JudasChrist, July 18, 2002, 20:01
My Teachings. Satanic?
Yesterday some-1 at work asked me if I thought God and Satan R really enemies.
This was my reply:
Islamic fundamentalists and Christians define themselves as monotheists, but practice dualism; they imagine a devil opposed to the creator, but creation cannot be divided against itself. If the devil physically exists, then God exists. If God created Satan, then God is Satan. You cannot create something unless it is a manifestation of your own will. How can you make a computer if you don't know how? You would have to base it on knowledge of that computer, or in this case, God's knowledge of "evil". So, God is evil. If God created hell, he'd have to know about eternal torment, meaning God is tormented. If God created humans, and humans are imperfect, God is imperfect. If I claim I am a perfect computer programmer, and I make a program that doesn't work right, I am not a perfect computer programmer. Christians blind to reason should refer to Isaiah 45:7, "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things."  (reply to this post)

fsck, July 20, 2002, 08:14
but why?
Why should the knowledge of evil imply that the holder of this knowledge is evil?

You are aware of acts that are unlawful, yet this knowledge does not make you a criminal.
(reply to this post)

Dnile, July 19, 2002, 07:43
my two cents opinion on the subject
It was a good answer yes but. Concerning the point on God being imperfect I don't really go for. The only thing that would make us imperfect is the fact that we have free choice and through our own choices we became imperfect. And concerning Lucifer and God being enemies... Everything needs an opposite or itself doesn't exist. Without darkness there would be no light and so on. Since God is non comprehendible being that he (well I prefer to call him the ultimate intelligence. Calling it in a male form is a little hang up from the church spread) is the creator and the end of all tracking back.. it's not really him that is in opposition to Lucifer but the archangels. God is just the creator and observer all knowing, all powerful and so on and so forth.
There is more but I won't get into it now.
(reply to this post)

Anthony, July 23, 2002, 19:13
Observer?
If god is just an observer then she/he/it is completely useless and deserves none of our attention or affection.
To give the nature of god characteristics is to limit the nature of god. I the nature of god is limited, then god is not all powerful.If god is beyond human comprehension, she/he/it is completely useless and our energies are better spent persuing that which we can understan.
Regards,
Anthony
(reply to this post)

Anthony, July 24, 2002, 18:33
Observer?
Last word in Line 4 should read "understand".
(reply to this post)

Dnile, July 24, 2002, 09:12
ideas... anybody?
Tks. Good point but tell me do you believe that there is only one God or do you believe they’re many? „Timaeus“ (I think) from Plato has a rather interesting version of creation. It basically states that God created first other Gods and that they (the lesser Gods that is) created man. I find it a good explanation considering it states in the bible that God created man in His own image .... question: how can we be created in the image of something we cannot describe or put a lid on? I'd like to find out what you would answer to this question. I’ll just mention the way I see it. Correct me If I go off. We were created by lesser Gods under the will of the Supreme G. We are Gods. If we were created in the image of God (or a God) then we must be Gods as well (We are the Gods of our own world. If you don’t believe in ur self you won’t get anywhere in life). Or at least the sons and daughters of God. The only reason Jesus is named the son of God was that he came the closest to touching God then any other. But, everyone has that chance.
(reply to this post)

Dnile, July 24, 2002, 09:14
ideas... anybody? (part. 2)
Now I’m of course leaving out the whole „Spiel“ of Jesus being the actual son of god (the whole Angel story). There is a theory that in those days the high priests were named after Angels. They also had rights to the virgins before they got married. So considering that, it’s quite likely that Jesus was not born of the spirit but instead from a Horny priest but not to worry because it could also be said that he was normal until he got baptized by John and that is when the spirit of God entered him.
Well comment I’m interested in what you have to say.... I'm open to critic.
(reply to this post)

Anthony, July 25, 2002, 00:11
The Most High
Behold, the most high dwelleth not in temples made of stones, but in temples made of Cannabis.
(reply to this post)

Observation, July 26, 2002, 10:13
Architectural
In which case, he dwelleth in temples made of stoneds.
(reply to this post)

neez, July 27, 2002, 22:10
post post observation
Behold, the most high dwelleth not in temples made of stones, but in temples made of the stoned...?

(reply to this post)

VWBabe, July 26, 2002, 08:32
LOL
Ah Tony, yes!!
This is the only temple I visit and the only Most High worth discussing.
(reply to this post)

Rock, July 26, 2002, 05:52
Used up my lifetime supply
....only if the temples have food, TV and a couch to take a nap between herbal applications.
(reply to this post)

JohnnieWalker, July 24, 2002, 10:30
RE: ideas... anybody?
Concerning your reasoning that "If we were created in the image of God (or a God) then we must be Gods as well", I look at it this way:

If I were to create a robot (for the sake of example), no matter how functional that robot is it would still not be a human.

It may consider itself to be on the same level as a human and may even be able to do certain tasks far better than one, but it will never be a human.

About the theory of high priests being named after angels: Sounds interesting. I'd like to know the origins and basis of that theory. It sounds to me more like "reverse hypothesis" (Jesus can't possibly be the Son of God, so what if high priests were named after angels...)Was there ever a high priest named Gabriel or Michael? The Bible doesn't mention any. Do any other history books? I'd be interested to find out.

It would also not explain the angel who came to Joseph in his dreams nor the angels that announced Jesus' birth to the shepherds.

As far as him being normal until baptism: Jesus considered God to be his father at age 12 (at least that's the earliest mention in the Bible of his knowledge in this regard) and he baffled the elders in the temple with his knowledge. If he was normal at birth and was later 'annointed' it would have had to be before then.

The 3 wise men who followed the star also believed him to be a king and the existance of a bright or significant star around that time has been proven by calculations of modern (agnostic) astrologers.
(reply to this post)

neez, July 24, 2002, 04:37
you said it..!
& the only proof we need that God is NOT meant to be understood..?

500 different versions of the same 'God'

& we all know that the Fam's God is the one true God...right! or was it Mormon..!? hmmmm..

'God' is simply an excuse for the truly evil(& the slightly dim) people to get away with murder.
Just think of the christian 'Crusades', & more recently, the Catholic priests 'indulging' in their altar boys. (on an extreme scale)

has anyone seen 'Dogma' (not half as boring as it sounds)
great movie... a real head-fuck

& Anthony.. don't you reckon if anyone (7*s maybe..) found out the secret of God.. then God would have to kill him(with a godly just wrath of course)??
Do u think that person could possibly keep it a secret forever?

I think if the world ever does end, this will be the reason. Perhaps the ol' fella' realised this way back in the 'book o' revelation' days.

But, as you said there is absolutely nothing we can do about anything (the Fam. tried people!!) we clearly know absoulutely nothing about.

but that's juz me..
(reply to this post)

Anthony, July 23, 2002, 19:52
Observer?
Third sentence should read "If the nature..."
Anthony
(reply to this post)

mike, July 22, 2002, 16:35
What’s Wrong With Humankind?
A similar discussion was held at my school not long ago. This was my point of view:
When asked the question – “What’s wrong with humankind?”, my immediate reactionary response is, “Nothing”. Of course, there is no denying that there are things that are wrong in the world, and that some of these wrongs are a result of human decision.
The notion that something is specifically wrong with humans implies that we have an understanding of something better. So what is the “something” that is better or perfect, that we are comparing our species to?
In the Christian world, it is widely held that we should compare our species today, with the species when God first created us - before committing the first sin. In my opinion, this is a poor comparison for one principal reason: we are comparing a finite period of time, with infinity. More specifically, the time that Adam and Eve spent in the garden, free from sin, is more correctly compared to an infant until the child commits his or her first infraction of parental or social rules.
In an effort to make further correct comparisons, we should consider the entire person – and personality perhaps – of the first people that God created. Adam and Eve were created with the propensity to commit infractions of the rules laid out for them by God, just as men and women today have a similar propensity to commit infractions of the social, divine, and governmentally mandated rules.

(reply to this post)

Mike, July 22, 2002, 16:37
What’s Wrong With Humankind? [continued]
[continued from previous post]
The fact is, that the ability to disobey God was in God’s original blueprint of human kind. So unless God made an erroneous decision when He created mankind, the ability for humans to make wrong choices and commit evil deeds, was a part of God’s original plan.
This thought process is the basis of my notion that there is nothing inherently wrong with humans. It is my opinion, that when people are confronted with the question of why there is wrong and evil in the world, many people choose to blame some inherent wrong in humans as a species. This theory seems to be advocated by many organized religions.
Christianity as I know it, for example, portrays humankind in an endless struggle towards some classic idea of perfection. However we are also taught that we will never be able to attain this perfection, because we are innately flawed because of some action committed by our forefathers countless generations ago. To this notion I directly object.
In conclusion, I submit that while humans are not perfect by the classical standard of perfection, we are the way we are by design – be it God’s design or evolutionary design. Furthermore, I believe that just as humankind has a seemingly built in propensity to fracture the rules, be they social or divine, we have an equally compulsive urge to create magnificent things, do good deeds for other humans, and obey the “will of God”.

(reply to this post)

fsck, July 20, 2002, 08:09
the nature of God
You touch on several very interesting issues regarding the nature of God.

If everything does indeed need an opposite to exist then God requires Satan in order to exist. This can't be the case if God is almighty. You've effectively emasculated your definition of God (and good) by making it dependant on Satan (and evil etc.)


(reply to this post)

porceleindoll, July 20, 2002, 05:36
Damien
I haven't read the whole post, but a book that I read that touches on the necessity of evil to make good what it is is the book Damien by Hermen Hesse, quite interesting with different outlooks on the story of Cain and Able, is Satan really evil, where would God be without Satan, etc.
(reply to this post)

Lance, July 19, 2002, 06:38
Lance
Very good response!
(reply to this post)

Jules, December 20, 2001, 20:35
About "Uncle Enoch"
MrNiceGuy has 'fessed up that this was just him. Not so nice, IMO, but we all know where he got these sentiments from.

Jules  (reply to this post)

MrNiceGuy, May 23, 2002, 15:32
RE: About
What rubbish - I am not "Uncle Enoch"...though I have posted as him twice, I have no idea who the real guy is...
(reply to this post)

Lance, August 29, 2001, 03:35
religion
I just want to say that I didn't mean to disrespect some of the exfam members current religious preference. my thoughts on religion have followed me since I was 12, it's just the way I am.
I do respect others rights to believe in a higher power, because I certainly don't rule out the possibility.  (reply to this post)

Jules, July 23, 2001, 23:27
Did you "keep the faith"?
When you left the Family, did you stay a Christian? Or did you decide to start completely from scratch. (A couple of exers I know actually joined Scientology--go figure.) Do you have a religion you adhere to now? Would you consider yourself spiritual?  (reply to this post)

smittyfan78, March 15, 2002, 09:06
RE: Did you
It's been a couple years since I left the Family.
I have "kept the faith".
And for me, even after leaving the Family; religion and spirituality was for me the most important thing.
I have now joined the Catholic Church
I am considering becoming a priest.
I will see how things develop.
(reply to this post)

porceleindoll, March 17, 2002, 18:51
RE: Did you
Wow smittyfan, you are definitely different from many of the exyoungers. Perhaps you would write up your story of why you left, your life in the group, and why you decided to go into the Catholic church. Many who left the group have also left religion, though having perhaps some faith in Jesus in God or a higher Being, but no faith in organised religion.
(reply to this post)

fsck, March 18, 2002, 14:35
from the frying pan...
Looking for a shortcut to hell eh? Roman Catholicism is full of heresy and corruption. I don't even know where to start but why not with the BVM?
(reply to this post)

porceleindoll, August 6, 2001, 04:10
RE: Did you
I was very confused for the first year after I left. I didn't want anything to do with religion (I still don't). I couldn't hardly think about it, the F. about my past beliefs without getting mad, sick, upset. It has taken me time to get over it, and I find that I had to wipe away everything and am starting from scratch.

I still consider myself a Christian, I believe in God and that Jesus is His Son. But I have many questions about Christianity, and am interested in reading the book you mentioned before (I forgot the name of it).

I have no interest in religious meetings, materials, people. I am interested in knowing more about the Eastern religions, Buddhism, Shinto, Confuscious, Taoism, and would one day like to do a study on the other religions of the world, in order to gain a rounded perspective of the belief systems of others.

I must admit I find it hard to agree with some Biblical doctrines. So at times I have a hard time reading even the Bible.

My sisters took turns going from athiesm to trying other things. I know ex young people who have gone into witchcraft as well.
(reply to this post)

Lance, August 29, 2001, 01:57
RE: Did you
I'm agnostic. I find it hard to be a part of something that believes it is right in all its aspects. and that the world needs to conform to those doctrines or suffer in an after life.
When I left the family I told myself that I was going to start doing what my inner reasoning tells me to do: the first thing that I got rid of was the mental infixiation that I am better then everyone else. I believe that though I'm individually unique, everyone is beautiful in the own way. Why should I condemn the buddhist, muslim, hindu, wiccans(witchcraft to some)and any other religious diversity that might conflict with what I was raised to be. Though I also think it would be foolish to throw out the idea of a god altogether, as is the case with atheists.
In short I believe life should be lived through proper morals and ethics, peace, love, unity, respect, responsibility and equality and let "god" figure out the rest. (ironically that is the abbreviation for the raver code, PLUR with an RE.)
(reply to this post)

Xeena, December 2, 2001, 21:25
RE: Did you
My dad (Zeb Geppetto, still in the COG), absolutly freaked when I said that I was agnostic. Although I can't even bring myself to read the bible or pray I have however made an effort to let my son (4 yrs) participate in christian activities. I take him every week to church. He is learning bible verses & is very excited about going. I also bought a book for him on religions around the world so he can decide for himself when he is a little older. The reason I take him to church is because I feel that religion, however misguided, is a good source of morals. It gives you a reason to be good & do good. He can be muslim, buddist or whatever for all I care so long as he's happy & fulfilled.For myself the subject makes me sick, too many bad memories. I think the bible in essence is good but that it is subject to interpretation,often the wrong one.People use it to manipulate giving many religions a bad name.
(reply to this post)

Deb, September 11, 2001, 09:35
RE: Did you
It's true, anyone should be able to believe in whatever they like. Hell, someone people believe in themselves so much it's their religion. When I first left, I dated this guy who was about 9 years older and in the Army, so he'd been through everything, including every religion. Of course, being fresh out of the F., I was still in the whole Christianity-is-IT mode (tho I never said anything) but he would always tell me that you take something good from every religion and there is no one religion that's better than all the rest. And I totally believe that now, tho I do still pray, religion is not a big deal for me anymore. My 3 brothers are all agnostics and my sister's like me, but who cares? As long as people don't push their religion on anyone else, then it doesn't matter what they believe as long as they believe in something.
(reply to this post)

Eman, September 12, 2001, 12:13
RE: Did you
Although I initially (after I "backslid") abandoned all faith in any sort of God, I became very interested in aspects of other religions: Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, even Satanism; I definitely agree that you can find good in every religion - even the darker or more "evil" ones, it all depends on remaining objective and trying to look at the bigger picture life is so much more interesting with a hint of fantasy and lore, and that is the way I feel religious beliefs should be handled.
(reply to this post)

porceleindoll, August 29, 2001, 05:11
RE: Did you
I have to agree with you Lance. It has been my latest religious controversy, how can God only be in one religion and one religion consider themselves the IT for the world. "Imagine there's no heaven..." John Lennon was actually really smart, as religion has been one of the biggest causes of wars and problems in the world. If people could put it aside perhaps we would have a little more peace.
(reply to this post)

< previous page     page: 1 | 2 | 3     next page>