Ok, I'm going to delve into the christian mythos here and ask a blunt question... If your god did not mean for us to be capable of something, why give us the capacity to accomplish it at all?

We have the capability of communicating with angels just as people have the capability of communicating with demons. The problem is people are not taught that they can. Angels are usually sent to deliver messages. They only talk when needed.

Ok, I'm going to delve into the christian mythos here and ask a blunt question... If your god did not mean for us to be capable of something, why give us the capacity to accomplish it at all?

We have the capability of communicating with angels just as people have the capability of communicating with demons. The problem is people are not taught that they can. Angels are usually sent to deliver messages. They only talk when needed.

The way this was written makes angels seem meek in nature. I'm sure that wasn't intended, but to clarify (for those wondering), they're beings of unimaginable power. So, a mere human wouldn't really matter much. We are to angels as insects are to humans - er, at least, in the grand scheme of things.

So, sure, we have the capability to communicate with angels, just as we can talk to demons. It doesn't mean that it'll happen.

[jordyn]

Ok, I'm going to delve into the christian mythos here and ask a blunt question... If your god did not mean for us to be capable of something, why give us the capacity to accomplish it at all?

who says that?

on the contrary i believe he gave us those very things to see how we fair without him and feel what he has to deal with, as it comes to spiritualism, who says he necessarily has control over who gets "it" and who doesn't?

like all supernatural they seek out what's compatible and most receptive to their influence, I dealt with this stuff long before i embraced the Judaic God, so i don't think he really has anything to do with it unless a person chooses for him to do so.

we're humans and if we do something that the gods don't like, they smack us hard and good, the tower of babel is a good example, in this context.

[jordyn]

Ok, I'm going to delve into the christian mythos here and ask a blunt question... If your god did not mean for us to be capable of something, why give us the capacity to accomplish it at all?

We have the capability of communicating with angels just as people have the capability of communicating with demons. The problem is people are not taught that they can. Angels are usually sent to deliver messages. They only talk when needed.

The way this was written makes angels seem meek in nature. I'm sure that wasn't intended, but to clarify (for those wondering), they're beings of unimaginable power. So, a mere human wouldn't really matter much. We are to angels as insects are to humans - er, at least, in the grand scheme of things.

then they're disobeying God, wasn't that supposed to be what sent the fallen angels away?  a temper tantrum because God stated we had dominion over everything even them...it didn't sit well with angels that had the same attitude towards humanity that you seem to have presented, god has always sent them as messengers to those he keeps an eye on...if angels step out of their position, well...we all get smack downs for disobedience.

i guess it's just where you want to put your spiritual faith?

Ok, I'm going to delve into the christian mythos here and ask a blunt question... If your god did not mean for us to be capable of something, why give us the capacity to accomplish it at all?

We have the capability of communicating with angels just as people have the capability of communicating with demons. The problem is people are not taught that they can. Angels are usually sent to deliver messages. They only talk when needed.

The way this was written makes angels seem meek in nature. I'm sure that wasn't intended, but to clarify (for those wondering), they're beings of unimaginable power. So, a mere human wouldn't really matter much. We are to angels as insects are to humans - er, at least, in the grand scheme of things.

then they're disobeying God, wasn't that supposed to be what sent the fallen angels away?  a temper tantrum because God stated we had dominion over everything even them...it didn't sit well with angels that had the same attitude towards humanity that you seem to have presented, god has always sent them as messengers to those he keeps an eye on...if angels step out of their position, well...we all get smack downs for disobedience.

i guess it's just where you want to put your spiritual faith?

You misunderstand me. Of course we are important, but there are so many of us, and we are of much lesser power than they are. They do keep watch, and they do intervene when they can, but they won't stop by every single time a human talks to them. Many pray without answer. It doesn't mean we aren't being watched, merely that we aren't going to get answers as often as we would like.

[Muerte]

  Or the ones doing the asking are found wanting and there for unworthy of answer?

  Or the ones doing the asking are found wanting and there for unworthy of answer?

...good point.

[jordyn]

Ok, I'm going to delve into the christian mythos here and ask a blunt question... If your god did not mean for us to be capable of something, why give us the capacity to accomplish it at all?

We have the capability of communicating with angels just as people have the capability of communicating with demons. The problem is people are not taught that they can. Angels are usually sent to deliver messages. They only talk when needed.

The way this was written makes angels seem meek in nature. I'm sure that wasn't intended, but to clarify (for those wondering), they're beings of unimaginable power. So, a mere human wouldn't really matter much. We are to angels as insects are to humans - er, at least, in the grand scheme of things.

then they're disobeying God, wasn't that supposed to be what sent the fallen angels away?  a temper tantrum because God stated we had dominion over everything even them...it didn't sit well with angels that had the same attitude towards humanity that you seem to have presented, god has always sent them as messengers to those he keeps an eye on...if angels step out of their position, well...we all get smack downs for disobedience.

i guess it's just where you want to put your spiritual faith?

You misunderstand me. Of course we are important, but there are so many of us, and we are of much lesser power than they are. They do keep watch, and they do intervene when they can, but they won't stop by every single time a human talks to them. Many pray without answer. It doesn't mean we aren't being watched, merely that we aren't going to get answers as often as we would like.

if your power is derived from a god, then nothing is less than you...the divine power source of it all, whatever you personify it as, if you believe then something created it all.

one of my favorite stories from the new testament is of the widow pounding on the judges door, everyday she knocks on his door asking for him to intercede on her behalf to keep her property, he always says there's nothing he can do...one day after months of knocking the judge finally relents, assures she keeps her house and it all works out in the end.

it depends on the answer your seeking and where you seek it...

we give away our inner divine power to false idols, sometimes they answer but it's always with a cost to your soul and a fracture in your will.

[Moloch]

Jordyn - I hereby issue you a challenge.

Define 'God' without resorting to religious implements.

"If the primary dichotomy of the Creation is a falsehood and hence does not exist, then must not god, the Devil, heaven, and Hell also not exist? If this is the case, then isn't my life my own, to make a heaven or a Hell out of, and to enjoy either as I see fit?"

Jordyn... your views are very strictly confined to specific religions. My own personal beliefs are somewhat a pick-and-choose based on what I've learned, studied, and know, but to each his own. I do understand what you mean, though, but I don't have to agree, and I'm not going to enter a heated religious debate here.

[jordyn]

Jordyn - I hereby issue you a challenge.

Define 'God' without resorting to religious implements.

"If the primary dichotomy of the Creation is a falsehood and hence does not exist, then must not god, the Devil, heaven, and Hell also not exist? If this is the case, then isn't my life my own, to make a heaven or a Hell out of, and to enjoy either as I see fit?"

the only thing in the world you can count on to keep you in touch with your heart and nature, we can interact with it, sense it, feel it, personify it and being the source of our life, that little spark of energy is within all it's creations, i suppose the best analogy would be a giant universal crystal that fractured into millions of shards, each with a bit of this universal consciousness that gives it life.

who says all those shards aren't the creators of humanity?

that's God, i chose to personify It as i needed to allow It to intercede in my life for my spiritual and mental growth, i have to deal with it...

the tuatha du danan, genies, devis and devas...somehow we got constrained to physical bonds, i think that'd suggest we're most dangerous free from them, imagine what we can do while connected to the tangibility of the earth...but now it's just getting to edgar cayce.

i actually agree with your theory of creating our own heaven or hell, as it relates to the state of your mind when you die my heaven is a place of nothing but thought and color, hell would be a inner city drive through and i'm on the intercom at midnight after a blackhawks game,  at that point you're unconstrained to the flesh and well...i don't know what happens after that point, houdini's not talking...but you can't destroy energy, just redirect and define it, but all energy comes from a source.

we have the best of both worlds, why offer it so freely to those who didn't qualify for the choice?

if people are going to support one dogma then they should support the entirety of that dogma, how can one talk to angels if they can't relate to their creator?

enoch is a biblical character....and so are angels, subject to the rules of the culture that created them.

[jordyn]

Jordyn... your views are very strictly confined to specific religions. My own personal beliefs are somewhat a pick-and-choose based on what I've learned, studied, and know, but to each his own. I do understand what you mean, though, but I don't have to agree, and I'm not going to enter a heated religious debate here.

even as a i witch i didn't believe in picking and choosing, it loses the strength of it's original form...mish mashed into some wishy washy new agey christian witch sort of pseudo religion that's more trendy than fact.

you can't fight ancient devils with donald tyson experience.

Jordyn... your views are very strictly confined to specific religions. My own personal beliefs are somewhat a pick-and-choose based on what I've learned, studied, and know, but to each his own. I do understand what you mean, though, but I don't have to agree, and I'm not going to enter a heated religious debate here.

even as a i witch i didn't believe in picking and choosing, it loses the strength of it's original form...mish mashed into some wishy washy new agey christian witch sort of pseudo religion that's more trendy than fact.

you can't fight ancient devils with donald tyson experience.

Oh, no, I don't mean mish mashed with other things. Mostly, I believe in Christian principles, but for instance, I don't think premarital sex means you'll go to hell, or that, you know, certain things that were relevant to the people of that time are still relevant now. Again, not interested in heated religious debates. At all.

I think what I was trying to say earlier got lost in the usage of the wrong words. It wasn't my intent to backfire against Christianity on the whole, just to make a point - which wasn't, in and of itself, clear whatsoever.

I'll kindly back out of this conversation.

[Moloch]

Jordyn... your views are very strictly confined to specific religions. My own personal beliefs are somewhat a pick-and-choose based on what I've learned, studied, and know, but to each his own. I do understand what you mean, though, but I don't have to agree, and I'm not going to enter a heated religious debate here.

even as a i witch i didn't believe in picking and choosing, it loses the strength of it's original form...mish mashed into some wishy washy new agey christian witch sort of pseudo religion that's more trendy than fact.

you can't fight ancient devils with donald tyson experience.

Oh, no, I don't mean mish mashed with other things. Mostly, I believe in Christian principles, but for instance, I don't think premarital sex means you'll go to hell, or that, you know, certain things that were relevant to the people of that time are still relevant now. Again, not interested in heated religious debates. At all.

I think what I was trying to say earlier got lost in the usage of the wrong words. It wasn't my intent to backfire against Christianity on the whole, just to make a point - which wasn't, in and of itself, clear whatsoever.

I'll kindly back out of this conversation.

It's ok, I backslap christians all the time too.

[chaoticpsyche]

Jordyn... your views are very strictly confined to specific religions. My own personal beliefs are somewhat a pick-and-choose based on what I've learned, studied, and know, but to each his own. I do understand what you mean, though, but I don't have to agree, and I'm not going to enter a heated religious debate here.

even as a i witch i didn't believe in picking and choosing, it loses the strength of it's original form...mish mashed into some wishy washy new agey christian witch sort of pseudo religion that's more trendy than fact.

you can't fight ancient devils with donald tyson experience.

Lol, I do as well, It's a knee jerk reaction for me to do so.
Oh, no, I don't mean mish mashed with other things. Mostly, I believe in Christian principles, but for instance, I don't think premarital sex means you'll go to hell, or that, you know, certain things that were relevant to the people of that time are still relevant now. Again, not interested in heated religious debates. At all.

I think what I was trying to say earlier got lost in the usage of the wrong words. It wasn't my intent to backfire against Christianity on the whole, just to make a point - which wasn't, in and of itself, clear whatsoever.

I'll kindly back out of this conversation.

It's ok, I backslap christians all the time too.