astral projection is biblical

[Jollybear]

You don’t “work independently of God” in the spiritual life. To do otherwise is to defeat the purpose of the spiritual life. Also, if you “invite God into it”, you’re no longer working independently of God.

Praying, reading the bible, witnessing, fellowshipping, obeying the laws of God, you do that with the act of your own will, your independent will and your own independent mind and body faculties. God does not do those things for you. Hence you’re not DIRECTLY relying on God. Therefore when you say sorcery is evil because it’s relying on your own methods instead of God, this is not consistent. Also if you say inviting God into prayer, bible reading and so on, that this makes it no longer independent of God, then inviting God into a self induced OBE then makes it not independent of God.

Also, newsflash: Pride doesn’t mean that you think you’re untouchable by anyone, that’s an extreme version of it. Pride just means you have an overinflated opinion of yourself and an underappreciative view of others.

Ok, by praying, reading the bible, obeying the laws, going to work, self inducing an OBE, all those things we DO, so it’s not an overinflated opinion of our self, it’s not an opinion of our self period, it’s just DOING stuff, also by doing these things, including the OBE, it’s just doing something, it is not having an under appreciative view of others.

This is not the case at all. They're still alive in Christ, and are already praying on the behalf of many. They're not in physical bodies so that you have to actually speak into their ears for them to hear you; since they are in the Holy Spirit and in Christ, they receive special awareness. There's no need to "get the attention" of a Saint; you ask them to pray for you, they hear you right away, and they pray for you--without any special tricks involved.

Two questions, does this make the saints God since they can hear millions of people talk to them at the same time?
Second question: why not just pray to God directly?

No telepathy involved.

There so many gaps in what you’re saying though. Telepathy is just what you described, the saints have special awareness, and they hear you right away. That sounds like telepathy.

Do you understand how prayer works, and how asking for intercessory prayer from the departed Saints works?

Educate me, I’m all ears?

Yes, they use incantations, special runes and glyphs, seals and symbols, as well as various ingredients and objects in their spellwork. This IS nothing like what we see Christians do, because occultists are relying on themselves, and putting no reliance on God--or worse, relying on false gods, or even demons masquerading as gods.

Let’s get the record straight. Not all occultists use runes, glyphs, seals, symbols and ingredients and objects. Some of them just use their mind to manipulate energy, which is the heart of magic. Also why pick on occultists for using seals, symbols and ingredients, SOME Christians indeed do use this stuff, incense (ingredient), symbols (cross, dove, ect).

Yes, because they were looking at the stars, not making horoscopes.

Right, so you concede that some forms of astrology are good then. Very good then, we are making progress.

What sort of “spiritual attunement” is going on when the Magi take a known prophecy, and see the star that fulfills said prophecy?

Sometimes I think people can answer their own question, but perhaps I have to answer it anyways. Yes, the magi had a “known” prophesy, from the Old Testament, yes, the magi looked up and studied stars, however, how did they ****KNOW**** that THIS star was in connection with the known prophesy of the messiah? How did they know this star was the star of Jesus? Exactly, they had to do their spiritual attunement or their astrology magic, whatever that looked like, that is what they would have had to do to figure that out. There was millions of stars to look at in the night sky, it would take a lot more than just looking up and going “oh, it’s that one! Great guess!” really?

I don’t know, my aim in the spiritual life is to grow close to God, not to wither trees or leaves. If you want to know how to align your heart to His in “practical terms”, then repent of your sins, grow in the virtues, pray to God, read the Scriptures, deny yourself, and free yourself from the distractions of the world to start.

You don’t know? Why is it that “most”(maybe all) Christians don’t know the answer to how to whether a leaf? When in fact THEIR “Lord” made such a BOLD and BIG statement that they could do this, would this not shift the perspective of what reality is if we could do this? Not just for ourselves, but for the world at large. I mean if you can whether a leaf with your faith, then I bet my bridges you can easily live a spiritually moral life for God with ease. It’s almost as a copout to say “my aim in the spiritual life is to grow close to God, not to wither trees or leaves.” And that may be fine and dandy to grow close to God, but why use that as a copout to the question? And the question is a BIG question, and Jesus statement is a BIG statement. Just think, moving mountains, withering fig trees, uprooting mulberry trees, also should I add in, parting the red sea, making water from a rock, or how about “those that believe in me will do the same things I do, even GREATER things” Jesus said. Greater things? I never seen any Christians walking on water, let alone doing greater than that, have you? Ok, I like Gideon shall ask “where are the miracles?” How do we whither the fig tree? Interesting enough, the Christian world won’t tell you in detail how that’s done, just a shrug off statement like “just have faith and it will happen” or at worst they would say “it’s symbolic!” but the occult world spells out for you how to actually do something like this in detail and gives you exercises to be able to practice in order to do it.

the art of producing a desired effect or result through the use of incantation or various other techniques that presumably assure human

control of supernatural agencies or the forces of nature.
magic [ˈmædʒɪk]
n
1. the art that, by use of spells, supposedly invokes supernatural powers to influence events; sorcery

Ok, I agree with this, I’ll go with this. But mind you, in the context that I use the word “magic” I mean the second part of your definition “techniques that presumably assure human control of the forces of nature” i.e. manipulation of energy with the mind.

Nowhere does it say in that source that sorcery=casting lots. It says one who INFLUENCES lots, not one who casts them. CASTING lots=just seeing how the cookie crumbles. INFLUENCING lots=trying to change how the cookie crumbles.

Talk about nit picking. Ok, the apostles cast the lots, God influences the lots, i.e sorcery. Bang, I got you. The proverbs 16:33 say “the lot is cast into the lap, but it’s every decision is from the Lord”.

 

[Jollybear]

Unless we pray before studying the Scriptures, like all proper Christians do to one extent or another. Reading Scripture itself can be a form of prayer—the Catholics especially develop this idea with the concept of lectio divina, and we Orthodox have a form of prayer called “meditation,” that is, meditating on the Scriptures and letting the divine fire kindle in our hearts.

Irrelevant whether we pray before reading the scripture, or during the read or after, that is completely irrelevant, either way we have to rely on ourselves to pick up the book, look at it, use our minds and read it, and think about what were reading. All of those decisions are using our human will and faculties. Thus we are not DIRECTLY relying on God to DO those things. True, we are directly relying on God when we ask him to reveal to us some things in the scriptures that he would like to bring to our attention, we rely on him to do that himself, but as for the rest, we rely on ourselves to do. Likewise, self inducing an OBE, we rely on ourselves to do it, but we can pray before we do it and ask God to be with us and shield us and show us where he would like us to travel or a few places he would like us travel.

Not at all. Have you actually tried to witness to others before? You rely a LOT on God to open the people’s hearts to what you’re saying and to make them receptive towards the Gospel.

Keep in mind Colossians 4:2-4. When we are witnessing, and even before we witness, we need to pray that we may be able to evangelize successfully. I could pull out dozens of other Scriptures that talk about this, and talk about how the fruit of evangelizing ultimately comes from God's part of the job and not ours, but I’ll mention one other: Christ told us not to worry about what to say when we were forced to witness to our faith before kings in a trial, because the Holy Spirit would give us the words to speak. Witnessing is most certainly something that God helps us with.

True, God can tug at the heart of the person, we rely on him to do that, but we don’t rely on him to actually speak, to actually go up to and talk to the person.

Do you know what “prayer” actually means? Prayer by its very nature is not something we do on our own.

I’m going to be a little sarcastic right now, don’t take it the wrong way, but have you ever prayed before? Surely you must never have said a prayer in your life? If you ever have said a prayer, you would know 100% that you need to use your will and human faculties in order to do it. God does not do it for you.

Going to church counts for nothing. Being a warm body in a building doesn’t get you anywhere. Worshipping God with love, in communion with others, does—and we don’t do that alone, either.

Of course we are not alone, God is everywhere, he is with us in what we do, but we got to rely on ourselves to do it while he is with us.

Nope.

So God quiets your mind, God makes you meditate, God makes you listen to him? Oh of course, you don’t have to do nothing, just lay back on the sofa and be lazy, God will do it all. If anything, THIS kind of Christianity is dangerous, not the other way around.

This one I’ll give you—but this can be done outside of the spiritual life. Just look at atheists who do the same thing.

Oh nice, you give me this one but not the others huh? Well, too bad, I took the others too. This can be done outside the spiritual life? So can all the others be outside the spiritual life. Atheists can read the bible, atheists can pray, atheists can go to church and raise their hands, atheists CAN DO all those things, atheists can tell others about Jesus, atheists can talk and fellowship with Christians. Atheists can SAY they believe in God, but then their actions say God does not exist.

Not so; we need Christ as our Shepherd to keep us on the straight and narrow, and out of the broad path leading to destruction. We are not perfect in following God’s commands.

Two things: If we don’t use and exercise our will power that God gave us, we are not going to even come close to obeying his laws perfectly. That creates laziness. Secondly, yes God can help us, and empower our spirits by killing the impulses of sin, he does that in the heart, but in order for that to happen, we need to connect to him, i.e meditation, esoteric methods.

If you think this, then you are deeply, deeply misguided. I think we can call this the pride that you were talking about. Spiritual pride is thinking that you don’t need God, you can do it yourself. Thinking that you can do it all on your own is actually a heresy. It’s called Pelagianism. Something for you to think about.

Everything exoteric we can rely on ourselves to do, but everything esoteric that relates to changing our hearts to be like Christ’s heart, that takes God. We can’t change our hearts. For instance, you can rely on yourself to not go out and commit the ACT of adultery, but when it comes to either not looking at a woman lustfully or thinking a lustful thought, that takes a whole other power to not do that. Now of course, you can still WILL yourself not to LOOK at the women, but that just means you’re fighting the lust that is ALREADY there. So not looking is just suppressing it, it’s not killing it, only God can kill it. Likewise, you can will yourself to not THINK a lustful thought, or think of something else, that is the same thing, suppressing a lust that is already there. Now not that ALL lust is evil, it’s not, so we got to be careful their too. But, to actually change the evil lust problem, that takes, umem, ESOTERIC METHODS.

None of it is relying on ourselves instead of God. The fact that you think it is is very disconcerting to me.

When you use your human will and faculties, you are relying on yourself, period. Human will and human faculties are NOT GOD HIMSELF. So now tying this back to my original point, here is what I said in reminder “so all this sorcery, divination stuff is bad because we would be relying on our own methods instead of God, well in that case” all the “spiritual” stuff I just mentioned that we rely on ourselves to do, would be us relying on our own methods instead of God.

But a "vision" in the sense that we're talking about does NOT refer to the physical sense of sight. I thought that was clear...

No, in the sense Ezekiel was seeing a vision, it was not just in his minds eye, it was with the eyes of his spirit, because he was out of his body.

 

[Jollybear]

It's quite clear that it was a vision. Just because it didn't specifically say the word "vision" doesn't mean that it wasn't one. What, did God have a physical body with which to be seen during the times of the Old Testament? Of course not. So it was, of course, a vision.

Yes, God DID have a body during times of the Old Testament. So, no it does not have to be a vision in the mind’s eye.

Yes, because it was a vision.

No, it’s because Ezekiel dug through the wall by means of his spirit form dug through the wall.

See my explanation of how "God giving some people OBE's" (AKA ecstasy) is a COMPLETELY different experience than your self-induced OBE's. Just because ecstasy is good and holy doesn't mean that self-induced OBE's are. You cannot say that the sole difference between the two is in one case, God does it, and in the other, we do it. Ecstasy (what we once called "God-induced OBE's") are of a completely different character than the self-induced OBE's that you're touting. You're bringing up old arguments that I've already addressed and refuted. I thought you'd understand this by now, since I've explained dozens of times why God granting us to be in a state of ecstasy is not sinful nor does it force us to commit a sin, while us self-inducing OBE's cannot be treated the same way.

Let me reiterate what you just said, because you seriously have to see your blind spot on this. Your saying when God gives an OBE he brings with it ecstasy, but when we induce an OBE, it does not come with ecstasy, therefore when God does it, it’s holy, but when we do it, it’s sinful. Can’t you see that this is STILL a double standard? It’s like saying, if you pray without ecstasy, then it’s sinful, but if you pray with ecstasy, then it’s holy. Not to mention, you assume that self induced OBE’s don’t come with ecstasy, when in fact many of them do. But regardless, if God gives an OBE (irrelevant if he gives it with ecstasy or not) it proves that OBE’s are not sinful. Therefore if we self induce one, it cannot be then sinful. Just like prayer, if God makes you pray and it comes with ecstasy, then that proves prayer would not be sinful, so to pray, whether you did so with or without ecstasy, would not be sinful. Plus, define ecstasy? Joy, peace? Just being in his presence? Well you can invite his presence into the self induced OBE, just like you can invite his presence into the prayer. Not to mention, his presence is already their whether you invite him or not.

Here's something for you to chew on: That purpose will never fully be reached. It's an eternal mission, like theosis; it never really ends.

True, but that does not take away from the fact that God wants us to reach everything that the apostle, prophet, evangelist, preacher, teacher is. Just because it will take awhile does not mean he WANTS it to take awhile. But regardless if he wanted it to take awhile or not, that just proves you concede that he wants this for his church to reach. We are making progress then.

Echolocation is not sight, but something that can sort of perform the equivalent function. Walking on your hands is wholly impractical, and most likely will do terrible damage to your wrists over time. Imitations of the gifts are not the gifts themselves.

Even though it’s not sight, it fulfills some of the same purpose, to navigate you around without bumping into stuff. Walking around on your hands will build large shoulder muscles, and arm muscles and cause the wrists and arms and shoulders to adapt and get stronger, thus the direct gifts of the shoulders and arms will be then heightened.

Without any evidence to support your claim, I'm not going to waste the character space talking about empty conjecture.

Here is a source of testimonies from people who have had real experiences with OBE’s. Some of them are confused, some of them had negative experiences and some of them had pleasant ones. I have not read all of them, but I read some to know that some have gotten positive experiences. Plus I already told you one guy who told me his experience verbally, he travelled to heaven. But anyhow, here is the source. http://www.experienceproject.com/groups/Astral-Travel/196644

And what does it tell you that Satan's kingdom is in this "spirit realm"?

What does it tell me? That’s all it tells me, that Satan’s kingdom is in the spirit realm. His kingdom is NOT the spirit realm itself, his kingdom is IN the spirit realm. The earth is in the physical realm, but is the earth the physical realm? No, it’s IN the physical realm, the physical realm is a HUGE place, the earth IN the physical realm is a VERY SMALL thing. My body lives on the earth, the earth is a very huge place in light of my body, my body is small in comparison. My body is not the earth, it lives on the earth. You getting this? Satan’s kingdom is in the spirit realm, the spirit realm is a VERY HUGE place, that place is not the devils kingdom; the devils kingdom is just IN that place. So his kingdom is very small in comparison to that huge place.

So if the Promised Land (Israel) is Heaven, then how do you interpret the Babylonians, Persians, Greeks and Romans stomping all over the place, killing the children of Israel, and defiling the Temple? If we use the themes from the Exodus typology here, you would be forced to say that demons conquer Heaven and kill and take away the people who have been saved by God! You clearly cannot use the same types all the time, or else you run into very messy issues like this.

Oh but I can use the same typology, this does not run me into a messy issue, which I’m sure you were hoping it would for the sake of your point, but luckily for me, it does not run me into a wall. Here’s why: to get to heaven (promised land) we must fight the fight of faith, we must persevere, with the full armor of God on and fight the spiritual forces of evil in HEAVENLY REALMS (fight the cannanites, jubasites, Hittites ect). Does this mean all the demons are in heaven, where God’s thrown is, and his garden of delights is and his city is? No, it means demons are outside the city, sorta like the jubasites and hitites and cannanites being in the land, but outside the garden of God, eden, which was garded by the angel. GOTCHA! You thought you had me didn’t ya? I sure slipped out of that one, lol.

No it's not. At the very least, it's not all part of the same typology.

Taking the whole narrative of the entire Old Testament in it’s natural format story, apart from it’s typology, it is a CONTINUAL story, true, there are different or block aspects to the entire story, but all those peaces of the story go together to form a whole picture. Likewise, the whole typology of the Old Testament is the same, it’s one continual story, just with different aspects of that story, but they all go together, they are not SEPARATE, they form a whole picture together. You can’t separate the story of David from the story of Jesus, you can’t separate the story of Genesis chapter one of creation from the story of revelation where it comes to an end. You can’t separate Adam and Eve, from the redemption. It all goes together. None of it’s random.

It should be pretty clear, for example, when the Exodus ends: The Hebrews get to Canaan. If you have trouble figuring out when one story ends and another begins, you could try looking at the section titles. Or just take five seconds to think about it.

Just because the exodus ends, does not mean it’s disconnected from the part of the story where the Israelites end up in the Promised Land, it’s not disconnected. God always reminded them where they came from and what he had done for them. It’s not disconnected.

 

[Jollybear]

Oh no, it does. Hence why the Bible consists of many books.

Many books yes, because it was a whole big historic story from the beginning up to the time of Christ and into the future of eternity. That’s why it was many books, but the story is not disconnected. It ties together like a web. Each string is a different PART of the story, but it makes one whole big web, one big story.

I'm sorry, where did I say that the entire OT is a typology? I believe those were your words, not mine.

This is what you said, now I could be misinterpreting what you meant by it, but here is what you said

“I commend you for knowing that the Old Testament is a foreshadowing of the New--many Christians don't understand this. I also commend you for trying to use typology, which was one of the Fathers' favorite methods of Biblical exegesis. I also commend you for correctly identifying Egypt as this sinful world, and Canaan being a type of Heaven. All of this is very commendable, and I give props to you for all of it.”

So you said the Old Testament is a foreshadowing of the New. You said that. Now did you mean not all of it? If so, well, how do you determine which parts are types and which parts are not? The New Testament is loaded with quotes, too many for me to quote right now, but loaded with them that show the Old Testament is a foreshadow of the New Testament. How do you deal with that? So I will again ask you, what does first Kings 8:41 a type of?

The only way your interpretation of this (which, BTW, you are the first person ever in the 2000-year lifespan of Christianity to even think of this)

You don’t know if I am the only one who has ever thought about self induced OBE’s or if they relate to leaving the tents, just because something is not recorded does not mean it was not thought of. Also even if they did not think it, just because they did not think it, does not mean that if someone AVENTUALLY thinks of it, that they are then invalidated. Truth is not in numbers. Truth is in TRUTH, period.

would make any sense is if we left our bodies constantly and spent more time outside our bodies than in them. The fact that you're the first person to ever think of this should tell you something: It's probably not right. If you were right, then SOME Church Father, somewhere along the line, would have thought of it.

But no one did.

[/font][/color]

They did not spend more time outside the tent then in them. They would have spent equal amounts of time, and some people would have spent more time out then in, and others would have spent more time in then out, it would have been variables in people and individuals. Dinner time, would have been spent in, sex, spent in, sleep, spent in, naps, spent in, prayer time, maybe sometimes spent in, fellowship, sometimes spent in. All other times, spent out, that would create on AVARAGE equal amount of time for being out as being in. Plus, when we sleep, many times we do project out of body, we are just not aware or we do not remember it. That is what some advanced OBErs have discovered. However, conscious OBE’s with memory of them, that would not even be equal amounts of time being out as being in anyway. But being out as being in would be overall, equal amounts of time being out as being in, since most of these OBE’s we have them every night without memory. Gotcha again!

It means death in this instance.

Disagree, it means both, death and OBE’s, because it’s dealing with a TENT. If a tent is worn out and thrown away, that is a type of death to the tent (body), but if the tent is not worn out and thrown away, then someone can still go outside the tent and then return to it (OBE). So, it refers to both, because it’s referring to a tent.

Because each culture has its own unique symbols and motifs for things. Given the thousands and thousands of cultures, a silver cord (representing the connection between the spirit and body) being cut (representing death) was bound to be thought up by one of them, and it happened to be the Israelites. I think a few other Ancient Near Eastern cultures had a similar concept, such as the Greeks (a la the goddess Iris).

Interesting the Israelites happen to get the silver cord literally right and the Greeks also got it literally right too. This was not by chance they got it right, they got it right because they KNEW, and self induced OBErs KNOW today there is a silver cord, many of them have seen it. Just so happens the Israelites got it right by a gauss? I don’t think so. You’re trying hard to get out of it, but I’m going to hold you tight to this.

Thought we could do little points at a time, but you did not respond fast enough, so i thought i would just go ahead and respond to all your points.

 

[Shiranui117]

Forgive me for my absence again. I just haven't felt like posting much on any forum for some reason...

Basically you’re saying laban knew that Jacobs God was blessing him and knew that his own lesser gods also blessed him at other times. This is irrelevant to my point, we both know that, but laban knew WHEN which God/god was blessing him. How did he know that? Divination.

I think we've reached an impasse here. I've made my case for how Laban perceived through natural observation (a definition that fits into Hebrew "nachash") that the God of Jacob was blessing Laban, based on the views which ancient peoples had of gods. Your view is based off conjecture, and you don't seem to be willing to relinquish it anytime soon, and nothing is going to change your mind on the matter.

Praying, reading the bible, witnessing, fellowshipping, obeying the laws of God, you do that with the act of your own will, your independent will and your own independent mind and body faculties. God does not do those things for you. Hence you’re not DIRECTLY relying on God. Therefore when you say sorcery is evil because it’s relying on your own methods instead of God, this is not consistent. Also if you say inviting God into prayer, bible reading and so on, that this makes it no longer independent of God, then inviting God into a self induced OBE then makes it not independent of God.

So your logic is, if we cooperate with God, communicate with Him and learn from Him, we do so independently of Him?

Two questions, does this make the saints God since they can hear millions of people talk to them at the same time?

Of course not. The definition of being God is not limited to being able to hear those who ask for your prayers.

Second question: why not just pray to God directly?

Of course you can do that. But if you can ask your family, priest, friends and parish community to pray for you, then why not ask the Saints to pray for you, since they're alive in Christ?

There so many gaps in what you’re saying though. Telepathy is just what you described, the saints have special awareness, and they hear you right away. That sounds like telepathy.

You like to take words with controversial connotations and fit Christian practices and concepts into them, don't you?

What's your aim? Are you trying to force Christianity under an occultist label? Why?

Educate me, I’m all ears?

Supplicating God is not magic; it is making a request to Him, just as we make requests to anyone for help or assistance. We ask God to do something for us, and we leave the matter in His hands to sort out. He is the Almighty, and perfectly capable of granting our prayer if He so wills. There's no magic involved, no spellwork, just asking for God's help and grace. Asking the Saints to pray for us (AKA intercessory prayer) is the exact same as asking your family, friends or priest to pray for you.

Let’s get the record straight. Not all occultists use runes, glyphs, seals, symbols and ingredients and objects. Some of them just use their mind to manipulate energy, which is the heart of magic. Also why pick on occultists for using seals, symbols and ingredients, SOME Christians indeed do use this stuff, incense (ingredient), symbols (cross, dove, ect).

Do you HONESTLY think we're working magic spells when we burn incense as a sweet-smelling fragrance to God, or venerate an icon, or hang up a cross? Please don't tell me you're going to seriously attempt to forcibly invent a connection between Christian spiritual practice, and occultist or pagan magic. My palm may break my skull into pieces. This is far beyond being a stretch. It's straight-up absurdity that no one in their right mind would ever accept, Christian or occultist or otherwise.

Right, so you concede that some forms of astrology are good then. Very good then, we are making progress.

As far as the old usage of the word "astrology" goes, you could finagle my words into that position. What I was speaking of is what we today recognize as the science of astronomy, and not what we today recognize as the pseudoscience of astrology.

Sometimes I think people can answer their own question, but perhaps I have to answer it anyways. Yes, the magi had a “known” prophesy, from the Old Testament, yes, the magi looked up and studied stars, however, how did they ****KNOW**** that THIS star was in connection with the known prophesy of the messiah? How did they know this star was the star of Jesus? Exactly, they had to do their spiritual attunement or their astrology magic, whatever that looked like, that is what they would have had to do to figure that out. There was millions of stars to look at in the night sky, it would take a lot more than just looking up and going “oh, it’s that one! Great guess!” really?

You have nothing but conjecture to back up your statement that they used "spiritual attunement or astrology magic" to find the star. This really isn't worth addressing.

You don’t know? Why is it that “most”(maybe all) Christians don’t know the answer to how to whether a leaf? When in fact THEIR “Lord” made such a BOLD and BIG statement that they could do this, would this not shift the perspective of what reality is if we could do this? Not just for ourselves, but for the world at large. I mean if you can whether a leaf with your faith, then I bet my bridges you can easily live a spiritually moral life for God with ease. It’s almost as a copout to say “my aim in the spiritual life is to grow close to God, not to wither trees or leaves.” And that may be fine and dandy to grow close to God, but why use that as a copout to the question? And the question is a BIG question, and Jesus statement is a BIG statement.

It's not a copout. It's keeping a proper focus on what really matters, and what is actually worth striving for. We NEED to keep our focus on Christ and the salvation that He offers, not neat party tricks.

Just think, moving mountains, withering fig trees, uprooting mulberry trees, also should I add in, parting the red sea, making water from a rock, or how about “those that believe in me will do the same things I do, even GREATER things” Jesus said. Greater things? I never seen any Christians walking on water, let alone doing greater than that, have you? Ok, I like Gideon shall ask “where are the miracles?” How do we whither the fig tree? Interesting enough, the Christian world won’t tell you in detail how that’s done, just a shrug off statement like “just have faith and it will happen” or at worst they would say “it’s symbolic!” but the occult world spells out for you how to actually do something like this in detail and gives you exercises to be able to practice in order to do it.

You want to see a greater miracle than a fig tree being withered, walking on water, or moving a mountain? Witness a person being brought to repentance and faith in Jesus Christ. Witness the salvation of a soul. That is greater than all the withered fig trees, bent spoons, water-walking and moved mountains in the world. That is one of the "greater things" that Jesus promised we would be able to do--bring others to salvation.

Tell me, would you rather spend your time withering fig trees, or helping people come to salvation? Would you rather feed your ego by walking on water, or become humble in working our your own salvation with fear and trembling, helping others to do the same? These are not rhetorical questions. I'd like to hear your answer.[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

 

[Shiranui117]

Talk about nit picking. Ok, the apostles cast the lots, God influences the lots, i.e sorcery. Bang, I got you. The proverbs 16:33 say “the lot is cast into the lap, but it’s every decision is from the Lord”.

Okay, and? The Apostles didn't influence fate or fortune or future. They cast lots to see God's will, and God showed them His will. It's not "nitpicking" to point out that a given example cannot fit into a certain definition. Nice attempt at another "gotcha", but it fell flat on its face.

Irrelevant whether we pray before reading the scripture, or during the read or after, that is completely irrelevant, either way we have to rely on ourselves to pick up the book, look at it, use our minds and read it, and think about what were reading. All of those decisions are using our human will and faculties. Thus we are not DIRECTLY relying on God to DO those things. True, we are directly relying on God when we ask him to reveal to us some things in the scriptures that he would like to bring to our attention, we rely on him to do that himself, but as for the rest, we rely on ourselves to do. Likewise, self inducing an OBE, we rely on ourselves to do it, but we can pray before we do it and ask God to be with us and shield us and show us where he would like us to travel or a few places he would like us travel.

So your argument is that, because we have free will, everything we do in our spiritual life is done independently of God?

True, God can tug at the heart of the person, we rely on him to do that, but we don’t rely on him to actually speak, to actually go up to and talk to the person.

But without God preparing both that person and us, our witnessing cannot possibly bear fruit. Keep in mind 1 Corinthians 3:6 “I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase.”

I’m going to be a little sarcastic right now, don’t take it the wrong way, but have you ever prayed before? Surely you must never have said a prayer in your life? If you ever have said a prayer, you would know 100% that you need to use your will and human faculties in order to do it. God does not do it for you.

It seems you don't understand why I said you were wrong. Allow me to explain: Prayer is two-way communication between us and God. We can heap up all the prayers we want, but we can still fail to really pray to God. Ratting off prayers is not necesarily the same thing as praying. An atheist can say a prayer. He can recite the Our Father or the Jesus Prayer. Does this mean he's really praying? No. Unless he is communing with God in his heart on one level or another, he is not truly praying. Prayer is by its nature not something we do on our own, because by its very definition, it is done in cooperation and in communion with God.

Of course we are not alone, God is everywhere, he is with us in what we do, but we got to rely on ourselves to do it while he is with us.

Yes, we have to exert our free will. But even though we do our own part, we rely on God rather than on ourselves, since it is He Who can save us and cause us to bear fruit.

Remember Isaiah 31; Woe to those who go down to Egypt for help, And rely on horses, Who trust in chariots because they are many, And in horsemen because they are very strong, But who do not look to the Holy One of Israel, Nor seek the Lord!

So God quiets your mind, God makes you meditate, God makes you listen to him? Oh of course, you don’t have to do nothing, just lay back on the sofa and be lazy, God will do it all. If anything, THIS kind of Christianity is dangerous, not the other way around.

You're in no position to say anything about "this kind" of Christianity, since you don't even understand the basics of it.

Oh nice, you give me this one but not the others huh? Well, too bad, I took the others too. This can be done outside the spiritual life? So can all the others be outside the spiritual life. Atheists can read the bible,

Atheists can read the Bible, but can they pull spiritual lessons from it and hear the voice of God speaking to them through the words? Can they meditate upon and contemplate its meaning while the divine fire burns within their hearts?

atheists can pray,

They can emptily rattle off prayers, but can they commune with God and be present with Him?

atheists can go to church and raise their hands,

They can go to church and go through the motions, but can they worship God in spirit and truth?

atheists CAN DO all those things,

They can do mock versions of them, yes, but they cannot do the things themselves.

atheists can tell others about Jesus,

And? I can tell people about Barack Obama, does that mean I'm in any way involved in the political life of the Democrats?

atheists can talk and fellowship with Christians.

And?

Atheists can SAY they believe in God, but then their actions say God does not exist.

Why would they say they believe in God, unless to avoid societal consequences?

Two things: If we don’t use and exercise our will power that God gave us, we are not going to even come close to obeying his laws perfectly. That creates laziness. Secondly, yes God can help us, and empower our spirits by killing the impulses of sin, he does that in the heart, but in order for that to happen, we need to connect to him, i.e meditation, esoteric methods.

Yes, but all of this is done in cooperation with Him. We aren't self-reliant in our spiritual lives. This is the point I want to impress upon you. We do not act independently of God in our spiritual lives. Yes, we exert our free will to cooperate with Him. But we are not independent of Him in our spiritual lives.

Everything exoteric we can rely on ourselves to do, but everything esoteric that relates to changing our hearts to be like Christ’s heart, that takes God.

And it's the inward part that matters. The exterior part of the Christian life only matters if the inner part is there, too. The "exoteric" counts for absolutely nothing otherwise, and our efforts in the spiritual life are worthless without God's grace.

When you use your human will and faculties, you are relying on yourself, period. Human will and human faculties are NOT GOD HIMSELF. So now tying this back to my original point, here is what I said in reminder “so all this sorcery, divination stuff is bad because we would be relying on our own methods instead of God, well in that case” all the “spiritual” stuff I just mentioned that we rely on ourselves to do, would be us relying on our own methods instead of God.

I've already explained why the first part is wrong. And the second part about the spiritual life consisting of "our own methods" is incorrect as well, since God provided these methods for us and instructed us in their use--they are not our own methods, as sorcery and divination (AKA augury) are.

[FONT=&quot]

Yes, God DID have a body during times of the Old Testament. So, no it does not have to be a vision in the mind’s eye.

What’s your evidence of this? God specifically forbade the Hebrews from making any images, because He had no form with which to be seen before the Incarnation of Jesus Christ, Who is “the image of the invisible God” as Colossians 1:15 puts it.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Moses said this in Deuteronomy 4:15 “[/FONT]Take careful heed to yourselves, for you saw no form when the Lord spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire”. This is Moses, who supposedly saw God’s “back.” If Moses said that God has no form, when God supposedly hid Moses in the cleft of a rock with His hand, and allowed Moses to see His “back”, what does this tell you? In many places in Scripture, one finds God described as “invisible”. I’ve already given you one such reference. In the times of the Old Testament, before Christ was born, one could not possibly see God with their physical eyes.[FONT=&quot]

No, it’s because Ezekiel dug through the wall by means of his spirit form dug through the wall.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Another impasse, it seems.

[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]

Let me reiterate what you just said, because you seriously have to see your blind spot on this. Your saying when God gives an OBE he brings with it ecstasy, but when we induce an OBE, it does not come with ecstasy, therefore when God does it, it’s holy, but when we do it, it’s sinful.

I see no blind spot there. Try explaining it better.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

Can’t you see that this is STILL a double standard? It’s like saying, if you pray without ecstasy, then it’s sinful, but if you pray with ecstasy, then it’s holy.

How can you honestly compare prayer to self-inducing an OBE? How can you honestly compare communication and communion with God to a neat party trick? This is not even close to being a valid comparison.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

Not to mention, you assume that self induced OBE’s don’t come with ecstasy, when in fact many of them do.

Got any proof?[/FONT]

 

[Shiranui117]

Plus, define ecstasy? Joy, peace? Just being in his presence?

I know for a fact I’ve given you the explanation. I’ll provide it again, but with some minor revisions:

I'm going to attempt to explain some of the spiritual states that fall under the category of "ecstasy" that I've read in the book I linked to above. Ecstasy may bring about something like an OBE, but the character of it is far different; the soul's perception is completely shut off from the physical senses, and the body is left in a state between sleep and death. Someone could cut your limbs off and you wouldn't even notice. But ecstasy may also be that one's body still receives physical stimulus, but doesn't respond, as the mind (I'm assuming "mind"=Greek nous, AKA the rational/"mind" part of the spirit) has gone beyond the physical senses, even while the soul remains with the body. In some cases, the Fathers speak of how both soul and mind (This is all in English, but I assume again that mind=nous) leave the body.

We can clearly see the difference between the state of ecstasy and the self-induced OBE that you describe, in which one travels around this world as a disembodied spirit. Rather, in the state of ecstasy (at least the specific type of ecstasy when one's mind or soul+mind depart from the body), one is taken by the Spirit of God to heavenly places, and cannot tell whether they are in or out of the body. The Holy Spirit takes the wheel, as it were, and we surrender our control. Rather than perceiving things of this world, one perceives heavenly things. Also, how ecstasy occurs differs from how OBE's occur; with ecstasy, all that one needs to enter into ecstasy is a deep, absolute and profound love for God, forsaking all things of this world for Him. Prayer, meditation and contemplation can help put us in a right state of mind before God. The reason that one takes leave of the physical senses in ecstasy is so they can experience God without interference from one's imagination or physical senses. But God can give this state of ecstasy to whoever He sees fit, without even these preconditions; grace is unbound. OBE's as you describe, on on the other hand, are derived solely from our own effort and practice, and we have control over the experience, not God."

True, but that does not take away from the fact that God wants us to reach everything that the apostle, prophet, evangelist, preacher, teacher is. Just because it will take awhile does not mean he WANTS it to take awhile. But regardless if he wanted it to take awhile or not, that just proves you concede that he wants this for his church to reach. We are making progress then.

The Church as a whole? Yes. The individual? I don’t see that.

Here is a source of testimonies from people who have had real experiences with OBE’s. Some of them are confused, some of them had negative experiences and some of them had pleasant ones. I have not read all of them, but I read some to know that some have gotten positive experiences. Plus I already told you one guy who told me his experience verbally, he travelled to heaven. But anyhow, here is the source.

Positive experiences with self-induced OBE’s=/=ecstasy.

Oh but I can use the same typology, this does not run me into a messy issue, which I’m sure you were hoping it would for the sake of your point, but luckily for me, it does not run me into a wall. Here’s why: to get to heaven (promised land) we must fight the fight of faith, we must persevere, with the full armor of God on and fight the spiritual forces of evil in HEAVENLY REALMS (fight the cannanites, jubasites, Hittites ect).

Wrong. There are no demons nor anything that opposes God in Heaven. Anything that opposes God exists outside of Heaven.

Does this mean all the demons are in heaven, where God’s thrown is, and his garden of delights is and his city is? No, it means demons are outside the city, sorta like the jubasites and hitites and cannanites being in the land, but outside the garden of God, eden, which was garded by the angel. GOTCHA!

You thought you had me didn’t ya? I sure slipped out of that one, lol.

You didn’t slip out of anything. God’s Temple was destroyed twice, and turned into a pagan temple several times. Those who were in Israel were forcibly scattered to the winds against their will. If we apply the Exodus typology to the whole of Biblical history, then you are forced to say that demons overthrow God’s Kingdom, and strip away those who are in God’s hand, which directly contradicts Christ’s promise that no one can snatch us out of His hand. You are forced to say that God’s kingdom is defiled by Satan. Satan conquers Heaven repeatedly.

Taking the whole narrative of the entire Old Testament in it’s natural format story, apart from it’s typology, it is a CONTINUAL story, true, there are different or block aspects to the entire story, but all those peaces of the story go together to form a whole picture. Likewise, the whole typology of the Old Testament is the same, it’s one continual story, just with different aspects of that story, but they all go together, they are not SEPARATE, they form a whole picture together. You can’t separate the story of David from the story of Jesus, you can’t separate the story of Genesis chapter one of creation from the story of revelation where it comes to an end. You can’t separate Adam and Eve, from the redemption. It all goes together. None of it’s random.

It’s a continuous story, yes. But this does not mean--and I’ve demonstrated by example why—that the whole of the Biblical is a continuous typology. You cannot take the typologies belonging to a certain event, turn around and say that this applies to the whole of the Biblical history. It is a blanket statement that cannot possibly be justified.

Just because the exodus ends, does not mean it’s disconnected from the part of the story where the Israelites end up in the Promised Land, it’s not disconnected. God always reminded them where they came from and what he had done for them. It’s not disconnected.

It’s not disconnected, no. But the Exodus refers to one specific part of the story where the Hebrews flee Egypt with God’s help, wander through the desert, and eventually arrive in the Promised Land. And since this is one specific episode, distinct from the rest, we can make one distinct typology that is used only for the Exodus story, and does not apply outside of it.

This is what you said, now I could be misinterpreting what you meant by it, but here is what you said

“I commend you for knowing that the Old Testament is a foreshadowing of the New--many Christians don't understand this. I also commend you for trying to use typology, which was one of the Fathers' favorite methods of Biblical exegesis. I also commend you for correctly identifying Egypt as this sinful world, and Canaan being a type of Heaven. All of this is very commendable, and I give props to you for all of it.”

So you said the Old Testament is a foreshadowing of the New. You said that. Now did you mean not all of it?

Foreshadowing doesn't necessarily imply typology, though it can.

If so, well, how do you determine which parts are types and which parts are not?

Seeing how the Fathers interpreted the OT is a big help. Meditation and contemplation of the Scriptures also helps.

The New Testament is loaded with quotes, too many for me to quote right now, but loaded with them that show the Old Testament is a foreshadow of the New Testament. How do you deal with that?

I accept it. There are OT prophecies that were fulfilled by Christ in the NT. This is no problem to me at all.

 

[Shiranui117]

So I will again ask you, what does first Kings 8:41 a type of?

41 “Moreover, concerning a foreigner, who is not of Your people Israel, but has come from a far country for Your name’s sake 42 (for they will hear of Your great name and Your strong hand and Your outstretched arm), when he comes and prays toward this temple, 43 hear in heaven Your dwelling place, and do according to all for which the foreigner calls to You, that all peoples of the earth may know Your name and fear You, as do Your people Israel, and that they may know that this temple which I have built is called by Your name.

I don't think it's a type of anything, but I do see a foreshadowing of the fact that the Gentiles came into the Church, which originally consisted of only Jews, because we Gentiles heard of God's great name, and of His mighty works. Solomon's prayer is still in effect today--perhaps not for the temple which he built, but certainly for the Church, which is the Body of Christ, which is the new Temple.

John 2:
19 Jesus answered and said to them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”
20 Then the Jews said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?”
21 But He was speaking of the temple of His body. 22 Therefore, when He had risen from the dead, His disciples remembered that He had said this to them; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said.

You don’t know if I am the only one who has ever thought about self induced OBE’s or if they relate to leaving the tents, just because something is not recorded does not mean it was not thought of. Also even if they did not think it, just because they did not think it, does not mean that if someone AVENTUALLY thinks of it, that they are then invalidated. Truth is not in numbers. Truth is in TRUTH, period.

If this was such an obvious truth, then why has no one ever taught it before you came along?

But being out as being in would be overall, equal amounts of time being out as being in, since most of these OBE’s we have them every night without memory. Gotcha again!

You still didn't "get" me, hate to break it to you, kiddo. It's still not a license to go and have OBE's whenever we like.

Interesting the Israelites happen to get the silver cord literally right and the Greeks also got it literally right too. This was not by chance they got it right, they got it right because they KNEW, and self induced OBErs KNOW today there is a silver cord, many of them have seen it. Just so happens the Israelites got it right by a gauss? I don’t think so. You’re trying hard to get out of it, but I’m going to hold you tight to this.

So what, you think that they got this right because they both had OBE's? Have you ever considered that the "silver cord" that appears during people's OBE's is a result of a cultural precondition? Have you ever considered that the appearance of the silver cord is because we have been disposed to think that such a silver cord exists between the body and soul?

Thought we could do little points at a time, but you did not respond fast enough, so i thought i would just go ahead and respond to all your points.

Yeah, sorry, I've been in a more contemplative mood lately.

 

[Jollybear]

I think we've reached an impasse here. I've made my case for how Laban perceived through natural observation (a definition that fits into Hebrew "nachash") that the God of Jacob was blessing Laban, based on the views which ancient peoples had of gods. Your view is based off conjecture, and you don't seem to be willing to relinquish it anytime soon, and nothing is going to change your mind on the matter.

My view is based off conjecture? And yours is not? I don’t think so, if my view really is based off conjecture, then yours would equally be as well. We both have to interpret some of this stuff. But when I ask a tough question it seems you shoot back with “that’s conjecture” instead of answering the question. Is that not a copout? Sure it is. I mean even if you want to say Laban perceived by his natural senses that Jacobs God was blessing him, the question remains, how did he know WHEN Jacobs God was blessing him vs WHEN his lesser gods were blessing him? How could he have known the “when” when it came to his natural perception since the God of Jacob was invisible and his lesser gods were invisible as well?

So your logic is, if we cooperate with God, communicate with Him and learn from Him, we do so independently of Him?

Yes and no. Ok, let me give an illustrative example of what I am completely saying here. I will tell it based on a story of my own with prayer. One day I went to my room to pray, was living with my mom at this time. I went into the room by the act of my own independent will, started to pray, can’t remember all the words, but let’s just say it was something like this “great God of the universe, the one who made all things, I seek your attention before your thrown, I come boldly to your thrown, I thank you for my life, for another wonderful day that you have graciously given me in your mercy, you have not given me another day because I am better than others who have died today, but out of your love you have given me another day to learn and grow. God, I am empty, weak, drained, and joyless. I need your fresh infilling of your Spirit.” And God completely interrupted my prayer with “stop praying, go hug your mom and tell her you love her, then you may return and we can fellowship” and then I said “what?! Are you kidding me! No way! Get me to do something else, but not that!” lol, then he says “if you don’t do it, I will not listen to your prayers, for I desire mercy, not sacrifice”. So I said “hmmm, alright, but this is going to be very hard to do Lord, you know how hard that women is” and he says “yes, love breaks the rock, she needs love”. So, I opened the door of my room, peeked out, went out into the living room, my mom was sitting on the chair and took a deep breath. I looked at her, I did NOT want to do this, lol, I swear I could get a picture of God getting a giggle out of this one, but I went up to her and said “mom, I just want to say I love you and give you a hug” and when we hugged she started to cry tears and said thank you and I said you’re welcome. Then I quickly strolled back into the room. I pondered for a few moments what just happened. I was shocked, she started to shed tears, that hardness went away. What just happened? God was right, she did need that, then I started to pray and said “God forgive me of my blind sightedness and pride to not humble myself to show love to my mom, heal her heart”. And then I just went on praying for a few hours after that.

Anyway, from this experience, let me pick apart what I am trying to say with my point. When I was praying, that was my independent will and faculties, that was NOT God. When God told me to stop praying and go hug my mom, that was God, not me. Then when I obeyed God and gave my mom and hug and told her I loved her, that was me COOPERATING with God and learning from him. But even my obedience was an act of my will, which was independent of him. God did not magically make me go out there and hug her and tell her I love her. I had to do that, not him, but by doing it, I was cooperating with him. If I would have disobeyed him and kept praying, then I would have been acting both independent of him and been in rebellion against him and walking in religious flesh.

You see?

Now, contrast that with, I pray to God to guide me in my OBE travels. I lay down on the bed, I get my body to fall asleep, while keeping my mind awake, then when I hit sleep paralyses, I imagine coming out of the body, bang, it happens. I say “energy arise!” as a affirmation to make the frequency of the atmosphere more stronger and vivid, lo it happens. Then I say a prayer “ok God, where would you like me to go?”

What’s so bad or different about this then with the prayer?

Of course not. The definition of being God is not limited to being able to hear those who ask for your prayers.

Of course you can do that. But if you can ask your family, priest, friends and parish community to pray for you, then why not ask the Saints to pray for you, since they're alive in Christ?

If I ask a priest or minister or a fellow Christian to pray for me, they can HEAR me ask them, but if the priest is at the chapel and I am at my house and I ask the priest to pray for me, is he going to hear me then? No, even though he is IN CHRIST, is he still going to hear me? No, I have to be face to face with him and verbally say it, so the sound waves hit his ears to hear the request. So now the departed saints, your saying they can hear our prayer requests, thousands of them at the same time, even though we are not near them face to face, but they can hear us because there in Christ, well, why can’t the priest who is in Christ hear me when I send the request at a long distance away?

You like to take words with controversial connotations and fit Christian practices and concepts into them, don't you?

Yes, because if there is no difference SOMETIMES, then why not break down the dividing wall?

What's your aim? Are you trying to force Christianity under an occultist label? Why?

Yes, because their similar in SOME ways.

Supplicating God is not magic; it is making a request to Him, just as we make requests to anyone for help or assistance. We ask God to do something for us, and we leave the matter in His hands to sort out. He is the Almighty, and perfectly capable of granting our prayer if He so wills. There's no magic involved, no spellwork, just asking for God's help and grace. Asking the Saints to pray for us (AKA intercessory prayer) is the exact same as asking your family, friends or priest to pray for you.

But if I ask the departed saint to pray for me, he hears me at such a long distance away, while also hearing thousands of others requesting from him at the same time, but this is not so with the priest who is in the flesh. You see the difference? Why can the departed saint hear thousands at the same time, plus hear them at such a long distance away, but the priest in the flesh cannot? You said the departed saint can do this because he is alive in Christ. Well, is not the priest in the flesh alive in Christ too?

Do you HONESTLY think we're working magic spells when we burn incense as a sweet-smelling fragrance to God, or venerate an icon, or hang up a cross? Please don't tell me you're going to seriously attempt to forcibly invent a connection between Christian spiritual practice, and occultist or pagan magic. My palm may break my skull into pieces. This is far beyond being a stretch. It's straight-up absurdity that no one in their right mind would ever accept, Christian or occultist or otherwise.

All you’re doing here is objecting to my point, but you’re not dismantling my point. Occultists are not the only ones who use picture symbols, Christians do to. But not all occultists use symbols, just like not all Christians use symbols. Symbols are not the issue, it’s the heart of occultism, it’s the heart of Christianity. Forget the symbols. Forget the incense, forget the outward stuff, the inside of it is what matters most.

 

[Jollybear]

As far as the old usage of the word "astrology" goes, you could finagle my words into that position. What I was speaking of is what we today recognize as the science of astronomy, and not what we today recognize as the pseudoscience of astrology.

Ahuh! So you concede that astrology form the magi used is good then!

You have nothing but conjecture to back up your statement that they used "spiritual attunement or astrology magic" to find the star. This really isn't worth addressing.

Ok, in your view, how did the magi know that “this” star was “Jesus star”?

It's not a copout. It's keeping a proper focus on what really matters, and what is actually worth striving for. We NEED to keep our focus on Christ and the salvation that He offers, not neat party tricks.

No, it is a copout, Jesus made a big statement, I am asking a big question. If you think withering a fig tree is a neat party trick, then Jesus apparently thinks it’s OK to make neat party tricks because HE was the one that said we could whither the fig tree, not me. So, that said, YOUR LORD said YOU could whither a fig tree and he says it’s ok to do that “neat party trick” so what say you about that? My question has nothing to do with getting souls saved, yea that’s important, more important then withering fig trees, but that does not do away with the fact that many other things are important as well in life, and this question whether it be important or not, it’s interesting, and for the sake of understanding what Jesus is saying, IS important for that sake alone. This does not do AWAY with helping lost souls; this is separating this from that and dealing with it. So how then do you deal with this?

Also some lost souls would seek a miracle to validate a message, what can we do? How can we do it? Moses said to God at the burning bush “what if they don’t listen to me” God said “throw down your staff” and he did so and it became a snake. That was to validate the message. Jesus said WE can validate. Ok, how do we whither the fig tree? HOW, HOW, HOW? My question is not saying winning lost souls is not important, that is NOT what my question is saying, my question is saying, HOW do we whither the fig tree, your Lord said we could do so, ok, HOW?

You want to see a greater miracle than a fig tree being withered, walking on water, or moving a mountain? Witness a person being brought to repentance and faith in Jesus Christ. Witness the salvation of a soul. That is greater than all the withered fig trees, bent spoons, water-walking and moved mountains in the world. That is one of the "greater things" that Jesus promised we would be able to do--bring others to salvation.

A soul coming to salvation is a greater miracle, but it’s not a more spectacular miracle. Moving a mountain or withering a fig tree, is MORE spectacular, greater? Not so much, indeed a soul being saved is greater. But that does not do away with my question, Jesus said we could whither a fig tree, that means it’s not WRONG to take the time to whither a fig tree, that means we can whither a fig tree, the question is, HOW?

Tell me, would you rather spend your time withering fig trees, or helping people come to salvation?

Your always dodging the swing of the sword, hold still and fling the sword out of my hand. I’m not saying helping people come to salvation is not important, indeed it is, but that does not do away with the importance of my question. It’s like, what’s more important, spending time with my wife or going to work? I mean it’s a stupid question, both are important, and just because one has MORE importance then the other, does not do away with doing both. It’s the same with helping souls and withering fig trees. Just because one is more important does not do away with dealing with the other.

Would you rather feed your ego by walking on water, or become humble in working our your own salvation with fear and trembling, helping others to do the same? These are not rhetorical questions. I'd like to hear your answer.

Two things I have to say: first is, if one does walk on water, you would have to be in a meditative state, trance state, and in that state the ego is consumed, so if it’s consumed, it’s not fed. Secondly, doing this does not do away with the fact that you still take time to work out your salvation and help others come to Christ too. Ok, let me ask you this, if walking on water is not something that is important at all, why did Jesus even bother doing it and why did he bid peter to even bother doing it? Using your logic, Jesus was wasting his time, he was feeding his “ego” and was helping peter feed his ego as well. Jesus should have “used” that time to help others come to salvation, what a shallow Jesus indeed huh? Really?

Okay, and? The Apostles didn't influence fate or fortune or future. They cast lots to see God's will, and God showed them His will. It's not "nitpicking" to point out that a given example cannot fit into a certain definition. Nice attempt at another "gotcha", but it fell flat on its face.

Oh my gosh, I can’t believe it, this is like holding up three fingers before a blind man and asking him how many fingers am I holding up and he says “two” and you say, no, you’re wrong, see, I’m holding up three, and he says, no you’re not, it’s two. Lol. No one who casts the lot influences it, either God or other entities influence it. The lot is cast and God influences it, which fulfills the definition of sorcery. It should be so obvious. Sorcery means one who influences the lot, ok, God influences the lot, i.e. God did sorcery. I got you on this one, I have the sword to your chest, I got you, do you surrender now? lol

So your argument is that, because we have free will, everything we do in our spiritual life is done independently of God?

Let me answer this by using my own parable. My wife tells me to take the dishes out of the dish washer and put them away. I say, ok, then I go and take the dishes out of the dish washer and put them away. She independently tells me to do this. I independently say, ok. She LETS me do it, I independently of my own will and faculties go and do it. She does not CAUSE or MAKE me do it or make it happen. She just asks me, then I GO and do it. So I cooperated with her. That’s how it is with us and God.

 

[Jollybear]

But without God preparing both that person and us, our witnessing cannot possibly bear fruit. Keep in mind 1 Corinthians 3:6 “I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase.”

Right, God tells you WHAT seed to plant, then YOU (not God) choose to OBEY and plant THAT seed instead of the OTHER seed. God says, plant the apple seed not the bean seed, we say, ok, then we go and plant the apple seed. In other words, God may want us to talk about his LOVE to so in so and not his justice. Or, God may want us to talk of his justice and not his love with so in so. OR God may want us to talk both to someone else. God sees what each one needs at the moment and at the season they are in their life. But, to get those specific instructions, we have to be tuned in, it’s not enough to just be versed in the bible to hear that, we have to be “psychic” oh boy, another occult word.

It seems you don't understand why I said you were wrong. Allow me to explain: Prayer is two-way communication between us and God. We can heap up all the prayers we want, but we can still fail to really pray to God. Ratting off prayers is not necesarily the same thing as praying. An atheist can say a prayer. He can recite the Our Father or the Jesus Prayer. Does this mean he's really praying? No. Unless he is communing with God in his heart on one level or another, he is not truly praying. Prayer is by its nature not something we do on our own, because by its very definition, it is done in cooperation and in communion with God.

Yes, we have to exert our free will. But even though we do our own part, we rely on God rather than on ourselves, since it is He Who can save us and cause us to bear fruit.
Remember Isaiah 31; Woe to those who go down to Egypt for help, And rely on horses, Who trust in chariots because they are many, And in horsemen because they are very strong, But who do not look to the Holy One of Israel, Nor seek the Lord!

Ok, so in other words, I self induce an OBE; I cooperate with God in how to fight off demons, and where to travel.

Atheists can read the Bible, but can they pull spiritual lessons from it and hear the voice of God speaking to them through the words? Can they meditate upon and contemplate its meaning while the divine fire burns within their hearts?

They can emptily rattle off prayers, but can they commune with God and be present with Him?
They can go to church and go through the motions, but can they worship God in spirit and truth?
They can do mock versions of them, yes, but they cannot do the things themselves.
And? I can tell people about Barack Obama, does that mean I'm in any way involved in the political life of the Democrats?
And?
Why would they say they believe in God, unless to avoid societal consequences?

My point is we have a will and faculties that is independent of God, motives are another thing.

Yes, but all of this is done in cooperation with Him. We aren't self-reliant in our spiritual lives. This is the point I want to impress upon you. We do not act independently of God in our spiritual lives. Yes, we exert our free will to cooperate with Him. But we are not independent of Him in our spiritual lives.

Agreed, now I self induce an OBE, I exert my free will, I invite God into the experience and cooperate with him. So I’m not independent of him.

And it's the inward part that matters. The exterior part of the Christian life only matters if the inner part is there, too. The "exoteric" counts for absolutely nothing otherwise, and our efforts in the spiritual life are worthless without God's grace.

Agreed.

I've already explained why the first part is wrong. And the second part about the spiritual life consisting of "our own methods" is incorrect as well, since God provided these methods for us and instructed us in their use--they are not our own methods, as sorcery and divination (AKA augury) are.

Methods are simply defined as doing stuff with our independent will and faculties. We can do so with prayer, or sorcery or divination or an OBE. Those are just methods. Your saying God gave the methods of prayer, but not self induced OBE. I would say yes he did give that method, since he gives some people OBE’s.

[FONT=&quot]

What’s your evidence of this? God specifically forbade the Hebrews from making any images, because He had no form with which to be seen before the Incarnation of Jesus Christ, Who is “the image of the invisible God” as Colossians 1:15 puts it.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Moses said this in Deuteronomy 4:15 “[/FONT]Take careful heed to yourselves, for you saw no form when the Lord spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire”. This is Moses, who supposedly saw God’s “back.” If Moses said that God has no form, when God supposedly hid Moses in the cleft of a rock with His hand, and allowed Moses to see His “back”, what does this tell you? In many places in Scripture, one finds God described as “invisible”. I’ve already given you one such reference. In the times of the Old Testament, before Christ was born, one could not possibly see God with their physical eyes.

Supposedly? No, it’s not supposedly that Moses saw God’s back, he actually saw his back. God told him in exodus 33:23 “Then I will remove my hand and you will see my back; but my face must not be seen.” So notice this passage says that God had a “hand” (part of a body) and a back (part of a body) and a face (part of a body). Is this not clear enough? Gotcha again.

[FONT=&quot]I see no blind spot there. Try explaining it better.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]How can you honestly compare prayer to self-inducing an OBE? How can you honestly compare communication and communion with God to a neat party trick? This is not even close to being a valid comparison.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Ok, let me see if I can explain it better. You say if God gives an OBE to you, it’s holy and it will come with ecstasy. You say if we self induce an OBE, its sinful and unholy and won’t come with ecstasy. You say self induced OBE’s are witchcraft. Ok, so, self induced OBE’s are witchcraft, sinful, unholy and come not with ecstasy. Now, prayer can come with our without ecstasy you concede, but if it does not come with it, it can still be holy because it’s a “method” God instituted. Ok, I get all that, however, if God gives an OBE, and God gives an inspiration of prayer to someone to make them pray, that means BOTH of those things are then a METHOD he institutes equally. So that means, if you pray, you’re not sinning, if you self induce an OBE you’re not sinning whether it comes with or without ecstasy, which just like prayer can sometimes come with it. If God gives an OBE, then he institutes or says OBE’s are not sin, because he won’t make someone sin. Just like prayer, if he inspires someone to pray, then we know prayer is not sinful to do. So, both methods are then instituted by God. Also prayer can be communion and cooperation with God, and sometimes it can be a rebellious religious act, likewise, self induced OBE’s can be rebellion against God, depending on what you do with them, however, they can also be used FOR God, in communion and cooperation with God. You understanding yet? [/FONT]

 

[Jollybear]

I know for a fact I’ve given you the explanation. I’ll provide it again, but with some minor revisions:

I'm going to attempt to explain some of the spiritual states that fall under the category of "ecstasy" that I've read in the book I linked to above. Ecstasy may bring about something like an OBE, but the character of it is far different; the soul's perception is completely shut off from the physical senses, and the body is left in a state between sleep and death. Someone could cut your limbs off and you wouldn't even notice. But ecstasy may also be that one's body still receives physical stimulus, but doesn't respond, as the mind (I'm assuming "mind"=Greek nous, AKA the rational/"mind" part of the spirit) has gone beyond the physical senses, even while the soul remains with the body. In some cases, the Fathers speak of how both soul and mind (This is all in English, but I assume again that mind=nous) leave the body.
We can clearly see the difference between the state of ecstasy and the self-induced OBE that you describe, in which one travels around this world as a disembodied spirit. Rather, in the state of ecstasy (at least the specific type of ecstasy when one's mind or soul+mind depart from the body), one is taken by the Spirit of God to heavenly places, and cannot tell whether they are in or out of the body. The Holy Spirit takes the wheel, as it were, and we surrender our control. Rather than perceiving things of this world, one perceives heavenly things. Also, how ecstasy occurs differs from how OBE's occur; with ecstasy, all that one needs to enter into ecstasy is a deep, absolute and profound love for God, forsaking all things of this world for Him. Prayer, meditation and contemplation can help put us in a right state of mind before God. The reason that one takes leave of the physical senses in ecstasy is so they can experience God without interference from one's imagination or physical senses. But God can give this state of ecstasy to whoever He sees fit, without even these preconditions; grace is unbound. OBE's as you describe, on on the other hand, are derived solely from our own effort and practice, and we have control over the experience, not God."

I agree with everything you said here, accept three parts. You said when God gives an OBE, we surrender our will to the Spirit to have control of the experience. Yea, we do, and should, but we still have free will to NOT surrender control. So lets say he gave the experience, we pop out of the body, we look around, God takes us, then we say “oh wait a minute, I’m going to go this way” we have the will to do so. The second thing I disagree with is when you say when we self induce an OBE, we have control of the experience, not God. Again, we can ask God after we induce the experience and pop out to come and TAKE control and make us travel where he wills. We can do that.

Also, you said if God induces an OBE, he will make you travel to heaven, not just as a disembodied spirit roaming the earth, to this I disagree; he does not have to make you always travel to heaven. I know someone who had a spontaneous OBE and he did not go to heaven, he did not self induce the experience either. He flew over to a hotel in Greece from united states, went inside a hotel room, into the bathroom, saw this little clay figure man on the tub. Then he flew back to his body. Then a few months after that he flew over to Greece by plain IN his body, went to a hotel, got the very same room (was not trying to), went to the bathroom and saw the exact same clay figure he saw when he had an SPONTANIOUS OBE. I asked him what was the purpose of this? He said he had no idea, that the experience was phenomenal and real, but the purpose appeared to be totally insignificant to him, but it just happened by itself. Now, two things here, first is, he did NOT self induce this, secondly, it happened spontaneously, does that mean this is a natural phenomena, or does it mean God did this for him? And if so, that would mean God does not always bring people to heaven that have OBE’s by him, and another thing, he would give what may appear to be insignificant things in the experience. So, how do you deal with this one?

The Church as a whole? Yes. The individual? I don’t see that.

Church as a whole is made of individuals, so all individuals would be being equipped with all the gifts.

Positive experiences with self-induced OBE’s=/=ecstasy.

Yes, equals ecstasy.

Wrong. There are no demons nor anything that opposes God in Heaven. Anything that opposes God exists outside of Heaven.

The bible says that the demons are in heavenly places. Now yes, that means the second heaven, not the third (city of God). But that goes with what I said, the Israelites went to the border of Canaan land (heavenly places) and fought the giants (demons) in the land. The giants were not in Eden (garden of God/city of God) but they were in the land (heavenly places).

 

[Jollybear]

You didn’t slip out of anything. God’s Temple was destroyed twice, and turned into a pagan temple several times. Those who were in Israel were forcibly scattered to the winds against their will. If we apply the Exodus typology to the whole of Biblical history, then you are forced to say that demons overthrow God’s Kingdom, and strip away those who are in God’s hand, which directly contradicts Christ’s promise that no one can snatch us out of His hand. You are forced to say that God’s kingdom is defiled by Satan. Satan conquers Heaven repeatedly.

Oh wait a minute now, your leaving out some very important pieces of information. The Israelites were first disobedient to God by doing idol worship and putting idols in the temple, then God PERMITTED invaders to come and exile them away and destroy the temple (as a form of discipline). Yes, even THIS is a TYPE of what happens to those who are in heaven. You see, just because people make it to heaven, does not mean their free will is taken away, they still have free will, just as Lucifer had when he was in heaven and a third of the angels with him. So likewise, any souls that make it to heaven, they have free will before they make it to heaven and they have free will during the period of time they are in heaven. Now free will means and has the potential to always choose to reject God. Now true, because we won’t have a sin nature in heaven, nor a devil to tempt us, nor a world that influences us to sin, it will be hard to sin, like it was for Lucifer, but the potential is still there since free will is still there. So, true we are in God’s hand, but we through our own disobedience can snatch ourselves out of God’s hand, then God permits the devil to take us away, we are then thrown out of heaven, and Satan exiles us. The temple is our body, if we use our will to reject God, which is like setting up self as the idol in the temple. The temple being destroyed is a type of us being thrown into hell and being destroyed. Now with all this, Satan is not conquering heaven itself (third heaven) just like the invaders did not go into the garden of Eden. Gotcha, gotcha.

It’s a continuous story, yes. But this does not mean--and I’ve demonstrated by example why—that the whole of the Biblical is a continuous typology. You cannot take the typologies belonging to a certain event, turn around and say that this applies to the whole of the Biblical history. It is a blanket statement that cannot possibly be justified.

Oh but it can be justified, I justified it through my examples above.

It’s not disconnected, no. But the Exodus refers to one specific part of the story where the Hebrews flee Egypt with God’s help, wander through the desert, and eventually arrive in the Promised Land. And since this is one specific episode, distinct from the rest, we can make one distinct typology that is used only for the Exodus story, and does not apply outside of it.

The exodus is distinct from the Promised Land dwelling, but their connected. The typology of coming out of sin, Egypt, is distinct from being in the promised land, heaven, but their connected.

Foreshadowing doesn't necessarily imply typology, though it can.

If foreshadowing does not imply typology what then does it imply?

Seeing how the Fathers interpreted the OT is a big help.

I have not read all the church fathers, but I have read the early church fathers. And according to my memory they say nothing against what I am saying in typology for Canaan.

Meditation and contemplation of the Scriptures also helps.

My meditation and contemplation of the scripture says that my interpretation of it for Canaan land above is correct, does your meditation and contemplation agree with mine? Probably not, so how do we determine who’s meditation and contemplation is leading them in the correct direction?

I accept it. There are OT prophecies that were fulfilled by Christ in the NT. This is no problem to me at all.

Not just prophesy, but figures, types or foreshadows is what I am talking about.

 

[Jollybear]

41 “Moreover, concerning a foreigner, who is not of Your people Israel, but has come from a far country for Your name’s sake 42 (for they will hear of Your great name and Your strong hand and Your outstretched arm), when he comes and prays toward this temple, 43 hear in heaven Your dwelling place, and do according to all for which the foreigner calls to You, that all peoples of the earth may know Your name and fear You, as do Your people Israel, and that they may know that this temple which I have built is called by Your name.

I don't think it's a type of anything, but I do see a foreshadowing of the fact that the Gentiles came into the Church, which originally consisted of only Jews, because we Gentiles heard of God's great name, and of His mighty works. Solomon's prayer is still in effect today--perhaps not for the temple which he built, but certainly for the Church, which is the Body of Christ, which is the new Temple.
John 2:
19 Jesus answered and said to them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”
20 Then the Jews said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?”
21 But He was speaking of the temple of His body. 22 Therefore, when He had risen from the dead, His disciples remembered that He had said this to them; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said.

Oh wait, the foreigner is coming to Canaan land (heaven), you even said yourself that Canaan land is a type of heaven, you can’t change it now, you have to be consistent. We both agree that the foreigner can be the gentiles, your saying the temple is a type of the church that the gentiles (foreigners) come into, ok, even if that is so, the foreigner visits Canaan land (heaven) and then goes back to his own land (earth). How do you deal with that? Are you going to turn around and change your interpretation of the land not being heaven now?

If this was such an obvious truth, then why has no one ever taught it before you came along?

Your missing my point. I’m saying, it COULD have been taught, just because something is not written down does not mean it was not taught verbally. Also, even if it was NOT taught, well, can you honestly say it was taught directly AGAINST? No, you can’t, and so just because something is not taught, nor taught against, does not mean if someone down the line eventually brings it up, now makes it invalidated.

You still didn't "get" me, hate to break it to you, kiddo. It's still not a license to go and have OBE's whenever we like.

You’re just dismissing my point without addressing it. So yes, being out of the tent equal amounts of time as being in, would give us license to self induce an OBE whenever we like. And if we have OBE’s naturally every night without memory, then having conscious ones would be OK.

So what, you think that they got this right because they both had OBE's? Have you ever considered that the "silver cord" that appears during people's OBE's is a result of a cultural precondition? Have you ever considered that the appearance of the silver cord is because we have been disposed to think that such a silver cord exists between the body and soul?

Absolutely not, I don’t think they see the silver cord through cultural preconditioning, not at all, they are actually seeing a silver cord, just like they are actually seeing their soul, the spirit realm, entities, having real experiences. It’s not a preconditioning for any of what they see. If this is your view, then your view is no better than a view that says these experiences are hallucinations, and not truly real. Your view is no better than someone saying bible writers sometimes just make good guesses in their predictions, and are then not truly inspired and are not truly experiencing things.

Plus, some people don’t even hear of a silver cord and see one, how do you deal with that? In that case there is no preconditioning.

Also, where would this preconditioning FIRST come from for the writer of ecclesiastes? It would have to come from someone who truly first sees the silver cord. How do you deal with that?

Yeah, sorry, I've been in a more contemplative mood lately.

It’s cool

 

[Shiranui117]

My view is based off conjecture? And yours is not? I mean even if you want to say Laban perceived by his natural senses that Jacobs God was blessing him, the question remains, how did he know WHEN Jacobs God was blessing him vs WHEN his lesser gods were blessing him? How could he have known the “when” when it came to his natural perception since the God of Jacob was invisible and his lesser gods were invisible as well?

What I've said about blessings being perceived through natural perception is based perfectly on the Bible. As I said, blessings back in those days weren’t invisible blessings. They were visible blessings—blessings such as being able to have children, having good land, having good numbers of livestock and a bountiful harvest. We see this in Deuteronomy 7 very clearly, among many other places in the Bible. Run a search for “bless” in the Bible, and you’ll see how often it refers to material blessings throughout the early part of the OT. Jacob himself says that God had blessed Laban through him by the increase of Laban’s livestock under Jacob’s care in Genesis 30:30:

For what you had before I came was little, and it has increased to a great amount; the Lord has blessed you since my coming. And now, when shall I also provide for my own house?”

As I said before, since Laban’s livestock increased under Jacob’s care, it was obvious to everyone that Jacob’s God was blessing Laban, and not Laban’s idols. You don’t need to perform a magic ritual to figure out Who was blessing Laban through Jacob, since the blessing was visible and had a clear source.


So now you see, my position that it was based off of natural experience and not divination magic is not merely conjecture, but is consistent with the Bible, historical reality and the common understanding of people at the time. You're the one making conjecture with no evidence to support you.

Now, contrast that with, I pray to God to guide me in my OBE travels... Then I say a prayer “ok God, where would you like me to go?”

What’s so bad or different about this then with the prayer?

Because in the story you described, you were fulfilling one of Jesus’ commands in the Gospel to be reconciled with your brother (or in this case, mother) before offering your sacrifice/prayer. With a self-induced OBE, what are you fulfilling in your spiritual life? What spiritual work are you accomplishing? Are you increasing in love toward your fellow human beings or God? Are you cultivating any virtues? Are you doing anything profitable for your soul? What makes you think God even wants you to do it?

Yes, because if there is no difference SOMETIMES, then why not break down the dividing wall?

Because it’s not proper to take terminology from one different tradition with different connotations, and attempt to shoehorn them into another tradition with its own nuances, concepts, foci and beliefs. All it does is create confusion and misunderstanding. We have our own terms for these things, we don’t need to borrow vocabulary. Borrowing vocabulary from others also means bringing in the baggage connected to the foreign terms that don’t belong to us. The fact that there are differences between Christianity and occultism, as you yourself admit, is proof enough that the two cannot ever be one. Our practices, beliefs and goals are different.

Yes, because their similar in SOME ways.

So this is what you’re after, trying to twist Christianity and mangle it until it fits under the occultist label, to validate occultism? At least be honest enough to leave Christianity alone and go be an occultist if that’s what you want so badly, but don’t try to drag Christianity into it. Do you want to be a Christian, or an occultist?

But if I ask the departed saint to pray for me, he hears me at such a long distance away, while also hearing thousands of others requesting from him at the same time, but this is not so with the priest who is in the flesh. You see the difference?

The difference is, the departed Saints are not bound by their physical bodies, and are not limited to their physical senses, while we the living are.

Occultists are not the only ones who use picture symbols, Christians do to. But not all occultists use symbols, just like not all Christians use symbols. Symbols are not the issue, it’s the heart of occultism, it’s the heart of Christianity. Forget the symbols. Forget the incense, forget the outward stuff, the inside of it is what matters most.

The last sentence you said proves my point. A few base externals may be the same, but the purpose, intent and use of the externals is completely different between a Christian and an occultist, so any superficial similarities are meaningless. The hearts of Christianity and occultism are different.

Ahuh! So you concede that astrology form the magi used is good then!

“That astrology form the magi used” is what we today know as the science of astronomy, not the superstitious nonsense we know today as astrology.

Ok, in your view, how did the magi know that “this” star was “Jesus star”?

Angels heralded the coming of Christ to the shepherds. An angel appeared as the star and led the Magi from Persia, to Jerusalem, to Christ in Bethlehem. This was no ordinary star; it moved from north (from Jerusalem) to south (to Bethlehem), and actually stopped above where Christ was, in a manner clear enough to indicate the actual building where He was—St. John Chrysostom surmises that the star actually descended from the sky and hovered over Jesus’ position. We see all this in Matthew 2:9-10. So when they saw this unusual star that defied the laws of astronomy, they had to go check it out. They didn’t discover the star through astrology, but by seeing such an unusual sight that would have gotten any stargazer intensely curious.

No, it is a copout, Jesus made a big statement, I am asking a big question. If you think withering a fig tree is a neat party trick, then Jesus apparently thinks it’s OK to make neat party tricks because HE was the one that said we could whither the fig tree, not me. So, that said, YOUR LORD said YOU could whither a fig tree and he says it’s ok to do that “neat party trick” so what say you about that? My question has nothing to do with getting souls saved, yea that’s important, more important then withering fig trees, but that does not do away with the fact that many other things are important as well in life, and this question whether it be important or not, it’s interesting, and for the sake of understanding what Jesus is saying, IS important for that sake alone. This does not do AWAY with helping lost souls; this is separating this from that and dealing with it. So how then do you deal with this?

What concerns me about your fixation on this point is this: You seem to be concerned with moving mountains and withering trees as ends in and of themselves, thus entirely missing the point of working miracles.

Also, you say “your Lord,” and not “my Lord” or “our Lord”. Do you not consider Jesus your Lord? If you’re not a Christian, why are you even concerning yourself with what Christianity has to say about self-induced OBE’s? Why do you care what the Bible says about the subject? Were you ever interested in seeing what the Bible said about these things, or were you just trying to validate yourself by attempting to use the Bible to support your own ends? These questions may seem harsh, but they are indeed sincere questions I'd like you to answer, not ones intended to make you feel bad or insult you.

Also some lost souls would seek a miracle to validate a message, what can we do? How can we do it? Moses said to God at the burning bush “what if they don’t listen to me” God said “throw down your staff” and he did so and it became a snake. That was to validate the message. Jesus said WE can validate. Ok, how do we whither the fig tree? HOW, HOW, HOW? My question is not saying winning lost souls is not important, that is NOT what my question is saying, my question is saying, HOW do we whither the fig tree, your Lord said we could do so, ok, HOW?

As I said before, through faith in God, love for God, and the grace of God. There is absolutely nothing like a three-step formula on how to work a miracle, since miracles don’t come from us, but from God through us. All we can do is love God, have faith in Him, and be open to His working through our lives. Whether we work a miracle, when we work a miracle, and what the miracle is, are all up to God. If you want a surefire recipe on how to make a miracle happen, you are going to be disappointed.

Two things I have to say: first is, if one does walk on water, you would have to be in a meditative state, trance state, and in that state the ego is consumed, so if it’s consumed, it’s not fed. Secondly, doing this does not do away with the fact that you still take time to work out your salvation and help others come to Christ too. Ok, let me ask you this, if walking on water is not something that is important at all, why did Jesus even bother doing it and why did he bid peter to even bother doing it?

Wrong. Jesus’ miracles were all to teach us and prove a point. I fear your interest in performing similar feats is merely for entertainment purposes or treating it as just another form of sorcery, like how Simon the magician from the Book of Acts was interested in obtaining the power to lay hands on people and have the Holy Spirit come upon them.

Would you like me to teach you what the point of Jesus walking on water was, and why Jesus allowed Peter to do the same?

 

[Shiranui117]

No one who casts the lot influences it, either God or other entities influence it. The lot is cast and God influences it, which fulfills the definition of sorcery. It should be so obvious. Sorcery means one who influences the lot, ok, God influences the lot, i.e. God did sorcery.

Again, wrong.“Sorcery” involves using magic to change fate/fortune. Have you ever heard the expression “one’s lot in life”? “Lot” means the same as “fortune” or “fate.” Casting lots is a way to determine what one’s fate is, what their “lot” is. God causing the lots to fall one way or the other is not Him using sorcery to change fate, but to show what His will is. Sorcery is changing someone’s lot(as in, fate/fortune) through magic.

Right, God tells you WHAT seed to plant, then YOU (not God) choose to OBEY and plant THAT seed instead of the OTHER seed. . . God sees what each one needs at the moment and at the season they are in their life.

This is all well and good, but what does this have to do with the fact that our witnessing cannot be successful and bear fruit without God’s help?

But, to get those specific instructions, we have to be tuned in, it’s not enough to just be versed in the bible to hear that, we have to be “psychic” oh boy, another occult word.

Keep your occult words where they belong. They have absolutely no place in Christianity. I’ve tolerated it before as a consideration to you because I thought you were on a particular level of understanding flavored by your personal history in your spiritual walk with Christ, but now I have a better idea what your motives are, and I won’t stand for this distortion of Christianity in favor of occultism. That state of being “tuned in” to God’s instructions is known in Christianity as “aligning one’s heart and will to God”, NOT “being psychic”.

My point is we have a will and faculties that is independent of God, motives are another thing.

And my point is, even if we have our own independent will and faculties, the spiritual life is not done independently of God.

Methods are simply defined as doing stuff with our independent will and faculties. We can do so with prayer, or sorcery or divination or an OBE. Those are just methods. Your saying God gave the methods of prayer, but not self induced OBE. I would say yes he did give that method, since he gives some people OBE’s.

Nowhere has God ever commanded us to have self-induced OBE’s. This is one of my objections that you have never satisfactorily answered.

Supposedly? No, it’s not supposedly that Moses saw God’s back, he actually saw his back. God told him in exodus 33:23...

So notice this passage says that God had a “hand” (part of a body) and a back (part of a body) and a face (part of a body). Is this not clear enough? Gotcha again.

I already addressed this. Moses himself said that God had no form, even after this encounter with God. The references to God’s face, hand and back are all synkatavasis, or God condescending to us, lowering Himself to our level of understanding, explaining things in ways that we can understand. He had no actual physical body, but He made these statements so that Moses could understand what God was saying. This is the universal teaching of Christianity and Judaism alike. Your interpretation matches up neither with what the Jews have to say about the passage nor what we Christians have to say.

Ok, let me see if I can explain it better. You say if God gives an OBE to you, it’s holy and it will come with ecstasy. You say if we self induce an OBE, its sinful and unholy and won’t come with ecstasy. You say self induced OBE’s are witchcraft. Ok, so, self induced OBE’s are witchcraft, sinful, unholy and come not with ecstasy. Now, prayer can come with our without ecstasy you concede, but if it does not come with it, it can still be holy because it’s a “method” God instituted.

Now you’ve got it.

Ok, I get all that, however, if God gives an OBE, and God gives an inspiration of prayer to someone to make them pray, that means BOTH of those things are then a METHOD he institutes equally.

If GOD gives it, it is alright. Again, note that the state of ecstasy (which, outside of near-death experiences, is by far the most common type of OBE that God gives, if not the only one as far as we can tell) is a completely different experience from the self-induced OBE that you’re touting. I’ve explained the differences dozens of times already, but if you need me to explain to you again how ecstasy differs from self-induced OBE’s, I’m happy to do it.

If God gives an OBE, then he institutes or says OBE’s are not sin, because he won’t make someone sin. [Just like prayer, if he inspires someone to pray, then we know prayer is not sinful to do. So, both methods are then instituted by God.

I’ve been over this point ad nauseum, but you still just don’t quite understand. No, God does not force us to sin. But ecstasy (the particular type of “OBE” that God gives, if the particular case of ecstasy does result in something of an OBE) is a completely different experience between the self-induced OBE that you describe. So you cannot say that, because ecstasy is holy, your self-induced OBE’s are as well. They are two totally different things and have no connection to each other whatsoever. Stop with the strawmen and face reality. What God gives us in the state of ecstasy is not at all like the technique you promote. You absolutely cannot say that, because ecstasy is holy, self-induced OBE’s are as well, because the two are completely different. There is no double standard whatsoever in saying so. One is holy and the other sinful in the same way that fornication is sinful, but loving sex between two married spouses is not. Outside their proper contexts, the actions become sinful. Do you get it yet? I’m tired of explaining the same point over and over. If you are blind to this, then no argument of mine will open your eyes.

Also prayer can be communion and cooperation with God, and sometimes it can be a rebellious religious act

Wrong. Prayer is, by definition, communion with God, and not a rebellious act.

likewise, self induced OBE’s …can also be used FOR God, in communion and cooperation with God. You understanding yet?

How? How can self-induced OBE’s be used FOR God? All you’ve been able to mention so far is asking God for suggestions on where to fly—and that doesn’t count for much. It’s like asking who to slaughter, to use an earlier comparison.

 

[Shiranui117]

Oh wait a minute now, your leaving out some very important pieces of information. The Israelites were first disobedient to God by doing idol worship and putting idols in the temple, then God PERMITTED invaders to come and exile them away and destroy the temple (as a form of discipline). Yes, even THIS is a TYPE of what happens to those who are in heaven. You see, just because people make it to heaven, does not mean their free will is taken away, they still have free will... any souls that make it to heaven… they have free will during the period of time they are in heaven. Now free will means and has the potential to always choose to reject God. Now true, because we won’t have a sin nature in heaven, nor a devil to tempt us, nor a world that influences us to sin, it will be hard to sin, like it was for Lucifer, but the potential is still there since free will is still there.

No. We will never sin once in Heaven. We know that to sin means to suffer and die, and to be cut off from God, Who is Life, Love and Light. Once we experience Heaven, we will never, ever want to sin again, nor will we ever sin. We know the hell and suffering that sin brings. We won’t ever want that again, when comparing suffering apart from God to rejoicing with Him. We will experience the LAST Judgement on the day of resurrection, meaning, we will forever be in Heaven, if we are saved, and there will be no more sins committed that need to be judged. We’ll still have our free will, yes, but we are always going to choose God over sin without exception once in Heaven. I’m leaving nothing out. If anything, the point you made argues even further against your argument that the whole of the OT is an extension of the Exodus typology.

So, true we are in God’s hand, but we through our own disobedience can snatch ourselves out of God’s hand, then God permits the devil to take us away, we are then thrown out of heaven, and Satan exiles us.

But after the Last Judgement, Satan is made utterly powerless. You yourself said that there is no devil to tempt us once we are in Heaven. There is also no devil to take us away from Heaven. NEVER does the Devil take us away from God, ever. God is the One Who sentences people to Hell, not Satan.

The temple is our body, if we use our will to reject God, which is like setting up self as the idol in the temple. The temple being destroyed is a type of us being thrown into hell and being destroyed.

If the Temple is us, then others force their way in and snatch us away from God, forcibly setting up idols and destroying us. If we work off of your typology, then it is sinners and demons that destroy us. Christ promised that this would never happen. Only God can destroy us, not sinners or demons.

Also, now who’s changing the typology? We said in the beginning that it was the Hebrews, not the Temple, who represent the faithful. Further, here you say that the Temple represents the body. Are you now giving up on the Hebrews’ tents being representative of their bodies, then? Are you now changing the typology to avoid some nasty contradictions?

Now with all this, Satan is not conquering heaven itself (third heaven) just like the invaders did not go into the garden of Eden.

The Temple is destroyed. The place where God made His dwelling is destroyed. If you believe that the land of Canaan is always a type of Israel throughout the entire Bible, then you must believe that even the third heaven is conquered by Satan—twice. The invaders wholly conquered the land of Israel and all that is in it, twice. If you do not think that they captured Heaven itself (as in the third Heaven), then you must admit that the land of Israel is not Heaven—further contradicting yourself. You are proving my point about how the Exodus typology cannot be used across the whole of Biblical history. You have no way out of this. I’m a pro at weaseling out of things, and believe me, there’s no escape from the predicament you’re in. You have two choices: Attempt to further defend your argument about the Exodus typology being applicable to the whole of Biblical history and further refute yourself, or concede the argument and admit that the Exodus typology cannot be used for the whole of Biblical history.

Oh but it can be justified, I justified it through my examples above.

You’ve done the complete opposite, actually. You’ve debunked your own argument.

The exodus is distinct from the Promised Land dwelling, but their connected. The typology of coming out of sin, Egypt, is distinct from being in the promised land, heaven, but their connected.

Once the Hebrews flee Egypt, that’s the start of the Exodus and the Exodus typology. Once the Hebrews get to the Promised Land and settle, that’s the end of the Exodus, and the end of the Exodus typology. How hard is that to understand?

If foreshadowing does not imply typology what then does it imply?

To foreshadow something means to hint at a future event. This is not limited to typologies, but also extends to hints and prophecies in general.

I have not read all the church fathers, but I have read the early church fathers. And according to my memory they say nothing against what I am saying in typology for Canaan.

Have you in fact read the early Church Fathers? The great Biblical exegetes are Origen of Alexandria, St. John Chrysostom and St. Basil the Great. Ss. Ignatius of Antioch, Justin Martyr, Polycarp and the other early Church Fathers don’t have too many Biblical commentaries known to us, so of course you wouldn’t have found them saying anything against your opinion. If the Fathers spent their time refuting every false interpretation of the Bible, they wouldn’t have time to teach the true interpretation of Scripture. Suffice it to say that no Father used the Exodus typology to cover the whole of Biblical history, and they certainly didn’t try to read as much into it as you do.

My meditation and contemplation of the scripture says that my interpretation of it for Canaan land above is correct, does your meditation and contemplation agree with mine? Probably not, so how do we determine who’s meditation and contemplation is leading them in the correct direction?

By looking at the Tradition of the Church. By looking at whose interpretation is in line with the Fathers.

Oh wait, the foreigner is coming to Canaan land (heaven), you even said yourself that Canaan land is a type of heaven, you can’t change it now, you have to be consistent. Are you going to turn around and change your interpretation of the land not being heaven now?

I’m not changing anything, and I’m being perfectly consistent. Just because Canaan is a type of Heaven in the Exodus story does not mean that it is a type of Heaven in the rest of the Bible.

We both agree that the foreigner can be the gentiles, your saying the temple is a type of the church that the gentiles (foreigners) come into, ok, even if that is so, the foreigner visits Canaan land (heaven) and then goes back to his own land (earth). How do you deal with that?

Foreigners ARE Gentiles, by definition, not a type of them. Anyone who’s not a Jew is a Gentile and a foreigner. The Church is the Third Temple, not just an antitype of the Temple, as we learn from John 2:19 and 1 Corinthians 12:27. You’re still trying to stretch the Exodus typology over the rest of the Biblical history.

1 Kings 8:41 is not a typology, but a foreshadowing. Solomon’s prayer came to full fruition when the Gentiles, AKA the foreigners, came into the Church, which is the new Temple.

Your missing my point. I’m saying, it COULD have been taught, just because something is not written down does not mean it was not taught verbally. Also, even if it was NOT taught, well, can you honestly say it was taught directly AGAINST?

As I said, if the Fathers spent all their time refuting every false idea that ever came up, there would be no time left to preach the Truth. Did the Fathers teach every correct interpretation of Scripture there is? No, of course not. But the question you need to ask yourself is, is your interpretation in line with what the Fathers teach? Would they ever have advocated such self-induced OBE’s as you describe? Would they ever have agreed with your position? No. Our current bodies are called “tents” because they are mortal, subject to decay, and easy to tear apart—and in the end, will be dissolved and destroyed. This is how the Fathers interpret 2 Corinthians 5, among them being St. John Chrysostom. Our bodies are NOT called “tents” because we can leave them whenever we like or because we spend as much time outside our bodies as in them, but because they are flimsy and easily destroyed.

Also, where would this preconditioning FIRST come from for the writer of ecclesiastes? It would have to come from someone who truly first sees the silver cord. How do you deal with that?

The same way I always deal with empty conjecture without support: I dismiss it for being unfounded speculation on something about which we know nothing. We have no idea where the idea of a silver cord originally came from, and no evidence to make a guess one way or the other.

 

[Jollybear]

What I've said about blessings being perceived through natural perception is based perfectly on the Bible. As I said, blessings back in those days weren’t invisible blessings. They were visible blessings—blessings such as being able to have children, having good land, having good numbers of livestock and a bountiful harvest. We see this in Deuteronomy 7 very clearly, among many other places in the Bible. Run a search for “bless” in the Bible, and you’ll see how often it refers to material blessings throughout the early part of the OT. Jacob himself says that God had blessed Laban through him by the increase of Laban’s livestock under Jacob’s care in Genesis 30:30:

For what you had before I came was little, and it has increased to a great amount; the Lord has blessed you since my coming. And now, when shall I also provide for my own house?”
As I said before, since Laban’s livestock increased under Jacob’s care, it was obvious to everyone that Jacob’s God was blessing Laban, and not Laban’s idols. You don’t need to perform a magic ritual to figure out Who was blessing Laban through Jacob, since the blessing was visible and had a clear source.
So now you see, my position that it was based off of natural experience and not divination magic is not merely conjecture, but is consistent with the Bible, historical reality and the common understanding of people at the time. You're the one making conjecture with no evidence to support you.

You misunderstood my point. I am not disagreeing that the “blessings” were visible, that’s OBVIOUS. My question to you is and which you have not answered in this response here, how did laban know WHEN Jacobs God was blessing him vs WHEN his lesser gods were blessing him? You said it’s through natural observation. No, natural observation would just tell you that your being “blessed” but it won’t TELL you by what GOD is the one blessing you. Because the God/gods ARE INVISIBLE even though the “blessings” are visible. So, yes, you have conjecture. Your conjecture is that Laban knew WHEN Jacobs God was blessing him vs WHEN his lesser gods were doing it by the mere means of just natural observation. That is YOUR conjecture; the passage does NOT clearly say or support that conjecture. So, if you think I have conjecture that Laban knew through divination, then you would EQUALLY and easily have conjecture as well, because I have shown that Laban even said he learned through divination that Jacobs God was blessing him, and that word in the Hebrew I have showed what it means in it’s entirety. So, yes, you DO have conjecture.

Because in the story you described, you were fulfilling one of Jesus’ commands in the Gospel to be reconciled with your brother (or in this case, mother) before offering your sacrifice/prayer. With a self-induced OBE, what are you fulfilling in your spiritual life? What spiritual work are you accomplishing? Are you increasing in love toward your fellow human beings or God? Are you cultivating any virtues? Are you doing anything profitable for your soul? What makes you think God even wants you to do it?

Yes, when you self induce an OBE, your learning more about your soul and spirit DIRECTLY, you’re experiencing it. You learn more about the spirit realm DIRECTLY through experience. You cultivate the virtue of courage by letting go and projecting out of the body and facing whatever comes your way in that realm. When you invite God into the experience, you can learn what it’s like to meet God in that realm through the avenue of an OBE(please don’t come back with the argument, you can learn God in the body, we’ve been their). Through this, you can learn to love God more. That guy who told me he visited heaven through a self induced OBE, when I asked him what it was like vs what hell was like. He said in heaven everyone was very happy all the time, loved each other, they were all one. In hell everyone was bitter and angry and hated one another. I can reasonably suppose that heaven would have made him love God more since the experience of being there.

Also I think God wants me to do it, yes, I think he is trying to stretch me spiritually and my spiritual senses and train them and get away from the physical senses and to LEARN this stuff inside out through direct experience, how else can you learn this stuff, for real now? You can’t learn it just by reading a book, let’s get real. You have to have practical information and practical exercises and a direct aim and then DO IT and experience it. The bible says in Hebrews 5:11-14 and 6:1-3 “We have much to say about this, but it is hard to make it clear to you because you no longer try to understand. In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil. Therefore let us move beyond the elementary teachings about Christ and be taken forward to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God, instruction about cleansing rites, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. And God permitting, we will do so.” I feel many things that are going on in the Christian church are ENFANTILE. Even their prophesying and speaking in tongues (which I have had some pretty awesome and real experiences with that) are infantile. I believe and feel God wants me to move higher, a lot higher, and higher is an understatement, I mean BEYOND higher. I believe God wants everyone to go beyond higher, but hardly ANYBODY is ready for it. I like the typology of Elijah and the prophets, Elijah was at the river, but the prophets were at a distance. God wants us not to be at a distance. He wants us to go deeper, and most people don’t know what deep is, they have their pathetic small version of what “deep” with God is, but God wants to throw that on its head and really show them what deep is. I feel the church (not everywhere) and ourselves are holding ourselves BACK, at a distance.

Because it’s not proper to take terminology from one different tradition with different connotations, and attempt to shoehorn them into another tradition with its own nuances, concepts, foci and beliefs. All it does is create confusion and misunderstanding. We have our own terms for these things, we don’t need to borrow vocabulary. Borrowing vocabulary from others also means bringing in the baggage connected to the foreign terms that don’t belong to us. The fact that there are differences between Christianity and occultism, as you yourself admit, is proof enough that the two cannot ever be one. Our practices, beliefs and goals are different.

Christians and the occult don’t OWN their terminology, terminology is owned by everyone, what matters is NOT the terminology, but rather the MEANING behind the terminology and if the terminology in the occult is the same in meaning to the different terminology in Christianity, then the dividing wall SHOULD come DOWN. If the meaning behind terminologies is NOT the same, then the dividing wall should go ahead and stay UP. But, the meanings behind the different terminologies I have shown in some cases in this debate ARE the same. You’re making the world black and white, and the world does not work like that. There are perversions within the Christian TERMILOGY world, but there are perversions within the occult terminology world. That is perversions of the devil. So one does not have to be in the OCCULT formalities in order to have perversions, one can be behind all the masks of Christianity and have perversions as well. All that matters is TRUTH.

 

[Jollybear]

So this is what you’re after, trying to twist Christianity and mangle it until it fits under the occultist label, to validate occultism? At least be honest enough to leave Christianity alone and go be an occultist if that’s what you want so badly, but don’t try to drag Christianity into it. Do you want to be a Christian, or an occultist?

To validate the part of occultism that I THINK the bible PROMOTES and does NOT condemn, but NOT all occultism do I seek to validate.

A true Christian IS an occultist, just not the perverted version of occultism. And a true occultist is a Christian, just not the perverted version of Christian.

The difference is, the departed Saints are not bound by their physical bodies, and are not limited to their physical senses, while we the living are.

O yes of course, how did I not see this response coming? This fits what I said above; the Christian world for the most part is in ENFANTILE Christian living. Most Christians are living by their physical senses instead of training their spiritual senses and being tuned out of their physical senses. So, does God want us to live by our physical senses? Be careful now how you answer this because I’m going to trap you. If you say yes, then I will ask you why through the whole bible the opposite seams to be the truth, that the physical senses is what God is trying to damper. If you say no, then I will ask you, why don’t the ministers and priests here our prayer requests at a distance?

The last sentence you said proves my point. A few base externals may be the same, but the purpose, intent and use of the externals is completely different between a Christian and an occultist, so any superficial similarities are meaningless. The hearts of Christianity and occultism are different.

The heart of unperverted Christianity and the heart of unperverted occultism ARE the same. The heart of unperverted Christianity and the heart of perverted occultism is NOT the same, true.

“That astrology form the magi used” is what we today know as the science of astronomy, not the superstitious nonsense we know today as astrology.

Wrong, wrong, what the magi did was astrology, NOT astronomy. The Greek lexicon which I have already showed you, clearly defines the magi as sorcerers, ASTROLOGERS, soothsayers, priests, wise men. That is NOT astronomy. How do you deal with that?

Angels heralded the coming of Christ to the shepherds. An angel appeared as the star and led the Magi from Persia, to Jerusalem, to Christ in Bethlehem. This was no ordinary star; it moved from north (from Jerusalem) to south (to Bethlehem), and actually stopped above where Christ was, in a manner clear enough to indicate the actual building where He was—St. John Chrysostom surmises that the star actually descended from the sky and hovered over Jesus’ position. We see all this in Matthew 2:9-10. So when they saw this unusual star that defied the laws of astronomy, they had to go check it out. They didn’t discover the star through astrology, but by seeing such an unusual sight that would have gotten any stargazer intensely curious.

Well for one, you’re wrong because the word “star” in the passage of scripture that the magi referenced in the greek is “aster” and it means “a star” and it means NOTHING else, angel in the lexicon is NOT there. Source here http://classic.studylight.org/desk/?l=en&query=Matthew+2%3A2&section=0&translation=str&oq=mt%25202%3A1&new=1&sr=1&nb=mt&ng=2&ncc=2 . Also “angel’s” in referenced to appearing to the shepherds (not the magi mind you) in the greek is “aggelos” and it means “a messenger, envoy, one who is sent, an angel, a messenger from God” source here http://classic.studylight.org/desk/?l=en&query=Luke+2%3A9&section=0&translation=str&oq=lu%25202%3A10&new=1&sr=1&nb=lu&ng=2&ncc=2 . So to wrap that point up, an angel appeared, yes, but to shepherds, NOT to magi, a star appeared and the magi seen it, it was a star. The magi knew that THIS star was JESUS star. That’s NOT astronomy. Astronomy does not deal with stars being the stars OF someone. Now whether the star moved or came down over the manger, I have no argument either way. But if it did come close to earth, then it would have been one small hell of a star. Also the magi were not just “curious” and so went over to check out the sight of this star, they were prepared to give gifts to Jesus and to come and worship him, they KNEW before they got to the manger that this star was Jesus star. Again, how do you deal with all this? Oh right, you can’t. That’s why your jumping all over the place.

What concerns me about your fixation on this point is this: You seem to be concerned with moving mountains and withering trees as ends in and of themselves, thus entirely missing the point of working miracles.

No, it’s not an end in itself, but I am dealing with one thing at a time here. The end in itself is, if you can whither a fig tree or walk on water in itself, you have discovered through direct experience a whole other level of reality and how to tap it and use it in many diverse ways for the benefit of life.

Also, you say “your Lord,” and not “my Lord” or “our Lord”. Do you not consider Jesus your Lord? If you’re not a Christian, why are you even concerning yourself with what Christianity has to say about self-induced OBE’s? Why do you care what the Bible says about the subject? Were you ever interested in seeing what the Bible said about these things, or were you just trying to validate yourself by attempting to use the Bible to support your own ends? These questions may seem harsh, but they are indeed sincere questions I'd like you to answer, not ones intended to make you feel bad or insult you.

There was no underlying ulterior reason for why I said “your Lord” instead of “my Lord” or “our Lord”. Yes I consider Jesus my Lord, but that is not why I said “your Lord” I said your Lord in order to make it personal for you and direct the question and make the question personal for you. Jesus, who is YOUR Lord, said we could whither fig trees, ok, don’t you take Jesus statement seriously? Surely you must since he is YOUR Lord, ok, well then, deal with my question and answer it. How do we whither fig trees? Actually you still have not answered it, instead you have asked me questions, I should have told you I won’t answer your questions until you first answer mine which I have asked you first. But instead I answered yours anyhow. So now, to my question?

 

[Jollybear]

As I said before, through faith in God, love for God, and the grace of God. There is absolutely nothing like a three-step formula on how to work a miracle, since miracles don’t come from us, but from God through us. All we can do is love God, have faith in Him, and be open to His working through our lives. Whether we work a miracle, when we work a miracle, and what the miracle is, are all up to God. If you want a surefire recipe on how to make a miracle happen, you are going to be disappointed.

AHUH! I got you trapped now, you’re in for it, lol, ….Ok, you said we work a miracle (whither fig tree) through faith in God, love for God and the grace of God. So if we do this, then you say even THEN we might not have the fig tree whither because God has to WILL the miracle through us, we don’t do the miracle. Your wrong, I am going to quote Jesus AGAIN, the context of this quote is that WE can do this miracle when we wish, it’s not caused BY wishing, but when we wish and do the exercise, then the miracle can happen. Here is what Jesus said in Matthew 21:18-21 “Early in the morning, as Jesus was on his way back to the city, he was hungry. Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it, “May you never bear fruit again!” Immediately the tree withered. When the disciples saw this, they were amazed. “How did the fig tree wither so quickly?” they asked. Jesus replied, “Truly I tell you, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, ‘Go, throw yourself into the sea,’ and it will be done.”

So Jesus is not just saying, have a mental belief, love God and then by the grace of God you will wither the fig tree IF God wants it done. No, that is not the context. The context is, Jesus withers this tree, the disciples are wondering how he did it, Jesus told them how and he made it clear to them that they could do the same thing WHEN they wanted to do it, if they practiced what he did in order to do it.. How do you deal with that?

Wrong. Jesus’ miracles were all to teach us and prove a point. I fear your interest in performing similar feats is merely for entertainment purposes or treating it as just another form of sorcery, like how Simon the magician from the Book of Acts was interested in obtaining the power to lay hands on people and have the Holy Spirit come upon them.

Would you like me to teach you what the point of Jesus walking on water was, and why Jesus allowed Peter to do the same?

You want to know the point of Jesus withering the fig tree was? He was hungry and the tree had no fruit, so he cursed it and he knew how to curse it. The disciples asked him how he did it. Here is another point of the miracle, to teach his disciples how to do this. The point is not so much the fig tree, it’s how to do this sort of thing, whether it’s a tree or something else. Jesus stopped a storm, walked on water, and withered a tree. The withering the tree and walking on water does not seem to have a point (but it does) but stopping the storm seems to have more of a point, to save their life. But the stopping the storm was done the same way withering the tree was done. He is trying to teach us HOW this is done. Seriously, if we are going to “follow” Jesus, it does not just means following his MORAL commandments and religious practices, it means following his mystical practices. Otherwise were only following a “half” Jesus, which is not the TRUE Jesus. And Paul warned the Corinthians about that, he said some were preaching a Jesus other than the one he preached (2 Cor 11:14). And Paul elsewhere said we are being conformed into the image of Jesus, or becoming LIKE Jesus, ok, becoming like Jesus should be walking on water, withering fig trees, stopping storms, not just praying, living morally good, that’s a HALF Jesus. Paul and John said we are becoming LIKE him, not HALF like him (Romans 8:29 1 John 4:17 and Galatians 4:19).

But yea, go ahead, tell me the point of Jesus withering fig trees and walking on water? Your saying if we do that, it’s egotistic, but when Jesus did it, it was not egotistic. Ok, well, that begs another question, what if we do it with the same motive as Jesus had, then would it be egotistic?

Again, wrong.“Sorcery” involves using magic to change fate/fortune. Have you ever heard the expression “one’s lot in life”? “Lot” means the same as “fortune” or “fate.” Casting lots is a way to determine what one’s fate is, what their “lot” is. God causing the lots to fall one way or the other is not Him using sorcery to change fate, but to show what His will is. Sorcery is changing someone’s lot(as in, fate/fortune) through magic.

Wow you sure twisted that to pieces. No, I disagree, casting lots is like flipping a coin, that’s it, that’s all your doing, by itself, nothing is influencing it, accept your hand that flips it and the wind that guides it and the ground that grabs it. But does that determine your future? No, unless you’re flipping the coin with the motive of making a decision, now that’s what casting lots were for in biblical times, to make decisions. Well, in this case, the people would pray, then cast the lot, but God would INFLUINCE the lot in order to dictate what the decision would be, i.e. “the lot is cast, but it’s every decision is of the Lord.” You even said in your above twisted version of lot casting that sorcery is changing (that is influencing) someone’s lot. God changed or influenced the LANDING of the lots and that fulfills sorceries definition. No matter what influences the lot, if a demon influences it, if God influences it, if you influence it either by sleight of hand or by real magic, no matter what influences it, that fulfills the definition of sorcery. Because sorcery is when the lot is influenced, one who influences the lot, or fate, or fortune. Again, read the source carefully http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sorcery

This is all well and good, but what does this have to do with the fact that our witnessing cannot be successful and bear fruit without God’s help?

Nothing except to show that we need to use our own independent will and faculties that God gave us.

Keep your occult words where they belong. They have absolutely no place in Christianity. I’ve tolerated it before as a consideration to you because I thought you were on a particular level of understanding flavored by your personal history in your spiritual walk with Christ, but now I have a better idea what your motives are, and I won’t stand for this distortion of Christianity in favor of occultism. That state of being “tuned in” to God’s instructions is known in Christianity as “aligning one’s heart and will to God”, NOT “being psychic”.

Just because you dismiss the point does not make the point invalidated. You have a prejudice against a word, that’s sad, if the word has the same meaning, or can have the same meaning, then it’s ok to use it. There should not be any dividing wall.

And my point is, even if we have our own independent will and faculties, the spiritual life is not done independently of God.

Agreed

Nowhere has God ever commanded us to have self-induced OBE’s. This is one of my objections that you have never satisfactorily answered.

Nowhere has God ever commanded against self induced OBE’s. This is one of MY objections that you have never satisfactorily answered. I asked you for one scripture to show that he has commanded against self induced OBE’s and you quote me verses condemning sorcery, wizardry, but those things do not say “out of body experiences”.