Theology 1: You can only get it correctly if you are ready to make it wrong.

The idea that we were created by God, yet we sinners, and God will judge us for our sins: this is baking in Christian belief and practice.

From the third for me to say, “Who are Hell? YouOh God, blame we to for you mistake?

“we for you Error, God. If you build us in this way, then you gave us free will, so we have fallen into sin, there is a problem with for you design.”

Christian belief assumes that God is good and we, his creation, is born in sin. What is wrong with this image?

It is a shame and blame – not turtles – all on the way.

Christ outside Christianity has more than one meaning. Perhaps the least clear meaning (from finding Christ outside Christianity) is that Christianity has actually made the stone of Christ; Either that, or it is a type of quarantine from Jesus.

Christ is not allowed to enter Christianity. It has been exiled.

I don’t think he is happy with that – but what does he do I Know?

I know I am not happy with that. I am not satisfied with the function of Christ of Christ for Christ. I think Christians have sinned from the beginning, since the first book of the Bible.

You can’t get more excessive than that, can you do that?

What is my motivation? I want to establish Christ in something physical, tangible and real, just as I want the Lion of Jesus the Nazareth – the historical Jesus, the man who walked on the same land in which we walk – in something material, tangible and real.

The Church (at some time) recognizes the historical denial of Jesus as unrelated. Christians are warned against not falling into mere historical facts, and that their faith may weaken. But what about historical (real metaphysical) Jesus?

So what does Pistis slogans mean? Does this mean faith in logic, logic of faith, or anything else?

Faith and logic work together is the main idea. It brings almost tears to my eyes to think about the matter – such as the marriage of heaven and hell (another innovation, from one of the great Christian heretics).

The more you read about early Christianity and theological interpretation, the more it appears The logic was denied by ChristianityJust as Christ was denied. Logos and logic are denying Verboten.

You can return to historical records to find out how it happened. He is Muslim, I am a beginner, so it is possible that I would like to simplify things when everything is completely new to me.

But what seems to say, in these different historical councils, and they still say today, is: “Do not depend on this logical thing. Just listen to us: We will tell you what it is. You must trust it. RevelationAnd He was Those who have detection, and who can tell you about the revelation to believe. “

For example, this is from Transformation points: decisive moments in the history of Christianity, Written by Mark A. Nol, on the neon doctrine:

Not only does it summarize the facts of the biblical revelation, but it is also a sadness against the continuous human tendency to prefer logical discounts related to what God must be and how he should act with the living facts of the separation of God (p. 51).

Certainly, I will admit that divine revelation is more important than the logical opponent, and that we are lost without it. But we cannot He depends On the revelation, because what about when we do not have one? What do we depend in the meantime? Church?

If we rely on last People, like the Bible, how will we test them? How will we determine whether they are standing or not? Do we say, “Well, says” John the divine “on him, so it should be good? Or, “it is in the New Testament, it is legal, so it should be true”?

With the exception of a blind belief in man, we have never met – a consolation is the acceptable exception, in some The road – what is leaving next to Logical discount? What does that leave it, but to apply conclusive logic (“with regard to what God should be and how should he behave”) when we read, compare, search, evaluate, and decide: Does this add or not?

One thing no Adding what is up is that if Christ Jesus is completely divine and human, then this makes him 200 %. I lived and worked with this idea for decades. It is a paradox and enjoy paradoxes, and I think – I still think – Christ Jesus was a unique historical event, and that God, in some way, is completely embodied through a person, as it has not happened before or since then. So I thought, fair enough, whatever. 200 % is!

But the fact is that there is something wrong with these mathematics. It is very close to 2 + 2 = 5.

The only alternative to logical opponent, when we cannot rely on our direct revelation (our) is Blind belief and negative submission to power.

This is a Christian doctrine: We have to believe that we are saved.

This means that we must believe BlindBecause who can get his head along this thing, God Jesus? Who was? How did that happen? Is he born from a virgin? He says that in the book, so it is better to believe it! Why Is he born from a virgin? What does this mean about sex and perception and how does God work through us? who knows? Just believe that, the curse on you!

Is this a case of a believer in the Bible, or from the believing authorities that tell us what we believe in the Bible? If we don’t really do it Understand The Bible, how can we believe that?

Is the belief without understanding it deserves anything – or does it leave us by 50 % perennial, and looks at what is impossible – with an uniformity phrase -?

The concept of the Virgin was mentioned only in Two out of four gospels. Why not the four? It is a very important event, so you think they can all agree on it.

Mark’s Gospel is believed to be the oldest, but there is nothing about the birth of Jesus there at all. A little overwhelming, right?

The Gospel of John is the most deep, the most spiritual, and the elegance that talks about slogans and embodiment of the most esoteric conditions, and also does not mention them. Do you think John will consider it related if Jesus was born from a virgin, right? They are important details – for that Why Didn’t he mention that?

Perhaps because it did not happen like this?

Despite the absence of the Gospel of John, this excerpt (specifically the line “slogans that have become a body”) was essential in confirmation and creation, in the Nagia and Chaltedon councils, from the doctrine that Jesus is divine, shared with God, as compared to the adoption view, on that:

A) The slogans or the divine son were a secondary emission of God, and therefore it was not equal to them

B) Christ was not born Logos as a man (son), Jesus, however I entered into Jesus’ body, whether in baptism by John the Baptist (as Rudolph Steiner), was in the steel, on the resurrection, or with ascending.

The standard Christian view makes Jesus, a fatal man, the soul of God, the entirety of existence, from the beginning to the end of time. Alpha and Omega.

This was Impose The Bible, historically, between the fourth and fifth centuries, through the device of both the priestly and political pressure that overthrew all those who did not agree and turn them into heretics. However, to this day, there are churches that do not share this opinion (such as the Assyrian Church in the East).

It seems that the apparent logical basis for apparently asserting the full deity of Jesus, unless Jesus was equal to God (like) God, then he could not communicate humanity from sin. It is not clear to me the reason for this, and I think that there are other unconscious or secret reasons for the establishment of Jesus’ deity by 100 %, from the miracle perception, in mysterious (or informal) circumstances that coexist with his humanity by 100 %.

It was the clearest impression that I got, while reading the book of Nol, is that these first Christian social engineers did not completely understand the Bible/the nature of Christ themselves, and that they made their best (?) In the wing, in a way that makes it coherent and consumed by the majority, and at the same time they are compatible with their social goals, and with social goals of separation.

This does not seem an example of following the example of Christ.

You have a church that begins with the Apostles, but it soon becomes more social and political, so that these priests are soon enjoyed by the priests in Cahoots with emperors.

In order to continue to obtain authority about these things, regarding the issue of who Jesus was and what is correct for belief, they should do so He appears To be 100 % sure of it. Not only can they say, “We He thinks It was, but it could have been. We are not really certainly If Mary is a virgin, but she is may It was, dependent on the gospel that you refer to. So you just have to compensate for your mind. “

Who will be followed Which – which?

Basically, it will be a church saying: “I got the Bible. We will talk to you about this topic, but you have to work to work yourself. It is you and Christ, you and the book. We can offer you some indicators here and there, and we can share notes and exchange it, but that’s all.

This may be honesty, integrity, care and promotion of individual responsibility; But this is not what most people respond to authority.

Of course, they had to get rid of belief, condemnation, certainty and knowledge – initially with themselves.

It is a strange kind of thinking about work. Even reading this intense history, it became clear to me that these religious leaders did not really do it Know What is the truth, clearly, because they were He argues on this topic. There was Division.

There were splits even before Nikia, of course, returning to the Apostles. For circumcision or lack of circumcision: this question was at that time. The first split.

How irony: There was a division between whether or not everyone would be divided. Fortunately, Paul has won the conflict session (although you will not know her by looking at statistics over the past 100 years).

When it comes to our relationship with SlogansThere will always be an element of uncertainty. Revelation will always be partial, and both faith and logic have their limits.

If God is existence, then existence is always moving. Jesus is a moving goal, as well as a thief at night.

The imposition of belief as a form of false certainty is a type of infection. To be Christian, in most community frames, it is required to imitate it. We have to think Feel Like certainty, although we only know that we are I don’t know.

If we put our faith in those who say they are Do I know, the logic says, then we can believe in everything we have that it is true, so we will save.

this may Work for some, assume. I do not form the entire Christianity, because we will not have this conversation without it. Blind belief maybe Work for millions, or billions, from people. Certainly it is better than the alternative, if the alternative has wakes up, then LGBTQ, edited atheists, progressive.

But this is not mine, and if you are reading this, it may not be for you either.

You may work for a while. But this is not the example that Christ left. About this, I have some certainty. Christ was not a follower. He was not a blind believer.

This does not mean that we are Not possible Learn about things on a deep level, or we are no You know certain things. We know in our bodies whether the earth is round or flat, even if we cannot bring that knowledge to the level of the mind (and we cannot trust the authorities to tell us).

We know things about Christ Jesus, and God also, in our bodies, hearts and souls. The mind must always be the last to know.

Faith is moved and directed through deep knowledge, but it is not a mental construction and should not be taken at all in cognitive certainty or condemnation.

Wood sealing, carrying water: This is all we are He can Certainly know, at the mental level. But Jesus’ praise is enough.

Involve

Theology 1: You can only get it correctly if you are ready to make it wrong.

The idea that we were created by God, yet we sinners, and God will judge us for our sins: this is baking in Christian belief and practice.

From the third for me to say, “Who are Hell? YouOh God, blame we to for you mistake?

“we for you Error, God. If you build us in this way, then you gave us free will, so we have fallen into sin, there is a problem with for you design.”

Christian belief assumes that God is good and we, his creation, is born in sin. What is wrong with this image?

It is a shame and blame – not turtles – all on the way.

Christ outside Christianity has more than one meaning. Perhaps the least clear meaning (from finding Christ outside Christianity) is that Christianity has actually made the stone of Christ; Either that, or it is a type of quarantine from Jesus.

Christ is not allowed to enter Christianity. It has been exiled.

I don’t think he is happy with that – but what does he do I Know?

I know I am not happy with that. I am not satisfied with the function of Christ of Christ for Christ. I think Christians have sinned from the beginning, since the first book of the Bible.

You can’t get more excessive than that, can you do that?

What is my motivation? I want to establish Christ in something physical, tangible and real, just as I want the Lion of Jesus the Nazareth – the historical Jesus, the man who walked on the same land in which we walk – in something material, tangible and real.

The Church (at some time) recognizes the historical denial of Jesus as unrelated. Christians are warned against not falling into mere historical facts, and that their faith may weaken. But what about historical (real metaphysical) Jesus?

So what does Pistis slogans mean? Does this mean faith in logic, logic of faith, or anything else?

Faith and logic work together is the main idea. It brings almost tears to my eyes to think about the matter – such as the marriage of heaven and hell (another innovation, from one of the great Christian heretics).

The more you read about early Christianity and theological interpretation, the more it appears The logic was denied by ChristianityJust as Christ was denied. Logos and logic are denying Verboten.

You can return to historical records to find out how it happened. He is Muslim, I am a beginner, so it is possible that I would like to simplify things when everything is completely new to me.

But what seems to say, in these different historical councils, and they still say today, is: “Do not depend on this logical thing. Just listen to us: We will tell you what it is. You must trust it. RevelationAnd He was Those who have detection, and who can tell you about the revelation to believe. “

For example, this is from Transformation points: decisive moments in the history of Christianity, Written by Mark A. Nol, on the neon doctrine:

Not only does it summarize the facts of the biblical revelation, but it is also a sadness against the continuous human tendency to prefer logical discounts related to what God must be and how he should act with the living facts of the separation of God (p. 51).

Certainly, I will admit that divine revelation is more important than the logical opponent, and that we are lost without it. But we cannot He depends On the revelation, because what about when we do not have one? What do we depend in the meantime? Church?

If we rely on last People, like the Bible, how will we test them? How will we determine whether they are standing or not? Do we say, “Well, says” John the divine “on him, so it should be good? Or, “it is in the New Testament, it is legal, so it should be true”?

With the exception of a blind belief in man, we have never met – a consolation is the acceptable exception, in some The road – what is leaving next to Logical discount? What does that leave it, but to apply conclusive logic (“with regard to what God should be and how should he behave”) when we read, compare, search, evaluate, and decide: Does this add or not?

One thing no Adding what is up is that if Christ Jesus is completely divine and human, then this makes him 200 %. I lived and worked with this idea for decades. It is a paradox and enjoy paradoxes, and I think – I still think – Christ Jesus was a unique historical event, and that God, in some way, is completely embodied through a person, as it has not happened before or since then. So I thought, fair enough, whatever. 200 % is!

But the fact is that there is something wrong with these mathematics. It is very close to 2 + 2 = 5.

The only alternative to logical opponent, when we cannot rely on our direct revelation (our) is Blind belief and negative submission to power.

This is a Christian doctrine: We have to believe that we are saved.

This means that we must believe BlindBecause who can get his head along this thing, God Jesus? Who was? How did that happen? Is he born from a virgin? He says that in the book, so it is better to believe it! Why Is he born from a virgin? What does this mean about sex and perception and how does God work through us? who knows? Just believe that, the curse on you!

Is this a case of a believer in the Bible, or from the believing authorities that tell us what we believe in the Bible? If we don’t really do it Understand The Bible, how can we believe that?

Is the belief without understanding it deserves anything – or does it leave us by 50 % perennial, and looks at what is impossible – with an uniformity phrase -?

The concept of the Virgin was mentioned only in Two out of four gospels. Why not the four? It is a very important event, so you think they can all agree on it.

Mark’s Gospel is believed to be the oldest, but there is nothing about the birth of Jesus there at all. A little overwhelming, right?

The Gospel of John is the most deep, the most spiritual, and the elegance that talks about slogans and embodiment of the most esoteric conditions, and also does not mention them. Do you think John will consider it related if Jesus was born from a virgin, right? They are important details – for that Why Didn’t he mention that?

Perhaps because it did not happen like this?

Despite the absence of the Gospel of John, this excerpt (specifically the line “slogans that have become a body”) was essential in confirmation and creation, in the Nagia and Chaltedon councils, from the doctrine that Jesus is divine, shared with God, as compared to the adoption view, on that:

A) The slogans or the divine son were a secondary emission of God, and therefore it was not equal to them

B) Christ was not born Logos as a man (son), Jesus, however I entered into Jesus’ body, whether in baptism by John the Baptist (as Rudolph Steiner), was in the steel, on the resurrection, or with ascending.

The standard Christian view makes Jesus, a fatal man, the soul of God, the entirety of existence, from the beginning to the end of time. Alpha and Omega.

This was Impose The Bible, historically, between the fourth and fifth centuries, through the device of both the priestly and political pressure that overthrew all those who did not agree and turn them into heretics. However, to this day, there are churches that do not share this opinion (such as the Assyrian Church in the East).

It seems that the apparent logical basis for apparently asserting the full deity of Jesus, unless Jesus was equal to God (like) God, then he could not communicate humanity from sin. It is not clear to me the reason for this, and I think that there are other unconscious or secret reasons for the establishment of Jesus’ deity by 100 %, from the miracle perception, in mysterious (or informal) circumstances that coexist with his humanity by 100 %.

It was the clearest impression that I got, while reading the book of Nol, is that these first Christian social engineers did not completely understand the Bible/the nature of Christ themselves, and that they made their best (?) In the wing, in a way that makes it coherent and consumed by the majority, and at the same time they are compatible with their social goals, and with social goals of separation.

This does not seem an example of following the example of Christ.

You have a church that begins with the Apostles, but it soon becomes more social and political, so that these priests are soon enjoyed by the priests in Cahoots with emperors.

In order to continue to obtain authority about these things, regarding the issue of who Jesus was and what is correct for belief, they should do so He appears To be 100 % sure of it. Not only can they say, “We He thinks It was, but it could have been. We are not really certainly If Mary is a virgin, but she is may It was, dependent on the gospel that you refer to. So you just have to compensate for your mind. “

Who will be followed Which – which?

Basically, it will be a church saying: “I got the Bible. We will talk to you about this topic, but you have to work to work yourself. It is you and Christ, you and the book. We can offer you some indicators here and there, and we can share notes and exchange it, but that’s all.

This may be honesty, integrity, care and promotion of individual responsibility; But this is not what most people respond to authority.

Of course, they had to get rid of belief, condemnation, certainty and knowledge – initially with themselves.

It is a strange kind of thinking about work. Even reading this intense history, it became clear to me that these religious leaders did not really do it Know What is the truth, clearly, because they were He argues on this topic. There was Division.

There were splits even before Nikia, of course, returning to the Apostles. For circumcision or lack of circumcision: this question was at that time. The first split.

How irony: There was a division between whether or not everyone would be divided. Fortunately, Paul has won the conflict session (although you will not know her by looking at statistics over the past 100 years).

When it comes to our relationship with SlogansThere will always be an element of uncertainty. Revelation will always be partial, and both faith and logic have their limits.

If God is existence, then existence is always moving. Jesus is a moving goal, as well as a thief at night.

The imposition of belief as a form of false certainty is a type of infection. To be Christian, in most community frames, it is required to imitate it. We have to think Feel Like certainty, although we only know that we are I don’t know.

If we put our faith in those who say they are Do I know, the logic says, then we can believe in everything we have that it is true, so we will save.

this may Work for some, assume. I do not form the entire Christianity, because we will not have this conversation without it. Blind belief maybe Work for millions, or billions, from people. Certainly it is better than the alternative, if the alternative has wakes up, then LGBTQ, edited atheists, progressive.

But this is not mine, and if you are reading this, it may not be for you either.

You may work for a while. But this is not the example that Christ left. About this, I have some certainty. Christ was not a follower. He was not a blind believer.

This does not mean that we are Not possible Learn about things on a deep level, or we are no You know certain things. We know in our bodies whether the earth is round or flat, even if we cannot bring that knowledge to the level of the mind (and we cannot trust the authorities to tell us).

We know things about Christ Jesus, and God also, in our bodies, hearts and souls. The mind must always be the last to know.

Faith is moved and directed through deep knowledge, but it is not a mental construction and should not be taken at all in cognitive certainty or condemnation.

Wood sealing, carrying water: This is all we are He can Certainly know, at the mental level. But Jesus’ praise is enough.

Involve