Catholics are not Christian?

It depends on your definition of Christians.

If Christians where supposed to be the anointed ones and share the secret of anointment (energetic body states) then Christians have not measured up to what they claim to be.

The Sikhs, Taoists, Buddhist and Hindus are doing a better job of not being opposed to objective picture on how light/chi/kundalini work. They can handle the unknown becoming known. Some ideas can be used very successfully for the ones who want verification of that we live in a reality that transcends materialism if Quntum physics entanglement have not proven it yet for them

In the experience seekers vs words (faith) followers duality:
Yeshua would fit in the experience seeker crowd vs the pharisees crowd (where dogmatic faith driven resides).
Sufi would be the experience seeker crowd vs the Sunni/Shia.

I should point out that I am speaking as a group and I am not very specific so my words are a simplification. There are individuals that are amazing within every label that do not deserve any criticism. And on one level sooner or later every souls realizes part of it's amazing potential.

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: Akragon
"The Pope is against Christ" goes back to Luther.
If one believes that Catholics are following the antichrist, then denying them the label "Christian" is a fairly natural deveopment. It just seems to have happened gradually and locally.
It doesn't make sense to people who have learned history, but who learns history nowadays?

I go with Parson Thwackum;

By religion I mean Christianity, by Christianity I mean Protestantism, by Protestantism I mean the Church of England as established by law.

I have met catholics who have a deep desire and love for Christ, in body and spirit.
Who do not worship saints or Mary
They live their lives better than many protestants I have met

You will know them not by their affiliations but by their fruits.
Book of Rags

Beautiful beings.

Though actions (fruit of the Spirit) are just as important "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control."

I agree 100%

a reply to: Akragon

There are those who proclaim themselves Christian but do not believe in the deity of, or follow the teachings of Jesus, or even believe that He existed and/or died and/or rose again.

Some proclaim they are Catholic, some Protestant and some are from offshoot cults. It does not make them so, nor does proclaiming that you are a Christian make you one.

A true Christian believes that Jesus Christ is deity, that He incarnated as a man, was crucified, dead and buried and rose again from the dead and that He endured all this so that we may be forgiven of our sins and may be reconciled to God.

originally posted by: LittleByLittle
It depends on your definition of Christians.

If Christians where supposed to be the anointed ones and share the secret of anointment (energetic body states) then Christians have not measured up to what they claim to be.

The Sikhs, Taoists, Buddhist and Hindus are doing a better job of not being opposed to objective picture on how light/chi/kundalini work. They can handle the unknown becoming known. Some ideas can be used very successfully for the ones who want verification of that we live in a reality that transcends materialism if Quntum physics entanglement have not proven it yet for them

In the experience seekers vs words (faith) followers duality:
Yeshua would fit in the experience seeker crowd vs the pharisees crowd (where dogmatic faith driven resides).
Sufi would be the experience seeker crowd vs the Sunni/Shia.

I should point out that I am speaking as a group and I am not very specific so my words are a simplification. There are individuals that are amazing within every label that do not deserve any criticism. And on one level sooner or later every souls realizes part of it's amazing potential.

Have you ever heard about Christian Mysticism?

It's a rich tradition; not only Sufis or Buddhist monks have a mystical life.


Mysticism has always been a facet of the Christian religions and experience



Actually my personal belief is that mysticism is the true personal expression of all faiths. Religions are just the social aspects of them and as such, they belong to the outer, material world, not the inner, spiritual one. They aren't totally bad or useless, but they certainly never ever replace the personal, internal spiritual journey of the individual which is eventually the most important aspect of all faiths.

a reply to: chr0naut

No. No human can be god. Jesus was human. Most saints once were human. Now that their dead, they can be intercessors for humans, because they reside with god.

originally posted by: Aedaeum
a reply to: markosity1973

Again, I don't believe that either. Christ gave us an example of how to pray: "Our Father in heaven...". Praying to "Jesus" is not what he wanted and in my opinion a dire misrepresentation to why he came in the first place. Anyone who prays outside of how he told us to pray, should be questioning why they would pray any other way. I'm sure that's not going to be a popular opinion with most Christians.

"Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it."

It would seem fairly clear in this passage that Jesus was suggesting that we pray to Him.

a reply to: DISRAELI

Wow never heard of the four loves. Interesting indeed.

Will have to read up on that.

But before i do
(ignorant response given i still need to read up).

How can Gods love be unconditional when he hates us as much as he supposedly loves us?

There are many passeges in the bible where Gods absolutly pissed at us and murders thousands at a time... like Moses and the 10 commandments as one example.

Ever heard of the Wrath of God?

..... or ...... Day of the Lord?

Unconditional love.... i think not.

Why send someone you love to Hell for an eternity of pain and torture?

If ive got this wrong happy to be educated.

Coomba98


Edit...

So if God is love or Agape as said in John 4:8

'Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love.'

So 'Hatred' comes from love? Evil comes from love? Wrath comes from love... the Agape love that is.

a reply to: Akragon

Catholic means Universal...

Okay, well that's not the way the OP is worded. If you want to go back to the original meaning of catholic, which means universal, then it doesn't have anything to do with the Roman Catholic (capital C) Church because it didn't exist at that time. When you use Catholic with a capital C it leads people to believe you mean Roman Catholics/people who practice Catholicism.

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: chr0naut

No. No human can be god. Jesus was human. Most saints once were human. Now that their dead, they can be intercessors for humans, because they reside with god.

Apparently God disagrees: "A child is born to us, a son is given to us, and authority will be on his shoulders. He will be named Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. There will be vast authority and endless peace for David’s throne and for his kingdom, establishing and sustaining it with justice and righteousness now and forever." Isaiah 9:6-7

Or here in John 20: 28-31: "Thomas responded to Jesus, 'My Lord and my God!' Jesus replied, 'Do you believe because you see me? Happy are those who don’t see and yet believe." I don't hear Jesus disagreement here? But read on... " Then Jesus did many other miraculous signs in his disciples’ presence, signs that aren’t recorded in this scroll. But these things are written so that you will believe that Jesus is the Christ, God’s Son, and that believing, you will have life in his name." nope, still no disagreement with being called God. Knowing Jewish blasphemy laws, Jesus was either allowing a blasphemy, or He was God.

If Jesus was just another man, then his death was just as pointless and powerless to save us as any other man's death.

originally posted by: Aedaeum
a reply to: Lucidparadox

In Christianity, you can't make up your sin with any amount of "positive" actions. Reciting anything is nothing but vain repetition.

You get on your knees with a contrite heart and spirit. There is no pope or priest giving you direction, just you and your Father in heaven. You're repenting. That's the only way to address sin for a Christian. Our Father wants to know what's in our hearts, not what's on our lips.

If you are christian, everything you do should be a 'positive action'. But because it isn't, and you fear repercussions, you turn to ritual in order to feel closer to your god. Different people prefer different rituals. The goal is the same.

It is not up to christians to judge others' level or righteousness of faith by their religious practices, or by any means at all. According to christian teachings, it is the job of your god to decide that or not. According to christian teachings, assuming that you know better than your god who is truly repentant is blasphemy.

Not every christian chooses to go to church to worship. Does that make them less christian? Not according to your god, if you are christian. If you need spiritual guidance on the right thing to do, do you not consult with your pastor?
And do you not trust that he or she will give you the right direction?

If so, what is the difference between that and confessing your transgressions to a priest, and trusting that he will give you the proper penitence to guide you on your way to your god and his forgiveness?

Spirituality is a journey, and it is different for everyone. Ritual, prayer, texts and teachings, symbols such as crosses and fish and the little wafers and holy water...all of those things are tools by which to get closer to your god. If you lived in a place where there were no churches or priests or religious icons or bibles or any of those tools, you'd still find a way to make that connection. If there is no quiet place to pray, you seek the stillness within.

It's semantics. The only one, if you are a christian, who knows what's in your heart is your god. The bible alleges that he in fact said exactly that. No matter what method you prefer to praise him, ultimately it is between you and him.

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: DISRAELI

By religion I mean Christianity, by Christianity I mean Protestantism, by Protestantism I mean the Church of England as established by law.

Isn't that what Constantine did?

You mean Theodosius I. Constantine ended the persecution of Christians by legalizing the religion, Theodosius I made it the state religion of the Roman Empire by law some 65 years later.

originally posted by: chr0naut

"Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it."

It would seem fairly clear in this passage that Jesus was suggesting that we pray to Him.

Yet God and Yeshi are clearly two separate entities. Otherwise Gods one messed up schizophrenic being.

Maybe he needs a hug me gently jacket?

Coomba98

originally posted by: coomba98
Ever heard of the Wrath of God?

..... or ...... Day of the Lord?

I have done threads on both of them;
Jealousy and wrath are not emotions
What is the Day of the Lord?
I refer you to those threads.

The short answer is that he is "God of love" by his own definition of love, not by yours.

originally posted by: coomba98

originally posted by: chr0naut

"Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it."

It would seem fairly clear in this passage that Jesus was suggesting that we pray to Him.

Yet God and Yeshi are clearly two separate entities. Otherwise Gods one messed up schizophrenic being.

Maybe he needs a hug me gently jacket?

Coomba98

Is my computer the Internet, or is your computer or is it some other computer out there somewhere? Is it a particular cable or networking hardware?

God is greater than humans but also in the same way that the Internet is greater than any network stuff. That does not mean that God cannot incorporate human identities or that the Internet cannot incorporate the network components.

Take a look at your own body, are you separate from your cells or are you the incorporation of your cells and their various functions?

It is not unreasonable to have multiple persons within the Godhead.

a reply to: DISRAELI

Yeah but you didnt respond to my queries on that. Probably because i queried it in another thread.

But... as per the John quote God is Love. Not a God of love, but that may just be semantics given context.

God murdering thousand... i cannot see this as love.

God sending people to Hell for eternity... i cannot see this as love.

God making a bet with the devil (Job).... i cannot see that as love.

God being angry and wrathful ... i cannot see this as love.

Or am i missing the point?

Coomba98

a reply to: chr0naut

This is different. Going by that belief everything in the universe is God. Even you are a part of God.

Yeshi prays to his father many times. Begs him when he finds out his going to die.

Schizophrenic?

Coomba98

originally posted by: coomba98
But... as per the John quote God is Love. Not a God of love,

To be exact, he says "God is AGAPE".

.. i cannot see this as love.

As I have already pointed out, your definition of love is not what matters.

a reply to: SpaceGoatFart

Actually my personal belief is that mysticism is the true personal expression of all faiths. Religions are just the social aspects of them and as such, they belong to the outer, material world, not the inner, spiritual one. They aren't totally bad or useless, but they certainly never ever replace the personal, internal spiritual journey of the individual which is eventually the most important aspect of all faiths.

But that mysticism is not in the forefront and from my point of view not known to the Christians as a whole. The same thing as Kabbalah to the Jewish and Sufi to the Muslim. Only a segment of every faith are taught more instead of pushing for knowledge to be shared.

But being a mystic that really walks down the rabbit hole have been very dangerous in history. Inquisition on witches being a perfect example where probably some knew about placebo energetic manipulation. Sufi being killed for not being the right Islam since it is beyond the Muslim duality.

Some parts of the bible can be viewed as how light/chi/kundalini flows thru the human body and what fire and water represent. But that understanding/view have not reached the majority of Christian.

a reply to: Akragon

It is not so much that Catholicism teaches a false Christ, since there is only one. However, what they do as an organisation and the way they present Christ to the masses, as some distant thing that can only be connected with through priests and cardinals and a huge, human hierarchy, which has historically acted in unchristian fashion on a repeated and extreme basis, is false.

Christ did not order the creation of Catholicism or any hierarchy of human servants to do his bidding and be the conduit for believers communications with His personage. Christ said "None come to the father, but through me." He made no mention of a succession of unnaccountable bastards with deplorable morals and questionable pasts, nor of the idiotic notion that a person must deal with a physical institution or its representatives, in order to gain His ear.

Ergo, the Catholic method, which insists on allegiance to the physical entities which make up the Church, far more than it ever does allegiance to God Almighty or the Holy Spirit, or Jesus Christ, is flawed and not of Christ in truth.

a reply to: DISRAELI

That was the context i was talking about in John. The Agape.

Definition:
unconditional love that transcends, that serves regardless of circumstances. Regarding Gods Agape of man and mans Agape for God.

So the jews worshipping a golden idol in the Moses story that angered God.... Gods response was Agape??? How many did he kill?

How can murder be in the same class as Agape?
How can eternal torture be classed as Agape?
How can making a bet with the devil to torture a devoted Job be consideredAgape?

Coomba98