet another form of the same “god substance”.

Again, this incomprehensible (in my belief) creed on the nature of God has almost completely obscured the basic and simple truths about the Nature of God, the meaning of life on earth, and the understanding of the hereafter.

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

You act like we don't know already what the Holy Fathers have already stated about these topics, why they rejected them, and even their explanations. I don't think you are very aware of the early church and church fathers as a result.

The question ultimately becomes, why should someone believe Navigator, a 21st century American, about what "original Christianity" is? If you don't realize how funny that sounds, likely, you'll keep speculating into the 1000s of protestant denominations. Oh wait, that's what they did already. You're just another person. I'm sure you know more than Ignatius of Antioch, John Chrysostom, Basil the Great, etc.

Let's have a little humility here, it is a good thing to be reminded of.

ps- I just read the former posts of Navigator and won't bother to explore any more of this, since he his positions are not of Christianity. The most important point of this edit is not to antagonize but rather to point out the fact that his position is unfalsifiable, so it matters not what anyone says. He basically believes or takes the form of a gnostic that there is knowledge that theoretically can be known (and he might know it, but is just guessing) but that generally there was a conspiracy about what happened, what the gospel is, etc. I've encountered this before, not only is it incorrect it's a tautology of nothingness, since it can't be falsified and it is a conspiracy theory belief. It's better to just pray for people, peace, and understand for all.

[Navigator]

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).

[John]

** 26-Oct-2021 World View: The Official New Testament

> This is getting at the fact that the New Testament didn't exist in
> its current form until HUNDREDS of years after the
> deaths/departures of the Apostles.

> It is my belief that this is not only where simple truths were
> lost, like Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ were separate
> individuals, but also the time period where the philosophies of
> the time were introduced into Christian worship. These things
> moved Christianity away from what Christ had taught and what he
> had established.

> Chief among these contemporary non-Christian philosophies were
> Gnosticism and Platonism.

The only comment I would add to this is that the fundamentalist
Christians that I have known, especially in college, would say that
whatever changes were made to the Apostolic letters, whatever letters
were found or lost, whatever led Bishop Athanasius to declare in 367
what were the all and only books of the official New Testament --
whatever went into all those decisions was guided by God at every step
of the way, and so every word in the official New Testament (and the
entire Bible) is the literal inspired word of God.

[tim]

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.

[Navigator]

** 26-Oct-2021 World View: The Official New Testament

The only comment I would add to this is that the fundamentalist
Christians that I have known, especially in college, would say that
whatever changes were made to the Apostolic letters, whatever letters
were found or lost, whatever led Bishop Athanasius to declare in 367
what were the all and only books of the official New Testament --
whatever went into all those decisions was guided by God at every step
of the way, and so every word in the official New Testament (and the
entire Bible) is the literal inspired word of God.

Athanasius is a very important historical figure. Not only did he evidently declare would comprise the New Testament, but he was also involved in labeling about half or more of the Christians alive at the time "heretics" (the Arians, who believed that Christ and his Father were distinct).

I think that he actually did a pretty good job of validating the letters that are in the New Testament. However, I cannot believe that John or Peter or Paul only wrote a couple of letters. They were overseeing the affairs of churches from Judea, Syria, Anatolia, and Greece to Rome itself (at least a third of the Roman World). Back then the only way to communicate was in person or by letter. They were probably writing one or two such letters a week, if not more frequently. I have come to the conclusion that most of what they wrote was lost.

Athanasius made his declaration in 367AD. The last materials which are included in the New Testament, probably 2 Peter or John, were written not much later than 110AD. Given the technology of the time, the passage of more than 250 years, not to mention the anti-Christian persecutions, it is no wonder that much was lost.

Lets say that somehow, a previously lost letter from Peter was found, and it could be authenticated. Would it not be as valid as any of his letters in the New Testament? Or would it be seen as Heretical?

The works I referenced earlier point out that Christian theology and practices were in flux from the time of the Apostles (with the Apostles trying, through their letters, to combat this) to the time of Athanasius and beyond.

Unfortunately, most Christians do not know about the early history of their beliefs. Fortunately, there are enough references and clues in the New Testament to point someone in the right direction to start to figure out some of the things I am writing about here. The first point being that Heavenly Father and Christ are two distinct individuals.

[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.

[John]

** 26-Oct-2021 World View: Generational Theory and Fatalism on personal and generational levels

> 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.

When I write about generational theory, I usually talk about crisis
wars or crisis eras or the 58-year rule, and so forth.

However, there are core concepts in generational theory that are
very deep, and were well understood in Biblical times.

• Generational theory is extremely fatalistic, on the
  generational level, and even on the personal level.
• Catastrophes must happen at regular intervals.
• One reason they occur is that generations forget, and "Those who
  cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it!"
• Another reason is that the population grows exponentially faster
  than the amount of food and other resources, so a war of extermination
  must occur at regular intervals.
• Moses must have understood generational concepts when he foresaw
  that he would lead his people out of Egypt in the Exodus.
• Later, Solomon had a profound grasp of generational theory,
  probably strongly influenced by his knowledge of the Exodus. As he
  writes in Ecclesiastes: "1:9 The thing that hath been, it is that
  which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done:
  and there is no new thing under the sun. 1:10 Is there any thing
  whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old
  time, which was before us. 1:11 There is no remembrance of former
  things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to
  come with those that shall come after."
• I just have to repeat, the three verses just quoted are
  exceptionally deep and profound, and form part of the core
  of generational theory.
• Jeremiah must have been deeply affected by the words of Solomon,
  and he could see in real time the generational changes that would lead
  to disaster, which allowed him to predict with certainty the
  destruction of Jerusalem.
• Next, we move to fatalism on the personal level.
• The most obvious Biblical example is that Jesus knew that he would
  be betrayed, and that he would have to die. I can only speculate how
  this came about. I assume that as a young boy he was familiar with
  the Old Testament and the teachings of Moses, Solomon, Jeremiah, and
  others. He might well have foreseen the destruction of Jerusalem in
  the same way that Jeremiah did. But while Jeremiah was punished by
  being thrown into a pit, Jesus caused a split in the population
  between his followers (the Jews) and his enemies (the Romans). I
  won't attempt to carry this analysis out any further, but somehow
  Jesus foresaw not on the big picture of what was happening (the
  destruction of the temple in Jerusalem) and his own role in it.
• Personally, of course I knew nothing about generational theory
  when I was young. But I look back at what I studied and read in high
  school, college and later, and I see them all as being pieces in a
  jigsaw puzzle of my life that led me to generational theory. I
  believe that Generational Dynamics was my destiny, in the fatalistic
  sense. And it hasn't ended well for me, just as understanding
  generational theory didn't end well for Jeremiah, Jesus or Winston
  Churchill.
• What all of us have in common is that what we believe and how we
  behave for our entire lives depends on our childhood. To take one
  obvious example, why does one person become a Christian, another
  become a Jew, another become a Muslim, another a Hindu? Obviously it
  depends on their childhood. But I go a lot farther, and claim that
  many behaviors and attitudes from out childhood influence us, both
  positively and negatively, for our entire lives.
• I'll give one more example. When Joe Biden was a child, he grew
  up in the Democrat party culture that was still lynching young blacks
  via the KKK, and where Democrats were still bitterly angry that they
  had failed to destroy the Union in the Civil War. The Democrats,
  especially Biden's mentor Robert Byrd, were also bitterly opposed to
  the Republicans' Civil Rights law of 1964, and when that passed it was
  like losing the Civil War to the Republicans all over again.
• The Democrats' slogan when Biden was a child was "The South
  Shall Rise Again!", meaning that there would be a new Civil
  War, and the Democrats would win this one and reinstate slavery.
• Today, Biden has the chance to fulfill his childhood dream. In
  one policy area after another -- the border, Afghanistan, street
  crime, Covid, and so forth -- every policy weakens or destroys
  something in the United States. Not a single one strengthens the
  United States. Biden knows that he's running out of time since the
  2022 elections are coming, so he's rushing to destroy as much of the
  country as he can, while he can. Let's go, Brandon!

One more thing: I said that understanding generational theory does not
end well. King Solomon said the same thing in Ecclesiastes: "For in
much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth
sorrow."

I hope that answers your question. Navigator asked me a similar
question in March of last year, and I responded with a video of Judy
Collins and the Rainbow Connection, with particular attention to the
last verse:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrakVGeTi14

Have you been half asleep and have you heard voices?
I've heard them calling my name.
Is this the sweet sound that calls the young sailors?
The voice might be one and the same.
I've heard it too many times to ignore it.
It's something that I'm s'posed to be.
Somewhere we'll find it, the Rainbow Connection,
The lovers, the dreamers and me.

If you do nothing else tonight, just sit back and listen to the
beautiful Judy Collins singing The Rainbow Connection, and think about
what you're s'posed to be.

(Above was updated to include another quote from Ecclesiastes.)

[Tom Mazanec]

So basically nobody else believes like you, Navigator?