How do the Cults explain away this?

[wil]

Originally Posted by Silas

... Romans 14:23 states that "whever that is not done in faith is sin." Therefore, I remind you friend, you are not good enough to please God no matter how good you think you are. So please trust in Christ alone and not on anything you do.

Namaste Silas,

I have faith, and I trust in the teachings. I just don't believe in a G-d that has such self worth issues as to need my worship or is in need of me placating or pleasing her.

Originally Posted by Silas

I wasnt aware that I attacked anyone, but if I was hasty and did offend anyone, please accept my appology - Im sorry.

Originally Posted by Silas

You dont think and thats the problem, friend.

hmmm, then what were you thinking when you said he didn't think?

[Silas]

Originally Posted by wil

Namaste Silas,

I have faith, and I trust in the teachings. I just don't believe in a G-d that has such self worth issues as to need my worship or is in need of me placating or pleasing her.[/color]hmmm, then what were you thinking when you said he didn't think?

Before I answer your comments I want to ensure that God needs nothing from anyone, He is completely self-suffient and satisifed within Himself. That said, He did create creatures for His glory. His Glory is bound up in the unsurpassed joy in His creatures. Therefore, when we are fully Satified in God, God is then fully Glorified in us, giving Him the glory and we the joy, which is the best of both possible worlds. So again in short, if you arent glorifying God, you're sinning. Therefore the situation remains, whatever is not done in faith is sin. You must understand that it is not just faith, but the objection of one's faith that makes it true. For example, I can bleieve that Oprah is god and if I say her names 5 times a day for the rest of my life, I will go to Heaven. Because I have faith in that does not make it true. The only way that my faith in that would be true is if it occured. As for my condesending remark, Im sorry!

[wil]

In him we live and breathe and have our being...

You know it is funny as I contemplate it, I realize all is of G-d, all my desires (of the father), and attribute all my blessings to G-d...but my mistakes are mine, the issues in my life I take personal responsiblity for...

Make me wonder.

[Silas]

Back to the question at hand...

How do JWs and Mormons understand Jesus saying "there is none good but God." And, if they believe Jesus isnt God and therefore not good, how are they saved by his sacrifice?

[mee]

Originally Posted by Silas

I agree! I wasnt talking about that, thats obvious to Christians. I was trying to see how the cults understand Jesus saying "there is none good but God." And, if they believe Jesus isnt God and therefore not good, how are they saved by his sacrifice? See what I mean? Hey JWs and Mormoms, answer please.

i would not know what cults believe i stick to the bible.

[mee]

Originally Posted by InLove

Apologies to all--I meant John 10:14-16




I would be interested both in how you interpret this, Silas, as well as input from the Jehovah's Witness point of view.

I hope this is not too far off-topic--it seems relative to me.

InPeace,
InLove

yes Jesus certainly does have other sheep . as John 10;16 tells us
"And I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; those also I must bring, and they will listen to my voice, and they will become one flock, one shepherd. .............
apart from the little flock of 144,000 he has a great crowd now welcoming Jesus as their king revelation 7;9-10

[InLove]

Thank you, Silas and mee, for your responses. I hope I did not interrupt the chain of thought too much with my interjection. I love that passage of Scripture--lots of food for thought and meditation there.

InPeace,
InLove

[path_of_one]

Originally Posted by Silas

I agree! I wasnt talking about that, thats obvious to Christians. I was trying to see how the cults understand Jesus saying "there is none good but God." And, if they believe Jesus isnt God and therefore not good, how are they saved by his sacrifice? See what I mean? Hey JWs and Mormoms, answer please.

Hi. Member of a cult here (at least by your definition). (Well, and we're all members of a cult by Webster's definition.)

"There is none good but God."

I can't say how "the cults understand" this. I am not a cult. I am just a person who you define as a member of a cult. So I can only speak for what this means to me. I am actually not a "member" of much of anything (see user name) but I guess I'd fall into the "cult" category for you because I don't agree with you and I am best described as a Christian Druid (Christian by faith/practice, Druid by philosophy/practice).

I believe this is saying that all goodness comes from God. So everything that is good, is of God. God's immanence shines through to us in all good things on earth. Christ was saying, "Look, all the goodness you see, including the goodness in me, is from God!"

If you are saying that there is nothing good on earth, then you are limiting God. You are putting God in a "non-earth" box. On the contrary, there are lots of good things on earth, and these point towards the immanence and goodness of God. This is why the Psalms say that the heaves show God's presence, and why Paul says that all humans are without excuse (in their choice whether or not to seek after God) because even if they have not heard the gospel, they have the Creation itself to speak of God's presence, goodness, and love.

When we are good to others, when we love others as we love ourselves, we are also showing God's immanence. This is why this commandment is so important. We can show Christ's love to others by exercising the goodness of God that is in us.

I believe Jesus was a pure manifestation of God. He completely emptied His human self (desires, fears, etc.) and was, at the end, entirely filled with God's love and spirit, though in the form of a man. He was not only God, but also man, and this is how He unites the two. That He struggled as a man is Biblical, down to His time at the Garden before His cruxifiction, when He asked God to spare Him.

That said, I do not think we are saved by Christ's blood sacrifice, per se. Christ is an eternal essence of God; He has always existed and will always exist. Jesus was the temporary manifestation, the personification, of this essence of God's grace and love and pure goodness, into human history. Christ's sacrifice (God's sacrifice) has always been and will always be. His sacrifice was not simply cruxifiction on a cross, but much much more. God's sacrifice is His willingness to love us despite our sins, His grace in the face of our cruelty and self-centeredness. A lot of humans (of all cultures and religions) couldn't really understand the extent of God's grace and love. And so Christ was made manifest in Jesus (the man) to show us the extent of God's love for us and to give us a guide for how to lead a life truly pleasing to God- a life that is free from "the rules" but following the right path, leading us to extend God's love and grace to others in turn.

So I suppose I fit in an odd category for you. I believe in the perfection of Jesus Christ, and His rightful place as an essence of God. But I do not believe that God demands blood sacrifice, so I think to see it in that way is limiting the true Gift that was given. Yes, there is none good but God. But God's goodness is in everything He ever created, as Genesis says. We can choose to not be good (that is our free will), we can choose not to cultivate the immanence of God in us, but we cannot be totally rid of it. We can only ignore it, and even this is only finite, for we exist in mere slivers of time and understanding that are as nothing at all to the eternal God.

[earl]

Originally Posted by path_of_one

Hi. Member of a cult here (at least by your definition). (Well, and we're all members of a cult by Webster's definition.)

"There is none good but God."

I can't say how "the cults understand" this. I am not a cult. I am just a person who you define as a member of a cult. So I can only speak for what this means to me. I am actually not a "member" of much of anything (see user name) but I guess I'd fall into the "cult" category for you because I don't agree with you and I am best described as a Christian Druid (Christian by faith/practice, Druid by philosophy/practice).

I believe this is saying that all goodness comes from God. So everything that is good, is of God. God's immanence shines through to us in all good things on earth. Christ was saying, "Look, all the goodness you see, including the goodness in me, is from God!"

If you are saying that there is nothing good on earth, then you are limiting God. You are putting God in a "non-earth" box. On the contrary, there are lots of good things on earth, and these point towards the immanence and goodness of God. This is why the Psalms say that the heaves show God's presence, and why Paul says that all humans are without excuse (in their choice whether or not to seek after God) because even if they have not heard the gospel, they have the Creation itself to speak of God's presence, goodness, and love.

When we are good to others, when we love others as we love ourselves, we are also showing God's immanence. This is why this commandment is so important. We can show Christ's love to others by exercising the goodness of God that is in us.

I believe Jesus was a pure manifestation of God. He completely emptied His human self (desires, fears, etc.) and was, at the end, entirely filled with God's love and spirit, though in the form of a man. He was not only God, but also man, and this is how He unites the two. That He struggled as a man is Biblical, down to His time at the Garden before His cruxifiction, when He asked God to spare Him.

That said, I do not think we are saved by Christ's blood sacrifice, per se. Christ is an eternal essence of God; He has always existed and will always exist. Jesus was the temporary manifestation, the personification, of this essence of God's grace and love and pure goodness, into human history. Christ's sacrifice (God's sacrifice) has always been and will always be. His sacrifice was not simply cruxifiction on a cross, but much much more. God's sacrifice is His willingness to love us despite our sins, His grace in the face of our cruelty and self-centeredness. A lot of humans (of all cultures and religions) couldn't really understand the extent of God's grace and love. And so Christ was made manifest in Jesus (the man) to show us the extent of God's love for us and to give us a guide for how to lead a life truly pleasing to God- a life that is free from "the rules" but following the right path, leading us to extend God's love and grace to others in turn.

So I suppose I fit in an odd category for you. I believe in the perfection of Jesus Christ, and His rightful place as an essence of God. But I do not believe that God demands blood sacrifice, so I think to see it in that way is limiting the true Gift that was given. Yes, there is none good but God. But God's goodness is in everything He ever created, as Genesis says. We can choose to not be good (that is our free will), we can choose not to cultivate the immanence of God in us, but we cannot be totally rid of it. We can only ignore it, and even this is only finite, for we exist in mere slivers of time and understanding that are as nothing at all to the eternal God.

Wonderful description of the meaning of "Christ" if I'm understanding you correctly path and a view I'd agree with: "Christ" being a principal, or force, or potential for a human to receive and manifest into this world of form the full expression of God, which was fully completed in and by Jesus. have a good one, earl

[Faithfulservant]

Originally Posted by wil

Namaste Silas,

Hmmm all cults in mind? Like Christianity? Words are meant to be used so all can understand them...According to Websters...(maybe you are using another dictionary?)So to be clear Christianity fits all these descriptions.

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes (to some of other cults like Islam, Judaism, etc.)
4. Yes, Jesus used curing disease as a main form to prove himself to others and taught his disciples to do the same.
5. Again yes.

So we can communicate, it appears you are referring to all peoples who don't believe as you do, am I correct?

What is the definition of a cult? this is what he means Wil..

[Faithfulservant]

Originally Posted by wil

Namaste Silas,

I have faith, and I trust in the teachings. I just don't believe in a G-d that has such self worth issues as to need my worship or is in need of me placating or pleasing her

her???

anyways..

God inhabits our praises.. He lives resides and is with us in our praises and worship... that means we are supposed to worship and praise Him to experience His divine glory, the shekinah glory of the living God. Not that HE needs it.. but that WE need it..

[path_of_one]

Thanks for the clarification, FS. This, of course, is not the only definition of cult and, like defining idolatry, it rests on others' judgements. No one would call themselves an idolator (worshipper of false gods) and no one would say they are in a cult by this definition (a person who believes something that prevents them from being saved). It is a judgement that is passed on other groups.

I think the word cult is very problematic to use because we all will think of different things in reference to the word.

From religioustolerance.org:

Cult: From the Latin word "cultus" -- meaning worship. Cult is a word with many religious meanings (and some secular as well) which should be used with great care to avoid misunderstanding. We recommend the neutral term "new religious movement" be used in its place. Even better is to refer to a religious group by its name:

1. Traditional theological usage: a style of worship and its associated rituals. It can be applied to any faith group.
2. Sociological usage: a small religious group that exists in a state of tension with the predominant religion; e.g. Christianity in Pakistan.
3. General religious usage: a small, recently created religious group; not a variant of an established religion. Often headed by a single charismatic leader.
4. Evangelical usage: a religious group that considers themselves to be Christian but which denies one or more historical beliefs of Protestant Christianity.
5. Counter-cult movement usage: Same as Evangelical usage.
6. Anti-cult movement usage: a small, evil religious group, often with a single charismatic leader, who engage in deceptive recruiting, brainwashing and other mind control techniques
7. Popular belief: A doomsday, dangerous, destructive religious movement whose members risk their life to belong.

That pretty much sums up the definitions I've seen float around. Note that Silas' use of the word is just one among many, and it is a relatively recent re-definition of the term, which has long been used in social science, psychology, and religious studies.

I do not pass judgement on other groups and the state of their salvation. This is a job reserved for God alone, in my opinion.

[Faithfulservant]

Originally Posted by path_of_one

Thanks for the clarification, FS. This, of course, is not the only definition of cult and, like defining idolatry, it rests on others' judgements. No one would call themselves an idolator (worshipper of false gods) and no one would say they are in a cult by this definition (a person who believes something that prevents them from being saved). It is a judgement that is passed on other groups.

I think the word cult is very problematic to use because we all will think of different things in reference to the word.

From religioustolerance.org:[/list]That pretty much sums up the definitions I've seen float around. Note that Silas' use of the word is just one among many, and it is a relatively recent re-definition of the term, which has long been used in social science, psychology, and religious studies.

I do not pass judgement on other groups and the state of their salvation. This is a job reserved for God alone, in my opinion.

I thinks its in error to use the term passing of judgement as in condemnation... I believe the intent and purpose is to judge as in identify the fruit of one that we label a cult.. most of us arent labeling to condemn we are labeling to identify the same way we do in labeling antichrist or apostate teachings..we are told to do this.. hope that helps.

[path_of_one]

Originally Posted by Faithfulservant

her???

anyways..

God inhabits our praises.. He lives resides and is with us in our praises and worship... that means we are supposed to worship and praise Him to experience His divine glory, the shekinah glory of the living God. Not that HE needs it.. but that WE need it..

I think Wil's just shaking it up a little. Him/Her/It/Them/Whatever. The point being that Wil doesn't believe God is gendered (as do I).

I agree with you that God doesn't need our praise, but we need to praise Him (Her/It/Them ). Worship is good for us, both for our spiritual growth and simply for our day-to-day mental and emotional health.

[path_of_one]

Originally Posted by Faithfulservant

I thinks its in error to use the term passing of judgement as in condemnation... I believe the intent and purpose is to judge as in identify the fruit of one that we label a cult.. most of us arent labeling to condemn we are labeling to identify the same way we do in labeling antichrist or apostacy teachings.. hope that helps.

I think we can see what the fruit is of a belief for a particular person by their attitude and actions. We are told that those in the Spirit will bear the fruit of the Spirit, and that good fruit cannot come from a bad tree.

So I think the discernment about a person's spirituality is a very individual thing- it has to do with that individual's spiritual fruit that is evident to us.

To put out a blanket statement for an entire religion/faith, like saying "Buddhism is a cult. What they believe will not lead to their salvation," is condemning all Buddhists to hell, and to me is a big judgement. Now, to say... "Hmmm... this particular Buddhist person I know does/does not show the fruits of the Spirit" is something different- it is discernment.

We are given discernment to know who and what is good for our own spiritual growth, not to determine whether or not those people are or will be saved by God. I maintain that it is not my place to judge others' journey toward (or away from) salvation. It is only my place to discern whether others' companionship, teachings, and actions are right for my own spiritual path and are in alignment with the guidance I receive from the Spirit.

Labeling a teaching as against what the Spirit tells me is right for me is different from labeling an entire group of people and saying that they will not be saved.

I hope this helps to clarify what I meant.