astral projection is biblical

[Shiranui117]

Alright, I think I took your posts from being 5k+ words and got the whole lot of it down to 1.5k, after boiling down a lot of your arguments and lopping off some of our tangential discussions. I want this entire exchange chopped down to 2 posts max. I hope I've at least made a lot of headway...

Balaam was led to God using his divination, numbers 22:7 says ...Then in chapter 24 verse 1 it says “...he did not resort to sorcery as at other times”. So...balaam...was using divination

I don't see anything that indicates he was using divination, it seems to me to be more Balaam offering sacrifices and asking for God to work through him, which to me isn't divination. It even says that he didn't use sorcery. We can talk more about what "divination" actually means.

Laban did not learn by NATURAL experience and perception that God blessed him because of Jacob...You cannot FIND out by natural perception and experience whether God is blessing your house, cattle, field, by a person’s work by just naturally observing it and experiencing it ... You would not be able to tell by natural perception or experience, you could only tell by SPIRITUAL perception and experience, i.e. divination.
the word used here in the Hebrew is “nachash”

You're reading 21st-century ways of thought back into people who lived 3800 years ago. Back then, if you were prosperous and wealthy, it meant you were blessed by God. The idea of blessings being spiritual didn't start developing until the Book of Proverbs in the time of King Solomon, a thousand years later. So yes, Laban would have been able to tell if he was being blessed by God via Jacob by just looking at how his flocks had increased under Jacob's care. And yes, I did see that the word was "nachash," which is why I say that Laban's "nachash" was normal observation.

When I talk about divination, sorcery, occult, and all that stuff, I am referring to the context of how it is used in scripture, not how it’s meaning is today in its diverse forms.

What do you see as the difference?

Necromancy is talking to the spirits of the dead, that’s all.

Necromancy often does involve/incorporate black magic and conjuring spirits, which is why people don't really use the term within the Christian context of Christ talking with Moses and Elijah, or asking the dead to pray for us/vice-versa. We just say we communicate with those who are asleep in Christ or pray to them ("prayer" here meaning an earnest request, not the same kind of prayer that we address to God)

There was atheists back in ancient times just as there is today, and the atheists would not believe in astrology, but only astronomy. But, regardless of that, you just admitted that the magi did astrology.

As I said, there was no distinguishment between astronomy and astrology in those days.

And NO, this was not ONLY a miracle of God; this was a teaching of faith. If God was the one doing this whole thing, peter would not have sunk

Yes, Peter had to cooperate with and trust God in order for the miracle to work with him. Miracles=/=magic though.

If you have faith the size of a mustard seed, what is he saying here? That faith, imagination, imagery, becoming one with the object to move it, takes time or cultivation, like a seed.

He's saying that faith is powerful, not proposing telekinesis.

Here is a quote from this source “sorcery, From the Latin sortiarius, a person who casts lots, or one who tells the lot of others.” sorc-, sors-, sort- + - Word Information

With one possible definition from one source as opposed to multiple other definitions from multiple other sources, I wouldn't put a whole lot of weight on sorcery=casting lots. Can we agree that this is unimportant to our conversation and cut it, however?

[FONT=&quot]I agree with this point half way, but just because I agree with it does not do away with the fact that there is hidden knowledge from God’s side of the kingdom ... Just because it will BECOME unhidden does not make it not NOW hidden in some forms of it.[/FONT]

My point is, God would not hide anything vital to our salvation.

But playing along here with your point, let me ask you this: WHY are these things abominable to God?

Because we're relying on our own power and methods, not on God.

[FONT=&quot]1: I don’t think you have. Elisha saying his heart being with gahazi does not mean he will know what gahazi did... But Elisha knew what gahazi was doing, his spirit was actually with him. Either that or he was “clairvoyant”, meaning having a clear vision.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]2: So, Elisha knew what gahazi was doing, that is more than just his heart being with him. [/FONT]

1: As said before (and as I quoted from St. Augustine), this was spiritual sight. What you'd call "clairvoyancy".
2: You're reading an English idiom into a Greek/Hebrew text, lol.

Oh no, the one with Ezekiel is not a vision in just the mind’s eye. Ezekiel is taken by the hair of his head by God’s hand, taken up between earth and heaven. That was not a vision

The one where God grabs Ezekiel by the head is most likely the same scenario as the time where the Holy Spirit transported Philip to another location in Acts 8. It was a full body-soul transportation, not an OBE.

Explain a little more?

Prophecy is getting a message directly from God. Augury is stuff like looking at an animal's intestines, or watching how birds fly, or astrology, etc. to determine the future. Augury is not relying on God to give a message.

[FONT=&quot]clair means clear and voyant means vision, so, clear vision. That’s what it means.[/FONT]

Just because of how the word "clairvoyancy" is used today, I'm still hesitant to use it myself. You can. Just as long as we understand each other's terminology.

But, here is two other passages that imply we can put OURSELVES in the Spirit. Ezekiel 47:3-6 ... So, WE got to DO this and put ourselves IN the Spirit. We got to worship IN the Spirit.

Actually, in Ezekiel 47:3-6, it talks about how the man brings Ezekiel through the waters. We do have to worship in spirit and truth, and have the Holy Spirit lead us. But I don't see a connection between being led by the HS and the self-induced OBE that you describe.

I'm adapting this from my post to Windwalker:

" 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. 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. I haven't gotten through the section of the book dealing with the vision of God yet, but when I do, I can share a couple insights from that. 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."

Your thoughts? I'd like to discuss ecstasy vs. self-induced OBE's some more, because this gets to the heat of why I consider what I previously called God-induced OBE's to be different from self-induced OBE's.

It was a state of ecstasy that St. Paul talks about in 2 Corinthians 12, and most likely what St. John experienced in Revelation 1. The reason St. Paul didn't know if the man was in or out of the body is because during a state of ecstasy, we can't even tell whether we're in or out of the body

 

[Shiranui117]

So you’re saying in essence God is not always willing to give his gifts in other words. I disagree with this. I think God is always willing to give his gifts and ALL of them.

I'd disagree. Remember what St. Paul said? Are all teachers? Are all prophets? No. Just as the body has many diverse members, so the body of Christ has people with diverse gifts, talents and blessings (cf. 1 Corinthians 12). We're not all pros in all areas spiritually, but that's part of why we have the Church--putting together many people with different talents, blessings and gifts so we can all help each other. God gives us the gifts that we're best suited to have, that we can best work with. We're all individuals with different affinities, and different levels of ability in different areas. I think God would rather give us a few gifts/abilities/talents that we can use like a BOSS than give us every single gift/blessing/talent possible and see a lot of those go to waste.

True, we do need God to get filled with the Holy Spirit...So basically BY US aligning ourselves, it’s almost as IF we WER filling ourselves with the Spirit, yet we are not directly doing so, it’s God directly filling us.

Alright, fair enough, I can accept this within the concept of our cooperation with God.

Ok, let me ask the question another way. You concede that the Holy Spirit SOMETIMES gives people an OBE, well, that means in essence OBE’s are not sin

I'm going to redirect you to the ecstasy vs. self-induced OBE point I made in my previous post. We should first discuss ecstasy vs. self-induced OBE's before saying that they're the same thing.

It’s perfectly ok, but on an intellectual level, I have a question, perhaps your anger was not even a sin, because I was not offended how you worded it, and the reason I was not offended is because I understand your passion for the subject. So since I was not offended, could it be that your anger toward me was not sinful? But regardless, apology accepted. It shows a lot of character to apologize too.

Thank you for saying so. :namaste I just like to keep in mind Jesus' teaching about putting aside all disputes and being reconciled to our brother before making our offering. I think it's better to not be angry at all, rather than to be angry and run the risk of going into the sin of wrath. I keep in mind the second half of Ephesians 4:26 (Let not the sun go down on your wrath), but you've reminded me of the first part (Be angry, but do not sin). Thank you for that.

…why are we free to roam the earth, but not free to roam heaven and the spirit world?

Because God gave us dominion over the earth. Did He give us dominion over the aerial realm (what I interpret to be the spirit realm)? I don't think so.

Your right, I did not provide a few details in the typology, such as what you said, the Israelites going through the desert before getting into Canaan...[Numbers 13 and Joshua 18 talk about spies being sent into Canaan]. So, this part of the typology shows that we can move about freely within the lands, that is visit heaven in other words

I wouldn't call that "moving about freely", since God specifically ordered spies to be sent. They were going to Canaan on God's orders, not wandering in and out of Canaan willy-nilly.

But why? Theirs ALWAYS a reason with God. It’s NEVER hypocrisy or double standard, it’s always a reason for protection. But apparently adam and eve’s sons/daughters did not need protection? Why, it’s my theory that incest from Adam and eve’s sons/daughters did not make retarded babies...That is why God NOW says AFTER the flood in the laws of Moses, do not have sex with a family member, because he knows what it will do, based on the degeneration of the power of the human body that took place after the flood.

I've heard this argument before, and it's one that I'd agree with if I did believe the flood wiped out the entire world (my views on the flood being global/local/otherwise are far from being set in stone). As long as the gene pool has enough diversity, inbreeding isn't a problem. Theoretically, our first ancestors had a LOT of genetic diversity.

The analogy goes like this: I live in a tent (the body), but every morning I can get up and leave the tent if I want and then come back to the tent to dwell in...the body is an outer clothing for the soul. There, gotcha. You won’t be able to get out of this one.

Well, no, I wouldn't agree with the idea that our bodies are like a tent or outer clothing. Our bodies are an integral part of us--hence why physical death is a big deal, and something that God the Son had to go through and rise from, in order to give us a way out of it.

[FONT=&quot]I concede physical danger pales in comparison to spiritual danger, I will agree with you on that and that is why I take this debate seriously and is why I appreciate your responses and feedback, because I need you as a check and balance for myself[/FONT]

Hah, glad I've been useful in this discussion

If this is a natural ability everyone has, surely ancient people could and did do this, perhaps not by the droves, but neither do droves of numbers of people do it today either. http://www.soul-psychics.com/astral_projection.html

I can speak to the Egypt part of that article. From all accounts I've seen, the Ba and Ka separate from the human body at death--hence the need to inhabit statues rather than the body. I've never seen anything about Egyptian OBE's. If you can find references to what the Greek philosophers said about souls separating from bodies other than at the time of death, I'd be much obliged--but many did in fact believe that the body was merely a prison for the soul. They also believed we could be reincarnated as fish, so what does that tell you?

Oh my God, I got this entire thing down to 2 posts. You want proof of God's existence? You want proof of miracles? There you go. I took your 10 posts and got it down to freaking 2. Holy hell, mang.:thud:

 

[Jollybear]

Alright, I think I took your posts from being 5k+ words and got the whole lot of it down to 1.5k, after boiling down a lot of your arguments and lopping off some of our tangential discussions. I want this entire exchange chopped down to 2 posts max. I hope I've at least made a lot of headway...

I don't see anything that indicates he was using divination, it seems to me to be more Balaam offering sacrifices and asking for God to work through him, which to me isn't divination. It even says that he didn't use sorcery. We can talk more about what "divination" actually means.

Numbers 24:1 “Now when Balaam saw that it pleased the Lord to bless Israel, he did not resort to divination as at other times” when was this “other times” at? It was the four attempts he was meeting with God, then after four times of meeting with God and getting the same answer, then he did not resort to divination or sorcery as at other times, that is, at those four other times.

Divination means to be inspired by a god. So, divine means God, so if you were divining, you are finding out God’s will or what God is doing.

You're reading 21st-century ways of thought back into people who lived 3800 years ago. Back then, if you were prosperous and wealthy, it meant you were blessed by God. The idea of blessings being spiritual didn't start developing until the Book of Proverbs in the time of King Solomon, a thousand years later. So yes, Laban would have been able to tell if he was being blessed by God via Jacob by just looking at how his flocks had increased under Jacob's care. And yes, I did see that the word was "nachash," which is why I say that Laban's "nachash" was normal observation.

It doesn’t just mean learn by natural experience, it also means to practice divination, divine, observe signs, practice fortunetelling and take as an omen. So I don’t think it means learning by natural experience, but rather it means learning by the experience of divining. The practice of divination would give him an experience that would make him learn that he was blessed by God through Jacob.

I did not bring up this point yet, but I just thought of it and I think it’s worth mentioning. We both know Laban worshiped false gods (idols). Well, how did he learn by natural experience that the LORD (Jacobs God) blessed him because of Jacob? How did he not know by experience that it was one of his false gods (idols) that he worshiped that was blessing him? Maybe it was the god he worshiped that was blessing him, or maybe it was the LORD that was doing it? How could he know by experience? He could not know this by natural experience, he would have to DIVINE it. And, that is just what he did. And it lead him to the right answer. Sort of like divining rods, they lead people to find water spots in the ground for the best places to dig wells, that is a form of divination, but it leads them to accurate sources to dig their wells. I know a man who personally used divining rods to find the best place to dig his own well, he saved thousands of dollars using the rod, that way he would not be guessing the best place for digging, and then dig the wrong spot and still have to pay the digger. If divining rods are of the devil, then the devil sure as hell made his life a whole lot easier and saved him thousands of dollars too, lol. You really think the devil wants to make our life easier? Answer should be obvious no. God is not against being smart.

What do you see as the difference?

Well, I think the way the occult words are used today and how they were used at their original time of making can sometimes be the same, or sometimes they can lose their true meaning and change with the times. That’s where we got to be careful, not of what we practice I mean (yes we got to be careful with that too) but be careful of our communication. Because someone can use a word, they mean something by it, but someone else takes it to mean something else and therefore misunderstands what is really being said to him.

I think what this whole debate boils down to is after we bypass on semantics in words we are left with that I believe WE can exercise and train our spiritual senses, our god given abilities to do amazing things, while you believe we can do that, but that we should NOT do so because we are then being independent from God and not relying on God to do it for us when he deems fit. However I think even though we can do these things and it’s ok to do them, and yes it’s independent of God, it does not HAVE to always be independent of him, we can invite him into the exercise, into the experience, just like inviting him into everything else we may do. Independent of God just means the act of our wills are independent because he made them to be independent. But then again, we would not have an independent will APART from God making it so, so in that sense, not even our free will is independently free, so in that sense we still are acknowledge God in all things. Also you think that by exercising these abilities it creates pride “I shall be as god” but I think, not necessarily so, because no matter how advanced we become spiritually or in that spirit realm, or no matter how powerful we may advance to, we still humbly lower our eyes before the all mighty God whom we KNOW is unlimited in power and glory and we will never be able to ascend higher than him, not even if we tried, but then again, I don’t even want to try. But coming out of the body is not trying to do that.

Necromancy often does involve/incorporate black magic and conjuring spirits, which is why people don't really use the term within the Christian context of Christ talking with Moses and Elijah, or asking the dead to pray for us/vice-versa. We just say we communicate with those who are asleep in Christ or pray to them ("prayer" here meaning an earnest request, not the same kind of prayer that we address to God)

So then it’s not talking to the dead that is “evil” it’s what dead we talk to, or rather what spirits we talk to that is either good or evil. And it’s for what REASON we are talking to them. So it’s not the ACT itself that is evil, it’s, what spirit are we conversing? And why? If it’s an evil spirit we are conversing with, that is not good then, or if it’s a good spirit we are talking to, but for the wrong reasons, that also would not be good. I mean I could be talking to God with the wrong motives, that would not be good.

 

[Jollybear]

As I said, there was no distinguishment between astronomy and astrology in those days.

It’s irrelevant if there was no distinguish between astronomy and astrology, the fact would remain that the magi did astrology, something you consider as evil. Just because they studied astronomy at the same time they did astrology does not do away with the fact they did astrology, lol. So are you saying the magi did evil? That they did something that was off the devil? You are also forgetting that in the greek lexicon they were also called soothsayers and sorcerers.

Yes, Peter had to cooperate with and trust God in order for the miracle to work with him. Miracles=/=magic though.

Something tells me though that God is always willing to do these sorta things, we are just so dumb down and weak in faith that they just hardly ever happen. Remember the bible says “Jesus could NOT do many miracles in his home town because of their lack of faith” I think it’s the same today, God CANNOT do many miracles because we tie his hands. He wants us to EXERCISE faith and faith is not this blind walking into darkness thing, it’s something we exercise, a god given ability that makes something miraculous happen.

He's saying that faith is powerful, not proposing telekinesis.

Ok, let me ask you this, Jesus told his disciples that if they had faith the size of a mustard seed, they could not just do what was done to the fig tree, but they could in turn speak to the mountain to move and it would.

Now explain to me, how is that done in practical terms? Don’t tell me he is speaking symbolically either, because I won’t buy it for a second, the context of the passage is not symbolic, it’s LITERAL, he literally withered a fig tree and the disciples literally asked him how to do it. So, tell me in your view and in practical terms, what is faith and how do we exercise it to whither a fig tree or a leaf of any sort?

With one possible definition from one source as opposed to multiple other definitions from multiple other sources, I wouldn't put a whole lot of weight on sorcery=casting lots. Can we agree that this is unimportant to our conversation and cut it, however?

I don’t know, we might not be able to cut this one, if the disciples cast lots, hmmm, sounds like sorcery to me, but of a good kind they did.

My point is, God would not hide anything vital to our salvation.

Right, that is your point, I agree with your point, but your point does not do away with the fact that there are some secrets in God’s kingdom, and secret knowledge means “occult”

Because we're relying on our own power and methods, not on God.

Ohhhhhh, I see, so all this sorcery, divination stuff is bad because we would be relying on our own methods instead of God, well in that case, it’s wrong to rely on my legs to walk because I’m relying on my own method to get to A to B and not relying on God to get me from A to B. It’s wrong to work because I’m relying on income to take care of my needs instead of relying on God. It’s wrong to eat food because I would be relying on that to sustain my life instead of God. We should not drive a car because it’s relying on our own methods instead of God. I should not even rely on my fingers to type this out or rely on my own ability to think to structure the words because I would be relying on my own methods instead of God. If this logic of yours is correct, then we are in deep trouble. Why would God even provide all this stuff if he did not want us to have some level of reliance on things? Is God trying to cripple us? I don’t think so, if anything I think he is trying to challenge and stretch us. How can we have any respect for existence if he did not challenge us and made us rely on him for every single little thing?

1: As said before (and as I quoted from St. Augustine), this was spiritual sight. What you'd call "clairvoyancy".

2: You're reading an English idiom into a Greek/Hebrew text, lol.

It’s irrelevant if I’m using a English word, it means the same thing. I’ll go along with this; Elisha was having spiritual sight, which fulfills the definition of clairvoyancy. Clairvoyancy is grouped into the category of divination or occult. But it was not bad in the case of Elisha.

The one where God grabs Ezekiel by the head is most likely the same scenario as the time where the Holy Spirit transported Philip to another location in Acts 8. It was a full body-soul transportation, not an OBE.

I don’t see how this can be compared to Philip and here is why, In Ezekiel chapter 8, we see God bringing Ezekiel to different parts of the temple and showing him what the people are doing, yet the people are oblivious that Ezekiel is there. Why do they not see Ezekiel? It’s because his body is not there. Also the part about him digging a hole in the wall, do you really think he had a shovel with him as he was being teleported? Even if he did have a shovel, surely someone would have noticed that going on and that would have taken awhile to dig through a stone wall even with a shovel. Now if he was doing so with his hands, it’s unimaginable how bloody his hands would have been. Now if he is out of body, he can easily dig through a wall

 

[Jollybear]

Prophecy is getting a message directly from God. Augury is stuff like looking at an animal's intestines, or watching how birds fly, or astrology, etc. to determine the future. Augury is not relying on God to give a message.

You said astrology, so the magi were not relying on God for a message, they were relying on astrology.

Just because of how the word "clairvoyancy" is used today, I'm still hesitant to use it myself. You can. Just as long as we understand each other's terminology.

Actually, in Ezekiel 47:3-6, it talks about how the man brings Ezekiel through the waters. We do have to worship in spirit and truth, and have the Holy Spirit lead us. But I don't see a connection between being led by the HS and the self-induced OBE that you describe.

Ok, the man lead him in the water, you got a victory in that one, but still, God is always willing to lead us into the water. And he still had to walk in the water too. But regardless, I can latch hold of the John verse. Jesus instructed that we worship the father in spirit and truth and such worshipers the father seeks. So that is something we are to do because he instructed it. Gotcha on this one.

I'm adapting this from my post to Windwalker:

" 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. 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. I haven't gotten through the section of the book dealing with the vision of God yet, but when I do, I can share a couple insights from that. 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."
Your thoughts? I'd like to discuss ecstasy vs. self-induced OBE's some more, because this gets to the heat of why I consider what I previously called God-induced OBE's to be different from self-induced OBE's.
It was a state of ecstasy that St. Paul talks about in 2 Corinthians 12, and most likely what St. John experienced in Revelation 1. The reason St. Paul didn't know if the man was in or out of the body is because during a state of ecstasy, we can't even tell whether we're in or out of the body

I agree ecstasy and self induced OBE’s can be different, but they don’t have to be. If one invites God into their self induced OBE, then they can receive ecstasy. We can receive the Joy of God in any other activities we do when we invite him and connect with him.

 

[Jollybear]

I'd disagree. Remember what St. Paul said? Are all teachers? Are all prophets? No. Just as the body has many diverse members, so the body of Christ has people with diverse gifts, talents and blessings (cf. 1 Corinthians 12). We're not all pros in all areas spiritually, but that's part of why we have the Church--putting together many people with different talents, blessings and gifts so we can all help each other. God gives us the gifts that we're best suited to have, that we can best work with. We're all individuals with different affinities, and different levels of ability in different areas. I think God would rather give us a few gifts/abilities/talents that we can use like a BOSS than give us every single gift/blessing/talent possible and see a lot of those go to waste.

I think there is a difference between talent, gift and office. A talent is like a natural ability someone has that they are good at. A gift is one of the spiritual abilities God gives by the Holy Spirit. The office is they either use the talent or gift ALL the time. But I believe God wants us to have all the gifts, not necessarily all the talents and not necessarily all the offices. But he does want us to have all the gifts and here is how I will support that. Ephesians 4:11-13 says “ So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.” So what is the purpose of the apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor and teacher? It’s to equip and build up until we reach unity in the faith and knowledge and become mature and attain fullness. In other words, the apostle fills in what the prophet lacks and the prophet fills in what the apostle lacks, but then when they both fill that in, they are getting the benefit of each other’s gift. Same with the church, when it reaches unity and matures, then they will become what the apostle, prophet is together. Their won’t be a need then to equip and build with these gifts because at that time the church will have reached the same level as all of these gifts together. And that is what God is trying to do, he wants us to REACH this HIGH LEVEL. Also Paul said eagerly desire the greater gifts, meaning, if he said desire them, that would mean God would be willing to give them.

Alright, fair enough, I can accept this within the concept of our cooperation with God.

I'm going to redirect you to the ecstasy vs. self-induced OBE point I made in my previous post. We should first discuss ecstasy vs. self-induced OBE's before saying that they're the same thing.

It would be irrelevant if ecstasy happens or not in a self induced OBE because if the Holy Spirit sometimes gives OBE’s then they would not be sinful, so to induce them would not be sinful because God’s standards are not double.

Because God gave us dominion over the earth. Did He give us dominion over the aerial realm (what I interpret to be the spirit realm)? I don't think so.

He gave angels dominion over the spirit realm; he gave us dominion over the earth realm. But does that mean we cannot connect or visit the spirit realm? Visiting it is a whole lot different than having dominion over it. I can go visit china but that does not mean I am taking dominion over the country.

I wouldn't call that "moving about freely", since God specifically ordered spies to be sent. They were going to Canaan on God's orders, not wandering in and out of Canaan willy-nilly.

Ok, you won’t be able to get out of this one: in first Kings 8:41-43 it says “As for the foreigner who does not belong to your people Israel but has come from a distant land because of your name— for they will hear of your great name and your mighty hand and your outstretched arm—when they come and pray toward this temple, then hear from heaven, your dwelling place. Do whatever the foreigner asks of you, so that all the peoples of the earth may know your name and fear you, as do your own people Israel, and may know that this house I have built bears your Name."

These foreigners would come to the land of Canaan FREELY and were permitted to do so.

 

[Jollybear]

I've heard this argument before, and it's one that I'd agree with if I did believe the flood wiped out the entire world (my views on the flood being global/local/otherwise are far from being set in stone). As long as the gene pool has enough diversity, inbreeding isn't a problem. Theoretically, our first ancestors had a LOT of genetic diversity.

Ok, so either way, whether God made two races of people in the garden of Eden or just one couple, or whether the flood was local or global, either way it doesn’t matter, incest would not be a problem in the beginning.

Well, no, I wouldn't agree with the idea that our bodies are like a tent or outer clothing. Our bodies are an integral part of us--hence why physical death is a big deal, and something that God the Son had to go through and rise from, in order to give us a way out of it.

Oh I got you on this one. Let me quote the whole passage. Second Corinthians 5:1-9 “For we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, an eternal house in heaven, not built by human hands. Meanwhile we groan, longing to be clothed instead with our heavenly dwelling, because when we are clothed, we will not be found naked. For while we are in this tent, we groan and are burdened, because we do not wish to be unclothed but to be clothed instead with our heavenly dwelling, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life. Now the one who has fashioned us for this very purpose is God, who has given us the Spirit as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come.
Therefore we are always confident and know that as long as we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord. For we live by faith, not by sight. We are confident, I say, and would prefer to be away from the body and at home with the Lord. So we make it our goal to please him, whether we are at home in the body or away from it.” Also here is another quote from second peter 1:13 “I think it is right to refresh your memory as long as I live in the tent of this body”
So, these passages clearly show that the body is like unto a tent and unto clothing. Now when the Israelites were living in tents, did they always STAY in them 24/7? No, they would go in them to eat, or sleep, have sex, fellowship, shelter from rain, stuff like that, but they would not stay in them all the time. They were FREE to leave them and come back to them. They could cloth themselves and then later unclothe themselves.

I can speak to the Egypt part of that article. From all accounts I've seen, the Ba and Ka separate from the human body at death--hence the need to inhabit statues rather than the body. I've never seen anything about Egyptian OBE's. If you can find references to what the Greek philosophers said about souls separating from bodies other than at the time of death, I'd be much obliged--but many did in fact believe that the body was merely a prison for the soul. They also believed we could be reincarnated as fish, so what does that tell you?

Here is a article and I’ll quote the section relevant to my point in the article ““Re‘ and Thot, take (the traveler?) with you…….that he may sit on that which ye sit,………that he may voyage in that wherein ye voyage” (210) and they go off to the night sky to “reeds” and “marshes”.
Then, very clearly, “thou didst not depart dead; thou didst depart living,” (213). They travel “regions” and “secret places” and he has to “beware of the ocean”. The “dew of the stars” purifies him.

I don`t think this could be any clearer, “thou didst not depart dead, thou didst depart living”. It seems quite clear to me that the traveler is alive!

He is then told very clearly he is not perishable, and that the imperishable stars have carried him away. The stars are always interchangeable with people; they are star persons. WE call famous people `stars`, so why shouldn`t they have? Where did we get the term `star` when referring to a famous person?

In 216, the evening boat comes for him and he is enveloped by something “pure and living” in the horizon. Apparently he is “cool” and it is all very pleasing.” http://www.midlandsschoolofastrology.co.uk/pyramid_texts_describe_quantum_realm.html

Wow, it is so hard to make it just two posts.

 

[Shiranui117]

Just as a JSYK Jollybear, the maximum character limit is 10,000 characters. You could have actually fit that all into three posts.

It was the four attempts he was meeting with God, then after four times of meeting with God and getting the same answer, then he did not resort to divination or sorcery as at other times, that is, at those four other times.

I think the word mentioned in verse 1 refers to things like augury, which the text seems to support. But you seem to be using "divination" as communicating with God, but verse 2 seems to indicate that Balaam is still using "divination" as you're defining it, that is, being inspired by God.

Now when Balaam saw that it pleased the Lord to bless Israel, he did not go as at other times, to seek to use sorcery... 2 ...and the Spirit of God came upon him. (NKJV)

We see the fourth time, Balaam is still being inspired by God, so Balaam not using divination cannot mean that he's no longer being inspired by God, but instead, he is no longer using magic or practicing augury. Moreover, I see no indication that Balaam was using augury or magic the previous three times. Do you?

Divination means to be inspired by a god. So, divine means God, so...you are finding out God’s will or what God is doing.

I will let you use the word in the context that pleases you, but know that I will usually refrain from using the same word, unless specifically addressing your usage of it.

It doesn’t just mean learn by natural experience, it also means to practice divination, divine, observe signs, practice fortunetelling and take as an omen.

As I've said before, the same word can have different meanings in different contexts. For example, I can cross (betray) you, I can cross myself (make the sign of the cross) cross (mark) out a word, cross (traverse) a street, etc, etc. The different meanings of the same word do not all apply at all times. My point is, "Nachash" CAN mean to learn by natural experience.

I did not bring up this point yet, but I just thought of it and I think it’s worth mentioning. We both know Laban worshiped false gods (idols). Well, how did he learn by natural experience that the LORD (Jacobs God) blessed him because of Jacob? How did he not know by experience that it was one of his false gods (idols) that he worshiped that was blessing him? ...How could he know by experience?

Because, since Jacob was the one increasing Laban's flock, Laban surmised that it was Jacob's God Who was blessing the part of Laban's flock under Jacob's care. Such things were common; if one prospered, others assumed it was because that person's patron god was blessing them.

You really think the devil wants to make our life easier? Answer should be obvious no. God is not against being smart.

The devil is all for giving us all the fame, power and glory in the world--just as long as we don't turn to God. Remember, Satan was willing to give Jesus all the kingdoms of the world, if He would only turn away from the Father and worship Satan. God is certainly not against us being smart, however, you're right there.

Well, I think the way the occult words are used today and how they were used at their original time of making can sometimes be the same, or sometimes they can lose their true meaning and change with the times. That’s where we got to be careful, not of what we practice I mean (yes we got to be careful with that too) but be careful of our communication. Because someone can use a word, they mean something by it, but someone else takes it to mean something else and therefore misunderstands what is really being said to him.

And this has been one of the big pitfalls of our conversation so far. Thankfully we're filling in the holes as we go along

I think what this whole debate boils down to is...I believe WE can exercise and train our spiritual senses, our god given abilities to do amazing things, while you believe we can do that, but that we should NOT do so because we are then being independent from God and not relying on God to do it for us when he deems fit...Also you think that by exercising these abilities it creates pride

Just so we're both clear, I'm a strong advocate of us developing ourselves spiritually. I simply stress that this is something which we need to do with the cooperation, guidance and support of God. And when we embark on the spiritual life and progress in that life, we will not fall into pride if we acknowledge that all that we have done in our spiritual lives has been done with the love and grace of God to keep us going and growing.

So then it’s not talking to the dead that is “evil” it’s what dead we talk to, or rather what spirits we talk to that is either good or evil.

No, necromancy involves black magic, which automatically makes all necromancy bad. Asking the dead to pray for us is not necromancy, because we don't use any magic to conjure spirits or control them.

It’s irrelevant if there was no distinguish between astronomy and astrology, the fact would remain that the magi did astrology, something you consider as evil.

If I did, then allow me to clarify: It's not that astrology (I mean the modern understanding of the word as distinct from the science of astronomy, mind you) in and of itself is evil, it's that it's a load of rubbish. The Magi observing a prophesied star that defied all natural logic (a star hovering over one specific spot in Judaea is unheard of; the only star that doesn't move is the North Star at the celestial north pole) is more observing an astronomical anomaly which merited investigating. The fact that they knew it heralded the birth of a king was icing on the cake.

Something tells me though that God is always willing to do these sorta things, we are just so dumb down and weak in faith that they just hardly ever happen. Remember the bible says “Jesus could NOT do many miracles in his home town because of their lack of faith” I think it’s the same today, God CANNOT do many miracles because we tie his hands. He wants us to EXERCISE faith and faith is not this blind walking into darkness thing, it’s something we exercise, a god given ability that makes something miraculous happen.

Faith, trust and cooperation with God, yes, I agree.

Now explain to me, how is that done in practical terms? Don’t tell me he is speaking symbolically either, because I won’t buy it for a second, the context of the passage is not symbolic, it’s LITERAL, he literally withered a fig tree and the disciples literally asked him how to do it. So, tell me in your view and in practical terms, what is faith and how do we exercise it to whither a fig tree or a leaf of any sort?

We can only work miracles through the grace of God. Remember when St. Paul said, "Not I, but the grace of God within me." (1 Cor. 15:10) We must fully cooperate with God, and this means completely aligning our heart to His, and our will to His. How to work miracles is an entire post or a thousand within itself, but this is the gist of it.

I don’t know, we might not be able to cut this one, if the disciples cast lots, hmmm, sounds like sorcery to me, but of a good kind they did.

I'm still not sold on the idea that casting lots=sorcery. It seems to me that, at best, sorcery means magic 99% of the time, and casting lots 1% of the time. Not convincing enough to use "sorcery" as a term for casting lots, when nearly everyone else thinks of it as using magic. Remember what you yourself said about using words that people misunderstand, and about having to be careful with communication? I will say that you are the first person I've ever run across in my life who defined sorcery as casting lots.

Ohhhhhh, I see, so all this sorcery, divination stuff is bad because we would be relying on our own methods instead of God, well in that case, it’s wrong to rely on my legs to walk because I’m relying on my own method to get to A to B... If this logic of yours is correct, then we are in deep trouble. Why would God even provide all this stuff if he did not want us to have some level of reliance on things? Is God trying to cripple us? I don’t think so, if anything I think he is trying to challenge and stretch us. How can we have any respect for existence if he did not challenge us and made us rely on him for every single little thing?

Remember our little talk about the physical not being like the spiritual? I'm talking about spiritual things and the spiritual life, not physical things and the physical life. Don't try and slippery-slope this.

It’s irrelevant if I’m using a English word, it means the same thing. I’ll go along with this; Elisha was having spiritual sight, which fulfills the definition of clairvoyancy. Clairvoyancy is grouped into the category of divination or occult. But it was not bad in the case of Elisha.

Because it's a different type of clairvoyancy.

 

[Shiranui117]

I don’t see how this can be compared to Philip and here is why, In Ezekiel chapter 8, we see God bringing Ezekiel to different parts of the temple and showing him what the people are doing, yet the people are oblivious that Ezekiel is there. Why do they not see Ezekiel? It’s because his body is not there. Also the part about him digging a hole in the wall ...Now if he is out of body, he can easily dig through a wall

This isn't an OBE, this is another vision. The text says that Ezekiel was brought "in visions of God" to Jerusalem. In Isaiah 6, an angel touches a live coal to the prophet's lips. Visions can be interactive as well, if God so makes them. Also, the people inside the temple would have noticed a hole in the wall, if Ezekiel had actually done so IRL.

Ok, the man lead him in the water, you got a victory in that one, but still, God is always willing to lead us into the water. And he still had to walk in the water too. ...Jesus instructed that we worship the father in spirit and truth... So that is something we are to do because he instructed it. Gotcha on this one.

Yes, we cooperate with God. Worshipping in the Holy Spirit (even in a state of ecstasy) is still not an OBE like what you describe, which is what you were trying to get it to say originally.

I agree ecstasy and self induced OBE’s can be different, but they don’t have to be. If one invites God into their self induced OBE, then they can receive ecstasy.

This is conjecture, and thus far is without evidence, so I won't comment on it.

We can receive the Joy of God in any other activities we do when we invite him and connect with him.

Aside from sin, of course. We can't sin and still have a strong connection to God, since sinning breaks that connection.

I think there is a difference between talent, gift and office... But he does want us to have all the gifts and here is how I will support that. Ephesians 4:11-13 says... So what is the purpose of the apostle ...and teacher? It’s to equip and build up until we reach unity in the faith and knowledge and become mature and attain fullness. In other words... they are getting the benefit of each other’s gift. Same with the church, when it reaches unity and matures, then they will become what the apostle, prophet is together.

Yes, we all reach that high level together, but where do you see that one person inherits all the gifts? All of us together have all the gifts. See the difference?

It would be irrelevant if ecstasy happens or not in a self induced OBE because if the Holy Spirit sometimes gives OBE’s then they would not be sinful, so to induce them would not be sinful because God’s standards are not double.

The Holy Spirit sends people into ecstasy, and all the experiences I've seen of your type of OBE's ending in a state of ecstasy have all been near-death experiences. Hardly a result of meditative exercise. God's standards are not double, because ecstasy (which God gives us) is not the same as the type of self-induced OBE you're advocating.

He gave angels dominion over the spirit realm; he gave us dominion over the earth realm. But does that mean we cannot connect or visit the spirit realm? Visiting it is a whole lot different than having dominion over it. I can go visit china but that does not mean I am taking dominion over the country.

You are a human, and humans have dominion over China. It's not the same thing. Also consider that demons are there in the spirit realm, too. They're fallen angels. Satan is the "prince of the powers of the air." He rules over what we could perhaps call an "aerial realm". What do you suppose this aerial realm is?

Ok, you won’t be able to get out of this one: in first Kings 8:41-43 it says “As for the foreigner who does not belong to your people Israel but has come from a distant land because of your name...

These foreigners would come to the land of Canaan FREELY and were permitted to do so.

Now this is outside the aforementioned typology completely. Also, this passage is actually from 1 Chronicles 6:33-34.

Remember, the previous typology about us entering Heaven was the Israelites (us) having to wander through the desert for many years before crossing the Jordan into Canaan (us having to struggle through the spiritual life until our death and resurrection) before entering Canaan (Heaven). You are introducing unrelated elements into the typology, which does not work. Keep in mind that a typology is rooted in one story, and we cannot necessarily use the same types in other circumstances. So your 1 Chronicles reference has absolutely no tie to the Exodus typology whatsoever.

Second Corinthians 5:1-9... Also here is another quote from second peter 1:13... So, these passages clearly show that the body is like unto a tent and unto clothing. Now when the Israelites were living in tents, did they always STAY in them 24/7? ...They were FREE to leave them and come back... They could cloth themselves and... unclothe themselves.

This is still not a sign-off on self-induced OBE's. Instead, it is acknowledging that we will one day leave our bodies (the "earthly tent that will be destroyed",) and upon rising, receive our bodies back, transfigured, which are now "mansions", that is, much stronger, stable, more permanent things that will not wear down with time. Also note that Paul says that he doesn't want to be naked--which, if we go with your interpretation, would actually mean that St. Paul DOESN'T want to be without a body, thus showing his unwillingness to have your type of self-induced OBE. To be "away from the body and at home with the Lord" is actually a yearning for death, so that we may be done with sinful passions and instead rest in God, eagerly awaiting our bodies to be transformed from tents into mansions.
So tl;dr, it's not saying that we can leave our bodies at will, but is contrasting our current corrupt and corruptible bodies (flimsy tents) with a permanent, glorified body (the strong mansion).

I don`t think this could be any clearer, “thou didst not depart dead, thou didst depart living”. It seems quite clear to me that the traveler is alive! ...Comparison of Pyramid Texts

That's an apparent quote from the Pyramid Texts, which do in fact discuss life after death. The Pharaoh's Ka does not die in Egyptian mythology, certainly not--but the physical body is another story.

Pyramid Texts - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The spells, or "utterances", of the pyramid texts are primarily concerned with protecting the pharaoh's remains, reanimating his body after death, and helping him ascend to the heavens, which are the emphasis of the afterlife during the Old Kingdom. The spells delineate all of the ways the pharaoh could travel, including the use of ramps, stairs, ladders, and most importantly flying.​

Wow, it is so hard to make it just two posts.

Not if you condense the other person's posts to the essence of their point

 

[Jollybear]

Just as a JSYK Jollybear, the maximum character limit is 10,000 characters. You could have actually fit that all into three posts.

Oh yea, I should have done that, I’m going to pay attention to that next round.

I think the word mentioned in verse 1 refers to things like augury, which the text seems to support. But you seem to be using "divination" as communicating with God, but verse 2 seems to indicate that Balaam is still using "divination" as you're defining it, that is, being inspired by God.

Now when Balaam saw that it pleased the Lord to bless Israel, he did not go as at other times, to seek to use sorcery... 2 ...and the Spirit of God came upon him. (NKJV)
We see the fourth time, Balaam is still being inspired by God, so Balaam not using divination cannot mean that he's no longer being inspired by God, but instead, he is no longer using magic or practicing augury. Moreover, I see no indication that Balaam was using augury or magic the previous three times. Do you?

The word used in the verse is “nachash” and it means divination, enchantment. http://classic.studylight.org/desk/?query=nu+24:1&t=str&st=1&new=1&sr=1&sc=1 . But yes, I think the previous three times balaam was connecting to God, he was using what he knew, which was his divination and God connected to him through it. But once balaam saw that it pleased God to bless Israel, he no longer used divination as at the other previous times to connect to God because he already got three confirmations.

I will let you use the word in the context that pleases you, but know that I will usually refrain from using the same word, unless specifically addressing your usage of it.

Fair enough, so divination=inspired by god.

As I've said before, the same word can have different meanings in different contexts. For example, I can cross (betray) you, I can cross myself (make the sign of the cross) cross (mark) out a word, cross (traverse) a street, etc, etc. The different meanings of the same word do not all apply at all times. My point is, "Nachash" CAN mean to learn by natural experience. Because, since Jacob was the one increasing Laban's flock, Laban surmised that it was Jacob's God Who was blessing the part of Laban's flock under Jacob's care. Such things were common; if one prospered, others assumed it was because that person's patron god was blessing them.

Ok, let me ask you this: If Laban really knew by natural experience that Jacobs God was blessing him and not his idol gods, why did he still seek to worship his idol gods in Genesis 31:30-35? Finding out by natural experience should have made him start worshiping Jacobs God, surely he would have been like ‘oh wow, Jacobs God must be the real God, look how he is blessing me and not my idols, I will now throw away my idols’ but he does not do that, he still worships his idols, which if he was using divination to find out WHICH god was blessing him, would make more sense that he would STILL cling to worshiping his idols, why? Because his divination methods probably at different times lead him to find out that his other gods (entities, demons) did in fact bless him. So the blessing of Jacobs God would not be convincing enough for him to worship him.

The devil is all for giving us all the fame, power and glory in the world--just as long as we don't turn to God. Remember, Satan was willing to give Jesus all the kingdoms of the world, if He would only turn away from the Father and worship Satan. God is certainly not against us being smart, however, you're right there.

Oh but divining rods are not worshiping satan, worship is a whole nother matter. Worship does not = using a divining practice or method. Worship means you give and bow your heart to Satan in pledge. That’s what Satan asked of Jesus “I will give you all this, IF you BOW DOWN and worship me”. The guy I know in person who used divining rods he is a committed Christian, he did not “bow down and worship” Satan. So why would Satan make his life easier in saving him thousands of dollars and helping him find the water for digging his well in the best spot?

And this has been one of the big pitfalls of our conversation so far. Thankfully we're filling in the holes as we go along

Just so we're both clear, I'm a strong advocate of us developing ourselves spiritually. I simply stress that this is something which we need to do with the cooperation, guidance and support of God. And when we embark on the spiritual life and progress in that life, we will not fall into pride if we acknowledge that all that we have done in our spiritual lives has been done with the love and grace of God to keep us going and growing.

Maybe we should define this word pride. If pride means something that rises in us when WE DO something independent from God, then that means virtually everything we do in our day to day lives would create pride in us. Looks like we’re in deep trouble. But you see, I don’t think pride means that, I think it’s more of an arrogant attitude of the heart. It’s where you become so haughty, so powerful, so advanced, so mighty, through your highly extensive hard work in whatever you do, whether it be material or spiritual that you become arrogant, that you forget that you are NOT invincible and you gloat over others who are less or below your advancement and you laugh in your heart toward God and say to yourself, he cannot do anything to me, I will rise above him. You become FULL of yourself that you think nothing can stop you. Pride is the epitome of arrogance. Pride puts them into an illusion. But pride is NOT this thing where you do something, or work independently of God but at the same time inviting God into it. That is not pride. That is not the kind of thing God hates. God hates this arrogance that I refer to.

 

[Jollybear]

No, necromancy involves black magic, which automatically makes all necromancy bad. Asking the dead to pray for us is not necromancy, because we don't use any magic to conjure spirits or control them.

Black magic is manipulating energy for the purpose of doing harm. Necromancy does not have to be that parse. I agree trying to control spirits or MAKE them come to us is not good, but then again, that would be a hard thing to do anyway. You can send a request. Even if you ask a departed saint to pray for you, even then you would have to get their attention first. Just because you say “st peter, pray for me” does not mean he is going to hear you.” You would have to send a telepathic message (oh their we go, another occult word, telepathic). Here is the consistent trend that I see, Christians seem to think they can speak words and they act as magic sorta speak, but occultists don’t think that way when they do their “magic”, their magic is not like superstitious “instant” kind of “magic” it involves spiritual WORK.

If I did, then allow me to clarify: It's not that astrology (I mean the modern understanding of the word as distinct from the science of astronomy, mind you) in and of itself is evil, it's that it's a load of rubbish. The Magi observing a prophesied star that defied all natural logic (a star hovering over one specific spot in Judaea is unheard of; the only star that doesn't move is the North Star at the celestial north pole) is more observing an astronomical anomaly which merited investigating. The fact that they knew it heralded the birth of a king was icing on the cake.

Ok, so you admit astrology is not evil, but then you say its rubbish. Only some forms of it are rubbish, the form that the magi were doing was NOT rubbish. So, not all astrology is rubbish. The magi were studying and investigating the stars(astronomy), they knew of the prophesy of the Messiah’s star, that is a form of astrology (not astronomy), using the stars to find out the future. So astronomy is using your analytical skill, astrology is using your spiritual attunement skill

Faith, trust and cooperation with God, yes, I agree.

We can only work miracles through the grace of God. Remember when St. Paul said, "Not I, but the grace of God within me." (1 Cor. 15:10) We must fully cooperate with God, and this means completely aligning our heart to His, and our will to His. How to work miracles is an entire post or a thousand within itself, but this is the gist of it.

In practical terms, how do we whither a leaf? Jesus said we could do it by a “mustard seed faith”. What is this mustard seed faith and how can we use it to whither a leaf? What is this faith, what does it look like, how do we have it and how do we put it to use in the context of withering the fig tree, or a leaf? You said by aligning our heart to his, our will to his. In practical terms, what does that look like in context of withering a leaf?

I'm still not sold on the idea that casting lots=sorcery. It seems to me that, at best, sorcery means magic 99% of the time, and casting lots 1% of the time. Not convincing enough to use "sorcery" as a term for casting lots, when nearly everyone else thinks of it as using magic. Remember what you yourself said about using words that people misunderstand, and about having to be careful with communication? I will say that you are the first person I've ever run across in my life who defined sorcery as casting lots.

Define “magic”? Here is another source that also agrees that sorcery = casting lots http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sorcery I’ll quote the relevant part “Word Origin & History sorcery
c.1300, from O.Fr. sorcerie, from sorcier "sorcerer," from V.L. *sortiarius, lit. "one who influences, fate, fortune," from L. sors (gen. sortis) "lot, fate, fortune" (see sort). Sorceress (late 14c.) is attested much earlier than sorcerer (1520s).” So this is a second source I have given you that is consistent with the first source saying it’s the lot.
Also yes, casting lots is not a magical thing, but in the context of casting lots and praying to God to guide them in the choice of replacing Judas, that would be a “magical” thing and not a natural thing. But define “magic”?

Remember our little talk about the physical not being like the spiritual? I'm talking about spiritual things and the spiritual life, not physical things and the physical life. Don't try and slippery-slope this.

Oh, well then I will bypass all my natural examples that we rely on, which I don’t think it would matter anyhow, because we should be consistent whether we are talking physical or spiritual. But regardless of that, I’ll give spiritual examples that you agree practicing. Studying the bible, we rely on ourselves to pick it up and read it and study it (this debate we have with one another is a form of studying the bible, because it gets us diving into scriptures about this subject). Witnessing to others, we rely on ourselves or our will to do it. Praying, we rely on our abilities to discipline ourselves and do it. Going to church, we rely on ourselves to get up and go and praise God with others. To meditate by listening to God, we quite our mind and just listen, we rely on ourselves to do that. To give to the poor, whither food or shelter or clothing or money, we rely on ourselves to do that. To obey the laws of God, we rely on ourselves to DO them. All of these things you agree are the “spiritual life” but do we rely on God to do those things? No, we rely on ourselves to do them. 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.

Because it's a different type of clairvoyancy.

Whether Elijah had a different TYPE of clairvoyancy or not, it was still clairvoyancy. Plus, any clairvoyancy that is a FALSE form of it would not then be clairvoyancy at all, because remember what the word means “clair” meaning “clear” and “voyant” meaning “vision”. So if someone has a false vision, that would mean a UNCLEAR vision. So it would not be clairvoyant.

 

[Jollybear]

This isn't an OBE, this is another vision. The text says that Ezekiel was brought "in visions of God" to Jerusalem. In Isaiah 6, an angel touches a live coal to the prophet's lips. Visions can be interactive as well, if God so makes them. Also, the people inside the temple would have noticed a hole in the wall, if Ezekiel had actually done so IRL.

Theirs different kinds of vision, every time I open my eyes when I wake up and do my daily tasks, everything I see is a vision. Seeing with your eyes, that is vision. A vision does not always have to be something in your mind’s eye. Also the Isaiah passage you refered to does not even say the word vision, it just says he SAW the Lord, but then again, that goes with what I just said, visions don’t always mean seeing with the mind’s eye, it just means seeing with our eyes. Ezekiel did not physically dig through the wall, so no the people would not have noticed a whole in the wall from Ezekiel.

Yes, we cooperate with God. Worshipping in the Holy Spirit (even in a state of ecstasy) is still not an OBE like what you describe, which is what you were trying to get it to say originally.

It doesn’t matter if it’s an OBE, irrelevant to my point, Jesus instructed us to worship the father in spirit and truth for such the father seeks. Ok, that means we CAN do this because he instructed it. So, if we can PUT ourselves IN the Spirit, for worship, for prayer, for anything else, why not also for OBE’s?

This is conjecture, and thus far is without evidence, so I won't comment on it.

It’s important to comment on it and I’ll tell you why: if we can INVITE God in our prayer, in our work/job, if we can invite him in our friendships, fellowships, as we eat, as we meditate, as we study his word, as we exercise, ect, and if he gives SOME people OBE’s (thus proving it’s not sinful) why could we also not invite him in our self induced OBE’s?

As you can see, the point is very important to comment on.

Aside from sin, of course. We can't sin and still have a strong connection to God, since sinning breaks that connection.

I totally agree, true, we cannot invite God into a sinful activity and expect him to show up and we receive his peace/joy. But if he gives some people OBE’s (thus proving it’s not sinful) and we invite him into our self induced OBE’s then that would not be sinful or wrong. Gotcha, gotcha, your finding it hard to answer this one, you keep answering around it. Oh yea, oh yea! lol, sorry, I just gotta be silly sometimes.

Yes, we all reach that high level together, but where do you see that one person inherits all the gifts? All of us together have all the gifts. See the difference?

No, your misunderstanding; the PURPOSE of the apostle, prophet and so on is to build and equip and mature and help the church to attain fullness and complete knowledge of God and reach unity in the faith. And it says they are here UNTIL all of this purpose is complete. So when the UNTIL is DONE, that means everyone will be like the apostle, prophet, evangelist, teacher, preacher, and so on. Everyone will have those gifts. A few verses below the one I quoted from Ephesians, it talks about the body, how each part does it’s work. The hand has a different function then the foot, does that mean a different gift? No, the function of the hand is like the talent, the foots function is like another talent, but both the hand and the foot can do the same thing, that’s gift. The cells in the hand, do the same job as the cells in the foot. The hand can walk, the foot can just do it better. The foot can write, the hand can just do it better, and if you have no hands, the foot can learn to write very well. Your ears have a different function then your eyes, but the ears can serve the same purpose as the eyes, if for instance you have no eyes, you can see with your ears (think of a bat, or think of a submarine in water). So every member of the body can have different offices and talents or functions, but they can all have the same gifts.

The Holy Spirit sends people into ecstasy, and all the experiences I've seen of your type of OBE's ending in a state of ecstasy have all been near-death experiences.

Just because you have not heard of the experiences God gave of OBE’s (not near death experiences) does not mean they don’t exist, but in fact they do exist and they end in ecstasy. Also just because of some examples you heard of from people self inducing OBE’s ended in fear, does not mean lots have not ended in ecstasy.

Hardly a result of meditative exercise.

Windwalkers meditation brought him into ecstasy. So yes meditation can do so.

God's standards are not double, because ecstasy (which God gives us) is not the same as the type of self-induced OBE you're advocating.

God’s standards would be double irrelevant of God giving ecstasy because God gives some people OBE’s but then if he tells everyone to not self induce an OBE, then that would be thus a double standard. How don’t you think it would be a double standard?

You are a human, and humans have dominion over China. It's not the same thing. Also consider that demons are there in the spirit realm, too. They're fallen angels. Satan is the "prince of the powers of the air." He rules over what we could perhaps call an "aerial realm". What do you suppose this aerial realm is?

Aerial or astral realm is the spirit realm, one and the same place. Astral planes are just many layers of the spirit realm. But even though satan is the “prince of the powers of the air” does not mean he OWNS the spirit realm. It just means he has his kingdom IN that realm and rules over the children of disobedience (you forgot to quote that part) from Ephesians 2:2.

Now this is outside the aforementioned typology completely. Also, this passage is actually from 1 Chronicles 6:33-34.

Remember, the previous typology about us entering Heaven was the Israelites (us) having to wander through the desert for many years before crossing the Jordan into Canaan (us having to struggle through the spiritual life until our death and resurrection) before entering Canaan (Heaven). You are introducing unrelated elements into the typology, which does not work. Keep in mind that a typology is rooted in one story, and we cannot necessarily use the same types in other circumstances. So your 1 Chronicles reference has absolutely no tie to the Exodus typology whatsoever.

Your mistaken on 1 chronicles 6:33-34 it’s actually 2 chronicles 6:32, also I am correct as well, it’s also mentioned in first kings 8:41

As for the typology, the two mentioned passages are not outside the typology at all. This is all a continuous story, and that entire story in the Old Testament is a typology. Plus even if you were correct, how do we know when one story ends and another begins? The bible does not set those boundaries; it just blurs and continues the story. But, regardless, you’re not correct, it’s one big story. And that one big story is then one big typology.

Plus I have another point, if you concede that all the OT is a typology, then tell me in what way then is first kings 8:41 a type of? You just said Canaan is a type of heaven, ok, the Israelites are us you said, so, who are the foreigners according to you who are permitted to come and go freely to this land? What are they a type of?

 

[Jollybear]

This is still not a sign-off on self-induced OBE's. Instead, it is acknowledging that we will one day leave our bodies (the "earthly tent that will be destroyed",) and upon rising, receive our bodies back, transfigured, which are now "mansions", that is, much stronger, stable, more permanent things that will not wear down with time.

The Israelites in the desert lived in their tents, but they would also leave their tents, come back to them, leave them, come back to them, they would do that for 40 years until they came into Canaan and then started to live in houses. The transferring from tent to house, is equivalent to the body being transformed from corruptible to stronger resurrected and glorified, but the leaving and coming back to the tent over and over again, is a typology of the soul having the ability to project and come out of the tent over and over and over again. How do you explain the parts where the Israelites left their tents not once and came back (like at death leaving the body and then the soul returning at resurrection time) but they left them over a period of 40 years, so they would leave them and come back thousands of times. How do you explain that part?

Also note that Paul says that he doesn't want to be naked--which, if we go with your interpretation, would actually mean that St. Paul DOESN'T want to be without a body, thus showing his unwillingness to have your type of self-induced OBE.

No, that’s not what he means at all, Paul saying he wants a body does not mean he would be against self induced OBE’s, it means he wants a GLORIFIED, more powerful, more immortal, more sinless, spiritual body. So having an OBE would be taking a break from this not so glorified body, weak body, mortal body, sinful and unspiritual body.

To be "away from the body and at home with the Lord" is actually a yearning for death,

It can mean death, but it does not always have to mean death, it can mean just being away from the body and being with the Lord.

so that we may be done with sinful passions and instead rest in God, eagerly awaiting our bodies to be transformed from tents into mansions.

Ok

So tl;dr, it's not saying that we can leave our bodies at will, but is contrasting our current corrupt and corruptible bodies (flimsy tents) with a permanent, glorified body (the strong mansion).

Yes, it is saying we can leave the body, because we can leave a tent, people did not stay in their tents their whole life literally, they would leave and go back to them over and over.

That's an apparent quote from the Pyramid Texts, which do in fact discuss life after death. The Pharaoh's Ka does not die in Egyptian mythology, certainly not--but the physical body is another story.

Pyramid Texts - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The spells, or "utterances", of the pyramid texts are primarily concerned with protecting the pharaoh's remains, reanimating his body after death, and helping him ascend to the heavens, which are the emphasis of the afterlife during the Old Kingdom. The spells delineate all of the ways the pharaoh could travel, including the use of ramps, stairs, ladders, and most importantly flying.
Not if you condense the other person's posts to the essence of their point

It says he departed living, he did not depart dead. So when you have a OBE, you depart from the body living, the body is still living.

Also I have another passage of scripture that talks about the “silver cord” that self induced OBErs sometimes SEE. In ecclesiastes 12:6 it talks about the silver cord attached to the soul and the body, that silver cord is cut at death, but when you just project out of body, it’s not cut, people can see it. How could the writer of ecclesiastes know about this silver cord IF in fact during that time period people were not aware of OBE’s and this silver cord during an OBE?

 

[Jollybear]

I’m going to sum up some of my strongest arguments that you have not rebutted successfully.

You say in essence the body is armor, that’s why we should stay in it. But I have shown from scripture that the body is not armor, the Lord is our armor. Demons can attack in or out of the body.

You say there is danger in the spirit realm, I have said that there is danger in the physical realm, and danger does not mean we run from it, but we deal with it and fight.

You say if God gives you an OBE, then it’s good, but if you self induce one, it’s against his law. I have said this is a contradiction and God does not create double standards, why would he make some break his own law?

You say self induced OBE’s are witchcraft, I say, if that is so, and God gives some OBE’s then he would be making some commit witchcraft, thus a double standard, my point directly above, but also, this is your assumption, the scripture does not directly say self induced OBE’s are sinful or of the devil. Plus even if self induced OBE’s were witchcraft, I have shown from scripture that not all divination, sorcery (lot), astrology is evil.

You say relying on these esoteric methods is not relying on God and thus creates pride. I say, if that is so, then doing all kinds of Christian disciplines, things we do with our own will, we are equally relying on our own methods instead of directly on God, thus it would create this same kind of “pride” that you talk of. Plus, I don’t think this kind of “pride” is what God hates, rather, what God hates is arrogance, we thinking we can beat God, rise above him and above everyone, that we are invincible and unstoppable.

You say learning the spirit realm apart from God is wrong, we need to learn from God. But I say, the psalms declare that God’s creation pours forth knowledge, and so we can learn from his creation, both in the physical and spiritual creation.

You say the ancients did not do OBE’s or even know about them. But I say, near death experiences would have been going on since the dawn of time, plus those two references I gave you, one from Egypt and the other from ecclesiastes show they did know of OBE’s. Plus scripture says “there is nothing new under the sun, what has been always will be” so there is no knew knowledge, just advancement, but all knowledge was always around.

Also you say Satan is the creator and maker of sorcery and witchcraft, but I say Satan can only pervert, he cannot create his own structure, before he fell he learned all this from God, after he fell he perverted it.

You say we can't invite God into a self induced OBE because it's sinful (although it's not because God gives some to people), but we can invite him in every other mundane thing in our daily life, thus showing inconsistency.

Just answer this summery here instead of everything above if you want to keep it shorter, that will be fine.

 

[Shiranui117]

I appreciate the summary. I will address this tomorrow; this is currently the biggest discussion I have going on, and I prefer to do it all in one burst. My apologies that it's taken me so long to get around to this.

 

[Shiranui117]

The word used in the verse is “nachash” and it means divination, enchantment. Numbers 24:1 - STR - with Study Resources - with Context - Study Desk . But yes, I think the previous three times balaam was connecting to God, he was using what he knew, which was his divination and God connected to him through it. But once balaam saw that it pleased God to bless Israel, he no longer used divination as at the other previous times to connect to God because he already got three confirmations.

It seems you and I cannot agree on this. The text is ambiguous as to what these “other times” were.

Fair enough, so divination=inspired by god.

I’ll assume that’s what you mean when you use the word.

Ok, let me ask you this: If Laban really knew by natural experience that Jacobs God was blessing him and not his idol gods, why did he still seek to worship his idol gods in Genesis 31:30-35? Finding out by natural experience should have made him start worshiping Jacobs God, surely he would have been like ‘oh wow, Jacobs God must be the real God, look how he is blessing me and not my idols, I will now throw away my idols’ but he does not do that, he still worships his idols, which if he was using divination to find out WHICH god was blessing him, would make more sense that he would STILL cling to worshiping his idols, why? Because his divination methods probably at different times lead him to find out that his other gods (entities, demons) did in fact bless him. So the blessing of Jacobs God would not be convincing enough for him to worship him.

You’re thinking too much like an evangelizing monotheist. Even though Laban knew that Jacob’s God was blessing him, Laban wouldn’t have thrown away the gods of his family, because the God of Jacob and his father (who constitute another part of Laban’s own family) would have been viewed as just another family god. Laban’s idols were the gods that had blessed him and his family, and he saw no reason to discard them—given that the concept of many gods was treated like a known reality (much like how having one God or no God at all is treated like a fact of reality in the Western world today), Laban would have been thinking that throwing away his idols would have very much displeased the gods, which would have screwed him over. You really need to understand how people thought back then to understand why people acted the way they did in the story.

Oh but divining rods are not worshiping satan, worship is a whole nother matter. Worship does not = using a divining practice or method. Worship means you give and bow your heart to Satan in pledge. That’s what Satan asked of Jesus “I will give you all this, IF you BOW DOWN and worship me”. The guy I know in person who used divining rods he is a committed Christian, he did not “bow down and worship” Satan.

I’m sorry, where did I say that using divining rods constitutes worshipping Satan? I merely addressed your point about Satan being willing to make our lives easier.

So why would Satan make his life easier in saving him thousands of dollars and helping him find the water for digging his well in the best spot?

To make him say, “Oh hey, I did this all by my own, using supernatural forces! It looks like I don’t need God for everything!” And the slippery slope goes all downhill from there. Also, using dowsing rods to find water doesn’t really work; if you dig anywhere where it’s geologically possible to find water (which is an incredibly wide amount of area, BTW), you’ll find it. Treating dowsing as a surefire way to find water is very sketchy, and far from being scientifically defendable or even plausible.

Maybe we should define this word pride. If pride means something that rises in us when WE DO something independent from God, then that means virtually everything we do in our day to day lives would create pride in us. Looks like we’re in deep trouble.

I’m sorry, did you miss the part where I said I was talking about the spiritual life?

And furthermore, sidelining God in our everyday lives lets us run the risk of becoming indifferent to Him. God is NOT the “Big Man upstairs”.

But you see, I don’t think pride means that, I think it’s more of an arrogant attitude of the heart. . .But pride is NOT this thing where you do something, or work independently of God but at the same time inviting God into it. That is not pride. That is not the kind of thing God hates. God hates this arrogance that I refer to.

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.

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.

Black magic is manipulating energy for the purpose of doing harm. Necromancy does not have to be that parse.

But it does, by definition of the word.

Even if you ask a departed saint to pray for you, even then you would have to get their attention first. Just because you say “st peter, pray for me” does not mean he is going to hear you.”

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.

You would have to send a telepathic message (oh their we go, another occult word, telepathic).

No telepathy involved.

Here is the consistent trend that I see, Christians seem to think they can speak words and they act as magic sorta speak,

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

but occultists don’t think that way when they do their “magic”, their magic is not like superstitious “instant” kind of “magic” it involves spiritual WORK.

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.

Ok, so you admit astrology is not evil, but then you say its rubbish. Only some forms of it are rubbish, the form that the magi were doing was NOT rubbish.

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

So, not all astrology is rubbish. The magi were studying and investigating the stars(astronomy), they knew of the prophesy of the Messiah’s star, that is a form of astrology (not astronomy), using the stars to find out the future. So astronomy is using your analytical skill, astrology is using your spiritual attunement skill

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

In practical terms, how do we whither a leaf? Jesus said we could do it by a “mustard seed faith”. What is this mustard seed faith and how can we use it to whither a leaf? What is this faith, what does it look like, how do we have it and how do we put it to use in the context of withering the fig tree, or a leaf? You said by aligning our heart to his, our will to his. In practical terms, what does that look like in context of withering a leaf?

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.

Define “magic”?

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

Here is another source that also agrees that sorcery = casting lots

Sorcery | Define Sorcery at Dictionary.com I’ll quote the relevant part “Word Origin & History sorcery
c.1300, from O.Fr. sorcerie, from sorcier "sorcerer," from V.L. *sortiarius, lit. "one who influences, fate, fortune," from L. sors (gen. sortis) "lot, fate, fortune" (see sort). Sorceress (late 14c.) is attested much earlier than sorcerer (1520s).” So this is a second source I have given you that is consistent with the first source saying it’s the lot.
Also yes, casting lots is not a magical thing, but in the context of casting lots and praying to God to guide them in the choice of replacing Judas, that would be a “magical” thing and not a natural thing.

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.

 

[Shiranui117]

Studying the bible, we rely on ourselves to pick it up and read it and study it

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.

Witnessing to others, we rely on ourselves or our will to do it.

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.

Praying, we rely on our abilities to discipline ourselves and do it.

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

Going to church, we rely on ourselves to get up and go and praise God with others.

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.

To meditate by listening to God, we quite our mind and just listen, we rely on ourselves to do that.

Nope.

To give to the poor, whither food or shelter or clothing or money, we rely on ourselves to do that.

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.

To obey the laws of God, we rely on ourselves to DO them.

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.

All of these things you agree are the “spiritual life” but do we rely on God to do those things? No, we rely on ourselves to do them.

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.

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.

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

Whether Elijah had a different TYPE of clairvoyancy or not, it was still clairvoyancy. Plus, any clairvoyancy that is a FALSE form of it would not then be clairvoyancy at all

I’m glad we established that not all things have a false version of them. It should be easy to demonstrate, then, that not all things have a “good” version of them, either.

Theirs different kinds of vision, every time I open my eyes when I wake up and do my daily tasks, everything I see is a vision. Seeing with your eyes, that is vision.

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...

Also the Isaiah passage you refered to does not even say the word vision, it just says he SAW the Lord

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.

Ezekiel did not physically dig through the wall

Yes, because it was a vision.

It’s important to comment on it and I’ll tell you why: if we can INVITE God in our prayer, in our work/job, if we can invite him in our friendships, fellowships, as we eat, as we meditate, as we study his word, as we exercise, ect, and if he gives SOME people OBE’s (thus proving it’s not sinful) why could we also not invite him in our self induced OBE’s?

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.

As you can see, the point is very important to comment on.

But there's nothing substantial to discuss about it, and it's not worth our time. We should focus on things with actual Scriptural arguments to be made.

No, your misunderstanding; the PURPOSE of the apostle, prophet and so on is to build and equip and mature and help the church to attain fullness and complete knowledge of God and reach unity in the faith.

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.

So every member of the body can have different offices and talents or functions, but they can all have the same gifts.

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.

Just because you have not heard of the experiences God gave of OBE’s does not mean they don’t exist, but in fact they do exist and they end in ecstasy. Also just because of some examples you heard of from people self inducing OBE’s ended in fear, does not mean lots have not ended in ecstasy.

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

Aerial or astral realm is the spirit realm, one and the same place. Astral planes are just many layers of the spirit realm. But even though satan is the “prince of the powers of the air” does not mean he OWNS the spirit realm. It just means he has his kingdom IN that realm

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

As for the typology, the two mentioned passages are not outside the typology at all.

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.

This is all a continuous story, and that entire story in the Old Testament is a typology.

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

Plus even if you were correct, how do we know when one story ends and another begins?

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.

The bible does not set those boundaries; it just blurs and continues the story.

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

But, regardless, you’re not correct, it’s one big story. And that one big story is then one big typology.

I've already explained why this is so terribly wrong.

Plus I have another point, if you concede that all the OT is a typology, then tell me in what way then is first kings 8:41 a type of?

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

 

[Shiranui117]

The Israelites in the desert lived in their tents, but they would also leave their tents, come back to them, leave them, come back to them, they would do that for 40 years until they came into Canaan and then started to live in houses. The transferring from tent to house, is equivalent to the body being transformed from corruptible to stronger resurrected and glorified, but the leaving and coming back to the tent over and over again, is a typology of the soul having the ability to project and come out of the tent over and over and over again. How do you explain the parts where the Israelites left their tents not once and came back (like at death leaving the body and then the soul returning at resurrection time) but they left them over a period of 40 years, so they would leave them and come back thousands of times. How do you explain that part?

Yes, it is saying we can leave the body, because we can leave a tent, people did not stay in their tents their whole life literally, they would leave and go back to them over and over.

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) 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.

It can mean death, but it does not always have to mean death, it can mean just being away from the body and being with the Lord.

It means death in this instance.

It says he departed living, he did not depart dead. So when you have a OBE, you depart from the body living, the body is still living.

It's not talking about the physical body being alive, but the Ka. He's departed from his body living (meaning, his Ka is living, and he is alive in that sense) but his body is dead.

Also I have another passage of scripture that talks about the “silver cord” that self induced OBErs sometimes SEE. In ecclesiastes 12:6 it talks about the silver cord attached to the soul and the body, that silver cord is cut at death, but when you just project out of body, it’s not cut, people can see it. How could the writer of ecclesiastes know about this silver cord IF in fact during that time period people were not aware of OBE’s and this silver cord during an OBE? [/quote]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).

 

[Jollybear]

Here's what i am going to do, i read all your recent posts, but i am going to respond to one point at a time, and then we can debate that until we finish it, that is until we cannot find nothing else to say about it. THen i will go back and respond to the next point and then we can debate that until we beat it to death, then i will go back and respond to the next point, and we can keep doing it that way, this way we can respond to eachother in bite sizes or spoonfulls. How's that?

 

[Jollybear]

You’re thinking too much like an evangelizing monotheist. Even though Laban knew that Jacob’s God was blessing him, Laban wouldn’t have thrown away the gods of his family, because the God of Jacob and his father (who constitute another part of Laban’s own family) would have been viewed as just another family god. Laban’s idols were the gods that had blessed him and his family, and he saw no reason to discard them—given that the concept of many gods was treated like a known reality (much like how having one God or no God at all is treated like a fact of reality in the Western world today), Laban would have been thinking that throwing away his idols would have very much displeased the gods, which would have screwed him over. You really need to understand how people thought back then to understand why people acted the way they did in the story.

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.