#The Christadelphians

[wisdomfish]

The church fathers formulated the Nicene Creed in large part to address the Arian heresy that denied the unqualified deity of Jesus Christ by making him a creature. Arianism is still seen today in the theology of Jehovah’s Witnesses, Christadelphiams, and Iglesia ni Cristo.

Samples, Kenneth Richard. ‘Without a Doubt: Answering the 20 Toughest Faith Questions. p. 55

#jws #jehovah's witnesses #christadelphianism #iglesia ni cristo #arianism

[l7y97qm6qkzj]

Ramming my new Indian girlfriend in my apartment Loira anal rabuda amarrada Aged man had a crazy sex session with a hot legal age teenager slut Teen voyeur masturbation and tall short If you overlook your Juicy ladyboy with admirable ass undresses and gets pounded hard Latina slut Alina Lopez fucked in churros advertisement shooting Mi segunda compilacion MiraCulos Angelic maiden Anya Ivy and male fuck rough Busty hairy babe in hogtie suspension caned Gaping Black Hairy Pussy Squirts

#fitness #Christadelphianism #bacilliculture #deep-questioning #wheaties #endoscopy #reappliance #inctri #unkindlier #erstwhiles #Gavriella #cleidotripsy #path #tesack #palanquiner #remissiveness #conducers #bifluorid #gitterns #Bombacaceae

[trinitiesblog]

episode 359 - Where We Stand

https://trinities.org/blog/episode-359-where-we-stand/

#Bible #Christadelphian #Christology #Podcast #Protestant #Roman Catholicism #Socinian #UCA #Unitarianism

[tamamita]

Is it heresy if there are christian denominations that don't believe in the Trinity such as Unitarianism?

I mean the very first Christians were Unitarians who believed in the theological concept of adoptionism. Adoptionism involved the idea that because Jesus (a) was such an upstanding moral figure among the Israelites, God declared him to be the son of God in the metaphorical sense. Adoptonists never accepted Christ as a divine figure, seeing him as fully human. The idea of Christ's divinity was mostly an issue that came to appear later in Christian history. Docalism, Marcionism, Modalism, Monarchianism, Montanism, Arianism and various other doctrines introduced between the 1st-4th century became the foundation of Jesus as a divine being, albeit with various definitions and interpretations. The Church adopted the Trinitiarian (albeit still in development) view as its mainstream theology in the Council of Nicaea, Council of Constantinople, introducing the Nicene-Constantinpolitan creed and apostole's creed respectively. The creed also deemed every other Christian doctrine to be heretical, surpressing any other heterodoxy, especially Arianism. It wasn't until Augustine that the concept of the Trinity was fully introduced in the 5th century, finalized by the Athanasian Creed. However, it wasn't until we the court of Charlemagne that we were introduced to the Johannine Comma that included the Trinity in brackets of the first epistle of John to substantiate its inclusion, so this was effectively the first alteration of the Greek Bible in the West. Enter Augustine, the man who described the Trinity in relation to each other. We can go further, but the doctrine of the Trinity has never been established with one single definite meaning, since the personal relationship and the meaning between each essence keeps being debated and discussed among Christians, even till this day.

Christadelphians are one of the few Unitarian Christians today, but they don't adhere to adoptionism, they simply hold that Jesus (a) was the son of God, but not in the literal sense. However, they reject Jesus' divinity, seeing him as fully human, subordinate to the Father. The adoptionists were very much the first true Christians, but not in the eyes of the Church. As you can see, the Trinity was a later invention that took several centuries to form and was not ultimately defined by the Church Fathers. Indeed, this is evident by the fact that several Christian scholars had to redefine the Trinity throughout history.

[catkin-morgs-kookaburralover]

thinking about the emblems, the Eucharist - I've forgotten the name y'all use for it this instant but I was just reading a Catholic thing so there's the Catholic name for it as well as Christadelphian -

It's based around food and drink, around nourishment. The emblems themselves aren't supposed to be nourishing (see the verse in... I want to say one of Paul's... maybe Corinthians, in which he berates them for some being drunk and some having nothing), but they're a symbol. I heard a talk once about the moral imperative of keeping yourself healthy, which was fascinating - upsetting because he referred dismissively to anorexia and self harm as things people in the world do, with no apparent understanding of the numbers of Christians in his audience who had a history of such things themselves - but useful. There's the verse about "the truth will set you free", the number of times sin is compared to slavery and righteousness is compared to freedom, too. Freedom from arbitrary rules, like the rules in an eating disorder.

The truth will set us free, truths like "you don't need to starve yourself", "you don't need to cut yourself". Easier said than done, but in an ideal world-

We're not in an ideal world of course but Still.

It's interesting to me that since I started self harming, the cup itself has become more important and thought-provoking to me. The phrase "his blood was shed that ours shall not be" is very important to me - I can't recall who came up with it but I don't think it's a New Testament verse or anything. Anyway, the idea that he took our sins on him and died for us is also very important - obviously, it's the core of the gospel.

Anyhow I don't really have a good way of ending this I was just rambling.

#personal #catkin rambles #christianity #chrumblr

[thisbibliomaniac]

I'm not familiar with this site, but this is some interesting info

[majorbaby]

I understand that church can be "violent, oppressive and patriarchal" but I think that's due to the institution rather than the actual religion and if anything I'd say father mulcahey is a very rare representation of the goodness of Christianity because he's accepting and respects when the others are agnostic/atheist or different religions. also the issue you had with the blind faith thing that's just a feature of all religion that they require faith so I don't see how thats a problem. (and just FYI this is coming from a queer atheist who grew up with christadelphians so has seen how bad and malicious Christianity can be)

firstly, i have no problem with people who enjoy this character or have the view of him that you do. I do not believe in "good catholic priests" much the same way that i do not believe in "good cops" - i dont have a problem with individuals practicing a religion, that's not the issue i have with mulcahy. if you’re reading this and you disagree already, then you may as well stop here. 

It was all over for me when he cheekily handed out bibles to a korean family in "the chosen people" as they were being displaced from their ancestral land in season 2. 

And, not that i think you must be of a certain background to hold the opinions i hold, but my family has been catholic for about 6 generations, after they were forcibly converted by catholic missionaries in asia. So yeah, overall I would say that I have a very personal and visceral, negative reaction to him - a catholic priest, in asia. And that’s to say nothing of the existential threat that catholic and christian institutions represent to me as a person of various intersecting identities living in a country that only claims it has separation of church and state. 

Beyond my personal feelings about him (and i freely admit i feel the way i feel because of my personal experiences with catholicism) - if you’re gonna do a show about the horrors of war and the perils of imperialism, nationalism and whatever else america was doing in korea it undercuts that message to have a representative of the church, specifically the catholic church, portrayed the way he is most of the time. The church was very much in league with the mission statement of the military.   Hawkeye doesn’t pull any punches when it comes to military brass because he is fundamentally opposed to the basis of their vocation, and I get grumpy when they try to walk that back in the Potter-era. You might say that I see all priests as ‘clergy brass’ - and no, that doesn’t prevent them from being individually good people, or performing good acts but I don’t see that as ‘positive representative for catholic priests’ and i resent any kind of ‘not all catholic priests’ messaging. All of ‘em, actually, it comes with the territory. Mulcahy is no more an example of the goodness of Christians than Charles is an example of the goodness of Republicans or even Hawkeye an example of the goodness of surgeons. You are a good person because you are a good person, not because of your job and oftentimes in spite of your job.  As for ‘accepting and respecting people who are a-religious’ i think this is basic human decency and i’m not patting anyone on the back for that in spite of whatever oppressive institution they may represent.  the full quote from mulcahy is ‘without blind faith i would be out of business’ indeed. i’m not going to go into all the fine details of how the catholic church collects its membership dues, but it’s sitting on a net worth in the billions. also i take issue with any org that requires ‘blind faith’ of its participants, but particularly one that has a great deal of power and influence over the personal freedoms of people.  i appreciate that your ask was respectful, but i’m not likely to budge on this so you may just wanna block and unfollow me if you haven’t already because i’m pretty candid about that character. 

#mulcahy meta #replies #long post

[in-christalone]

What do you think about Christadelphianism?

Salvation is by the work of God and not by any human effort.

[beachgothgay]

Got a letter from the Christadelphians and it's just like "anyway God's gonna solve Russia don't even worry about it" and I'm like "huh?" and they're like "yeah it's in the bibble lol" and I'm like "what are you fukikn talking about" and then htey're like "come to our seminar lol" and thren i throw it it the bin

[thegreenleavesofspring]

She's a christadelphian, and has stated many times on her main blog, catkin-morgs, that she does not believe that Jesus is God

I will bring this up to my fellow moderator and we will look into it.

[sophieinwonderland]

Hey, hullo, just a little bit of a syntax thing I noticed might be amiss;

In some posts you’ve referred to the “Christin” God as being plural. Technically, I think it’s actually the Catholic belief that holds the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, as all being parts of the same God

I believe this because it was actually a conversation I distinctly remember having at my high school (which was a Catholic school). No plural terms were thrown about, but it was very clear looking back that those ideas fit the concept of the Holy Trinity really well

That being said, I’m not religious myself, and haven’t studied Christianity, just the Catholic faith (had to do so to graduate) so take this with a grain of salt. Anyway, it’s just a nitpicky thing that I picked up on, no need to reply to this

It's both. Many Protestant faiths also carried on the Trinity after branching off. It was taught in several of the churches my host attended during childhood despite none of them being Catholic.

But Christianity is a very broad religion (most religions are) and it is true that not every denomination believes in the Trinity. Wikipedia lists several nontrinitarian denominations here...

Modern nontrinitarian groups or denominations include Christadelphians, Christian Science, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Dawn Bible Students, Iglesia ni Cristo, Jehovah's Witnesses, Living Church of God, Members Church of God International, Oneness Pentecostals, La Luz del Mundo, the Seventh Day Church of God, Unitarian Christians, United Church of God, and The Shepherd's Chapel.

Saying the Christian God is a Trinity is a generalization, but it seems to apply to the majority of sects.

#ask box #christianity #christians #religion #catholics #catholiscism #jesus #trinity

[wisdomfish]

Early Trinitarian Quotes before the Council of Nicea

There are cult groups (Jehovah’s Witnesses, The Way International, Christadelphians, etc.) who deny the Trinity and state that the doctrine was not mentioned until the 4th Century, around the Council of Nicea (325). The following quotes show that the doctrine of the Trinity was indeed alive and well before the Council of Nicea:

Polycarp (70-155/160).  Bishop of Smyrna.  Disciple of John the Apostle.

“O Lord God almighty . . . I bless you and glorify you through the eternal and heavenly high priest Jesus Christ, your beloved Son, through whom be glory to you, with Him and the Holy Spirit, both now and forever” (n. 14, ed. Funk; PG 5.1040).

Justin Martyr (100?-165?).  He was a Christian apologist and martyr.

“For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water” (First Apol., LXI).

Ignatius of Antioch (died 98/117).  Bishop of Antioch.  He wrote much in defense of Christianity.

“In Christ Jesus our Lord, by whom and with whom be glory and power to the Father with the Holy Spirit for ever” (n. 7; PG 5.988). “We have also as a Physician the Lord our God Jesus the Christ the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin.  For ‘the Word was made flesh.’ Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passable body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts.” (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 1, p. 52, Ephesians 7.)

Irenaeus (115-190).  As a boy he listened to Polycarp, the disciple of John.  He became Bishop of Lyons.

“The Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: . . . one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father ‘to gather all things in one,’ and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Savior, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father, ‘every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess; to him, and that He should execute just judgment towards all . . . ‘” (Against Heresies X.l)

Tertullian (160-215).  African apologist and theologian.  He wrote much in defense of Christianity.

“We define that there are two, the Father and the Son, and three with the Holy Spirit, and this number is made by the pattern of salvation . . . [which] brings about unity in trinity, interrelating the three, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.  They are three, not in dignity, but in degree, not in substance but in form, not in power but in kind.  They are of one substance and power, because there is one God from whom these degrees, forms and kinds devolve in the name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” (Adv. Prax. 23; PL 2.156-7).

Origen (185-254).  Alexandrian theologian.  Defended Christianity and wrote much about Christianity.

“If anyone would say that the Word of God or the Wisdom of God had a beginning, let him beware lest he direct his impiety rather against the unbegotten Father, since he denies that he was always Father, and that he has always begotten the Word, and that he always had wisdom in all previous times or ages or whatever can be imagined in priority . . . There can be no more ancient title of almighty God than that of Father, and it is through the Son that he is Father” (De Princ. 1.2.; PG 11.132).

“For if [the Holy Spirit were not eternally as He is, and had received knowledge at some time and then became the Holy Spirit] this were the case, the Holy Spirit would never be reckoned in the unity of the Trinity, i.e., along with the unchangeable Father and His Son, unless He had always been the Holy Spirit.” (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 4, p. 253, de Principiis, 1.111.4)

“Moreover, nothing in the Trinity can be called greater or less, since the fountain of divinity alone contains all things by His word and reason, and by the Spirit of His mouth sanctifies all things which are worthy of sanctification . . . ” (Roberts and Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 4, p. 255, de Principii., I. iii. 7).

Conclusion

If, as the anti-Trinitarians maintain, the Trinity is not a biblical doctrine and was never taught until the council of Nicea in 325, then why do these quotes exist?  The answer is simple: the Trinity is a biblical doctrine, and it was taught before the council of Nicea in 325 A.D.

~ Matt Slick

#trinity #doctrine #christianity #council of nicea #jehovah's witnesses #christadelphians #the way international

[legend-collection]

Devil

​A devil is the personification of evil as it is conceived in various cultures and religious traditions. It is seen as the objectification of a hostile and destructive force.

It is difficult to specify a particular definition of any complexity that will cover all of the traditions, beyond that it is a manifestation of evil. It is meaningful to consider the devil through the lens of each of the cultures and religions that have the devil as part of their mythos.

In Christianity, evil is incarnate in the devil or Satan, a fallen angel who is the primary opponent of God. Some Christians also considered the Roman and Greek deities as devils.

Christianity describes Satan as a fallen angel who terrorizes the world through evil, is the antithesis of truth, and shall be condemned, together with the fallen angels who follow him, to eternal fire at the Last Judgment.

In mainstream Christianity, the devil is usually referred to as Satan. This is because Christian beliefs in Satan are inspired directly by the dominant view of Second Temple Judaism (recorded in the Enochian books), as expressed/practiced by Jesus, and with some minor variations. Some modern Christians consider the devil to be an angel who, along with one-third of the angelic host (the demons), rebelled against God and has consequently been condemned to the Lake of Fire. He is described as hating all humanity (or more accurately creation), opposing God, spreading lies and wreaking havoc on their souls. Horns of a goat and a ram, goat's fur and ears, nose and canines of a pig; a typical depiction of the devil in Christian art. The goat, ram and pig are consistently associated with the devil. Detail of a 16th-century painting by Jacob de Backer in the National Museum in Warsaw.

Satan is traditionally identified as the serpent who convinced Eve to eat the forbidden fruit; thus, Satan has often been depicted as a serpent.

In the Bible, the devil is identified with "the dragon" and "the old serpent" seen in the Book of Revelation, as has "the prince of this world" in the Gospel of John; and "the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience" in the Epistle to the Ephesians; and "the god of this world" in 2 Corinthians 4:4. He is also identified as the dragon in the Book of Revelation and the tempter of the Gospels.

The devil is sometimes called Lucifer, particularly when describing him as an angel before his fall, although the use of Lucifer (Latin lúcifer, "bringer of light"), the "son of the dawn", in Isaiah 14:12 is a reference to a Babylonian king.

Beelzebub is originally the name of a Philistine god (more specifically a certain type of Baal, from Ba‘al Zebûb, lit. "Lord of Flies") but is also used in the New Testament as a synonym for the devil. A corrupted version, "Belzeboub", appears in The Divine Comedy (Inferno XXXIV).

In other, non-mainstream, Christian beliefs (e.g. the beliefs of the Christadelphians) the word "satan" in the Bible is not regarded as referring to a supernatural, personal being but to any 'adversary' and figuratively refers to human sin and temptation.

In the Book of Wisdom, the devil is represented as the one who brought death into the world. The Second Book of Enoch contains references to a Watcher called Satanael, describing him as the prince of the Grigori who was cast out of heaven and an evil spirit who knew the difference between what was "righteous" and "sinful".

In the Book of Jubilees, Satan rules over a host of angels. Mastema, who induced God to test Abraham through the sacrifice of Isaac, is identical with Satan in both name and nature. The Book of Enoch contains references to Sathariel, thought also to be Sataniel and Satan'el. The similar spellings mirror that of his angelic brethren Michael, Raphael, Uriel and Gabriel, previous to his expulsion from Heaven.

A lion-faced deity found on a Gnostic gem in Bernard de Montfaucon's L'antiquité expliquée et représentée en figures may be a depiction of the Demiurge.

Gnostic and Gnostic-influenced religions postulate the idea that the material world is inherently evil. The One true God is remote, beyond the material universe, therefore this universe must be governed by an inferior imposter deity. This deity was identified with the deity of the Old Testament by some sects, such as the Sethians and the Marcions. Tertullian accuses Marcion of Sinope, that he

[held that] the Old Testament was a scandal to the faithful … and … accounted for it by postulating [that Jehovah was] a secondary deity, a demiurgus, who was god, in a sense, but not the supreme God; he was just, rigidly just, he had his good qualities, but he was not the good god, who was Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

John Arendzen (1909) in the Catholic Encyclopedia (1913) mentions that Eusebius accused Apelles, the 2nd-century AD Gnostic, of considering the Inspirer of Old Testament prophecies to be not a god, but an evil angel. These writings commonly refer to the Creator of the material world as "a demiurgus" to distinguish him from the One true God. Some texts, such as the Apocryphon of John and On the Origin of the World, not only demonized the Creator God but also called him by the name of the devil in some Jewish writings, Samael.

In the 12th century in Europe the Cathars, who were rooted in Gnosticism, dealt with the problem of evil, and developed ideas of dualism and demonology. The Cathars were seen as a serious potential challenge to the Catholic church of the time. The Cathars split into two camps. The first is absolute dualism, which held that evil was completely separate from the good God, and that God and the devil each had power. The second camp is mitigated dualism, which considers Lucifer to be a son of God, and a brother to Christ. To explain this they used the parable of the prodigal son, with Christ as the good son, and Lucifer as the son that strayed into evilness. The Catholic Church responded to dualism in AD 1215 in the Fourth Lateran Council, saying that God created everything from nothing, and the devil was good when he was created, but he made himself bad by his own free will. In the Gospel of the Secret Supper, Lucifer, just as in prior Gnostic systems, appears as a demiurge, who created the material world.

The earliest Hindu texts do not offer further explanations for evil, regarding evil as something natural. However, later texts offer various explanations for evil. According to an explanation given by the Brahmins, both demons and gods spoke truth and untruth, but the demons relinquished the truth and the gods relinquished the untruth. But both spirits are regarded as different aspects of one supreme god. Even some fierce deities like Kali are not thought of as devils but just as darker aspects of this god and may even manifest benevolence.

In Islam, the principle of evil is expressed by two terms referring to the same entity: Shaitan (meaning astray, distant or devil) and Iblis. Iblis is the proper name of the devil representing the characteristics of evil. Iblis is mentioned in the Quranic narrative about the creation of humanity. When God created Adam, he ordered the angels to prostrate themselves before him. All did, but Iblis refused and claimed to be superior to Adam out of pride. [Quran 7:12] Therefore, pride but also envy became a sign of "unbelief" in Islam. Thereafter Iblis was condemned to Hell, but God granted him a request to lead humanity astray, knowing the righteous will resist Iblis' attempts to misguide them. In Islam, both good and evil are ultimately created by God. But since God's will is good, the evil in the world must be part of God's plan. Actually, God allowed the devil to seduce humanity. Evil and suffering are regarded as a test or a chance to proof confidence in God. Some philosophers and mystics emphasized Iblis himself as a role model of confidence in God, because God ordered the angels to prostrate themselves, Iblis was forced to choose between God's command and God's will (not to praise someone else than God). He successfully passed the test, yet his disobedience caused his punishment and therefore suffering. However, he stays patient and is rewarded in the end.

Muslims hold that the pre-Islamic jinn, tutelary deities, became subject under Islam to the judgment of God, and that those who did not submit to the law of God are devils.

Although Iblis is often compared to the devil in Christian theology, Islam rejects the idea that Satan is an opponent of God and the implied struggle between God and the devil. Iblis might either be regarded as the most monotheistic or the greatest sinner, but remains only a creature of God. Iblis did not become an unbeliever due to his disobedience, but because of attributing injustice to God; that is, by asserting that the command to prostrate himself before Adam was inappropriate. There is no sign of angelic revolt in the Quran and no mention of Iblis trying to take God's throne and Iblis's sin could be forgiven at anytime by God. According to the Quran, Iblis's disobedience was due to his disdain for humanity, a narrative already occurring in early apocrypha.

As in Christianity, Iblis was once a pious creature of God but later cast out of Heaven due to his pride. However, to maintain God's absolute sovereignty, Islam matches the line taken by Irenaeus instead of the later Christian consensus that the devil did not rebel against God but against humanity. Further, although Iblis is generally regarded as a real bodily entity, he plays a less significant role as the personification of evil than in Christianity. Iblis is merely a tempter, notable for inciting humans into sin by whispering into humans minds (waswās), akin to the Jewish idea of the devil as yetzer hara.

On the other hand, Shaitan refers unilaterally to forces of evil, including the devil Iblis, then he causes mischief. Shaitan is also linked to humans psychological nature, appearing in dreams, causing anger or interrupting the mental preparation for prayer. Furthermore, the term Shaitan also refers to beings, who follow the evil suggestions of Iblis. Furthermore, the principle of Shaitan is in many ways a symbol of spiritual impurity, representing humans' own deficits, in contrast to a "true Muslim", who is free from anger, lust and other devilish desires.

In Sufism and mysticism In contrast to Occidental philosophy, the Sufi idea of seeing "Many as One", and considering the creation in its essence as the Absolute, leads to the idea of the dissolution of any dualism between the ego substance and the "external" substantial objects. The rebellion against God, mentioned in the Quran, takes place on the level of the psyche, that must be trained and disciplined for its union with the spirit that is pure. Since psyche drives the body, flesh is not the obstacle to humans but rather an unawareness that allows the impulsive forces to cause rebellion against God on the level of the psyche. Yet it is not a dualism between body, psyche and spirit, since the spirit embraces both psyche and corporeal aspects of humanity. Since the world is held to be the mirror in which God's attributes are reflected, participation in worldly affairs is not necessarily seen as opposed to God. The devil activates the selfish desires of the psyche, leading the human astray from the Divine. Thus it is the I that is regarded as evil, and both Iblis and Pharao are present as symbols for uttering "I" in ones own behavior. Therefore it is recommended to use the term I as little as possible. It is only God who has the right to say "I", since it is only God who is self-subsistent. Uttering "I" is therefore a way to compare oneself to God, regarded as shirk.

In Salafism Salafi strands of Islam commonly emphasize a dualistic worldview between the believers and the unbelievers, with the devil as the enemy of God's path. Even though the devil will be finally defeated by God, he is a serious and dangerous opponent of humans. While in classical hadiths, the demons (Shayateen) and the jinn are responsible for impurity and possibly endanger people, in Salafi thought, it is the devil himself, who lurks on the believers, always striving to lead them astray from God. The devil is regarded as an omnipresent entity, permanently inciting humans into sin, but can be pushed away by remembering the name God. The devil is regarded as an external entity, threatening the everyday life of the believer, even in social aspects of life. Thus for example, it is the devil who is responsible for Western emancipation.

Judaism Yahweh, the god in pre-exilic Judaism, created both good and evil, as stated in Isaiah 45:7: "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things." The devil does not exist in Jewish scriptures. However, the influence of Zoroastrianism during the Achaemenid Empire introduced evil as a separate principle into the Jewish belief system, which gradually externalized the opposition until the Hebrew term satan developed into a specific type of supernatural entity, changing the monistic view of Judaism into a dualistic one. Later, Rabbinic Judaism rejected the Enochian books (written during the Second Temple period under Persian influence), which depicted the devil as an independent force of evil besides God. After the apocalyptic period, references to Satan in the Tanakh are thought to be allegorical.

Mandaeism In Mandaean mythology, Ruha fell apart from the World of Light and became the queen of the World of Darkness, also referred to as Sheol. She is considered evil and a liar, sorcerer and seductress. : 541 She gives birth to Ur, also referred to as Leviathan. He is portrayed as a large, ferocious dragon or snake and is considered the king of the World of Darkness. Together they rule the underworld and create the seven planets and twelve zodiac constellations. Also found in the underworld is Krun who is the greatest of the five Mandaean Lords of the underworld. He dwells in the lowest depths of creation and his epithet is the 'mountain of flesh'. : 251  Prominent infernal beings found in the World of Darkness include lilith, nalai (vampire), niuli (hobgoblin), latabi (devil), gadalta (ghost), satani (Satan) and various other demons and evil spirits.

Manichaeism In Manichaeism, God and the devil are two unrelated principles. God created good and inhabits the realm of light, while the devil (also called the prince of darkness ) created evil and inhabits the kingdom of darkness. The contemporary world came into existence, when the kingdom of darkness assaulted the kingdom of light and mingled with the spiritual world. At the end, the devil and his followers will be sealed forever and the kingdom of light and the kingdom of darkness will continue to co-exist eternally, never to commingle again.

Hegemonius (4th century AD) accuses that the Persian prophet Mani, founder of the Manichaean sect in the 3rd century AD, identified Jehovah as "the devil god which created the world" and said that "he who spoke with Moses, the Jews, and the priests … is the [Prince] of Darkness, … not the god of truth."

Tengrism Among the Tengristic myths of central Asia, Erlik refers to a devil-like figure as the ruler of Hell, who is also the first human. According to one narrative, Erlik and God swam together over the primordial waters. When God was about to create the Earth, he send Erlik to dive into the waters and collect some mud. Erlik hid some inside his mouth to later create his own world. But when God commanded the Earth to expand, Erlik got troubled by the mud in his mouth. God aided Erlik to spit it out. The mud carried by Erlik gave place to the unpleasant areas of the world. Because of his sin, he was assigned to evil. In another variant, the creator-god is identified with Ulgen. Again, Erlik appears to be the first human. He desired to create a human just as Ulgen did, thereupon Ulgen reacted by punishing Erlik, casting him into the Underworld where he becomes its ruler.

According to Tengrism, there is no death, meaning that, when life comes to an end, it is merely a transition into the invisible world. As the ruler of Hell, Erlik enslaves the souls, who are damned to Hell. Further, he lurks on the souls of those humans living on Earth by causing death, disease and illnesses. At the time of birth, Erlik sends a Kormos to seize the soul of the newborn, following him for the rest of his life in an attempt to seize his soul by hampering, misguiding and injuring him. When Erlik succeeds in destroying a human's body, the Kormos sent by Erlik will try take him down into the Underworld. However a good soul will be brought to Paradise by a Yayutshi sent by Ulgen. Some shamans also made sacrifices to Erlik, for gaining a higher rank in the Underworld, if they should be damned to Hell.

Yazidism According to Yazidism there is no entity that represents evil in opposition to God; such dualism is rejected by Yazidis, and evil is regarded as nonexistent. Yazidis adhere to strict monism and are prohibited from uttering the word "devil" and from speaking of anything related to Hell.

Zoroastrianism Zoroastrianism probably introduced the first idea of the devil; a principle of evil independently existing apart from God. In Zoroastrianism, good and evil derive from two ultimately opposed forces. The force of good is called Ahura Mazda and the "destructive spirit" in Avestan-language called Angra Mainyu. The Middle Persian equivalent is Ahriman. They are in eternal struggle and neither is all-powerful, especially Angra Mainyu is limited to space and time: in the end of time, he will be finally defeated. While Ahura Mazda creates what is good, Angra Mainyu is responsible for every evil and suffering in the world, such as toads and scorpions.

Devil in Moral Philosophy Spinoza A not published manuscript of Spinoza's Ethics contained a chapter (Chapter XXI) on the devil, where Spinoza examined whether the devil may exist or not. He defines the devil as an entity which is contrary to God. "  However, if the devil is the opposite of God, the devil would consist of Nothingness, which does not exist. Causes of anger, hate, envy, and all things the devil is blamed for, could be expained without the proposal of a devil."   Spinoza doesn't explain evil individuals as moral agents making evil choices, but as being affected by emotions comparable to a weakness or an illness. In Religion Within the Limits of Reason Alone, Immanuel Kant uses the devil as the personification of maximum moral reprehensibility. Deviating from the common Christian idea, Kant does not locate the morally reprehensible in sensual urges. Since evil has to be intelligible, only when the sensual is consciously placed above the moral obligation something can be regarded as morally evil. Thus, to be evil, the devil must be able to comprehend moral but consciously reject it, and, as a spiritual being (Geistwesen), having no relation to any form of sensual pleasure. It is necessarily required for the devil to be a spiritual being, because if the devil were also a sensual, it would be possible that the devil does evil to satisfy lower sensual desires, and doesn't act from the mind alone. The devil acts against morals, not to satisfy a sensual lust, but solely for the sake of evil. As such, the devil is unselfish, for he does not benefit from his evil deeds. However, Kant denies that a human being could ever be completely devilish. Kant admits that there are devilish vices (ingratitude, envy and malicious joy), i.e. vices that do not bring any personal advantage, but a person can never be completely a devil. In his Lecture on Moral Philosophy (1774/75) Kant gives an example of a tulip seller who was in possession of a rare tulip, but when he learned that another seller had the same tulip, he bought it from him and then destroyed it instead to keeping it for himself. If he had acted according to his sensual in according to his urges, the seller would have kept the tulip for himself to make profit, but not have destroyed it. Nevertheless, the destruction of the tulip cannot be completely absolved from sensual impulses, since a sensual joy or relief still accompanies the destruction of the tulip and therefore cannot be thought of solely as a violation of morality.

#devil #global

[shechempost]

#Jesus #GOD #love #peace #bible #study

[nijjhar]

The Rabbis had become so greedy that they even started to fleece their o... The Rabbis had become so greedy that they even started to fleece their own members of the Synagogue. https://youtu.be/f06gUnVkF7s Holy Gospel of our Supernatural Father of our “souls” Elohim, Allah, Parbrahm, etc., delivered by the first Anointed Christ, which in Punjabi we call Satguru Jesus of the highest living God Elohim that dwells within His most beautiful living Temple of God created by the greatest artist demiurge potter, the lord of the Nature Yahweh, Brahma, Khudah, etc. and it is called Harmandir or “Emmanuel” if you are not “greedy” according to Saint Mark 6,30-34. The Apostles gathered with Jesus and reported all they had done and taught. He told them, "Come away by yourselves on a solitary basis to a deserted place and rest a while." People were coming and going in great numbers, and they had no opportunity to eat. So they went off in the boat by themselves to a deserted place. People saw them leaving and many came to know about it. They hastened there on foot from all the towns and arrived at the place before them. When he disembarked and saw the vast crowd, his heart was moved with pity for them, for they were like sheep without a shepherd; and he began to teach them many things. Church of England Vicar objected to my T-shirt that it may cause problems. COE is a Church of Satan headed by Mammon and not God. https://youtu.be/wp_8D3tlu90 Please click on my Playlists at http://www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/playlist.htm  Church of England Vicar objected to my T-shirt which may cause problems. Today, 05 December 2010, I visited four Churches. First I went to the United Reformed Church that is just near the Bus stop and I thought let me go in as it was getting late to service. It was normal and a few looked at my T-shirt and logos but with curiosity. Only one man engaged me in the discussion. Then, I thought let me go to the Greek Orthodox Service nearby at Bartholomew Church, corner of Palmer Park and diagonally opposite to URC that I just attended. Serving Priest was from London but he normally is busy with the formalities. However, he gave me his London address and invited me to visit the Church and ask questions. That would be good. After the service, they invite people to join them in their service of Tea and Coffee with food cooked by different members at home. They also served hard drinks as it was cold. I had some cough and it was good for me to have a few. So, in the afternoon or rather evening, I went to Christadelphian Fellowship on Oxford Road with my T-shirt and they also looked with curiosity. They did not like the last two lines that Gnostics are living Christs of living God. This became clear when I attended the next Church of England, Greyfriars Church and over there the head priest, Rev Jonathan Wilmot, Vicar told me to cover my T-shirt as he did not like the way I was dressed. So, I had a rain cover that I put it on covering the back side leaving the front side open. So, he is the first priest to object and I can well imagine that these priests especially of the Church of England are hirelings of Mammon who hate the Light more than the others. In fact, most people who do not understand the Gospel in spirit would not love to see a man like me in their Churches. No wonder someone after reading the last two lines the Gnostics are living Christs of Living God pointed out that only One Christ Jesus. At this I explained to them Christ Thomas and not St.Thomas as propagated by the Anti Christs was known as Christ Thomas in South India and so was His Labourers called Christs and not Christians. Portuguese Pope went there telling people only one Christ Jesus and no other Christ and killed those who were the Labourers of Thomas and burnt their Books. This was told to me by a priest in Wellington, South India. So, please do not be deterred by the people who have no idea of Gospel but blindly follow others leading to so many divisions of the Church of God, ONE FOLD, and One Shepherd, Christ Jesus like the blind defining an elephant. Most of the religious places are infested with Mammon worshipping Antichrists who have no love for Light but love Darkness to carry on fleecing the congregations. For the unlisted videos:- www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/Unlisted.htm My ebook by Kindle. ASIN: B01AVLC9WO Private Bitter Gospel Truth videos:- www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/JAntisem.htm www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/Rest.htm Any helper to finish my Books:- ONE GOD ONE FAITH:- www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/bookfin.pdf and in Punjabi KAKHH OHLAE LAKHH:-  www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/pdbook.pdf Very informative Channel:- Punjab Siyan. John's baptism:- www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/johnsig.pdf Trinity:- www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/trinity.pdf

#youtube

[catkin-morgs-kookaburralover]

What denomination are you?

Christadelphian. :) Ask me any questions you like. You should be able to find information about us easily enough on Google, even if you've never heard of us.

#ask #asks #christianity