Is Christ the Prince of Pieces?

Topic's author

#1

949havoc

Debates: 7

Posts: 816

3

2

8

949havoc

09.22.2021 09:09PM

3

2

8

09.22.2021 09:09PM

In my profile, I've stated, as a Christian, that my approach is havoc, because it is so contrary to what most Christians believe.

1. Godhead: I believe in three distinct, separate, two physical and one spirit beings; that God, the Father, his Son, Jesus Christ, Redeemer of mankind, and the Holy Spirit, the Comforter, comprise the Godhead.

2. I believe we were created first as spirits by God, the Father, that Jesus was one of his spirit children, and Satan, another spirit child. That pre-mortal spirit life preceded our mortal birth. When we die, our spirit and physical body separate, and they are then reunited in resurrection, which will result in a united, perfect sprit and physical body, which immortal state will continue in to eternity.

3. I believe Christ's atonement is infinite in nature, because it covers all mankind, whether or not all have heard of Jesus Christ in this mortal lifetime, and I believe it was suffered by Christ for not only all our sins, but also our suffering of pain, physical, mental, spiritual, our disappointments, sorrows, and losses. All will be restored at resurrection. I believe it was suffered by Christ even for Satan and his minions, event hough they will ever refuse to accept it, and thus are damned forever.

4. I believe in one mortal life, not a repetition, such as reincarnation, because of Christ's atonement, we need but one tour of mortality. Although commanded to be perfect [Matt. 5: 48], we all fall short for now, but repentance is the big qualifier, coupled with forgiveness. By constant use of these principles, we cam purify ourselves and qualify to ultimately become perfect. Therefore, no additional mortal lives are necessary to live. To think such merely belittles the power of the atonement.

5. I believe repentance is not merely confession of sin, using a confessional like a revolving door. That's not repentance; that's expectation of the impossibility to be on a path of continuous improvement. Repentance is a change of heart such as to overcome sin; all sins, ultimately.

6. I believe that, ultimately, man can become as God is now, while God, himself, continues to advance, and we, following in kind. Men can become gods, and create worlds of their own, thus generationally continuing expansion of the human species throughout the universe, forever and ever, worlds without end.

7. I do not believe God, our Father [of our spirits] and Jesus, our Brother, created the entire universe, but only part of it. There are other gods, like God the Father, who have created other worlds, and inhabited them with people like us. I believe the physical appearance of "humans" is a much wider variation than we see among ourselves on Earth, thus, people like the blue Na'vi in "Avatar" are possible, as well as the typical "Roswell" alien.

#2

EtrnlVw

Debates: 0

Posts: 2,869

3

5

EtrnlVw

09.22.2021 10:52PM

3

5

09.22.2021 10:52PM

-->

@949havoc

Well it looks to me like you've created a topic where you lay out your personal beliefs. I don't see the real correlation between the topic title and the OP but I'm not too sure what the point here is. I mean, are you just trying to present your beliefs or are you wanting people to dissect them? usually when someone presents their beliefs there is no real point in debating anything, it's more an exercise in futility.

TBH I've been around Christians of all types for as long as I can remember and much of that experience is not very favorable lol. On the other hand I have had some real genuine and deep relationships and joyous experiences as well. A lot of this is typical Christian mumbo jumbo except for maybe 6 and 7 you sort of go out on a limb. Considering Christians have several religious hypothesis they disagree on and many various factions and denominations I wouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water here. I tend to be more attracted to the looser side of your beliefs as someone who is also not compatible with a fundamentalist version of Christianity.

What I would like to point out (not that you would personally reflect on) is your rejection of reincarnation and then your approval of a "resurrection" and your more loose idea of other worlds, men becoming Gods, creators and so forth. You seem to have a rigid idea or definition of reincarnation, it's not a "repetition" in the sense you repeat something like as if it were on replay. Don't let the word itself fool you. It is defined as a rebirth of a soul in a new body, a progression, a life after death, a transmigration, a new life in a different physical form or body....reincarnation refers to the belief that an aspect of every human being continues to exist after death.

Also...Reincarnation-

"In most beliefs involving reincarnation, the soul is seen as immortal and the only thing that becomes perishable is the body. Upon death, the soul becomes transmigrated into a new infant (or animal) to live again. The term transmigration means passing of soul from one body to another after-death."

"Resurrection is a similar process hypothesized by some religions, in which a soul comes back to life in the same body."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reincarnation

Reincarnation 'can be' a reoccurrence back to the planet earth but it is not a 'repeat' anymore than you visiting the same place more than once, you can still have quite a different experience being in the same place and certainly with a new body and different circumstances. And...it is still part of a progression, it is not a replay. If a soul is reincarnated back to earth it's because the soul has not yet been permitted to pass this experience for whatever reasons.

But certainly reincarnation is not limited to any destination, it is simply the concept of rebirth or life after death leaving the physical body behind to continue the souls experience. Returning to this planet is only one single option out of virtually endless options.

More than not, a term like reincarnation is rejected or shunned simply because it originates with another religious source lol, God forbid oh no!! we wouldn't want to cross paths with some other term from some other source!

Religions come up with their own terms for things that describe reality in a way they find accurate. We call it an afterlife, life after death, the soul, heaven and hell, crossing over ect ect and reincarnation is basically the very same concept. I will say that though it is the same idea it adds a layer of understanding and dynamics that other fundamentalists might not have. Most fundies think the can only inhabit one of two places when they die, they don't realize that the options are virtually endless. God's not that creatively limited or stupid to provide one place for one culture and one bad place where everyone else goes. That is one of the biggest examples of stupidity that occurs within religious circles.

Topic's author

#3

949havoc

Debates: 7

Posts: 816

3

2

8

949havoc

09.22.2021 11:12PM

3

2

8

09.22.2021 11:12PM

-->

@EtrnlVw

My topic is simple: point of view. I have mine; Christ is called [by Isaiah] the Prince of Peace. I call him the Prince of Pieces, because I believe that is what we've made of him, not that Pieces is what he is. I invite you to read my profile that I mentioned in my #1. My profile explains the title. I've offered the reasons why I say my approach to typical Christianity is bring havoc because my six stated belief are not typical Christian thought. Clearly, I'm not trying to throw out the baby. But we have so many different versions of what that baby looks like, and I don't really understand why.

The reason why I say reincarnation is nonsense is because, as I said, it belittles the atonement. It says we must have several repeating cycles through mortality so we can learn to get it right. What says by repeating mortality, we can learn from our mistakes in one life and avoid them in the next? We would just make other mistakes, so what is gained by repetition? And the reason I say that most of Christianity's view of repentance is a revolving door is just like reincarnation, because we don't learn from our mistakes, and still commit new mistakes without ever a change of heart, which change is the true nature of repentance. Nobody accomplishes a change of heart with a revolving door. "Father, forgive me, for I have sinned?" What's the point when it is the same sins over, and over, and over...? That's the revolving door, and it's useless.

You're right, Heaven and hell are not the only two realms we are intended to inhabit. The scriptures tell us there are many kingdoms to inherit, each according to that in which we will be individually comfortable, based on how we have lived our mortal life. Various stages of misery love company. So, too, for joy.

#4

EtrnlVw

Debates: 0

Posts: 2,869

3

5

EtrnlVw

09.22.2021 11:56PM

3

5

09.22.2021 11:56PM

-->

@949havoc

My topic is simple: point of view. I have mine
The reason why I say reincarnation is nonsense

And as I've said...."usually when someone presents their beliefs there is no real point in debating anything, it's more an exercise in futility."

What says by repeating mortality

You keep using the term "repeat" and I explained why that was not accurate, but you don't care do you? we're not repeating anything, we are learning from experience in different ways and various circumstances. There is no repeat, there is only progress.

There is no mortality either, the term reincarnation itself opposes the notion. The soul is immortal by nature.

we can learn from our mistakes in one life and avoid them in the next?

Apparently you have no concept of practice, or progression. Also, you ignored the fact that I said reincarnation is not limited to a repeating cycle on this planet. You basically just repeated your ignorance regarding the concept. We can't avoid a next experience, it will happen and we will always learn and progress from our mistakes. If you think that you, living this one life will die and appear in heaven as a perfect, mistake-free agent you are delusional. Get a grip. Perfection will never be a realistic goal in a lifetime, but progression will take place through our actual experiences of reincarnation. Which is simply the continuance of the soul to a next experience. Even if you squeak into the Christian Kingdom of Heaven, that will not be your final destination, your eternal soul will always reincarnate.

it belittles the atonement.

I haven't, only you asserted it does. I never mentioned it and need not to. The atonement doesn't change what you are or how you choose to act, it helps you respect and reflect on the reality of your weaknesses in light of a larger picture... All the responsibility of what you do rests squarely on your shoulders and your life's experience assists in letting you observe the consequences of your actions.

The goal of reincarnation is self improvement. There is no atonement that can work that out for you, it is self-actuated.

We would just make other mistakes, so what is gained by repetition?

Have you ever learned how to play an instrument? you tell me what is gained then, would you tell a Martial Arts Master that all his practice (repetition) is of no consequence? eventually "repetition" breaks the mold of what you were to what you become.

Topic's author

#5

949havoc

Debates: 7

Posts: 816

3

2

8

949havoc

09.23.2021 03:16AM

3

2

8

09.23.2021 03:16AM

-->

@EtrnlVw

There is no mortality either, the term reincarnation itself opposes the notion

Look at the root etymology of "incarnation," then at the meaning of the suffix, "re." Result: a repetition of becoming flesh, i.e., mortal.

The atonement doesn't change what you are or how you choose to act

Wrong, that is exactly the power of applying the atonement to our lives. It is a change agent.

Have you ever learned how to play an instrument?

Yes, I have. But repeating practice to improve on a skill is not what I mean. I mean the philosophy of reincarnation is to repeat a second, third, fourth, n mortal life in order to get it right. I'm saying the atonement, and the availability of repentance negates the need of reincarnation. We can succeed all we need in one pass.

I told you that my brand of Christianity differs from most. I mean exactly what I said.

#6

ethang5

Debates: 1

Posts: 5,875

3

6

ethang5

09.23.2021 04:10AM

3

6

09.23.2021 04:10AM

-->

@949havoc

1. Godhead: I believe in three distinct, separate, two physical and one spirit beings; that God, the Father, his Son, Jesus Christ, Redeemer of mankind, and the Holy Spirit, the Comforter, comprise the Godhead.

What is the basis for this belief? Did you gain this information through revelation? Logic? Or did you just make it up because you like it?

Are you presenting it as truth, or as just your belief?

Topic's author

#7

949havoc

Debates: 7

Posts: 816

3

2

8

949havoc

09.23.2021 01:07PM

3

2

8

09.23.2021 01:07PM

-->

@ethang5

Good questions, all.

I did not make it up.

The basis is a multiple of activities. First, reading the scriptures the Holy Bible, OT, NT, plus the holy writ of a number of differing religions, then study, pondering, reasoning, and applying faith over all from the time I was about 15. Finally, I sought the affirmation by prayer for revelation from God that what I had read, studied, pondered and reasoned was true. Yes, I present it as truth. I'm older, now, but it ha never been successfully assailed by anyone, though many have tried. I have sought such affirmation on all points I presented.

#8

EtrnlVw

Debates: 0

Posts: 2,869

3

5

EtrnlVw

09.23.2021 03:02PM

3

5

09.23.2021 03:02PM

-->

@949havoc

Look at the root etymology of "incarnation," then at the meaning of the suffix, "re." Result: a repetition of becoming flesh, i.e., mortal.

Please tell me you're not that dunce?

Reincarnation emphasizes the immortality of the soul, having mortal lives is of no relevance to the eternal soul that occupies temporal bodies. This is why forums like these are so frustrating at times, you people don't think. I even supplied the very definitions of reincarnation and you still missed it lol. The "mortality" that is experienced through material bodies is a brief temporal event, it is not the reality of the soul.

Reincarnation-

"the soul is seen as immortal and the only thing that becomes perishable is the body."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reincarnation

So again, in reincarnation the soul is specifically seen as immortal.

Wrong, that is exactly the power of applying the atonement to our lives.

Wrong, the only way to change the nature of your choices, attitudes and deeds is to change the nature of your choices, attitudes and deeds and no belief can do that for you. The atonement doesn't change what you are or how you choose to act, it helps you respect and reflect on the reality of your weaknesses in light of a larger picture... All the responsibility of what you do rests squarely on your shoulders and your life's experience assists in letting you observe the consequences of your actions.

Yes, I have.

Great then I don't have to remind you that practice makes perfect. Of course there is no literal meaning of the word perfect in terms of our abilities, but it does mean that one can only reach an advanced state of development through practice, or as you say "repetition". And as you probably clearly have seen, many souls have left this planet severely underdeveloped no matter if they had a Christian background or not.

So here you have a clear example of why repetition is not only important but also imperative and why a single life's experience is almost never sufficient to gain a mature progression of attitude, morality or deeds. But again, the soul is immortal so there is no time limit or immediate concern that a soul must reach a certain destination at any particular time or place. And reincarnation allows for many logical solutions to play out in the journey of each soul within the vast context of God's creation.

No matter what preconceived ideas you throw at reincarnation I should also remind you it is defined simply as....

"the rebirth of a soul in a new body."

"rebirth of the aspect of an individual that persists after bodily death"

"the philosophical or religious concept that the non-physical essence of a living being begins a new life in a different physical form or body after biological death."

"involving reincarnation, the soul is seen as immortal and the only thing that becomes perishable is the body."

This is compatible with any idea that the soul moves on after the death of the physical body. The point, is that there doesn't have to be a rigid set of ideas or rules that must be applied to the term, it is a universal concept. Notice how there is no dogma tied to any of those descriptions, it simply highlights the fact that the soul exists independent of any physical form or body.

We can succeed all we need in one pass.

You can assert that, but in reality deep down you know that you will not succeed and we know through many examples that many souls leave this planet severely morally bankrupt. If one lifetime was sufficient, every soul would leave morally and functionally perfect, having mastered the errors of their ways. You can delude yourself, it won't change reality.

And unbeknown to you, if reincarnation is a reality, this might not have been your only "pass". But each experience we undergo, it carries over in our conscious warehouse where our progression is caught up in each life. So even though you may not be fully aware you had prior experience, all your cyclical patterns of behavior play out right where you left them.

I told you that my brand of Christianity differs from most. I mean exactly what I said.

What does this have to do with our discussion? I don't care how you view your Christianity. But no, there is nothing here that sets you apart from all the weirdo Christians I've been around. As I said in my first post, there are many factions, denominations and loose flavors of Christian teachings. Get over yourself. I would be more concerned with your logic, comprehension and reading issues.

#9

Deb-8-a-bull

Debates: 0

Posts: 3,205

3

2

3

Deb-8-a-bull

09.23.2021 03:04PM

3

2

3

09.23.2021 03:04PM

If christ can be halv father /son half holy spirit and the other half a jesus / god.

I don't see no reason whatever to say with confidence.

YES.

Yes , christ is Prince pieces.

Correct.

#10

Tradesecret

Debates: 2

Posts: 3,437

3

2

6

Tradesecret

09.24.2021 06:52AM

3

2

6

09.24.2021 06:52AM

-->

@949havoc

Good for you.

I think your wrong. But there you have it. What basis could I possibly have to say that unless I have a measuring stick?

Does the Christian religion have measuring sticks in respect of their doctrines?

Or does the Christian religion simply let anyone decide whatever they want?

Yes, we have the Scriptures. The OT and the NT. Some denominations add the Apocrypha. Yet people seem to interpret them anyway they like.

Then we have the creeds. The creeds from the ecumenical councils seem to provide a certain orthodoxy to the Christian religion. Of course, many denominations reject the Creeds. The LDS and the JW for example. The Orthodox church reject part of them and the RCC take a different view.

Coming into the Protestant Reformation there were a whole lot of Confessions and Documents drafted up.

And then of course there was also the counter - Catholic position. In the 20th and the 21st Century further documents and Statements have been drafted.

I grew up in a Church of Christ. It really had no standard but the Bible. Hence people were all inconsistent in their doctrinal standards. Similarly in the Baptist and Brethren circles. Unsystematic and inconsistent. Arbitrary - but based on the idea of the "priesthood of all believers". No need to have a clergy or hierarchical status within the church.

I now realize everyone has a theology of the bible and the way they interpret it. Mostly, however it is inconsistent and unsystematic. I hold to the WCF. It is a systematic way of understanding the doctrines in the Bible. It doesn't make them right. But it does provide transparency and a means of attempting to apply a consistent methodology. The WCF follows the reformed statements and the Creeds for the most part. It acknowledges that EVERYONE who says that they base their ideas on the bible still has a manner in which they interpret it. It self-consciously attempts to systematize it - and uses the WCF as a framework to understand the bible. It removes the personal and subjective element from interpretation. The WCF was written by many people - and tested and tried over a long period of time. It is not perfect and acknowledges this. Yet is enables several important things which not having a confession cannot provide. It provides a measuring stick and a framework. It enables the doctrines to be articulated - and does so transparently. They are consistent. Obviously it removed arbitrariness.

Yet it also a document in history that is in accord with the Scriptures.

I suggest your position is wrong - next to the Scriptures as understood by the framework of the WCF.

Your position is not wrong - when you are the ultimate judge and allow your personal and subjective interpretation to understand the bible.

In fact in that latter position - no one is wrong. Everything is subjective.

Thanks for providing your personal understandings.. Unfortunately, your opinion is just your personal opinion and as such - it can be taken no further. And should be taken no further. I disagree with you that your position causes havoc. Why on earth would you think that? You are not asking anyone to believe you. If you were to join a church, your personal beliefs are irrelevant. The teaching of whatever church you attend and wish to join would expect you to subscribe to their position. If they don't have a position - then it still would not cause havoc - because if there is no position - there is no standard by which they could reject or confirm your views.

On your stated beliefs - I could not admit you as a member of our church. You could certainly attend our church, but you would be unable to become a member and have any membership rights and privileges. Your being there would not cause any havoc. We have lots of people who attend - who are not members and who have a variety of beliefs. Yours are not particularly extreme by any means. Yet they are not orthodox.

Again, thanks for your opinions.

Topic's author

#11

949havoc

Debates: 7

Posts: 816

3

2

8

949havoc

09.24.2021 10:26AM

3

2

8

09.24.2021 10:26AM

-->

@EtrnlVw

Please tell me you're not that dunce?
Reincarnation emphasizes the immortality of the soul, having mortal lives is of no relevance to the eternal soul that occupies temporal bodies.

Please tell me you're not that dunce.

Re-read my #1 posit. With the exception if then Holy Spirit, who is, himself, a spirit child of God as are the rest of us, including Jesus Christ, gods are physical beings having immortal physical bodies, just as Jesus Christ demonstrated upon his resurrection. The physical body is essential in eternity, and all of us will eventually resurrect in like manner. The physical body is, then, incorruptible and will never die again. Like I said, my beliefs cause havoc with most Christians, because you're somehow locked into this idea that resurrection into a perfect physical body is somehow only a temporary condition, that Jesus had a physically resurrected body while he spent a few days on Earth that people could feel and confirm was solid flesh, then when he rose into heaven he became a spirit again? Absurd.

Like I said, understand the root etymology of reincarnation. Yes, the concept does recognize the eternal nature of the soul, as does resurrection, but the difference is that reincarnation requires that the soul occupies a succession of mortal, corruptible physical bodies. I have indicated in #s 2, 3, 4, that we have one pass in one physical, corruptible body in mortality, and that the power of the atonement allows us to learn to be obedient to God's commands, necessary in just one pass through mortality, and achieve forgiveness of our sins by proper, sincere repentance by choice to to change our carnal nature - the change of heart.

You don't understand me at all, but I understand you implicitly, Face it, we disagree on this matter of reincarnation and its effects. Reincarnate: as the etymology suggests, repeated possessions of physical bodies. To what purpose that is not accomplished in one pass with use of the power of the atonement of
Jesus Christ, which reincarnation does not even consider.

Topic's author

#12

949havoc

Debates: 7

Posts: 816

3

2

8

949havoc

09.24.2021 10:52AM

3

2

8

09.24.2021 10:52AM

-->

@Tradesecret

Thanks for your commentary. I admit to a certain ignorance of the WCF; I've read from it, but admit not all of it. I shall endeavor to do so. There is, however, an early item mentioned in it, "Since God no longer reveals himself to his people in those earlier ways,[5] Holy Scripture is absolutely essential.[6]". The [5] reference is Hebrews 1: 1-2, which. does not imply that at all. It acknowledges God speaking to prophets [OT] and that the Word was given directly by Christ "in these last days" speaking of their current, first century. But those "last days" are not ours; we are different days, altogether. It appears first-century Christians, particularly during Christ's ministry, believed the coming of the kingdom of heave would occur in their lifetimes, thus use of the "last days" verbiage. B?ut that was not the case at all. We're two thousand years distanced from then, and we're still waiting. it does not say that God stopped speaking to man, so why is it interpreted that way? I believe he still reveals to us today [I should have mentiojned that in my #1], and not just by historic scripture, which, I agree, is essential.

#13

Tradesecret

Debates: 2

Posts: 3,437

3

2

6

Tradesecret

09.25.2021 04:37AM

3

2

6

09.25.2021 04:37AM

-->

@949havoc

Thanks for your commentary. I admit to a certain ignorance of the WCF; I've read from it, but admit not all of it. I shall endeavor to do so. There is, however, an early item mentioned in it, "Since God no longer reveals himself to his people in those earlier ways,[5] Holy Scripture is absolutely essential.[6]". The [5] reference is Hebrews 1: 1-2, which. does not imply that at all. It acknowledges God speaking to prophets [OT] and that the Word was given directly by Christ "in these last days" speaking of their current, first century. But those "last days" are not ours; we are different days, altogether. It appears first-century Christians, particularly during Christ's ministry, believed the coming of the kingdom of heave would occur in their lifetimes, thus use of the "last days" verbiage. B?ut that was not the case at all. We're two thousand years distanced from then, and we're still waiting. it does not say that God stopped speaking to man, so why is it interpreted that way? I believe he still reveals to us today [I should have mentiojned that in my #1], and not just by historic scripture, which, I agree, is essential.

Hebrews 1:1-3 clearly states that in times past - God spoke in various ways - but now he speaks through Jesus. This includes his words as he directed the Apostles and others who wrote the NT.

The last days in the time of the Apostles are the times of the Last Days of the OT covenant with Israel. This finished in AD 70. The NT was written prior to AD 70.

We are not living in the LAST DAYS anymore. We are living in the "Age to Come". Hence God has stopped revealing revelation to us - prior to the Day of judgment.