Why are the New Age movement and other exotic ideas so attractive?

  • Thread starter Thread starter spiritualwrrior
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
tqualey said:
Now, Benedictus2 … this is getting tedious… 😃

Maybe you could gather these assorted evasions into groups of 5. At the way they are coming in … it won’t be long before I ask you to package them in groups of 10!!! 😃

But, enough of my teasing … After reading these numerous posts, it really is painfully obvious that there are no answers from those who deny Christ.

God bless
Click to expand...
😃 I can smell evasion a web-galaxy away.
 
benedictus2 said:
The question is simple.

Which understanding of the person is correct?

And you are right, the mind is not the essence of the person. The soul is.

The explanation of how re-incarnation started is really strange to say the least. A Supreme Being is unable to keep all of himself intact such that parts of him go wandering in time and space.

Another question is if the Supreme Being is consciousness how can he possibly have particles?

Sufjon gave your post the thumbs up so this must line up with correct Hindu theology. As presented, it is rather strange as it sounds like a self- combusting deity.
Click to expand...
It is not an accident. God takes on countless forms on purpose. Nothing is lost or split up. It is all one thing, as I have explained to you a number of times. God is in everything, and because you are unable to see Him is only your misfortune. You will see Him eventually though.

Now before you make fun of me seeing Him in everything, I might remind you that you see Him in a wafer. I agree that He is in the wafer, like He is in everything. This is what He was trying to tell you at the Last Supper, and by telling them to eat it He was demonstrating how He was in them as well. As I said about 100 posts ago, His followers were ordinary and thick. They had an excuse in that they were closer Neanderthals than to you in regards to the information they had available to them at the time. They had an excuse to form a primitive understanding of what they heard and saw. You don’t, and you’ll have to keep doing it until you get it right.

Your friend
Sufjon

Your friend
Sufjon
 
Sufjon said:
I looked up that article. It’s by Rosemary Ellen Guiley, author of “The Encyclopaedia of Ghosts and Spirits.” Some other topics that she covers on her web page are:

Angels and Faeries
Demons & Demonology
Djinn
Dreams
EVP & ITC
Ghosts & Hauntings
Magic and Alchemy
Mysterious Creatures
Ouija
Psychic Skills
Shadow People
Spirituality
UFOs and ETs
Vampires & Werewolves
Witchcraft & Wicca

Impeccable credentials.

Shadow People sounds interesting. Anyway, I have never heard of such practices in modern times, although you might find them in a village somewhere, much the same as you might find some interesting Christian practices involving snakes, dancing and stills somewhere in the Ozarks. So it sounds like perhaps the most uneducated of Hindus, lacking in scriptural learning may have something in common with you, but your source is kind of shaky. There are no formal exorcists in Hinduism. Of course, there’s no formal structural organization called Hinduism anyway.

Your friend
Sufjon
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I accept your word that there are no formal exorcists in Hinduism.
 
Hi, Conor7,

I do not know if you are still advocating for the Devil … but, the last time I heard, he did not need any special help from us - we are doing his bidding quite well as it is! :eek:

Of course you are correct. Expertise in one area does not necessarily convey any expertiese in another field.

In keeping with your analogy, so here is Sally - suspecting she is possessed and going to seek help - from a Cathollic Priest - someone who obviously does not know the True Church from any of the 30,000+ other ‘true chruches’ . You just have to wonder how someone can be publicly recognized as a fighter of the Evil One - yet can not make the correct decision on which Church Christ founded. I guess even Matt 16:18 is of no help.

When it comes to new age groups - it does not appear that demonic possession is much of a problem. There was one post that basically said the devil is not attracted to new age like he is to the Catholic Church - so the Catholic Church has this specialized training. I am guessing this may be explained in simple human terms: "conservation of energy:, Given the devil is a spirit and not subject to the human frailties like hunger, sleep or fatigue - but something tells me that he does not have infinite resources (unlike God!). So, why bother with the new age groups - everyone is so self-absorbed there probably is little room for the Devil to begin with! My guess is that he would marshall his finite resources to work at undermining those souls who are resisting temptation and working to throw this damn spirit back into the firely pit. Efforts taken to neutralize those efforts would have more impact on getting more souls into hell - then working on those who are going there anyway!

Now, that is just a wild idea of mine - but conservation of energy just makes sense to me. I am sure there are better ideas out there. And, of course those better ideas would be able to address not only why new age groups care so little about the devil, but why do Catholic Priests know so much, yet don’t meet the test for knowing the most basic Truth there is. Amazing, eh? 😉

God bless
Conor7 said:
Patient while I work through this synaptic misfire. What I’m saying is that I would gather that seminarians in mainline Christian denominations do not receive training on demonic possession if it’s discussed at all. It is perhaps at least discussed in Catholic seminaries, and of course those priests who are singled out for further training to become exorcists receive exhaustive training. (I’m not sure how all that works, but you catch my drift.)

Therefore, if Sally suspects she is possessed she is going to seek the help of a Catholic Priest because common knowledge dictates that Catholic Priests are trained on such matters. You wouldn’t go to a oncologist for a gynecological examination. Make sense?

So in my previous post, I was making the argument to the person who’s post I was replying to that specialization in one field, doesn’t necessarily mean one can make the leap in logic that that person is an expert in all fields.

So in short, because Catholic Priests perform a darn-good exorcism, one cannot logically state that this proves that the Roman Catholic Church is the one true church.
Click to expand...
 
Conor7 said:
So in short, because Catholic Priests perform a darn-good exorcism, one cannot logically state that this proves that the Roman Catholic Church is the one true church.
Click to expand...
This is a non-sequitur, Conor.

I don’t believe anyone here has offered exorcism as proof that Catholicism id the “one true Church.”

🤷
 
Sufjon said:
It is not an accident. God takes on countless forms on purpose.
Click to expand...
So why did you say that afhomercy’s post was good. He said that by accidents particles of god got separated from him.
Nothing is lost or split up. It is all one thing, as I have explained to you a number of times. God is in everything, and because you are unable to see Him is only your misfortune. You will see Him eventually though.
Click to expand...
So God is going through re-incarnation because he needs to attain to enlightenment. Why? Was he not enlightened enough before as God that he needed to work through being animal, then human and hopefully back to god?
Now before you make fun of me seeing Him in everything, I might remind you that you see Him in a wafer.
Click to expand...
I don’t see Him in the bread. I see Him who has taken the appearance of bread.

I see God in everything in the same same way that a painter is in his every painting.
But the painter is not in the painting substantially.
I agree that He is in the wafer, like He is in everything. This is what He was trying to tell you at the Last Supper,
Click to expand...
No, that is your impoverished interpretation of it.
and by telling them to eat it He was demonstrating how He was in them as well. As I said about 100 posts ago, His followers were ordinary and thick. They had an excuse in that they were closer Neanderthals than to you in regards to the information they had available to them at the time. They had an excuse to get it wrong. You don’t, and you’ll have to keep doing it until you get it right.
Click to expand...
Your friend
Sufjon
Click to expand...
Hmmm, the apostles were closer to Neanderthals. I suppose it is okay to say that of all Hindus as well.

It is interesting though that this god of yours who self-combusts was at one time less than a neanderthal.
 
PRmerger said:
This is a non-sequitur, Conor.

I don’t believe anyone here has offered exorcism as proof that Catholicism id the “one true Church.”

🤷
Click to expand...
Exactly my point. We have to stop reading each other’s minds 😃
 
PRmerger said:
This is a non-sequitur, Conor.

I don’t believe anyone here has offered exorcism as proof that Catholicism id the “one true Church.”

🤷
Click to expand...
OK, fair enough. Since it was my reply to you that I was attempting to explain and I was worried that you were about to make that leap in logic, I accept your point. The thread officially has my apology.
 
Sufjon said:
But people can be fully aware of the doctor and not need to visit one because one is not needed. I know all about podiatrists, but I have never been to one because I don’t have feet problems, or at least my feet don;t bother me. I think you are deluding yourselves into thinking that everyone is plagued by what you’re plagued by. **If we had a need for exorcists, we’d probably have them.
**
Your friend
Sufjon
Click to expand...
People needed oncologists long before there were any.
 
Ahimsa said:
I didn’t say that anything inconsistent with scripture had been adopted. I said that Neo-Platonic ideas had been adopted.
Click to expand...
And there’s the answer to your question. They were adopted because they were not inconsistent with scripture.
 
Sufjon said:
It is not an accident. God takes on countless forms on purpose. Nothing is lost or split up. It is all one thing, as I have explained to you a number of times.
Click to expand...
I was mulling this over on the train home and I thought I’d like to put this to greater scrutiny.

If God takes on countless forms, and if there is only one God, does that mean that everything is God?

If yes, then that means every single being (let us limit it at this stage to animals and man) is God. Put this way, there is therefore nothing that is not God.

How come then that God (already fully enlightened) chooses to be as unenlightened as a gnat or a cockroach?

Or the brick wall. If everything is God then the brick wall is God. Now why would God choose to be not just dumb but lifeless as brickwall?

You said that before there ever was the material world, there was only God - Concsiousness.

What was the reason for God assuming matter if the end goal is to be pure consciousness?

You said before that this lifetimes of re-incarnation are meant toward attaining enlightenment? But why take the form of matter at all if the goal is to reduce everything to enlightened consciousness in the end which was its beginning in the first place?
God is in everything, and because you are unable to see Him is only your misfortune.
Click to expand...
But it is your misfortune too because think about it, you are supposed to be God and yet I doubt very much if anyone can see an omniscient and omnipotent being in you.

Furthermore, if you are God because everything is God, can you give me a display how one creates a universe?
 
PRmerger said:
Yes, I am interested in the answer to this as well. What Christians* deny the physical resurrection of Christ?

And how do they reconcile that with St. Paul’s “If Christ is not risen then our faith is in vain!”?

*Actually, as I type this I now remember one of my college Theology professors–one of those “enlightened” modernists–proclaiming that it really didn’t matter if Christ physically rose from the dead, because he “rose in the hearts and minds of his disciples”.

Hogwash!

Christianity is not about its ethos and Christ’s teachings, important as they are. It is about a PERSON, a person who became the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.
Click to expand...
Amen to that. And the same person who went through the clouds BODY and SOUL and entered heaven.

And I agree with you it DOES matter because it DID happen and Christ will come AGAIN!!

Ever since I was old enough to understand about Jesus until this day as a matter of fact when I look up into the sky I think someday he will appear and come back the same way he left. Body and Soul.😃
 
benedictus2 said:
I was mulling this over on the train home and I thought I’d like to put this to greater scrutiny.

If God takes on countless forms, and if there is only one God, does that mean that everything is God?

If yes, then that means every single being (let us limit it at this stage to animals and man) is God. Put this way, there is therefore nothing that is not God.

How come then that God (already fully enlightened) chooses to be as unenlightened as a gnat or a cockroach?

Or the brick wall. If everything is God then the brick wall is God. Now why would God choose to be not just dumb but lifeless as brickwall?

You said that before there ever was the material world, there was only God - Concsiousness.

What was the reason for God assuming matter if the end goal is to be pure consciousness?

You said before that this lifetimes of re-incarnation are meant toward attaining enlightenment? But why take the form of matter at all if the goal is to reduce everything to enlightened consciousness in the end which was its beginning in the first place?

But it is your misfortune too because think about it, you are supposed to be God and yet I doubt very much if anyone can see an omniscient and omnipotent being in you.

Furthermore, if you are God because everything is God, can you give me a display how one creates a universe?
Click to expand...
You are actually getting closer to figuring it out Benedictus. If you read back a few more times it’ll come to you. I am not being a wise guy. Some people have to work things out on their own, and I think you are doing that. I can tell you, but you won’t get it. It has to “dawn on you” as they say. It’s all about the experience.

Your friend
Sufjon
 
Sufjon said:
You are actually getting closer to figuring it out Benedictus. If you read back a few more times it’ll come to you. I am not being a wise guy. Some people have to work things out on their own, and I think you are doing that. I can tell you, but you won’t get it. It has to “dawn on you” as they say. It’s all about the experience.

Your friend
Sufjon
Click to expand...
All I’ve “figured” in that post was the flaw in Hinduism. So it seems you see the same flaw.

Interesting. I wonder then why you remain Hindu.

And interestingly, you have not given any answer to any of the questions I’ve raised.
 
Sufjon said:
You are actually getting closer to figuring it out Benedictus. If you read back a few more times it’ll come to you. I am not being a wise guy. Some people have to work things out on their own, and I think you are doing that. I can tell you, but you won’t get it. It has to “dawn on you” as they say. It’s all about the experience.

Your friend
Sufjon
Click to expand...
Sufjon we do not believe in re-incarnation simply because we are given one body and one soul. We believe that when our time in this world is over our soul departs from the body and the body remains and returns back to dust. Ashes to ashes dust to dust.

But we believe that the soul lives on and that is when we receive our final judgement from God. That is the final answer and it comes from God. We will either be with him in eternal light or be in eternal darkness which we call heaven and hell.

Now think about this, if re-incarnation is possible then what happens to our eternal life with Christ in heaven? Are we not promised that? To say that a person is re-incarnated would make Christ a liar would it not?

Because he said at the hour of our death we will have our final judgement. Now if we got another round here then Christ would not have given us our final judgement at the hour of our death now would he? Think about this. We are deemed for heaven or hell at that moment. There is no do over. If there were would Christ not have told us so? Why would he teach what he taught then?
 
Hi, Benedictus2,

Apparently we are seeing new agers providing a range of human failings being attributed to God - no too dissimilar to those of the Ancient Greek gods. There is forgetfulness and lack of coordination (having god-like particles separate for god - now, what kind of control is that?!) What made the Greeks so interesting is that they would take such a statement and sure-enough, a new Greek hero would acquire a wantering particle - and now you have another Achiles or Hercules or Theseus!

And, now it appears that creator of heaven and earth does not have all he answers - but, must seek (from who? through what?) enlightenment. It appears that, if this were a computer progr;am, someone would think they are lost on an endless loop! :rolleyes: There just does not seem to be much promise from super beings with all-too-human failings!

Seriously, every explanation seems to lead to more discouraging answers - except the ones that reinforce the “It’s all about me” philosophy. This is ultimately discouraging, but it will take a while to get there - and, who knows, maybe one will be reincarnated into a dog or cat before one gets the realization that this just isn’t working! But, then it would probably be too late. :eek:

God bless
benedictus2 said:
So why did you say that afhomercy’s post was good. He said that by accidents particles of god got separated from him.

So God is going through re-incarnation because he needs to attain to enlightenment. Why? Was he not enlightened enough before as God that he needed to work through being animal, then human and hopefully back to god?
I don’t see Him in the bread. I see Him who has taken the appearance of bread.

I see God in everything in the same same way that a painter is in his every painting.
But the painter is not in the painting substantially.
No, that is your impoverished interpretation of it.

Hmmm, the apostles were closer to Neanderthals. I suppose it is okay to say that of all Hindus as well.

It is interesting though that this god of yours who self-combusts was at one time less than a neanderthal.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top