-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Abrahamic religions and white magick
- Thread starter Starlight
- Start date
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
Some forms of magick are acceptable if they're used for a divine purpose.
How do you determine the difference between black magic and white magic? Eg is cursing someone through prayer black or white magic?
Starlight
Spiritual but not religious, new age and omnist
All manipulation of energy thru power of the mind/will is 'magick' more or less
- I think 'God' allows us as co-creators of his to do 'white magick', thru all means possible, - that includes thru traditional means or more occult,....if you're engaging your mind and will in anything, I deem that a magical process. What are many prayers, evocations, rituals, sacraments, religious gestures, etc. but magical movements to invoke some effect or response? Consciousness everywhere is working magic. - just a few thoughts to muse over.
~*~*~
Last edited:
Then I would say Baha'i who accurately follow the teachings of Baha'u'llah believe in one form of black magic.
Baha'u'llah curses those who reject him, and also engaged in Mubahila with one of his enemies which is a kind of prayer invoking God's curse on the party who is not truthful.
Starlight
Spiritual but not religious, new age and omnist
I agree with you that God allows us as co-workers to do white magickAll manipulation of energy thru power of the mind/will is 'magick' more or less
~*~*~
Starlight
Spiritual but not religious, new age and omnist
Are you sure about that? Maybe he did a mistake. No one of the messengers from God is perfect
The Bible too is full of both white and black magick, even Jesus did harm and curses,....he cursed an innocent fig tree and killed it! plus in at least one infancy gospel did harm or killed another child, if i recall, one can double check on that count. David prays for 'God' to do harm against his enemies, and even 'God' kills people and commands genocide, so maybe that 'God' is the biggest MAGICK-user ever, and does whatever he please, since after all, he CLAIMS to be 'God'. It looks like a full banquet to me, enjoy whatever dish you please.
~*~*~
Last edited:
Starlight
Spiritual but not religious, new age and omnist
I believe the whole Bible is not from God. Some people who wrote parts of the Bible were wrong about God. God has never asked us humans to kill each other.
Yes many parts of the Bible is from God, but I believe some parts of the Bible is not from God
How to know what is from God in the Bible? That is simple. God is love and just. What is against love and justice is not from God. God is against killing innocent people.
Starlight
Spiritual but not religious, new age and omnist
This is a question that participants of The Great Adventure Bible studies frequently ask us, and it’s a tough one to answer. We know that God is all good and all loving. In fact, “God is love” (1 John 4:8). And yet, in the Old Testament, we find various scenes in which God’s people are called to “destroy” other nations.
Troublesome passages remind us why it is so important to understand how to interpret Scripture “in accordance with the Spirit who inspired it” (see Catechism of the Catholic Church 111-114). Based on this text alone, without proper context, it’s easy to see why someone might think that God commands evil. If we are to understand what is happening here, then we need to keep in mind the following criteria for biblical interpretation:
- Pay attention to the “content and unity of the whole of Scripture” (CCC 112). In other words, the rest of Scripture should help to make sense of this passage. So we can turn to similar passages of the Bible to help shed light on this question.
- Read the Bible in light of the “living Tradition” of the Church (CCC 113). We have to take into account what God has revealed to us not only in the written words of Scripture, but also in Sacred Tradition. The Church’s teaching on the command, “Thou shalt not kill,” is that “no one can under any circumstance claim for himself the right directly to destroy an innocent human being” (CCC 2258).
- We need to remember that there is a “coherence of truths of the faith” (CCC 113). This means that our faith is not self-contradicting. We cannot say it was morally acceptable for the Israelites to kill innocent people then, but that it is no longer acceptable in our day.
We know it’s never morally acceptable to intentionally kill innocent persons. We also know that God is all good. So what was God asking Israel to do in this passage? Was he calling them to act in an evil way by killing innocent persons? Two other stories in Scripture should help to answer this question.
Abraham, God, and Sodom (Genesis 18-19)
In this story, Abraham is like a defense attorney pleading for clemency on behalf of Sodom (a city with some serious problems, as we learn in Genesis 19). Abraham asks God,Abraham affirms that God is just, and it’s unjust to kill righteous persons. So Abraham asks God if he would spare Sodom if there were fifty, forty, thirty, or ten righteous people in Sodom. In each instance God says that he “will spare the whole place for their sake.” From this we learn that God is indeed just, and he will not kill the innocent. As the Catechism says, “God is infinitely good and all his works are good” (CCC 385). “God is in no way, directly or indirectly, the cause of moral evil” (CCC 311). The interesting thing is that God does end up destroying Sodom in Genesis 19. Does that mean there wasn’t a single righteous person among them? Were there no innocent children? Or is there something more to this scene? Let’s look at our next story and see how it can help explain what might be happening.
The Battle of Jericho (Joshua 6)
A literalistic interpretation of this passage brings us back to where we started: It would seem God was commanding the death of the innocent, But is this the only possible way to interpret this text? When we read Scripture, it’s important to distinguish between a literal and a literalistic interpretation of a text. The literalist interprets every word of Scripture as literal, historical truth; and does not distinguish among the various types of writing found in Scripture—including poetry and metaphor.A literal understanding of Scripture recognizes that “truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing” (CCC 110). Is the author of Joshua really intending to say that every single living creature in Jericho was utterly destroyed, including innocent children? The problem with this view is that the story itself has an exception to Jericho’s utter destruction. Rahab and her family are spared (see Joshua 6:25). Is it possible that in these examples the sense of utter destruction was not meant to be understood literally, but was used as an expression? Could this refer to a great—but not total—devastation? We use similar expressions frequently. For example, if I described a comedy I really enjoyed and said “I was dying of laughter,” you wouldn’t begin thinking that I was literally dying. You know that’s just an expression for how funny something was. So too, the idea that “every living creature” in Jericho was killed is quite possibly just an expression.
What’s Deuteronomy Calling Israel to Do?
We know from Abraham’s conversation with God that God does not punish the innocent. So it’s not likely Deuteronomy intended to say that God was commanding the death of everyone. In fact, Deuteronomy goes on to say, “You shall not make marriages with them, giving your daughters to their sons or taking their daughters for your sons” (Deuteronomy 7:3). Why would Deuteronomy need to forbid intermarriage with these nations if they were to be utterly destroyed? There would be no one left to marry among them. It’s more likely that the phrase “utterly destroy” was used as an expression.Perhaps it was intended to describe a complete victory for Israel; a victory that meant separating themselves from anything that might get in the way of their relationship with God. Actually, that’s the reason Deuteronomy gives for this command, “For [the nations] would turn your sons from following me to serving other gods, and then the anger of the LORD would flare up against you and he would quickly destroy you” (Deuteronomy 7:4). This interpretation would mean that God did not command evil. Rather he commanded Israel to avoid evil by removing those temptations that might lead them astray. Christ uses a similar expression in the New Testament to describe avoiding sin:
Christ is not speaking literally. He’s using an expression to illustrate the severity of what he is saying. So the lesson here is, don’t literally cut off your hand, pluck out your eye, or lay waste to a nation. Instead, remove those things in your life that draw you away from the Lord. It’s better to separate yourself from those things than to find yourself separated from God.
Does God Command Evil Acts in the Bible? - Ascension Press Media
We know God is all good and all loving. And yet, in the Old Testament we find various scenes in which God’s people are called to “destroy” other nations.
media.ascensionpress.com
Last edited:
Indeed, no scripture can be claimed to be wholly perfect, infallible or inerrant, as some claim the Bible is, which is ridiculous really, since anything coming thru human channels is subject to some distortion or bias by fact of filtration. Some writings are more or less inspired, no matter what human channel or religious tradition that channel is a part of. So, when we read a certain book or essay, we judge it by its content and context, - some parts may be more or less inspired, from 'God' and from the 'person',....mix and mingled.......all human works are a co-creation anyways.
You are a co-creator, by fact of power of choice, mind and will, plus all the latent powers of divinity within you, innate to you and further granted by the Spirit. - universal laws and principles govern the karmic flow of your actions always, - seedtime and harvest is always going on, as long as there is ACTION on any level, or of any kind. Your word is your wand so to speak,.....if we consider the law of faith and the power of the tongue. We determine our conditions, and can modify them whenever and however we can.
~*~*~
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
There is no mention of white magic or black magic. Witchcraft is simply forbidden.
I'm sure that Baha'u'llah refers to it in a number of his writings such as his Lawhi Mubahila to Mulla Sadiq-i-Khurasani. For an educational reference you may refer to the final paragraph of page 5 of this;
For a Baha'i account of the incident you may refer to The Revelation of Bahá'u'lláh, Volume 2, Chapter 14
Well sure they are not perfect, but Baha'u'llah claimed to be no less than infallible which implies perfection, therefore his claim must be false if it is also true that he is not perfect;
'Intellect hath various degrees. As a discussion of the pronouncements made by the philosophers in this connection would pass beyond the scope of our discourse, we have refrained from mentioning them. It is nonetheless indisputably clear and evident that the minds of men have never been, nor shall they ever be, of equal capacity. The Perfect Intellect alone can provide true guidance and direction. Thus were these sublime words revealed by the Pen of the Most High, exalted be His glory, in response to this question: “The Tongue of Wisdom proclaimeth: He that hath Me not is bereft of all things. Turn ye away from all that is on earth and seek none else but Me. I am the Sun of Wisdom and the Ocean of Knowledge. I cheer the faint and revive the dead. I am the 30 guiding Light that illumineth the way. I am the royal Falcon on the arm of the Almighty. I unfold the drooping wings of every broken bird and start it on its flight.” 11'
Source: Bahá'í Reference Library - The Tabernacle of Unity, Pages 15-55
As it turns out I enjoy the pettiness of none of those dishes thanks. Others are welcome to their petty gods which allegedly destroy those who reject them.
Starlight
Spiritual but not religious, new age and omnist
This text was about God, not Baha'u'llah. The sentences *The Perfect Intellect alone can provide true guidance and direction * is about God.
I believe you have to ignore the paragraph below that sentence to reach the conclusion that this is not about Baha'u'llah. Is God the "royal falcon on the arm of the almighty"? Really, God is on his own arm?
I think Bible is against any magic.
Starlight
Spiritual but not religious, new age and omnist
It is a metaphor. and for God all things is possible
Sure for God all things are possible, but I don't think you are reading the intention of the author into it, I believe you are reading your own ideas into it.
The metaphor is one of Baha'u'llah being the perfect source of knowledge being assisted by God.
Its not a metaphor for God doing the illogical (ie literally resting on his own arm) as I see it.
To claim that it is a metaphor for a literal occurrence is to miss the point of what is being said altogether in my view.