CHAPTER 81 PANTHEISM, POLYTHEISM, AND MONOTHEISM: SUPPLEMENT: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A CONSERVATIVE-REPUBLICAN CHRISTIAN: JESUS IS A SMALL-C COMMUNIST

 


INSERT FOR YOUR NAVIGATIONAL CONVENIENCE
Not Part of the Text


Wednesday, September 27, 2006:

Pantheism can be a confusing concept for many. Where is the line between spirit and matter and phenomena? Where do the perceptions of the senses start and stop? Where do gods and God start and stop? What are the proper contexts in which to comprehend the true nature of God?

To add to it, the difficult concept known as Luciferianism is superimposed on these other questions.

Who's right?

Consistency is critical. Hypocrisy is death.

The Lucifer of Babylon is the apostate Lucifer who hasn't returned to God. Conceptually, that's his condition forever. That's his definition. He went against good shepherding and good stewardship. He set himself up as God. He brought the light, the law, to the people; however, his light and law were darkness. They were in error and no light or law at all.

Lucifer means light-bringer. There is a false Lucifer, one who brings falsehood calling it light. There is a real morning star (light-bringer), one who brings God's light that is error free. It is the good news for those who return to God's desire for us to be good shepherds towards each other and good stewards toward God's creation, which God will make good in return, reflecting spirit.

The line between spirit and matter is a matter of perspective, a matter of comprehension. It is a matter of linguistics, of semantics. Our comprehension is limited to our language that is limited by our limited vision. We don't see what God has limited us from seeing. There is a difference between spirit and matter from our limited understanding. God though is not confined to our language. God knows what is happening when particles don't manifest wave pixel pictures being painted one particle at a time spread out over human time. Science is right now dumbfounded, but God has known forever.

Where do gods and God start and stop? This two is a matter of perspective, a matter of comprehension. No matter how close one gets to God, God will always know the difference between God and the other. At the same time, God has said that God is as a tree or a vine and that human beings are living beings, parts of the whole tree that is God. God has made clear that this is the way things are. God has further made clear that even though everything came from God, those who don't believe, by that very act of unbelief, cause for themselves to manifest their own preclusion from the eternal potential of oneness with the original wholeness who is God.

The terms "pantheism," "polytheism," and "monotheism" are insufficient. They alone don't answer that God and Jesus dwell within the believer. In terms of pantheism, polytheism, and monotheism, what does it mean to have God living within one? Jesus abides in God. God abides in Jesus. Jesus said God and Jesus abide in believers and believers in God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit all as one. What then are pantheism, polytheism, and monotheism?

Well, there is one. Then there is other. That is where error lies. Either you believe in what Jesus said and did or you don't. You can't merge Christianity with religions that don't believe Jesus and still have Christianity.

What are the proper contexts in which to comprehend the true nature of God?

You see, those currently most often labeled Christian fundamentalists are half right. Where they are half wrong is where they fail to move beyond the position of the Pharisees who wanted to stone Jesus do death for, as they called it, making "thyself God."

Jesus said Jesus is the Son of God. Jesus said God and he, Jesus, dwell within those to whom the word of God has come. He rebuked the Pharisees and others who didn't abide by their own law in Psalm 82:6 saying, "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High."

The self-styled fundamentalists call this Luciferian. They are mistaken. It is not humanism in the negative sense. It is not rebellion. After all, those to whom the word of God has come do not rebel against the government of the real and new heaven and new earth. They reject the false governance of the rebels against God, against the new heaven and new earth, the gift of God to come for those who believe in Jesus's pacifistic and giving and sharing teachings he brought directly from God's own mouth.

Jeremiah 27

Look at Jeremiah 27 where Jeremiah says that God told the people of Israel to serve Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, God's servant. Look at Jesus saying that Pontius Pilate had worldly authority over Jesus. Look at Jesus teaching that we are all to serve each other and not violently resist evil or fail to pay even taxes to caesar who uses such taxes for evil. Reconcile all of this.

One must stop falling into false paradoxes about who sits or stands or walks or talks, etc., closest to God or as God. God is absolute, infinite, independent, and makes interdependency. For those who believe what Jesus said and did, everything is relative to God while everything real is of God. Those who reject Jesus, no matter how much they attempt to co-opt or manipulate Jesus's words and deeds to fit their supremacy, will not be of the real one but rather of the other.

There is immortality of the soul and there is divinity for those who will believe in Jesus Christ who is not Lucifer of Babylon. Even that Lucifer can turn to God if he will. If he won't, he can't. Tautology or paradox or infinite truth, what do you believe? What will you cause to be your future? Will you be with God and Jesus or not?

Half right is half wrong. Now understand, we aren't dividing things literally exactly in half here. Half is used in place of "some" really. Some right is some wrong. Half-truths aren't to be taken as literally exact half true. A half-truth is a catch-all term meaning that there is some truth, some facts, given while there are falsehoods introduced causing the course to be off to miss the straight and narrow. One percent off steers one off the straight and narrow. The Holy Spirit gives course corrections to those who ask, to those who sense their own deviation.

So, we have the self-styled conservative, Republican, Christian fundamentalists who say that all advocacy for sharing is a cloak for stealing. Of course, it is not. Jesus and his disciples never stole from those who shared with them and for the sake of others. Coercion is not real Christianity, ever. However, sharing is.

Robert Schuller

On the other end, we have the Robert Schullers of the world, who say things such as, "There is no greater damage that can be done than to refer to the lost sinful condition of man."[218] How wrong can one be! All those who don't hear the voice of Jesus are lost sheep or not of the fold if they are within hear distance and ignore. Schuller's way lead straight down the wide path to hell.

Norman Vincent Peale

Robert H. Schuller fell under the spell of Norman Vincent Peale, the author of The Power of Positive Thinking. It is self-esteem. It is the opposite of humility. It cannot take one to where one realizes how one's selfishness has done so much damage, how everyone's selfishness has done so much damage. It isn't the message of Jesus. It isn't really positive. It's a pretense.

There is real positive thinking. It sees beyond the weakness of the flesh.

Faith is positive thinking. Understanding that given enough faith, one can ask mountains to be moved and they will be moved. This is literal and a metaphor for moving the powers that be and the whole of humanity. The spirit does it. When the movement is to righteous behavior, it's God. When it is to iniquity, it's Satan.

God blesses. Satan curses.

The satanic is as a jinx, but there is no luck or chance to it. The evil eye is real, but it isn't un-attributable or magic. The spirits of God and Satan don't perform magic, per se. They are metaphysical, more than physical (as vague as the human understanding of "physical" is); but, they are that to which the power is attributable.

This would appear to elevate Satan; however, if it were not for the need for human beings and other creatures of God to truly learn, Satan would have no such power. This doesn't mean Satan is imparting good but just the opposite; and, we are too come to realize that and not follow the path anymore, forever.

Now, one can make the case for the concept of using wrath to teach the ill-behaved to behave correctly, but wrath itself is something that must end within each of us. We must help one another reach that state. The healing must come from the movement to universal conversion.

God's love is such that God wants what is good. There is no other way to teach right from wrong without there being that spectrum which we must overcome so much that then, even though we know it is there, it no longer tempts any of us. That is true knowledge. That is the real life.

Now Peale's way allows for the confusion that is other than the new commandment. Peale didn't focus people on the fact that positive thinking is thinking perfectly positively about the new commandment, which then moves one to do that, to follow the new commandment.

Following the new commandment brought the curses of others upon Jesus. They were negative thinkers. Jesus didn't think of ways to make his life better in creature comforts and the absence of all spiritual assaults, because to do so would have been to leave his fellows lost to the higher and highest good. It would have left them all to the eternal mercilessness of the effects of their own iniquitous emotions, thoughts, words, and deeds, etc., and what is spiritual death that is the real misery that is hell eternal.

Therefore, what Jesus did may appear to have many negative consequences, but that is just a negative and false view. Jesus is in heaven—the real one. There is great joy there that these things are coming out and that people are turning to undertake bringing forth in the here and now in that spirit that is in the real and new heaven that will break forth when the critical mass is reached.

The great flood was to wash away the iniquitous. The coming of the new earth and heaven is more momentous than that event only it is the pouring out of righteousness upon the elect, the chosen people, those who convert, repent, and bring forth through those works that God and Jesus will smile upon, because those works come out of soft hearts where God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit live and are magnified and glorified.

Peale was a Freemason

Peale's way is humanism cloaked in false Christianity. It is ecumenicalism not for the sake of conversion but for the sake of syncretism-down. It's no accident that Peale was a Freemason. It feels good to its followers. However, they aren't bringing forth. The fruit has never come out of this bent. It is half-truth in that, of course, God is positive.

Feel-good psychology doesn't feed the lambs and sheep. It isn't guilty enough to atone that way. It's too busy tending to its own ego.

Don't take it wrong. There is definitely a time and place for joy, joy always in fact so long as it is simultaneously aware of the sorrow and pain of others and takes joy in serving to do right by them. That's where we want to be in this here and now.

Peale was half right. He gleaned what he wanted from the scriptures to make his system work. It's the truths he left out though that make the difference, as always.

Rick Warren

This is where Rick Warren and all the megachurch building under giving the consumers what they want has come from. It fills the seats in infotainment facilities calling themselves the church, but it doesn't get the job done and never will of doing what Jesus said that is feeding the lambs and sheep. At the same time, Rick Warren is advocating ecumenicalism in an effort to do just that.

This sounds good, but it takes the focus away from what will really save souls. Jesus made clear that we are to do both things at once. We are to feed physically and spiritually. We are to do this by example while always giving credit to God with a single vision, not a vision that allows in the hypocrisy of religions and denominations that allowed for the problems in the first place.

The narrow way is not the way of all the world's religions or all the world's so-called Christian denominations. It is not the way of Freemasonry or any other secret society.

Church is not a mall

This new age, new world, church is a mall, literally. They have shops, services, groups to appeal to the widest range of people possible. One size doesn't fit all so they offer every size. One brand or style doesn't suit all, so they offer every brand and size under the sun. If that's not enough, they'll make it up as they go along. The idea is consolidating under the big tent where very little that is misdirecting is rejected.

Bill Hybels and Rich Warren are purpose driven, but what's their purpose?

Look, the reason to dialogue is not to get to the place where everyone agrees to everyone else's divergent view. The reason to dialogue is to get everyone who is willing to come to Jesus Christ as Jesus Christ earnestly represented himself.

There is objective reality independent of the belief systems or lack thereof that create reality. Belief fits within reality. Reality allows belief to create but only within the ranges of creation set down by God. Jesus's message is not one of hopeless futility. His message is not one of being endlessly lost in relativity. One is found in the certainty of righteousness, which is doing no harm and going beyond that to doing only good that is unselfish love in action on the order of Jesus.

Most of the error comes in when people start making excuses for God. They think God is weak. What an error! They take all of their exclusive language, the language of the self-styled philosophical intellectual, and stir it in the pot in an attempt to explain why they don't know anything. They don't know anything, so God must be weak. It's as bad as the flipside that is God is strong so therefore I know everything that is put forth by the conservatives. The problem being that each side sees only the half it can fathom while they each need to see the truth the other sides sees and combine it and get rid of the falsehood on each side.

Benjamin Crème

Aquarian age

Take a person such as Benjamin Crème. He looks to mean well. Benjamin Crème purports to believe all the Theosophical ideas put forth by the New Agers. The misled want peace and love and truth. They end up being taught that the only way to get there is by transcending Jesus. They see in history a whole, long mistake of the Roman Catholic and other churches, and rightly so. So, they have concluded that Jesus must not have been right or good enough. Rather then looking deeper for the truth in what Jesus said and did, they go looking elsewhere to every other message that they think must be melded together or humanity will forever fail. They see the Aquarian age as bringing in someone better than Jesus. No. The second coming is consistent with Jesus. Theosophy is not consistent with Jesus.

Crème is absolutely right to put forth the principle of sharing. However, we don't need a new messiah to tell us that. Jesus already did. All we need to do is implement the new commandment that Jesus gave already.

The problem was with syncretism at the time of Jesus and before. People got off track from the first. The serpent was syncretic. The serpent was ecumenical. The serpent got the divergence started to divide the people from God, to divide the people amongst themselves, to conquer the people. God was not the first human being, per se. Adam was not God proper. God did not fall into temptation.

Maitreya

This is a slick job of selling the people on being devoured by Satan. The Maitreya person that is being put forth claims Jesus was not Christ.

These people are taking everything Jesus taught and did and twisting it to serve selfish ends. They are competing for supremacy for themselves. They are arguing for the same old hierarchy of bondage. The leveling of Jesus is subtly ignored. These people want to take Jesus and blend him in with everyone else as just another in a long series of enlightened and divine people. That way, they can move him down in people's estimation with one goal in mind that is to avoid the implications of Jesus's teachings and life example. They hate Jesus.

We aren't saying that everyone who follows these people hate Jesus. We are saying that those who started the path they are on hate Jesus.

The false one will come and will attempt to (continued...click the next page number below)...continues... Click next page number below. [If you would like to see the full text on one page (helps with searching for text on the page), use the "No-Graphics Print Version".]

Donate


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Sup5 No Such Thing Conservative-Republican Christian. Bookmark the permalink.