In a certain sense, St. Paul teaches this as well.
I think I would say that people in non-Christian religions can come in Union with Him, but not because of their religion, but rather despite it.
What do think the Image is? The Jews and Christian think that our Image of God is our ability to obtain and have knowledge (intellect) and our ability to make moral decisions freely (will).
Oh, I understand what you adhere to: Within the holy Trinity, only the Father is the true God, and the other two aspects (the Son and the Holy Spirit) came forth as a result of the Father, again, who is the true God? Hope I got it right this time.
That’s what I was leaning toward…
Interesting-Where does he say this?
God doesn’t just reveal Himself through the Apostles and their successors, but in many ways, including the Sacrements, and to everyone. However, The Holy Spirit has worked with the Church to ensure that the Bishops collectively, who like the Apostles are the teachers of the Gospel, preach the Gospel and interpret it correctly, that they would collectively bind what needs to be bond and loose what needs to be loosen. The Church is the Body of Christ, and thus infallible.
Gnostics believe this image is half divine-half material.
Correct!Oh, I understand what you adhere to: Within the holy Trinity, only the Father is the true God, and the other two aspects (the Son and the Holy Spirit) came forth as a result of the Father, again, who is the true God? Hope I got it right this time.
New-age can be associated with Gnosticism due to common themes. Gnosticism has more in common with new-age than it does with Catholicism (a lot more). Gnosticism died out for the most part after the second century, but of course resurfaced in groups such as rosicrucians, Alastair Crowley, etc.
I can’t help wondering why the true God, i.e. the uncreated God, (who is not knowable) would reveal Himself in the form of the imperfect God (trinity) to Christians, as well as an imperfect God (whatever that may be) to other religions? Why doesn’t the true God reveal himself i.e. manifest himself (not that the true God has a gender) in the form of a perfect God to the imperfect human race; surely he could if he wanted to; after all he is the truth God who has no limitations?
Of course you would never consciously downgrade another religion (youre nice guys!), but you must see how this perspective implies superiority which obviously downgrades other religions to an inferior position in the grand scheme of truthThat’s what I was leaning toward…
Caveat for those non-Christians reading this: Of course neither myself nor Lucretius, are attempting to downgrade any other religion…
Well, you do the same thing with the God that we worship. LOL.
John 4:24: “God is a spirit…”
We Catholics do believe that say Buddhists are wrong. We also believe Muslims are wrong. I don’t see what the problem is. We’re just being logically consistent. Many people think that to disagree with some (especially religiously) some translates to “therefore you’re stupid and ignorant, oh and going to Hell”
I don’t ever think that someone is stupid, and unless someone shows me that they are indeed ignorant (“you Catholics worship Mary!” ), I don’t just assume that they are. If they are informed, then I just say that I think they are mistaken. Like you. I think you’re mistaken, but I don’t think you are either ignorant or stupid, but rather informed and rather intellegent Smart people can be wrong (St. Thomas was).Not true! What I am doing is claiming the superiority of mystical, esoteric religious approaches over exoteric, dogmatic religion. The experience of God by John of the Cross, Teresa of Avila, etc. is in no way inferior to the experience of authentic Gnostics. It is the theology that I disagree with, which in the end is an external aspect of spirituality.Well, you do the same thing with the God that we worship. LOL.
Be careful, because even though I use New Age to describe certain person’s beliefs, I don’t think that Gnosticism is New Age (since it’s pre-Vatican II
). I myself was a part of the “all religions are true” crowd for a while. Then I learned what other religions teach and logic.Yes we believe God is pure spirit, yet Jehovah is only half spirit. We think that since we are created in his image, we mirror his flaws as well as his spiritual potential. It is our duty to transcend these flaws which stem from the material and unite with the purely spiritual aspect.
The new-age movement has been around a lot longer than Vatican ll! I try to not put down new-agers, but rather I try to help them to see reality.Be careful, because even though I use New Age to describe certain person’s beliefs, I don’t think that Gnosticism is New Age (since it’s pre-Vatican II
Plus, “New Age” has become a boo! word, so don’t just throw it out there. Who knows, maybe they are right after all :whacky:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzlG28B-R8Y
Christi pax,
Lucretius
Makes sense. I wasn’t accusing you of displaying an elitist attitude which views those of other religious traditions as stupid or ignorant. My issue was with the fact that to believe Muslims, Buddhists, etc. are objectively wrong is to limit the omnipotent and omnipresent nature of God to one particular incarnation.We Catholics do believe that say Buddhists are wrong. We also believe Muslims are wrong. I don’t see what the problem is. We’re just being logically consistent. Many people think that to disagree with some (especially religiously) some translates to “therefore you’re stupid and ignorant, oh and going to Hell”
What do you think of the modern theory of evolution and its relationship to the creation of humans?
Christi pax,
Lucretius
I believe the dawn of the New Age movement is connected to the thought of Helen Blavatsky and Theosophy; somewhere around the mid to late 19th century. I see it as a watered down version of her brand of spirituality and can be called neo-Theosophy just as well as New Age. This is a purely personal opinion though.