Does The Gospel Make Sense?

[Red Sky at Morning]

@Aero

I admire your commitment to unity and reconciliation - so often people brandish their beliefs like clubs to hit each other with!

On the rationality of finding "middle" ground, where there is agreement we should be supportive of one another, even if we different on other topics.

The issue arises where contradictory claims are made, and where these are non-negotiable. A capitalist communist would be a conflicted individual, and what about our confused legalistic libitarian?

That having been said, in the battle for truth, people may disagree without being disagreeable!

 

[Aero]

@Aero

I admire your commitment to unity and reconciliation - so often people brandish their beliefs like clubs to hit each other with!

On the rationality of finding "middle" ground, where there is agreement we should be supportive of one another, even if we different on other topics.

The issue arises where contradictory claims are made, and where these are non-negotiable. A capitalist communist would be a conflicted individual, and what about our confused legalistic libitarian?

That having been said, in the battle for truth, people may disagree without being disagreeable!

Thanks. I try to be that person that can talk to anyone about religion or politics. And a good way to do that, is to put on a naive disguise. I find it increasingly difficult to form a world view that can be expressed. Like when we speak we devalue some part of ourselves, or our belief system. The internal world being far more important is what I'm saying.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

Thanks. I try to be that person that can talk to anyone about religion or politics. And a good way to do that, is to put on a naive disguise. I find it increasingly difficult to form a world view that can be expressed. Like when we speak we devalue some part of ourselves, or our belief system. The internal world being far more important is what I'm saying.

I would imagine that if you have been trying to reconcile disparate beliefs and be polite to all parties, you will find yourself weary in working towards the cause of "oneness", whilst observing the partisan rudeness of many who try to push the "my belief is better than yours" angle.

On the other hand, how do you truly find a centre way between contradictory views? Sometimes there is no "other hand"...

 

[Daciple]

Is self rationalization and confirmation bias all that's being offered here?

Oh I guess you want us not to speak on the Biblical Gospel? What exactly would you like for us to say? That Gnostic Jesus is legit?

Maybe your over enthusiasm and hard line position is what makes people uncomfortable.

No its the Gospel that speak against the Flesh that makes people uncomfortable and Im sure if you went to a Gospel preaching Church with a Gospel preaching preacher under the power of the Holy Spirit it would make you uncomfortable, as you clearly hate the Gospel seeing how much you are railing against it in this thread...

Because I can tell you plenty of stories about spirits and making people uncomfortable. And bringing up Jesus isn't in those stories. Well maybe Gnostic Jesus around you superstitious folks.

So you think because you know Gnostic Jesus it literally sets you at odds with everyone else? I bet you can talk about spirits, the demonic kind that are summoned to help you find "enlightenment", I know all about them as well...

You would be considered the uninitiated.

You mean like in Freemasonry, the Religion of the Elite you wants to enslave the World? Man makes me feel bad that Im not considered part of the initiated in the World System of those who want to bring in the Anti Christ...

In Gnosticism most of you would be reincarnated constantly. Or maybe even cast into the abyss. You would not ascend, as most of you are still consumed by the flesh and material. It's clear as day in your writing.

Lol we are consumed by the Flesh? Im sorry brother but it those who are into "elightenment" are consumed with themselves. As Jo said you live to please your Self/Flesh via "gnosis".

I literally quoted you what the Lusts of the Flesh are:
Gal 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

If we were consumed with the Flesh as opposed to the Spirit we would chase after the lusts of the Flesh. I am the one saying we need to Repent of the lusts of Flesh and walk after the Spirit, you however are telling everyone they dont need to Repent at all. Therefore you are the one consumed with the lusts of the Flesh and have zero desire to Repent of the works of the Flesh. I wonder if you even think anything listed is something you shouldnt practice save murder.

And good thing Gnosticism isnt the Truth then and neither is Reincarnation. I have no worries...

 

[AspiringSoul]

So the description that I found on the website of the author of Jesus the Sufi, Max Gorman describes something much more along the lines of an eastern Christian sect rather than a branch of Islam. I am not opposed to the idea of the church of Christ growing under different leadership in the eastern direction; whereas, you could say that Paul went north.

In fact, Gorman says "By the Sufis I do not, as I make very clear in my book, mean “Islamic mystics” – the usual misconception – but masters of an ancient tradition of inner teaching, unbound by culture, free-moving, finding those who truly seek, wherever and whenever they are. "http://www.maxgorman.net/?page_id=11

So essentially, an eastern branch of Christianity before the internet that did not maintain communication with the northwest possibly. Therefore, it developed differently which doesn't mean that it would subsequently be false teaching just because they did not have access to the writings of Paul.

So my question is which comes first Sufism or Islamic Sufism and why do you consider yourself a Muslim rather than a Christian? Also, what is the importance of spreading the Gospel and confessing sin according to Sufism? Do you think it is possible that Sufism identifies with Islam based on location more than anything? I think that is a possibility since the presence of Sufism would seem to located in places where Islam is the majority.

Would it be possible that this is a way to avoid persecution and bring the Gospel in places where Islam is the controlling religion of the area rather than Sufism identifying with Islam in a way that it could be considered more of a denomination of Islam rather than Christianity?

Technically Islam itself is not limited to the religion of Prophet Mohammad SAW ie we believe all the prophets followed islam. Islam is a state of being more than it is a religion. Hence a child is born in the state of islam before it's even understood matters of religion.Similarly the Tao means 'the way/order' and Dharma (the proper name of hinduism) means something similar.
Torah means 'the law' which actually in the context is very similar to Dharma.


There were a group of sufis who came to meet this prophet and see for themselves if he was worth following. They met him, accepted islam but they made a pledge (bayah) to him.
However in the early days a lot of people didnt know exactly why they were referred to as sufis
the most common view is that they wore wool (suff) and so were called sufis.

sufism in itself is just a term though, we don't know what the 'original' name was just like with judaism. It's the mystical path that existed i guess on the 'side' like Melchezedek existed but little is known of him. Similarly not much is known of Khidr AS who is mentioned in the Quran as the secret teacher of Moses AS.

As for how it all links to christianity
the 'Order' of Melchezedek
in sufism you have spiritual orders (tariqahs). For one to become a 'Sheikh 'for example he needs permission from his teacher (a sheikh of course) and another oath.
It's called the golden chain.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naqshbandi_Golden_Chain
This golden chain link is done face to face, direct...
in this case

The Lord has sworn
and will not change his mind:
“You are a priest forever,
in the order of Melchizedek.”

here God made the oath
so this is clearly a very special spiritual order.
Christianity didn't begin as a new religion but as a spiritual order within judaism where Jesus was the head.

So when I talk about Jesus as a 'sufi' i mean the spiritual order itself, it's structure and their approach to God and how it differed from regular judaism.

As for whether or not sufis follow christianity
well wouldnt they have just been called 'christians'?
the implication being that authentic christianity is no more, right?
maybe not?

lol at the comments, as always there's divide between muslims and christians
they're praying very much like how we pray...
minus the instruments.

As for me, why im a muslim and not a christian
I believe Jesus did say he would send the holy spirit after him ie the comforter. Now granted, in the context he meant the actual holy spirit that's in our hearts..but he also said he would send him to bring us into ALL the truth and tell us what is yet to come.

Unless I go away, the Advocate will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. 8 When he comes, he will prove the world to be in the wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment:

Jesus went further to say
He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.

I believe the holy spirit was in Prophet Mohammad SAW but even my belief in the holy spirit in the metaphysical sense differs from yours. I
yet ironically many muslims think the holy spirit is gabriel AS (because they've been lied to)/
Even though in the hadiths it says
Whoever satirises the Apostle from amongst you, or praises him and helps it is all the same, And Gabriel, the Apostle of Allah is among us, and the Holy Spirit who has no match. (Book #031, Hadith #6081)

if you look at the book of Revelation, all this end times judgement comes through Jesus...and so when did the holy spirit specifically
"prove the world to be in the wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment:"
where is that proof?

he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.
this is what a prophet does.
so of course I do believe in the prophethood of Prophet Mohammad SAW, in his prophecies..etc

in metaphysics the Son represents the Macrocosm and the Holy Spirit represents the microcosm
the Tree and the the fruit of the tree containing a seed (as an analogy)
from the fruit and seed, what do you get? another tree..
you see that in how Jesus came and then enabled religion to go to the gentiles and then how, a gentile prophet came who happened to be an ishmaelite thus connecting Abraham to the promise of becoming the father of many nations through islam (since muslims are circumcised, not christians).
you get the fulfillment of the 12 princes prophecy and making the arabs into a great nation.....
so basically a lot of things promised were fulfilled but then it leads back to the tree ie when Jesus arrives again.

You also have the 2 periods of Mohammad SAWs prophethood. The meccan pre-hijri period and the Madani post-hijri period

e ie passive/active which is an entirely diff topic but still links to spirituality.
In Mecca, Prophet Mohammad SAW represented the passive path /yin
in Medina he represented the active path/yang

These 2 periods are similar to the messiah ben joseph and messian ben david themes linked with Jesus ie that he lived as the suffering servant in the first instance but returns as the conquering king.
So basically Prophet Mohammad SAW represents Jesus in the same way the holy spirit represents the logos.

I believe islam has more in common with what would have been authentic christianity
I also think in terms of teachings and life stories, there is a lot you're missing out on not just with the great sufi sheikhs in the past but even the lives of the ahle-bayt (the family of the prophet SAW) and many of the sahaba especially the 4 rightly guided Caliphs...

see much of the appeal towards the bible narratives for me are about getting into the personalities and life stories of these prophets.
You're only getting a small part of the picture that I am because this way im not only connected with the Quran and the Hadiths (which in terms of volume are far bigger than the bible) but with a never ending supply of stories from the lives fo so many muslims.
Now i know you also have the church fathers but i've kind of read the confessions of St augustine too.
so i think for me it's just about learning more and more
and whilst you're asking about islam, i went from islam to learning about jewish history and christianity, to hinduism, buddhism and taoism all in quick succession and then to kabballah too (not on some deep level but just understanding the tree of life system from my personal perspectives)
i honestly believe if it wasn't for the groundwork laid out by SUFIS, i would not have 'gotten' the actual point when reading into those other religions
if i was thinking purely in theological terms as a muslim i would have given up on them all even the New testament.
there are many muslims who read the new testament and think 'this isnt islam, this is something else'
whereas i read it and thought 'this is sufism for sure'.

islamic sufism is centered on mainstream islamic rules, simple

The 4 sufi steps are
Shariah
Tariqah
Marifah
Haqiqah

shariah=the rules of religion
tariqah=the spiritual order
marifah=gnosis
and haqiqah =the ultimate truth ie the combined knowledge of theology and gnosis (the mystical side).

applied to early christianity, it was a tariqah built on the torah
but it only had to change to incorporate gentiles...
so they followed what were basically the noahide laws

the same principles of sufism apply to christianity with the only real confusion occuring to people because of the change from leaving the mosaic law.

Btw in recent times there is another type of sufism, it's called universal sufism and isnt confined to islam
sufi inayat khan founded it and he is actually one of my fav sufis
here's his perspective
http://www.hazrat-inayat-khan.org/php/views.php?h1=2&h2=1&h3=2&p=5

 

[Karlysymon]

Great question, @Red Sky at Morning!

I think the themes of the cross are a multitude, chief of which is, salvation/redemption. Paul call it "a mystery,which for ages past has been kept hidden in God". (Eph 3:9, Colossians 1:26,27 )
And Peter wrote:
Of this salvation the prophets have inquired and searched carefully, who prophesied of the grace that would come to you, searching what, or what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ who was in them was indicating when He testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow....things which angels desire to look into.(1Peter 1:10-12)

Redemption must be a topic so grand/lofty or mysterious enough to engage the attention of not only men but heavenly intelligences aswell. Afterall, this is the Creator of the universe, taking it upon Himself to remedy a situation the best way He possibly could, and to me, the cross vindicates God's character. Angelic interest in salvation is portrayed in the instruction God gave to Moses to;

“.... make a mercy seat (Atonement cover) of pure gold;.... And you shall make two cherubim of gold; of hammered work you shall
make them at the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub at one end, and the other cherub at the other end; you shall make the cherubim at the two ends of it of one piece with the mercy seat. And the cherubim shall stretch out their wings above, covering the mercy seat with their wings, and they shall face one another; the faces of the
cherubim shall be [looking] toward the mercy seat.(Exodus 25:17-20)

So yeah, not everything regarding salvation in Christianity will make sense in this lifetime. The angels are studying it(for millenia) and so are we

 

[Karlysymon]

"The subject is inexhaustible. The study of the incarnation of Christ, His atoning sacrifice and mediatorial work, will employ the mind of the diligent student as long as time shall last; and,
looking to heaven with its unnumbered years, he will
exclaim, “Great is the mystery of godliness.”

...It was that the universe might be convinced of God's justice in His dealing with evil; that sin might
receive eternal condemnation. In the plan of redemption there are heights and depths that eternity itself can never exhaust, marvels into which the angels desire to look. The redeemed only, of all created beings, will have in their own experience known the actual conflict with sin; they have wrought with Christ and, as even the angels could not do, have entered into the fellowship of His sufferings; will they have no testimony as to the science of redemption— nothing that will be of worth to unfallen beings?

 

[rainerann]

Technically Islam itself is not limited to the religion of Prophet Mohammad SAW ie we believe all the prophets followed islam. Islam is a state of being more than it is a religion. Hence a child is born in the state of islam before it's even understood matters of religion.Similarly the Tao means 'the way/order' and Dharma (the proper name of hinduism) means something similar.
Torah means 'the law' which actually in the context is very similar to Dharma.


There were a group of sufis who came to meet this prophet and see for themselves if he was worth following. They met him, accepted islam but they made a pledge (bayah) to him.
However in the early days a lot of people didnt know exactly why they were referred to as sufis
the most common view is that they wore wool (suff) and so were called sufis.

sufism in itself is just a term though, we don't know what the 'original' name was just like with judaism. It's the mystical path that existed i guess on the 'side' like Melchezedek existed but little is known of him. Similarly not much is known of Khidr AS who is mentioned in the Quran as the secret teacher of Moses AS.

As for how it all links to christianity
the 'Order' of Melchezedek
in sufism you have spiritual orders (tariqahs). For one to become a 'Sheikh 'for example he needs permission from his teacher (a sheikh of course) and another oath.
It's called the golden chain.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naqshbandi_Golden_Chain
This golden chain link is done face to face, direct...
in this case

The Lord has sworn
and will not change his mind:
“You are a priest forever,
in the order of Melchizedek.”

here God made the oath
so this is clearly a very special spiritual order.
Christianity didn't begin as a new religion but as a spiritual order within judaism where Jesus was the head.

So when I talk about Jesus as a 'sufi' i mean the spiritual order itself, it's structure and their approach to God and how it differed from regular judaism.

As for whether or not sufis follow christianity
well wouldnt they have just been called 'christians'?
the implication being that authentic christianity is no more, right?
maybe not?

lol at the comments, as always there's divide between muslims and christians
they're praying very much like how we pray...
minus the instruments.

As for me, why im a muslim and not a christian
I believe Jesus did say he would send the holy spirit after him ie the comforter. Now granted, in the context he meant the actual holy spirit that's in our hearts..but he also said he would send him to bring us into ALL the truth and tell us what is yet to come.

Unless I go away, the Advocate will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. 8 When he comes, he will prove the world to be in the wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment:

Jesus went further to say
He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.

I believe the holy spirit was in Prophet Mohammad SAW but even my belief in the holy spirit in the metaphysical sense differs from yours. I
yet ironically many muslims think the holy spirit is gabriel AS (because they've been lied to)/
Even though in the hadiths it says
Whoever satirises the Apostle from amongst you, or praises him and helps it is all the same, And Gabriel, the Apostle of Allah is among us, and the Holy Spirit who has no match. (Book #031, Hadith #6081)

if you look at the book of Revelation, all this end times judgement comes through Jesus...and so when did the holy spirit specifically
"prove the world to be in the wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment:"
where is that proof?

he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.
this is what a prophet does.
so of course I do believe in the prophethood of Prophet Mohammad SAW, in his prophecies..etc

in metaphysics the Son represents the Macrocosm and the Holy Spirit represents the microcosm
the Tree and the the fruit of the tree containing a seed (as an analogy)
from the fruit and seed, what do you get? another tree..
you see that in how Jesus came and then enabled religion to go to the gentiles and then how, a gentile prophet came who happened to be an ishmaelite thus connecting Abraham to the promise of becoming the father of many nations through islam (since muslims are circumcised, not christians).
you get the fulfillment of the 12 princes prophecy and making the arabs into a great nation.....
so basically a lot of things promised were fulfilled but then it leads back to the tree ie when Jesus arrives again.

You also have the 2 periods of Mohammad SAWs prophethood. The meccan pre-hijri period and the Madani post-hijri period

e ie passive/active which is an entirely diff topic but still links to spirituality.
In Mecca, Prophet Mohammad SAW represented the passive path /yin
in Medina he represented the active path/yang

These 2 periods are similar to the messiah ben joseph and messian ben david themes linked with Jesus ie that he lived as the suffering servant in the first instance but returns as the conquering king.
So basically Prophet Mohammad SAW represents Jesus in the same way the holy spirit represents the logos.

I believe islam has more in common with what would have been authentic christianity
I also think in terms of teachings and life stories, there is a lot you're missing out on not just with the great sufi sheikhs in the past but even the lives of the ahle-bayt (the family of the prophet SAW) and many of the sahaba especially the 4 rightly guided Caliphs...

see much of the appeal towards the bible narratives for me are about getting into the personalities and life stories of these prophets.
You're only getting a small part of the picture that I am because this way im not only connected with the Quran and the Hadiths (which in terms of volume are far bigger than the bible) but with a never ending supply of stories from the lives fo so many muslims.
Now i know you also have the church fathers but i've kind of read the confessions of St augustine too.
so i think for me it's just about learning more and more
and whilst you're asking about islam, i went from islam to learning about jewish history and christianity, to hinduism, buddhism and taoism all in quick succession and then to kabballah too (not on some deep level but just understanding the tree of life system from my personal perspectives)
i honestly believe if it wasn't for the groundwork laid out by SUFIS, i would not have 'gotten' the actual point when reading into those other religions
if i was thinking purely in theological terms as a muslim i would have given up on them all even the New testament.
there are many muslims who read the new testament and think 'this isnt islam, this is something else'
whereas i read it and thought 'this is sufism for sure'.

islamic sufism is centered on mainstream islamic rules, simple

The 4 sufi steps are
Shariah
Tariqah
Marifah
Haqiqah

shariah=the rules of religion
tariqah=the spiritual order
marifah=gnosis
and haqiqah =the ultimate truth ie the combined knowledge of theology and gnosis (the mystical side).

applied to early christianity, it was a tariqah built on the torah
but it only had to change to incorporate gentiles...
so they followed what were basically the noahide laws

the same principles of sufism apply to christianity with the only real confusion occuring to people because of the change from leaving the mosaic law.

Btw in recent times there is another type of sufism, it's called universal sufism and isnt confined to islam
sufi inayat khan founded it and he is actually one of my fav sufis
here's his perspective
http://www.hazrat-inayat-khan.org/php/views.php?h1=2&h2=1&h3=2&p=5

hmm, interesting. I am wondering how much comparison you have been able to consider between the Sufi's and the traditions of the orthodox church? The reason I ask is because there are many things that they would seem to have in common that makes me think it is possible that the Sufi's actually came first. Islam second especially considering how Islam does separate itself from the New Testament; whereas, you don't consider there to be a conflict.

It seems to me to be another potential schism almost from the origin of Christianity that separates into Roman Cahtholicism, Eastern Orthodox, and then Islam.

From what I can see so far, the opinion of Sufi's varies depending on how they identify themselves according to Islamic teachings. I will look into Inayat Khan as well as a couple others. I am presently shopping around for some books to order on the subject, but there are things I would already like to compare with the book of James from the New Testament.

Maybe I will start a thread with Max Gorman's book once I get it. I was so bummed that they didn't have a digital version. I have to wait for it to come in the mail.

Where would you be able to source what you are saying about Sufi's meeting with Muhammad? And, if they met with Muhammad and considered his teachings to have value, isn't that the same as saying that Sufi's are the original Muslims? Do you feel that the Sufi tradition depends on the teachings of Muhammad or would they be able to exist as an independent entity? Then, isn't it a possibility that Muhammad did more to deviate from the Sufi's teaching and create division, which is manifested by the Islamic opinion towards the Biblical teachings.

I also don't know whether I think it is possible to understand the prophets better because of the presence of Hadiths which vary considerably in terms of quality. Especially, when you consider the Bible devotes whole books to individual prophets in order to know them. This is a complaint that I have with the Quran in that it is entirely lacking in teachings of the lives of the prophets and the Hadith's are more like reading the Talmud. They filled with landmines and wicked teachings in the same way as the book Shabbat in the Talmud says Ruben never sinned by sleeping with Jacob's concubine. I will never be able to understand why they needed to include this in the writings on the Sabbath, but they did and I find most of the discussion I have participated in on the subject of the Hadith's is a very similar experience.

I am not opposed to learning more about the point of origin within Christianity, but it is also a priority to remove deviations that exist even if they have always been associated together.

Overall, I do think that you have a very unique perspective and I appreciate that you do not demonstrate the same bias that I often see when discussing this subject and that you will recognize error within Islam and confess this when you feel it is appropriate. It makes it much easier to discuss a subject like this when people are not responding in such a way that it seems like it is more important to whitewash error than to accept accountability as a representitive of your faith. I can really appreciate this and I am ordering some books on the subject and looking forward to further discussion.

 

[Aero]

Oh I guess you want us not to speak on the Biblical Gospel? What exactly would you like for us to say? That Gnostic Jesus is legit?

That's not what I meant at all. You take a very black/white approach to things, and you will find that I'm not like that. My intention was to see if I could steer you into a more rational course of dialogue. Specifically away from the field of apologetics.

No its the Gospel that speak against the Flesh that makes people uncomfortable and Im sure if you went to a Gospel preaching Church with a Gospel preaching preacher under the power of the Holy Spirit it would make you uncomfortable, as you clearly hate the Gospel seeing how much you are railing against it in this thread...

Maybe you are right on the gospel, but wrong about me.

So you think because you know Gnostic Jesus it literally sets you at odds with everyone else? I bet you can talk about spirits, the demonic kind that are summoned to help you find "enlightenment", I know all about them as well...

Not at all. In fact I think a lot of mainstream Christians actually know more about the Gnosis than they think. They probably practice it in some form that simply remains in their subconscious.

You mean like in Freemasonry, the Religion of the Elite you wants to enslave the World? Man makes me feel bad that Im not considered part of the initiated in the World System of those who want to bring in the Anti Christ...

Biased, unsubstantiated conspiracy theory. Besides, not really my fault my Grandpa was an engineer and joined the Masons.

Lol we are consumed by the Flesh? Im sorry brother but it those who are into "elightenment" are consumed with themselves. As Jo said you live to please your Self/Flesh via "gnosis".

I literally quoted you what the Lusts of the Flesh are:
Gal 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

If we were consumed with the Flesh as opposed to the Spirit we would chase after the lusts of the Flesh. I am the one saying we need to Repent of the lusts of Flesh and walk after the Spirit, you however are telling everyone they dont need to Repent at all. Therefore you are the one consumed with the lusts of the Flesh and have zero desire to Repent of the works of the Flesh. I wonder if you even think anything listed is something you shouldnt practice save murder.

And good thing Gnosticism isnt the Truth then and neither is Reincarnation. I have no worries...

Yep. I'm afraid so. You are good at preaching, but I'm wondering how well you walk the walk. You are guilty of variance, and possibly envy or hatred. Your inability to found common ground with me kind of confirms that. Like you are ready to turn someone into the enemy very quickly.

 

[AspiringSoul]

@rainerann
Unfortunately you still have this perception that islam as against christianity but do not realise that the Quran itself says christians are the closest to islam.
Unfortunately in the modern age there is a major gulf between us but that's because so many has happened in the last 1500 years.
For example
colonialism, zionism and arab nationalism and also a sort of 'revival' of islamic thinking based on modern narratives in the english speaking world.
How this works is that muslims who spoke english came from a perspective of being colonial subjects. For example Ahmad Deedat was an indian gujrati fella who was born in South Africa. Who's responsible for that one? it's because of british policies during colonial times that many indians were taken to africa/the carribean to work in clerical roles. These people got labelled with the tag 'coolie' which was a racist term.
Strong attempts were made to convert them to christianity throughout. So a guy like Ahmad Deedat had a perspective of christianity based on modern thinking and modern examples, not a true reflection of 'authentic' christianity, right?
It's the same when christians think of islam and do not know whether islam was truely good in it's conception or whether it was evil/satanic etc.

It's better to remove these modern narratives..and the best way i could do that for example with the jews was to read the bible and therefore gather a better image of what being a jew would have been and then read the Quran's view about them. It's actually not negative but more positive than negative, it focuses on their good and bad points just like the OT does. Just like how in Jeremiah, Zecheriah, Habakkuk etc the common jew is portrayed in negative.

Now here's the other thing. I have never tried to seperate islam from sufism because to me, you cannot have islam without sufism. There is a very famous quote from Imam Malik

Imam Malik (94-179 H./716-795 CE)
Imam Malik (r) said, "Whoever studies jurisprudence [fiqh] and didn't study Sufism (tasawwuf) will be corrupted; and whoever studied tasawwuf and didn't study fiqh will become a heretic; and whoever combined both will be reach the Truth."

jurisprudence refers to matters of religious law/theology etc whilst tasawuff refers to matters of the heart/the mystical.
One side deals with the Transcendence of God and the other with His Immanence.

Islam is the 'whole thing'
do you get that?

it's akin to how in the Quran Allah says He revealed the Scripture AND the Wisdom.

sufis focus on the mystical side of religion, that's the only difference.
in truth one cannot exist without the other.


So here's how i understand christianity
rather than make christianity an entire religion
i look at it as a spiritual order built ON the foundation of mosaic law
BUT only shifted in order to accomodate gentiles.

So it's more like a spiritual order built on the noahide laws now.
So if you compare the noahide laws to islamic laws...or the mosaic law, some differences
but the matters of spirituality ie God's love, are the same.
so it's the same essence, clothed differently due to the context, get it?



I had a christian once ask me why the Quran didn't follow a pattern like the bible ie stick to one topic, why it goes from one to another to another so fast.
well, did we learn anything from jewish history?
it is allllllll story, i actually loved learning that 'story' but let's be honest, it wasn't a pretty picture for most was it?
the never ending story, like the Godfather.
So when Jesus came, the jews had enough 'story' and he didn't appeal to the story, did he?
for the most part he ignored it.

the monkey mind, LOVEEES stories
it's like if you went to see a psychiatrist, you would talk about your problems ie expose the entire story
but the psychiatrist isn't going to repeat it all, he/she will only going to take our snippets and remind you of them in order to make a point.

The Quran means 'recitation'.
the people who learn the recitation are called Qari's
listening to the qirats from some of the best qari's is a different type of religious experience
i do not 'understand' arabic btw..i can recite the arabic letters/words without knowing their meaning...
i have to make do with reading translations...but the arabic recitation itself is a whole different angle related to the Quran...in this case the biggest one we miss out on.
In the recitations, these seemingly random narratives are evoked but the tone of the recitation itself brings a powerful form of healing.
it works not only with psychological problems, addictions but also with physical healing.


not long ago i was explaining the crucifixion verse (4:157) via my own interpretation but this 1 single verse made me link to soo many different topics and chapters in the bible.
it did that, one single verse in the Quran encapsulated an entire theme that connects with chapters and verses in the bible that many people are debating over today.
you know, the Quran or any book can just mention an event from the past...and you might wonder why since we may not even have ever heard of it, why was it so relevant?
for example the story of the sleepers of the cave, why is it even relevant?
Humans, are all subconsciously connected...ie the collective consciousness.
These seemingly random events are still connected to us on a deeper level.
I don't believe language/words are just 'communication'
they're ways we express our inner self
like Jesus said they come from our heart and out of our mouth
so would it not also obviously work the otherway round ie that we could hear and express sounds/words that bring about spiritual healing?


The talmud are opinions of rabbis
the hadith are not opinions of random people, the only real issue is whether the chain of narration is weak/trustworthy and we simply do not know. Aside from that the body of work in the hadith eventually adds up
You say 'evil' because you've generalised based on VERY small samples...but have never read them entirely, wholesale, without prejudice,#
ie if you look for a fault you'll find the fault
I'm pretty certain you would love to have something similar for Jesus, the gospels only tell us a few details and yet I hold them in very high regard.
in terms of content, the hadith contain as much content as, i'd just come up with a totally random guess, 7 bibles.
you can't tell me you wouldn't love to have that amount of information about Jesus, right?
I think we're lucky we have that in islam.

There are a lot of varying stories linked to them, so this is a bit of a random link and not one ive really read entirely before
http://www.questionsonislam.com/article/ashab-suffa
i think if you read about these people, the beatitudes would spring to mind.

You should also know that im influenced by and studied sufi islam but that doesnt make me 'sufi'
it means my beleifs are def influenced by them but im not a sufi.
To be a sufi technically you have to be part of the fraternity, like a christian is baptised
it is an oath made to a teacher
i made an oath once, but i realised the guy was not a true teacher...so i cut ties and moved on...and this was a guy with hundreds of thousands of followers and a pretty influential guy.
i just realised he was not my type of person at all but just someone who's fame exceeded his qualities.
Real sufis live in poverty, give up everything and go on the journey

this documentary on Al Ghazali for example tells us how he went from being the most famous theologian, to an existential crisis...and then found the sufi path and actually persued it.

I don't know if you have the patience to check links and watch an entire video, but it's def worth watching even if you're not a muslim. Al Ghazali is one of the most famous sufis.
or you can begin from the 1 hour mark to see him at the point where he leaves his 'life' behind.
i guess the imagery ought to give you a general feel of how the sufi's were meant to live.

 

[Daciple]

You are good at preaching, but I'm wondering how well you walk the walk.

I fail daily, but I also try and die daily, I am a human with flaws and weaknesses. I will never stand up and say I walk the walk like some perfect person, if I did that then I wouldnt need Jesus. What exactly to you would "walk the walk" look like and mean?

To me it is the person that strives to die to what their Flesh desires, and that is the main intention, strives. I dont look at the actual ability to continually and always be in victory at all times, because the Bible tells us exactly how we all stand:

Matt 26:41 Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.

I find that when I am not watching as I should and not praying as I should I find I fall into temptation, into what my Flesh desires. My Spirit is always willing and has the desire to do what the Word states, but my Flesh is always trying to pull me away. Therefore I fail, daily. If you read the story behind this verse, Jesus is in the garden right before being handed over to be Crucified and He asked the disciples to stay alert and to pray for Him. He goes off to pray comes back and they are asleep, He then speaks this verse to them, asking them again to watch and pray and with Him as He goes off to pray again. What does He find when He comes back? That they are asleep again, even after He asked them and warned them.

This isnt an excuse but simply a Fact of Human Nature, a Fact of the Flesh. So again I wonder what you desire to see in a person to have you say they walk the walk.

You are guilty of variance, and possibly envy or hatred.

I admit I am guilty of variance, envy and hatred at times, I dont believe I am guilty of it towards your person tho. I separate the human being that goes by the name Aero and the ideologies you are expressing. I can definitely tell you I do hate the ideologies you are expressing because they are Anti Christ. That doesnt mean I hate you in the least, I not only like you, I love you but just because I speak against your ideologies and where they come from and lead to, means I have any dislike let alone hatred for you the person that goes by the name Aero.

Your inability to found common ground with me kind of confirms that.

You are free to believe anything you choose, however what I see when it comes to this train of thought is that if I dont compromise my positions and beliefs it somehow marks me as being full of hate or I guess envy. No sir, and that is exactly what you are asking me to do, compromise and say well maybe there is something to the Gnostic Ideologies and their understanding of Christ. That maybe the Gospel that is founded and spoken of in the Word of God isnt necessarily the whole Truth. I am sorry but that is exactly why Christianity isnt making the impact you even have complained about it in the World today, because the mass majority of self professed Christians want to compromise with the World in order not to be labeled full of hate or envy or whatever other label on wishes to place upon those who refuse to compromise on the Word of God and Christ.

Thats why God isnt in most Churches, thats why most so called Christians have no power in their Testimonies or demonstration of the Holy Spirit and Witness. That is why most Churches dont preach the Gospel and instead have become glorified Clubs with Self Help Sermons and striving after Materialism and false Works to make people feel Good about their Worldliness and compromising lifestyles. The thing you accuse Christianity of not being, is due to what you expect me to do, but sorry I refuse to compromise on what the Word of God states and concede that anything from Gnosticism is beneficial to ones life. Its not, its witchcraft, and I speak not only from personal experience but also deep study of its text and ideologies.

But just because I despise Gnosticism itself doesnt mean I have any bitterness or hate held in my heart for you as a person. I will tell you that the most profound and deeply knowledgeable Gnostic on the forum, I have complete respect for and love him, Art, but if you ask him I have never and will never compromise on the ideologies he expresses on the forums. I always call them into question and test what He says and call them false and AntiChrist, but I still genuinely like the guy, I tell him that all the time, he may be my favorite person in which to have discourse with, while at the same time believe he may preach the absolute worst and most vile ideologies on the entire forum.

I like you Aero, I love you as well, but I will never compromise my positions nor give credence
to yours and if that to you mean I am full of hate and envy or whatever other negative label you would like to apply to me, then by all means I will wear that label regardless of how false it truly is...

Like you are ready to turn someone into the enemy very quickly.

No sir, I dont turn people into the enemy, I simply identify the false doctrines of the enemy and have zero qualms in blatantly stating that so those who happen to be reading can see them clearly identified. I hope if we continue to have discussions you will see and understand that I speak to or it is my intention to speak to, usually bluntly, the ideologies, and not to make it a personal attack. However you can view me as you wish and label me as you wish, its of no bother to me and doesnt change how I personally feel about your person.

 

[JoChris]

Not sure why you are still trying to apologize for believing in Christianity. But you really don't need to. I'm well aware of world history, and it's not the rosy picture you paint with your apologies. Christians were heavily persecuted in the early Roman Empire. So your whole argument kind of collapses on itself.

It might be more accurate to say wherever Christianity spreads it destroys. First Rome and the list goes on. Soon it might be America's turn. And I blame you apologists. The over abundances of zeal and anti social behavior doesn't improve culture.

Apologise? I don't where you get that from. Christians were heavily persecuted AND still overcame it all according to God's will.

Whenever Christianity stops being like salt through:
* no longer evangelising to younger generations
* compromising beliefs with unbelieving culture
* trying to control culture through politics not spiritual means
* women become church leaders (contradicting bible)
* believing man is naturally good (blaming society, family upbringing, socioeconomic status for personal problems)
* believing people can be changed through positive thinking, not repentance
* preaching to people's "felt needs", not convicting them of sin
* people NOT God are the focus
* music NOT preaching sermons is the focus
* believing signs and miracles are needed to convert people (not preaching alone)
* recently socially acceptable sins e.g. homosexuality, transsexualism never preached upon for fear of backlash

And so on....

..... Christianity is no longer salt to the decaying world. Remember salt used to be the preservative to stop meat rotting and still is used as a cleaning agent (e.g. saline solution for wound dressings).

Modern Christianity Televangelism is either exceptionally diluted (close to useless) or it is polluted (contaminated with false teachings and money hungry wolves). Churches competing with televangelists or modelling themselves after them are going the same way.

It doesn't matter whether YOU think the bible was written in 1st century or last week. Truth outranks personal opinion. Admit it - you WANT to believe the bible was written in 4th century to excuse your embracing of false doctrine i.e. Gnosticism.

 

[JoChris]

Aero, you do realise that Freemasonry is a form of gnosticism don't you?

A bit of word-gaming here, but the pro-Freemason writer admits that Freemasonry has similarities with Gnosticism: http://web.mit.edu/dryfoo/Masonry/Essays/dl_gnosis.html

Detailed Christian viewpoint https://www.biblebelievers.org.au/masonic.htm

Haven't you rejected Freemasonry? Why do you want return it via a different route? You'll reach the same destination if you truly take the Gnosticism path.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

Just a quick post of the simplicity of two of the common words in scripture, grace and mercy...

Grace (God's riches at Christ's expense) means getting what we don't deserve, mercy means not getting what we do!

Without the grace and mercy of the Lord, my life would have been in a very different place today, if I still had it. I hope anyone who needs a new start in life finds what and who they truly seek.

 

[Aero]

I'm glad I'm not your enemy Daciple. And my qualm obviously isn't with you, but with the tyranny of the Church. For it has been my people who were cast out. Hunted down, and our works burned. This is a common trend too, so we are all kind of in the same boat here. We are all in the same boat trying to get to the same place. I'm interested in hearing what you have to say about Gnosticism.

None of you are really getting into the debate about dualism. All I hear is a lot of superstition getting thrown around. I don't want to hear about your fantastical stories of demons and possessions. I can eat up your fear like it's a snack for breakfast. I don't match moods with people who are afraid. Tell me how good can even exist without evil. And why there's any difference as far as the universe is concerned. Use your own brain and just tell me without preaching.

Or apologizing and I'm sorry if that term bugs you. That's just what a lot of these religious conversations seem like. People start to make excuses for things, because we all disagree. Whether we like each other or not, we should disagree about things. I don't think there is any real evidence to suggest free masonry is the direct descendants of Gnosticism. I think the CIA has played most of you as fools. There is just so much generalization and confirmation bias floating around.

 

[JoChris]

I'm glad I'm not your enemy Daciple. And my qualm obviously isn't with you, but with the tyranny of the Church. For it has been my people who were cast out. Hunted down, and our works burned. This is a common trend too, so we are all kind of in the same boat here. We are all in the same boat trying to get to the same place. I'm interested in hearing what you have to say about Gnosticism.

None of you are really getting into the debate about dualism. All I hear is a lot of superstition getting thrown around. I don't want to hear about your fantastical stories of demons and possessions. I can eat up your fear like it's a snack for breakfast. I don't match moods with people who are afraid. Tell me how good can even exist without evil. And why there's any difference as far as the universe is concerned. Use your own brain and just tell me without preaching.

Or apologizing and I'm sorry if that term bugs you. That's just what a lot of these religious conversations seem like. People start to make excuses for things, because we all disagree. Whether we like each other or not, we should disagree about things. I don't think there is any real evidence to suggest free masonry is the direct descendants of Gnosticism. I think the CIA has played most of you as fools. There is just so much generalization and confirmation bias floating around.

Aero, where was stories of demons and possessions in this thread until you just introduced it?
Where is the Gospel in Gnosticism?

 

[KoncreteMind]

I think the gospel on its own makes sense to a certain extent but not when compared with the OT. When comparing the two it just seems like someone came along and didnt want to obey certain statutes of the OT so they created someone greater than the OT to do away with that of the OT they did not like. Paul seemingly being the main culprit.

Its either that or foreigners didnt like the hold that Israel had over the scriptures, so they added a "Part 2" to remove some of that hold and deliver it to foreigners. In the OT, it says that foreigners who do/believe/obey as Israel was supposed to would be considered just like Israel. In the NT, it says that foreigners dont have to do as Israel to be considered like them. How the two are reconciled? Im not sure. But to me, they're not really compatible.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

I'm glad I'm not your enemy Daciple. And my qualm obviously isn't with you, but with the tyranny of the Church. For it has been my people who were cast out. Hunted down, and our works burned. This is a common trend too, so we are all kind of in the same boat here. We are all in the same boat trying to get to the same place. I'm interested in hearing what you have to say about Gnosticism.

None of you are really getting into the debate about dualism. All I hear is a lot of superstition getting thrown around. I don't want to hear about your fantastical stories of demons and possessions. I can eat up your fear like it's a snack for breakfast. I don't match moods with people who are afraid. Tell me how good can even exist without evil. And why there's any difference as far as the universe is concerned. Use your own brain and just tell me without preaching.

Or apologizing and I'm sorry if that term bugs you. That's just what a lot of these religious conversations seem like. People start to make excuses for things, because we all disagree. Whether we like each other or not, we should disagree about things. I don't think there is any real evidence to suggest free masonry is the direct descendants of Gnosticism. I think the CIA has played most of you as fools. There is just so much generalization and confirmation bias floating around.

There seem to be two simple views in conflict over the need for repentance.

We find within ourselves good and evil and are seduced by the wiccan rede "An it harm none, do what ye will." I think in this mindset, repentance is the polar opposite of embracing our "true selves".

One of the peculiarities of human nature is the love of the familiar and the fear if change. You sometimes get it with people who have a particular disability but in compensating for it, they have grown in character and "become who they are", or in a prisoner who becomes a "somebody" on the inside, fearing release in case they were a nobody in the free world.

Dualism appeals to the bit of the human soul that would sooner hang on to the bit of "identity" it's darkness affords it.

I know this because looking back I spent half my life as a worldly, self centered "Christian", more bothered about building my own kingdom than God's. My conscience had stopped telling me that what I did was wrong - I was just being "me". Fortunately when I was well on the way to getting everything I wanted, God allowed circumstances in my life to take an unexpected turn.

On the inside I had began to look like a character I was drawn to watching on a series called "Nip/Tuck", Dr Christian Troy.



Suddenly I was facing the potential divorce, the loss of my home, the loss of contact with my kids, the failure of my business and a physical breakdown.

Everything was wrong in my life, and one particularly bad evening I stood by the road waiting for the next bus to pass by and wondering if I might step out in front of it.

Somehow in my darkness and confusion, I heard a still, small voice.

I had a picture in my mind of a boat, tied to a post next to the shore. I felt it represented my life. I was in the boat but going nowhere because I didn't want to lose touch with the shore. I was so committed to my little bit of muddy bank that I had stayed just where I was "being me" in my own dualism of being a churchgoing Christian unwilling to let go of lust, greed and the deepest of all, pride.

Without taking away from me for a time the trappings of the life I wanted, I would never have seen myself as the lukewarm Church is described in Revelation 3...

"15I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. 16So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. 17Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:

While I was searching for a way to explain what I meant, I came across a quote I had not read before, and which reminded me of the moment I chose to cut the rope and give God the right to guide me, and to make me into the "me" that he wanted me to be.



Change didn't come right away but as I repented, and kept repenting it was like throwing out old rubbish from a home. It turned out the hoarded sins I was so attached to looked tired and cheap when thrown out on the front lawn. Against all odds, my marriage didn't fail, my business restored and perhaps the most difficult of all, my heart changed and I stopped hiding from truth.

 

[JoChris]

I think the gospel on its own makes sense to a certain extent but not when compared with the OT. When comparing the two it just seems like someone came along and didnt want to obey certain statutes of the OT so they created someone greater than the OT to do away with that of the OT they did not like. Paul seemingly being the main culprit.

Its either that or foreigners didnt like the hold that Israel had over the scriptures, so they added a "Part 2" to remove some of that hold and deliver it to foreigners. In the OT, it says that foreigners who do/believe/obey as Israel was supposed to would be considered just like Israel. In the NT, it says that foreigners dont have to do as Israel to be considered like them. How the two are reconciled? Im not sure. But to me, they're not really compatible.

All of the original 12 apostles were Jews. The apostle Paul was a Jew.
Nearly every book in Old and New Testament were written by Jews. http://www.askpastorlance.com/quick-question-are-there-any-books-of-the-bible-that-were-not-written-by-a-jew/
Your theory is contradicted by the above facts.

 

[Aero]

Aero, where was stories of demons and possessions in this thread until you just introduced it?
Where is the Gospel in Gnosticism?

Daciple wrote that Gnosticism is witchcraft and that's a recurring theme with you superstitious folks.

And there is plenty of gospel in Gnosticism. Sure repentance isn't a major subject. But its hardly about witchcraft