Divine or Demonic?

originally posted by: Terpene
I see a lot of Christians here hoping for the end times, and I wonder about many things concerning that issue.

A very general thing I ask myself often is who has the authority to decide that someone is the antichrist, or consecutively the second coming?
Is it the Vatican? Historically, they are the only ones that had the authority to declare someone was divine, rather being demonic. It seems to me a lot of the miracles performed by said hollies would be labeled as demonic under different circumstances. Which makes me wonder is it just the Vatican word that makes all the difference?

I frequently hear Christians say the Vatican can’t be trusted, which leaves us with a big dilemma, which is there is no authority to which we could turn. Instead, we will be left with our own judgment. This is not a bad thing, yet at this point we would be interpreting the bible on our own terms.

If the scenario described by the bible is to pass and one's interpretation does not align with what the Vatican is saying, would one become a heretic?

Does it boil down to personal belief, making it nothing more than believes that are not backed up by an institution, like any other human that has believes?

It just seems very arbitrary when it comes to the distinction between demonic and divine miracles, and who is going to be that arbitrary, if we don’t trust the Vatican?

(1)

Rev. 1:1 - The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

Rev. 1:2 - Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.

Rev. 1:3 - Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.


(2)

John 14:6 – “I am the way, the truth, and the life. ... No one comes to the father except through me.”

Acts 4:12 - "And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

John 3:17 - For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.

Romans 6:23 - For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

2 Peter 3:9 -
The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.

Doesn't matter what the Vatican or any other group says. All that matters is whether or not we believe in and accept the gift offered by Jesus. He is the only way we can have eternal life once our time here is over.

a reply to: Terpene

Where did the divine defined divinity for us humans to actually understand what it is?

In the Holy Bible.

As you said God is the only one who has an understanding of the divine

Never did I say that. Those would be your words. I take no responsibility for your words.

One need not create a definition to comprehend a definition. I also know what a "tree" is. Does it follow that I have some inherent authority to define "tree"? I know what a "car" is; I was not around when the word was defined.

You are attempting to redefine, or at least undefine, words which make you uncomfortable. I cannot help you with that. I responded to your OP in an attempt to clarify some things you asked; I did not do so to debate reality. I have no problem whatsoever answering questions; I have no interest in debating someone who refuses to accept definitions which have existed longer than both of us put together.

Please, feel free to refine "divinity" any way you want to. You can make the word mean what, to the rest of society, the word "cat" means... none of my business. However, I will warn you that you might experience some difficulty communicating.

Or, using your redefinition concept, that might come out as

"Junk mash drip why guessing under design mythicism zero. Burn pond elite, laser grave unique better."

Maybe we now understand each other?

TheRedneck

a reply to: Terpene

There is a fine line btwn demon and divine.
Finer, btwn Divine and Demon?

* Ying-yang principle: Divine is already Divine. Demon, has the 50-50 chance to change.

Divine, needn't change.

a reply to: Terpene

What if I'm more interested in the diffrent interpretations, as there is obviously no authority to tell whose interpretation is right, it comes to personal understanding and interpretations.

Carry on then. You will get plenty of interpretations. Revelations has been hotly debated since it was first distributed. Churches have split over it, and scholars have practically had fist fights over it. Everyone knows what they believe about the end times, few know why they believe their version of it.

a reply to: TheRedneck

I can't see your answers...but that is on me.

You are certainly entitled to your reality, and I'm reserving that right for me too. you don't want to discuss differing views on reality because they make you feel uncomfortable.

Wait till God tries to explain his reality to you, that will blow your mind. This is just baby steps, and you obviously can't even take them.

Yes I gladly unterstand you, being on top is not my thing anyways...

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: LABTECH767

First you are not addressing my questions, you are preaching something you have found to be true for yourself. It reminds me vaguely of politicians that can't or won't answer a question.

Second

First of all Christianity is NOT a death cult, that was a claim made since heathen Roman times.

I missed the part, where I claimed that?

I only have an issue with the "demonic" genocide described if no one can accurately define whos who.

I have this feeling that things will not turn out how Christians hope and that somehow they will find them self's on the accused bench rather than the accusers bench.

I think There is too much unbalanced polarity in most of them to be able to enter a Golden Age.

Christ would would have you describe yourself as a child of the light if you followed Him but you won't find that in the Bible.

a reply to: mysterioustranger

Divinity is stagnation?

a reply to: Smigg

He would still have described me as a child of light even if I WOULD NOT follow him.

He seems to be a very tolerant, forgiving and patient dude. I can't imagine he cared all that much about which god you pray to.

He would chase out the money changers though...

Divinity and Demons are the same thing. It is your interpretation alone that makes the distinction.
The source is one and the same.

a reply to: Terpene

You are certainly entitled to your reality, and I'm reserving that right for me too.

The reality I mention is not that of the divine, but of language. I do not claim to understand God; I do attempt to earnestly try to understand His Word.

What I gave you was the definition of the divinity of God, as spoken in the Bible by God Himself.

Exodus 3:14

And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

God is because God is. There is no other reason. I am (I exist) because God made me. You exist because God made you. The earth exists as it is because God made it. nothing else in this universe exists without owing that existence to something or someone else... only God (Yahweh, Jehovah, or whatever proper name one wishes to ascribe to Him).

That is the definition of divinity based on the document that introduces divinity. Not based on me or "my reality."

Look, I get it. You question God. And there's really nothing wrong with that; I did so for a long time. God has even challenged others to "prove" Him.

Malachi 3:10

Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.

My only admonishment to you is how you have chosen to question God. God cannot be proven without relying on God to do so. You are attempting to "prove" (more properly, "disprove") God using definitions of words... but God is not dependent on the words we use to describe Him. Those words are simply boxes of sounds we use to communicate with each other. The importance lies not in the boxes used, but in the ideas they contain.

There is a rose bush in my side yard. It I walk outside and decide to call it a cat, and I call it a cat every time I think about it and every time i talk about it, it will still never chase mice or say "meow." It does not matter to the rose that I call it a cat; it is still a rose. All I have done is make people think I don't know what a rose or a cat is.

I will have changed nothing of consequence; I will only have made it impossible to communicate with others about roses or cats.

In the same vein, attempting to call God "demonic" does not change what God is, nor does it make Him not exist. It changes nothing, except your ability to communicate with others on the subject. I made an attempt to correct that error in communication, and I seem to have failed. It is difficult to fill a cup which is already full.

Wait till God tries to explain his reality to you, that will blow your mind.

I have no doubt of that. And I'm looking forward to it.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

quote source

How does the Bible define divinity?

The divinity in the Bible is considered the Godhead itself, or God in general. Or it may have reference to a deity. Even angels in the Psalms are considered divine or elohim, as spirit beings, in God's form. In the New Testament the Greek word θεῖον (theion) in the Douay Version, is translated as "divinity".

You keep bringing examples of naming material things for proving I'm communicating wrong. But we are talking about things that are not of the material realm.

We can not really know what the others interpretation of divine is. This thread is a good example for it, many differing interpretations on it.
Obviously this wont happen with a cat or a tree, but take love or pain and we are in the same ballpark.

I think these concepts and the actual thruth behind the words are better understood the more differing interpretation one can include into the definition of said concept.
Almost as if we need eachother to understand them.

Imagine some could only see, some could only hear, some only smell, some only taste, some only feel.
If we would come across a cat it would take some time until we had shared all our impressions and came to a common understanding of that cat.
If any of us thinks his is the only correct interpretation, maybe because he found the cat first or for whatever reason, the truth about the cat will never fully be revealed

In my endeavour to understand Gods words I think it's detrimental to listen to his children.

a reply to: Terpene

Mate perhaps you don't fully understand what the Vatican and Catholicism is so allow me to elaborate.

Catholics are very dissimilar from most Christians , Christians believe in a personal relationship with Christ they Pray , they ask for the Son of God to Forgive there sins and they embrace his love and So it is they are saved.

Catholics do not believe in a personal relationship with Christ , they believe that Christ can only be reached through the Church or more over a Priest Via the Confessional and Communion , This is how the Catholics consolidate the power they hold the keys to Christ and there fore Heaven .

The Vatican is just the Center of Power for Catholicism , it is not the center of power for Christianity .

And as far as Demonic and Divine goes , they both come from the same place.

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

Mate this makes alot of sense to me, and will clear alot of things up, once it has settled. Thanks

The demonic is Satan and his evil spirits that go around the world seeking the ruin of souls, that influence men into war, that tempt all under the watchful eye of God, who restricts what he can and cannot do.

It is right to rejoice in the second coming, but God said humanity will go thru great tribulation that will precede his coming from the clouds, such as disease, which we are going thru now, then war, then famine, then all combined that God will have no choice but to come, and he alone knows when that day and hour is, so we wait and watch for the signs as Heaven and earth clash and unite once and for all.

a reply to: asabuvsobelow
Of course Catholics believe in a personal relationship with Christ and God, it’s the only way to the Father.

a reply to: Terpene

From your source:

In the New Testament the Greek word θεῖον (theion) in the Douay Version, is translated as "divinity".

I need go no farther than that. The statement is inaccurate. The word "divinity" is itself never used in the King James Version (which is the oldest accepted English version of the Holy Bible). It is also not exactly the word "theion"... the Greek word is theiotēs, and is translated in the King James Version as "Godhead"... exactly one time.

The statement insinuates that the Greek word is used multiple times. While it does not state that directly, the implication seems clear to me.

To be fair, the word theiotēs does indeed mean the same as the English word "divine."

According to the dictionary, "divine" means "of a god." That is the definition, like it or not. I previously quoted the passage where God Himself defines why He is God: because He owes His existence to no one or no thing. That comes from the Bible itself, not from a scholar's interpretation of the Bible. Scholars are men; they are fallible. God is not a man; God is infallible.

Which circles back to my first reply to you: why do you seek information from an "authority" for that which is right before your own eyes?

We can not really know what the others interpretation of divine is. This thread is a good example for it, many differing interpretations on it.
Obviously this wont happen with a cat or a tree, but take love or pain and we are in the same ballpark.

You did not start this thread based on nuance of a definition; you started it based on two words which are polar opposites: "divine" and "demonic." You might as well call a "cat" a "tree" and vice versa.

Imagine some could only see, some could only hear, some only smell, some only taste, some only feel.
If we would come across a cat it would take some time until we had shared all our impressions and came to a common understanding of that cat.

If we were discussing a total unknown, perhaps that would be the case. However, God is not a total unknown. The Bible exists in large part to explain God, at least as much as our feeble minds can comprehend.

Let's use your own example. Say one person can see and knew what a cat looked like, but cannot hear it. Another can hear and knew a cat could purr and say "meow,' but cannot see it. Now, which would make sense? To combine those two senses to know what a cat looks like and what a cat sounds like, or to say that based on it's appearance, you believe a cat goes "bark, bark" and therefore you will discount what the blind man heard?

In my endeavour to understand Gods words I think it's detrimental to listen to his children.

Who, then, will you listen to? All humans are God's children (me, you, and every other human who ever lived, including Adolph Hitler and Mother Teresa). All spirits are God's children (yes, that includes Lucifer too). You just removed all possible information from the equation. There is no one you can now listen to, including yourself.

That demonstrates, again, how little you actually understand the subject you are discussing.

TheRedneck

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

Catholics do not believe in a personal relationship with Christ

I hope you stated that in error.

How can one be a follower of someone they do not know?

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: asabuvsobelow

Catholics do not believe in a personal relationship with Christ

I hope you stated that in error.

How can one be a follower of someone they do not know?

TheRedneck

allow me to re-word.

Catholics do not Practice a Personal relationship with Christ , They believe there salvation is obtained through the Priest .

The Priest is there Conduit to Christ .

I see the bible more as predictive programming than anything divine...

Hear here. Like the simple act of prayer..It changes ones physiology with body mechanics. My Catholic pals call it Catholic aerobics..

I had no idea that some Priests carry sidearms. One told me that the only use he could see for me would be to contain Legion without having to waste the pork..Im paraphrasing, but it was something close to that.

The Vaticans global authority can't be underestimated. They are active in areas of the world that nobody goes and most aren't allowed, or would be killed if one ventured there.

I don't give anyone the authority to determine my heart in nature. Not even the Vatican tough guys.

YOU are the miracle. It can't be heresy.

Now can nature be manipulated into something terrible? Thats actually not as cut and dried as it seems. As a thing is just a thing, and without human control its just a thing.

a reply to: TheRedneck

I need go no farther than that. The statement is inaccurate. The word "divinity" is itself never used in the King James Version (which is the oldest accepted English version of the Holy Bible). It is also not exactly the word "theion"... the Greek word is theiotēs, and is translated in the King James Version as "Godhead"... exactly one time.

Hmmm, I thought the definition is in the bible, but now it seems only trough interpretation, which undoubtedly is based on human understanding on a word that goes far beyond human understanding.

Now, which would make sense? To combine those two senses to know what a cat looks like and what a cat sounds like, or to say that based on it's appearance, you believe a cat goes "bark, bark" and therefore you will discount what the blind man heard?

Depends if you are looking for confirmation bias the latter if you are interested in the essence the former.

Who, then, will you listen to? All humans are God's children (me, you, and every other human who ever lived, including Adolph Hitler and Mother Teresa). All spirits are God's children (yes, that includes Lucifer too). You just removed all possible information from the equation. There is no one you can now listen to, including yourself.

Because I listen to all I can't listen to any? I don't know how you reach that conclusion.
Unless of course I was looking for confirmation bias, I would pick the most appealing and only listen to him, yes kind of like most devout christians do.
But I think these people missed the essence of the teachings we all are part of God and therfore each contribution is valuable... To limit your understanding on such a broad topic on one book only is intelectual circumcision, and to only listen and engage in discussion with like minded is intelectual incest.

But as you stated correctly, what do I know...