A Question of the Path to Heaven

[Sneaksuit]

Or stuck in hell with all those atheists like Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Madam Blavatsky, Alister Crowley for starters.

How do you link the beliefs of Madam Blavatsky and Alister Crowley to atheism, being they're clearly esoteric?

[fluffy]

Or stuck in hell with all those atheists like Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Madam Blavatsky, Alister Crowley for starters.

If you believe in that sort of thing. I'm of the mind that "hell" exists right here on this earth and in this life, and is just a metaphor for a life of fear and anger for those unable to make peace with themselves and the world around them.

[averagejoe]

How do you link the beliefs of Madam Blavatsky and Alister Crowley to atheism, being they're clearly esoteric?[/quote]


adjective: esoteric
1.
intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest.


Madam Blavasky wrote the most books (occult) in women's history. Has a huge following. Alice Bailey mentored by Blavasky http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3CB5XSpGjc set up the United Nation's religious Lucifer Trust.


Nice guy...

Aleister Crowley: The Wickedest Man in the World

Born Edward Alexander Crowley, he is primarily known for his occult writings and teachings.
Crowley's lifestyle was absolutely shocking in the era in which he lived. Besides his interest in the occult, he was sexually promiscuous with both genders (at a time when homosexuality was still illegal in Britain), frequented prostitutes, was vocally defiant against Christianity and Victorian and post-Victorian prudishness toward sexual subjects, and was a drug addict.

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/aleister ... man-world/

[fluffy]

I don't know if "atheist" is the right word to describe occultism. The following definitely has its spiritual aspects, they just lean toward a higher power that's a little darker than the traditional guy with the big "G" on his sweatshirt.

[averagejoe]

How do you link the beliefs of Madam Blavatsky and Alister Crowley to atheism, being they're clearly esoteric?

Atheism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Atheism is accepted within some religious and spiritual belief systems, including Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Raelism, Neopagan movements[19] such as Wicca,[20] and nontheistic religions. Jainism and some forms of Buddhism do not advocate belief in gods,[21] whereas Hinduism holds atheism to be valid, but some schools view the path of an atheist to be difficult to follow in matters of spirituality.[22]

Here is a link....

Gia Madonna of the Esoteric Order of Dagon.

http://atheistexperience.blogspot.ca/20 ... prove.html

Ethical Atheists strive for esoteric knowledge.

http://www.interfaith.org/forum/ethical ... 10289.html

[Bsuds]

I don't know if "atheist" is the right word to describe occultism. The following definitely has its spiritual aspects, they just lean toward a higher power that's a little darker than the traditional guy with the big "G" on his sweatshirt.

Not to be picky but I believe he wore a hoodie.

[fluffy]

That's his kid, I was talking about the old man.

[Bsuds]

Like Father like son!

[cliffy1]

Like Father like son!

JC wasn't a white dude either.

[Glacier]

How can there be only three worldviews with many different religions?

Fair enough. There are many ways to divide the pie, or to sort out the peoples of the world. One could further divide things down further. I was merely breaking it down one way. Similarly, one could divide politics into the left-wing worldview and the right-wing world view, but as we know, each wing could further be divided depending on how specific a person wants to get. Heck, some divisions can have overlap. I wouldn't get too hung up on that division, though notice that even though the majority of Canadians are Christians, I lumped most Christians into the eastern worldview. Ie. There are many paths to truth.

Anyway, we could say that there are two views on how people get to heaven. The first is by works, and the second is by grace.

According to the Christian bible, a person is saved by grace, not works. When we think of grace, we think of mercy or favour, but grace actually means "God's ability" within a biblical context.

Many people within the church and outside the church suggest ‘grace’ means "freedom to sin," but this not what it means. "Faith without works is dead." This means that if you truly accept the gift of grace through faith, then you actions will change for the better. In other words, you don’t change your actions because you want to change, but rather, because your wants changed. Hear the words of that great preacher Charles Spurgeon:

Does a sin easily beset us? We are doubly warned to lay it aside. More grace is needed and more grace may be had. Never suppose that God has given to you a licence for any sin, so that you may live in it as long as you please; no, believe that Jesus has come to save us from our sins. I have received no intimation from the Lord to deal delicately with any man’s sins, or to become an apologist for transgression.

There are really two different reasons why people improve their behavior. The first is because they are afraid of being caught doing wrong or afraid of missing out on heaven, or afraid of hell. The second is because they have a change of heart, and truly want to do what is right.

Change because you are afraid of the law or of being punished or embarrassed is generally a short term improvement. As soon as no one is looking or the cops are over at the doughnut shop you jump back in your own ways. Permanent change only comes with a change of heart. A government can pass all the laws in the world, but if the people don't actually have an internal change, the law will be ineffective.

The message that Jesus taught was one of the heart. This is the opposite of the one taught by the Pharisees who believed hat following the rules was what mattered. The reason for the rule were secondary. Jesus came along and said, “no, you are a brood of vipers who follow the rules to make yourself look good in front of others, but inwardly your hearts are wicked.” Jesus also say, "if you love me you will keep my commandments." Love comes first. The works based systems is like being married, following the rules of the house, but not loving your wife. Sure you’re not cheating and such, but what’s the point if you have not love?

The religious leaders in Jesus’ day (and dare I say many religious leaders today) tried to make things better by making all kinds of rules, but it didn’t work because people’s hearts were not into it. Actually, many non-religious leaders through history have also tried to make things better with this same approach, but it really never works very well. Trying to change yourself on your own steam simply to follow a rule just doesn’t work very well. Making all the laws against marijuana or even cocaine will do almost nothing to change human behavior. The only way to change human behavior is to change the condition of the heart. We can see this in society when it comes to smoking and drunk driving. It wasn’t the laws that caused the changes, but rather, the attitudes of the people that changed.

This is basically what Jesus was saying about entering the kingdom of God. His message was that “love is the answer,” and as we know love is a condition of the heart. The Pharisees believed that it was enough not kill your enemy, but Jesus said, that if you so much as want to kill someone, you have committed murder in your heart, which is the same thing. It is also written that that god “resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble.” This means that if you are arrogant and proud, and think you can make it into heaven on your own steam, you’re on the wrong path, but if you humble yourself before god, and admit that you are a fallible human who needs the grace of god to better yourself, god freely gives you his grace (ability) to make it through the present situation. It says that God resists the proud, but give grace to the humble. It is the act of humbling oneself before god, and accepting the gift available to all of humanity that gets your name written into the “lamb’s book of life.”

[averagejoe]

JC wasn't a white dude either.

According to a letter from from Pontius Pilate to Tiberius Caesar.

His golden colored hair and beard gave to his appearance a celestial aspect. He appeared to be about 30 years of age. Never have I seen a sweeter or more serene countenance.


Majority of these pictures and drawings show Jesus with golden colored hair. Hummmmm....

https://www.google.ca/search?q=jesus&so ... 00&bih=772

[cliffy1]

I keep hearing about this letter but nobody has been able to produce a copy of it> it is like an urban legend among Christians.

This from Snopes on whether Jesus actually existed: "The problem with Tacitus as a source is the question of what his source was. Objectivity and precision were not the norm for histories in those times (and it's not improved a whole lot since then). Tacitus was repeating what he had heard from some unknown source or sources with no indication that he tried to verify the accuracy.

Josephus is a more compelling soure for the existence of Jesus, even though his account is at least a partial forgery (it's debatable whether there was only a change or a complete insertion for one of his two mentions of Jesus).

Otherwise, there really isn't any contemporary mention of Jesus (besides the gospels) and the gospel accounts don't quite match up with other historical accounts.

[averagejoe]

Funny cliffy1, it seems like Christians always have problems explaining themselves according to you. You should give some evidence to back up your extraordinary claims.

The original letter is in the Smithsonian Institute in Washington D.C. I have the translated one.

So what colour was Jesus Christ? I have others telling me the same thing with no back up. I would like to see your and others
evidence....I'm actually really interested in your evidence.

[averagejoe]

Snopes is such a respected website....The old and boring line...did Jesus ever exist. Your argument is rather getting old.

I keep hearing about this letter but nobody has been able to produce a copy of it> it is like an urban legend among Christians.

This from Snopes on whether Jesus actually existed: "The problem with Tacitus as a source is the question of what his source was. Objectivity and precision were not the norm for histories in those times (and it's not improved a whole lot since then). Tacitus was repeating what he had heard from some unknown source or sources with no indication that he tried to verify the accuracy.

Josephus is a more compelling soure for the existence of Jesus, even though his account is at least a partial forgery (it's debatable whether there was only a change or a complete insertion for one of his two mentions of Jesus).

Otherwise, there really isn't any contemporary mention of Jesus (besides the gospels) and the gospel accounts don't quite match up with other historical accounts.

[cliffy1]

"Christianity is the Monsanto of religions. Its goal is the monoculture of belief. Christianity is roundup ready." - Spade