Denomination quiz....very accurate!

mabsoota

Archon
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
2,859
Reaction score
0
Points
0
guys, it's a computer.
back away from the computer.
do not hit the computer!
go talk to a real life person!
you may find one outside your house...
;)
 

Nathanael

High Elder
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
539
Reaction score
6
Points
18
I wouldn't exactly call myself a New Ager though. I suppose it's the closest thing on the list.
But isn't Helena Blavatsky (on your profil picture) a leading name in the New Age Movement? Helena was rather a patchwork-theosophist. If at the time when Blavatsky lived, would exist such accessible and rich informations about different religious traditions, she would be perhaps also a classical New Ager.
 

Jetavan

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
7,007
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
www.esoteric.msu.edu
My first taking of the quiz (2010):

My #1 is:   Eastern Orthodox Church      
  My #2 is:   Evangelical Lutheran Church      
  My #3 is:   Episcopal/Anglican Church      
  My #4 is:   Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod      
  My #5 is:   Methodist/Wesleyan Church      
  My #6 is:   Seventh-Day Adventist      
  My #7 is:   Presbyterian Church USA      
  My #8 is:   Roman Catholic Church      
  My #9 is:   Assemblies of God    
  My #10 is:   Presbyterian Church in America/Orthodox Presbyterian Church      
  My #11 is:   Reformed Churches      
  My #12 is:   Southern Baptist      
  My #13 is:   Mennonite Brethren      
  My #14 is:   Church of Christ      
  My #15 is:   Free Will Baptist      
  My #16 is:   Reformed Baptist      
  My #17 is:   Unitarian Universalism      
  My #18 is:   United Pentecostal Church      
  My #19 is:   Liberal Quakerism      
  My #20 is:   Orthodox Quakerism      
  My #21 is:   International Church of Christ      
  My #22 is:   Mormonism      
  My #23 is:   Unity Church      
  My #24 is:   Jehovah's Witness  

Today's results

        Unitarian Universalism (100%)  
Episcopal/Anglican Church (95%)  
Eastern Orthodox Church (88%)  
Unity Church (88%)  
Evangelical Lutheran Church (85%)  
Methodist/Wesleyan Church (85%)  
Seventh-Day Adventist (85%)  
Liberal Quakerism (72%)  
Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (72%)  
Roman Catholic Church (72%)  
Presbyterian Church USA (62%)  
Assemblies of God (59%)  
Southern Baptist (59%)  
Free Will Baptist (57%)  
Mormonism (57%)  
Church of Christ (54%)  
Mennonite Brethren (54%)  
Orthodox Quakerism (52%)  
Presbyterian Church in America/Orthodox Presbyterian Church (49%)  
Reformed Churches (49%)  
Reformed Baptist (47%)  
International Church of Christ (42%)  
United Pentecostal Church (42%)  
Jehovah's Witness (0%)
 

Keble

Protokentarchos
Joined
Mar 31, 2003
Messages
3,623
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
60
Location
Maryland
Is anyone surprised?

  • Episcopal/Anglican Church (100%)
  • Evangelical Lutheran Church (100%)
  • Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (89%)
  • Methodist/Wesleyan Church (78%)

EO was 8th at 56%, RC was 11th at the same percentage. I'm happy to see that I got 15% or less on Mormonism, Liberal Quakerism, JWs, UU, and Unity Church.
 

montalo

Archon
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Messages
2,011
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Age
27
my old results

Link: Christian Denomination Selector
          Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (100%)     


        Evangelical Lutheran Church (94%)     


        Eastern Orthodox Church (92%)     


        Roman Catholic Church (79%)     


        Episcopal/Anglican Church (74%)     


        Methodist/Wesleyan Church (74%)     


        Church of Christ (72%)     


        International Church of Christ (66%)     


        Free Will Baptist (64%)     


        Presbyterian Church in America/Orthodox Presbyterian Church (61%)     


        Reformed Churches (61%)     


        United Pentecostal Church (59%)     


        Assemblies of God (57%)     


        Mennonite Brethren (57%)     


        Southern Baptist (57%)     


        Presbyterian Church USA (55%)     


        Mormonism (50%)     


        Orthodox Quakerism (50%)     


        Reformed Baptist (50%)     


        Seventh-Day Adventist (44%)     


        Jehovah's Witness (27%)     


        Liberal Quakerism (7%)     


        Unitarian Universalism (0%)     


        Unity Church (0%)     


my new results

Eastern Orthodox Church (100%) 


Roman Catholic Church (88%) 


Evangelical Lutheran Church (73%) 


Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (73%) 


Episcopal/Anglican Church (65%) 


Methodist/Wesleyan Church (50%) 


Mormonism (40%) 


Church of Christ (35%) 


International Church of Christ (35%) 


Mennonite Brethren (30%) 


Seventh-Day Adventist (30%) 


Assemblies of God (25%) 


Free Will Baptist (25%) 


Orthodox Quakerism (23%) 


United Pentecostal Church (23%) 


Presbyterian Church USA (13%) 


Presbyterian Church in America/Orthodox Presbyterian Church (13%) 


Reformed Churches (13%) 


Southern Baptist (13%) 


Liberal Quakerism (8%) 


Jehovah's Witness (5%) 


Unity Church (3%) 


Reformed Baptist (0%) 


Unitarian Universalism (0%) 
 

Asteriktos

Hypatos
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
39,123
Reaction score
45
Points
48
Age
41
Thanks broski, if you hadn't put all that space in there I wouldn't have been able to read it  :p
 

AndrewR

High Elder
Joined
May 11, 2011
Messages
596
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
28
I guess I'm in the right place!


Eastern Orthodox Church (100%)   
Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (95%)   
Evangelical Lutheran Church (85%)   
Roman Catholic Church (85%)   
Episcopal/Anglican Church (83%)   
Methodist/Wesleyan Church (75%)   
Assemblies of God (62%)   
Church of Christ (62%)   
Free Will Baptist (62%)   
Mennonite Brethren (57%)   
International Church of Christ (54%)   
Seventh-Day Adventist (54%)   
Presbyterian Church in America/Orthodox Presbyterian Church (52%)   
Reformed Churches (52%)   
Southern Baptist (52%)   
Orthodox Quakerism (47%)   
Presbyterian Church USA (42%)   
Reformed Baptist (42%)   
United Pentecostal Church (42%)   
Mormonism (39%)   
Jehovah's Witness (8%)   
Liberal Quakerism (8%)   
Unitarian Universalism (8%)   
Unity Church (0%)   
 

Apples

Protokentarchos
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
4,360
Reaction score
0
Points
0
100% RCC and EOC, Lutheranism was pretty high up, Anglicanism was 78%, Unitarian Universalism and Unity Church come in at satisying 2% and 0%.
 

Ioannis Climacus

High Elder
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
861
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Nathanael said:
I wouldn't exactly call myself a New Ager though. I suppose it's the closest thing on the list.
But isn't Helena Blavatsky (on your profil picture) a leading name in the New Age Movement? Helena was rather a patchwork-theosophist. If at the time when Blavatsky lived, would exist such accessible and rich informations about different religious traditions, she would be perhaps also a classical New Ager.
Well, she is often referred to as the mother of New Age, but the modern movement postdates her. Theosophy, which Blavatsky taught, is the belief that there exists an esoteric spiritual core to the various religions of the world (though it has become distorted in some more than others) that was taught by the likes of Jesus, Buddha, Plato, Pythagoras, etc. New Age, on the other hand, is more or less an amalgamation of Blavatsky's contributions with various other writers (of course New Age is very diverse, so some forms may be more devoted to a particular source). I suppose it would not be entirely inaccurate to call Theosophy New Age, so long as it was distinguished from some of the modern practices/beliefs that go under that name. I say this not to disparage the New Age movement (which I believe has a lot to contribute to the world), but that many Theosophists will distance themselves from its more superstitious and dangerous manifestations.
 

Nephi

Protokentarchos
Joined
Apr 18, 2011
Messages
4,829
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
29
Honestly, quizzes like these are pretty terrible.

(1st) Selectsmart Quiz:
Eastern Orthodox Church (100%) 
Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (97%) 
Roman Catholic Church (93%) 
Evangelical Lutheran Church (87%) 
Episcopal/Anglican Church (79%) 
International Church of Christ (70%) 


(2nd) Beliefnet Quiz:
Roman Catholicism (100%)
Eastern Orthodox (97%)
Seventh-day Adventist (87%)
Conservative Christian/Protestant (85%)
Orthodox Quaker (76%)
Hinduism (58%)

From a few months ago:
Nephi said:
Eastern Orthodox Church (100%)  
Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (88%)  
Roman Catholic Church (86%)  
Evangelical Lutheran Church (79%)  
Episcopal/Anglican Church (71%)  

This is also an interesting religious quiz that is much more indepth:
http://www.beliefnet.com/Entertainment/Quizzes/BeliefOMatic.aspx

And my scores for the one I just linked...
Eastern Orthodox (100%)
Roman Catholic (100%)
Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (89%)
Orthodox Quaker (85%)
Seventh Day Adventist (85%)
Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (61%)
Orthodox Judaism (56%)
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (54%)
 

tweety234

High Elder
Joined
Nov 23, 2012
Messages
626
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
33
Location
brantford, ontario, canada
Here is the list:

Episcopal/Anglican Church (100%)   

Mennonite Brethren (84%)   

Methodist/Wesleyan Church (84%)   

Church of Christ (67%)   

Evangelical Lutheran Church (67%)   

Free Will Baptist (67%)   

Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (67%)   

Orthodox Quakerism (67%)   

Presbyterian Church USA (67%)   

Presbyterian Church in America/Orthodox Presbyterian Church (67%)   

Reformed Churches (67%)   

Southern Baptist (67%)   

Assemblies of God (50%)   

Eastern Orthodox Church (50%)   

International Church of Christ (50%)   

Reformed Baptist (50%)   

Seventh-Day Adventist (50%)   

Liberal Quakerism (34%)   

Roman Catholic Church (34%)   

Jehovah's Witness (17%)   

United Pentecostal Church (17%)   

Mormonism (0%)   

Unitarian Universalism (0%)   

Unity Church (0%)   


fine with everything else. Where did jehovas witness come from?
 

Nathanael

High Elder
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
539
Reaction score
6
Points
18
I say this not to disparage the New Age movement (which I believe has a lot to contribute to the world),
Are you kidding me?:(. I know so many people (and myself) who were destroyed by New Age, especially mentally, but also physically. And so many who converted from New Age/Theosophy to the living Christ and there's hardly a vice versa tendency. New Age and Theosophy are dead philosophies, because among other things you cannot find any models or rather saints there. It's mind-worshipping. You worship your own "glorious" subjective ideas of life and "God"/truth. It's pride. There's no humility. It's a patchwork-truth.
Please forgive me that I write so bold against it. I wouldn't do it, If I weren't a former New Ager.
 

Jetavan

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
7,007
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
www.esoteric.msu.edu
Nathanael said:
I say this not to disparage the New Age movement (which I believe has a lot to contribute to the world),
Are you kidding me?:(. I know so many people (and myself) who were destroyed by New Age, especially mentally, but also physically. And so many who converted from New Age/Theosophy to the living Christ and there's hardly a vice versa tendency. New Age and Theosophy are dead philosophies, because among other things you cannot find any models or rather saints there. It's mind-worshipping. You worship your own "glorious" subjective ideas of life and "God"/truth. It's pride. There's no humility. It's a patchwork-truth.
Please forgive me that I write so bold against it. I wouldn't do it, If I weren't a former New Ager.
Do you see any positive qualities to the New Age movements?
 

Nathanael

High Elder
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
539
Reaction score
6
Points
18
Do you see any positive qualities to the New Age movements?
I cannot find any positive qualities, which the christian or rather orthodox belief hasn't already.
For the most people the New Age Movement or Theosophy is easy accessibly, because you can, in an individual way, take from the various religions what you need and New Age/Theosophy doesn't condemn all other religions and denominations theoretically(!), but they give you a harmonic religious system, that "there exists an esoteric spiritual core to the various religions of the world." But when you're a New Ager you're becoming more and more proud, thinking that you're spritual higher than other people. Sure, this can also happen when you're an orthodox christian, but much less.
 

Ioannis Climacus

High Elder
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
861
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Nathanael said:
I say this not to disparage the New Age movement (which I believe has a lot to contribute to the world),
Are you kidding me?:(. I know so many people (and myself) who were destroyed by New Age, especially mentally, but also physically. And so many who converted from New Age/Theosophy to the living Christ and there's hardly a vice versa tendency. New Age and Theosophy are dead philosophies, because among other things you cannot find any models or rather saints there. It's mind-worshipping. You worship your own "glorious" subjective ideas of life and "God"/truth. It's pride. There's no humility. It's a patchwork-truth.
Please forgive me that I write so bold against it. I wouldn't do it, If I weren't a former New Ager.
People have been "destroyed" in nearly every sect and religion. It entirely depends on the mindset and the aspirations of the individual in question. The biggest problem with New Age is the arrogance and self-indulgence of many of its practitioners. Many  (but certainly not all) New Agers are self-centered (in the bad way) and use (or attempt to use) the occult for their own end and for self-satisfaction. This is evil and it will ultimately destroy a man. It is nothing short of black magic and spiritual sorcery. Every religion is as flawed as its practitioners, so the New Age is no different.

Theosophy is, in this respect, the complete opposite. Theosophists devote (or should devote) themselves to altruism, humility, love, etc. For a Theosophist, the occult (if it is to be used at all) must never be used for selfish reasons, but only for benefit of those in need and for the betterment of humanity. Theosophy, like the occult, is esoteric. It is not our goal to make of the world a great number of Theosophists. The various religions of the world have assisted mankind and will continue to do so as they evolve alongside their practitioners. Theosophy is also not "mind-worshiping". If anything, it is the worship of the divine Spirit that is in and is every human being, every atom, and indeed everything that is. Theosophy is about recognizing that everything shares in divinity - to this end, love and brotherhood have no higher manifestations than self-sacrifice.

Just out of curiosity, how many Theosophists have you met? Have you met enough to claim that there are no "role models/saints"?
 

88Devin12

Protokentarchos
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
5,182
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Eastern Orthodox Church (100%)
Roman Catholic Church (100%)
Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (99%)
Evangelical Lutheran Church (90%)
Episcopal/Anglican Church (86%)
International Church of Christ (81%)
United Pentecostal Church (79%)
Church of Christ (72%)
Methodist/Wesleyan Church (72%)
Assemblies of God (70%)
 

Nathanael

High Elder
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
539
Reaction score
6
Points
18
People have been "destroyed" in nearly every sect and religion. [...]The biggest problem with New Age is the arrogance and self-indulgence of many of its practitioners.
Indeed! Many of its practitioners, too many! But the biggest problem is that the theoretical background of New Age lead the people to arrogance and self-indulgence(. (There's no theoretical concept which show you clearly the way of humility and spiritual life. There're too many different concepts, which you can individual choose). And even if there would be only one, which shows you the way of life, you couldn't still avoid pride.
With the theoretical background of Orthodoxy it's doesn't happen. And there're so many models and giants of love and humility, who show you that this path can lead you to perfection. Yes, also people in orthodoxy have been "destroyed", but not because of the theoretical concept in orthodoxy, but because of their pride and impatience in struggle with the passions.

Theosophy is also not "mind-worshiping"
Mind-worshipping because their belief is formed by theoretical thinking and every person has his individual access to it. There're no prophets. Theosophists try to find out the truth by "logical" thinking, but orthodoxy try it by keeping all the commandments of God, especially the perfect love towards God and towards neighboor.
You must first purify your mind and heart to that you can see and realize the truth.
How can a man who is full of passions claim that he  found the truth, that he has the true theory about the truth? With such a impure mind?

Just out of curiosity, how many Theosophists have you met? Have you met enough to claim that there are no "role models/saints"?
If you talk only about Theosophist and not New Ager (although it's often quite difficult to clearly separate them), so I've met about six Theosophists. And they were ok at first sight.
But I don't especially mean personal encounters, but about lives of more or less famous theosophists. There're no famous theosophist who impressed me with their life. And you really cannot compare their life with the life of orthodox saints. Or can you show me for example one theosophist who cried daily before God because of his sins and who prayed day and night for other people, what also many orthodox people in the world have been doing. Such a heart I want to get, and therefore I see no reason why to be a theosopist. The most people are theosophist because it seems to can explain everthing much more better than other religions. :/
 

Ioannis Climacus

High Elder
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
861
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Nathanael said:
Indeed! Many of its practitioners, too many! But the biggest problem is that the theoretical background of New Age lead the people to arrogance and self-indulgence(. (There's no theoretical concept which show you clearly the way of humility and spiritual life. There're too many different concepts, which you can individual choose). And even if there would be only one, which shows you the way of life, you couldn't still avoid pride.
Well, New Age is an umbrella term. Most New Agers settle with a certain writer or several whose works form the basis of belief. Some writers are better than others, but it is still no different than choosing amongst other religions. Pride is difficult to avoid, but not impossible. Arrogance and self-indulgence are quite common in every religion regardless of teachers and concepts.

Theosophically speaking, yes, there are "concepts which show you clearly the way of humility and spiritual life". Aside from our usage of other religious texts (Bible and patristics included), Blavatsky's writings are filled with teachings concerning morality. Love for humanity (and thus God) is the chief duty of a Theosophist. When you truly see yourself as one with others, pride and vanity will vanish.

Nathanael said:
With the theoretical background of Orthodoxy it's doesn't happen. And there're so many models and giants of love and humility, who show you that this path can lead you to perfection. Yes, also people in orthodoxy have been "destroyed", but not because of the theoretical concept in orthodoxy, but because of their pride and impatience in struggle with the passions.
Orthodoxy has many beautiful contributions (both holy men as well as guides to living a moral life), but it is far from being unique in that respect. Love, humility, virtue, etc. can all grow independent of one's dogma (though certain religions are more conducive to certain virtues). This can be seen in the Buddhist, Catholic, Protestant, Hindu, Muslim, etc. worlds. I do not wish to put words in your mouth, but would you argue that true exemplars of love and humility were almost non-extant outside of Eastern Europe/the Middle East until the last two centuries?

Nathanael said:
Mind-worshipping because their belief is formed by theoretical thinking and every person has his individual access to it. There're no prophets. Theosophists try to find out the truth by "logical" thinking, but orthodoxy try it by keeping all the commandments of God, especially the perfect love towards God and towards neighboor.
You must first purify your mind and heart to that you can see and realize the truth.
How can a man who is full of passions claim that he  found the truth, that he has the true theory about the truth? With such a impure mind?
No, you do not truly understand Theosophy. Theosophy is not a speculation based on historical research, but an ancient truth. That is, while H.P.B. was extremely well read, many of the connections and parallels she made (as well as prophecies) were revealed to her by those who had escaped the cycle of rebirth and decided to remain with humanity to watch over and assist in our spiritual evolution. Teachers and true Theosophists are found throughout the ages, each teaching an aspect appropriate to the time and culture. While you will most certainly disagree with these assertions, it must be understand that we see Truth as something to be "unveiled" not "discovered".

While purity is necessary in following Truth to the fullest degree, your logic is a bit circular. If purity of heart and mind are necessary to see Truth (and thus become Orthodox), what of Orthodoxy's role as the hospital of man. How could an impure man find Truth? Would a man pure enough to find truth need the hospital to being with? This is one of the many reasons I am a Theosophist. By our understanding, each individual is born not only as a consequence of karmic law, but also in a position to overcome wickedness (perhaps an aspect of evilness in particular) and grow spiritually. Rebirth continues until one is truly able to say "not my will, but yours, be done".

But I don't especially mean personal encounters, but about lives of more or less famous theosophists. There're no famous theosophist who impressed me with their life. And you really cannot compare their life with the life of orthodox saints. Or can you show me for example one theosophist who cried daily before God because of his sins and who prayed day and night for other people, what also many orthodox people in the world have been doing. Such a heart I want to get, and therefore I see no reason why to be a theosopist. The most people are theosophist because it seems to can explain everthing much more better than other religions. :/
Well, a Theosophist wouldn't pray in the way most Orthodox use the term (seeing as we do not believe in a personal God), so daily tears would be unlikely (but not impossible given great remorse). Of course if your standard of holiness is Orthodoxy, then it will logically confirm Orthodoxy.

But for a Theosophist that lived with love and humility, read H.P.B. The Extraordinary Life & Influence of Helena Blavatsky Founder of the Modern Theosophical Movement by Sylvia Cranston. It is a wonderful book not only for its well researched content, but its refutation of the malicious lies and slander directed towards Blavatsky. People who actually knew her felt that same sense of love and peace Klaus Kenneth felt from Mother Teresa and Elder Sophrony.

Two links pertinent to virtue and morality in Theosophy :

http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/key/key-4.htm
http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/key/key-12.htm
 

Jetavan

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
7,007
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
www.esoteric.msu.edu
Ioannis Climacus said:
Well, a Theosophist wouldn't pray in the way most Orthodox use the term (seeing as we do not believe in a personal God)....
By this, do you mean that the impersonal Truth can never take, or incarnate in, human form?
 

Ioannis Climacus

High Elder
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
861
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Jetavan said:
Ioannis Climacus said:
Well, a Theosophist wouldn't pray in the way most Orthodox use the term (seeing as we do not believe in a personal God)....
By this, do you mean that the impersonal Truth can never take, or incarnate in, human form?
Theosophy teaches that all that is is an emanation of the formless divine singularity (God). The physical would can be regarded as an incarnation of the Divine (albeit maya), though it is not through the will of the absolute impersonal Truth.
 

vamrat

Merarches
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
9,471
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
36
Location
Omaha
100% Orthodox followed very closely by Missouri Synod Lutheran.  Then Evangelical Lutheran, and then Catholic.  I am 0% Unitarian. 

Word.
 

orthonorm

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jul 24, 2010
Messages
17,715
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Nathanael said:
I wouldn't exactly call myself a New Ager though. I suppose it's the closest thing on the list.
But isn't Helena Blavatsky (on your profil picture) a leading name in the New Age Movement? Helena was rather a patchwork-theosophist. If at the time when Blavatsky lived, would exist such accessible and rich informations about different religious traditions, she would be perhaps also a classical New Ager.
Theosophy is newage.
 

orthonorm

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jul 24, 2010
Messages
17,715
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Ioannis Climacus said:
Second Quiz :

New Age (100%)
Scientology (91%)
Mahayana Buddhism (89%)
New Thought (84%)
Unitarian Universalism (79%)
Taosim (77%)
Hinduism (73%)
Jainism (67%)
Theravada Buddhism (66%)
Wow. If only "neo-pagan" replaced Jainism could this be worse. I would sue for defamation.
 

orthonorm

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jul 24, 2010
Messages
17,715
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Keble said:
Is anyone surprised?

  • Episcopal/Anglican Church (100%)
  • Evangelical Lutheran Church (100%)
  • Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (89%)
  • Methodist/Wesleyan Church (78%)

EO was 8th at 56%, RC was 11th at the same percentage. I'm happy to see that I got 15% or less on Mormonism, Liberal Quakerism, JWs, UU, and Unity Church.
I don't whether I should be. I know I almost always enjoy your posts, but I have no idea if you are a Christian or, if so, of what stripe. "Conservative" Anglican?
 

orthonorm

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jul 24, 2010
Messages
17,715
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Jetavan said:
Nathanael said:
I say this not to disparage the New Age movement (which I believe has a lot to contribute to the world),
Are you kidding me?:(. I know so many people (and myself) who were destroyed by New Age, especially mentally, but also physically. And so many who converted from New Age/Theosophy to the living Christ and there's hardly a vice versa tendency. New Age and Theosophy are dead philosophies, because among other things you cannot find any models or rather saints there. It's mind-worshipping. You worship your own "glorious" subjective ideas of life and "God"/truth. It's pride. There's no humility. It's a patchwork-truth.
Please forgive me that I write so bold against it. I wouldn't do it, If I weren't a former New Ager.
Do you see any positive qualities to the New Age movements?
ZERO.

It is pure garbage.

It does offer a quick litmus test of who to avoid if they self-describe themselves as such though.

So that is a plus.
 

Nathanael

High Elder
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
539
Reaction score
6
Points
18
Theosophically speaking, yes, there are "concepts which show you clearly the way of humility and spiritual life". Aside from our usage of other religious texts (Bible and patristics included), Blavatsky's writings are filled with teachings concerning morality. Love for humanity (and thus God) is the chief duty of a Theosophist. When you truly see yourself as one with others, pride and vanity will vanish.
Love for humanity is the chief duty of almost all religions more or less. But the question is, how succesfull and deep can a person fulfill the divine commandments in his life...It's easy to write and say beautiful commandments and comment them, that can do everbody, but to really realize it not only in his mind and in the way of feelings, but also in every step in his life, that is hard. It needs many models.
The problem is that in New Age and Theosophy and other eastern religions the spiritual person see himself as one with others, but he doesn't go further. That is to say: he doesn't go the way down, he hardly consider himself unworthy, consider himself to be the worst of all people or rather sinners. He "only" see himself as one with others- that's all. Excuse me, but that's not humility. When I can consider a really bad person to be greater than me, to be an angel, then humility starts...

Love, humility, virtue, etc. can all grow independent of one's dogma (though certain religions are more conducive to certain virtues). This can be seen in the Buddhist, Catholic, Protestant, Hindu, Muslim, etc. worlds. I do not wish to put words in your mouth, but would you argue that true exemplars of love and humility were almost non-extant outside of Eastern Europe/the Middle East until the last two centuries?
Especially love and humility, but also some other virtues- are used by all religions, but they often don't have the same meaning or rather the same deepness, dimension. That's the point. (And I cannot expect that all other persons who are not orthodox that they 're quite immoral and barbarous. If somebody wants to be virtous, he can achieve it on a certain level, because he has a free will.)
When for example a buddhist have compassion then he does it more intellectual, he try to put himself in his shoes, but he's at the same time quite carefull with compassionate fellings, because he want to avoid suffering. He's "just" emotional. His emphaty has a limit. But if I'm an authentic orthodox, then I truly see myself one with the other person, that's mean I take all his pain in my heart or even more, and I suffer because I love; And it will be not a problem to go to the abyss of the suffering love, because Christ give his love, his power for that.  Love makes us also ready to pay for the sins of others.
The same thing we see regarding humility.

"He says that the empirical cosmic being is like a pyramid: at the top sit the powerful of the earth, who exercise dominion over the nations (cf. Matt. 20:25), and at the bottom stand the masses. But the spirit of man, by nature [unfallen nature as given by God], demands equality, justice and freedom of spirit, and therefore is not satisfied with this “pyramid of being.” So, what did the Lord do? He took this pyramid and inverted it, and put Himself at the bottom, becoming its Head. He took upon Himself the weight of sin, the weight of the infirmity of the whole world, and so from that moment on, who can enter into judgment with Him? His justice is above the human mind. So, He revealed His Way to us, and in so doing showed us that no one can be justified but by this way, and so all those who are His must go downwards to be united with Him, the Head of the inverted pyramid, because it is there that the “fragrance” of the Holy Spirit is found; there is the power of divine life. Christ alone holds the pyramid, but His fellows, His Apostles and His saints, come and share this weight with Him. However, even if there were no one else, He could hold the pyramid by Himself, because He is infinitely strong; but He likes to share everything with His fellows. Mindful of this, then, it is essential for man to find the way of going down, the way of humility, which is the Way of the Lord, and to become a fellow of Christ, who is the Author of this path." Archimandrite Zacharias in Enlargement of the heart

Theosophy is not a speculation based on historical research, but an ancient truth. That is, while H.P.B. was extremely well read, many of the connections and parallels she made (as well as prophecies) were revealed to her by those who had escaped the cycle of rebirth and decided to remain with humanity to watch over and assist in our spiritual evolution. Teachers and true Theosophists are found throughout the ages, each teaching an aspect appropriate to the time and culture. While you will most certainly disagree with these assertions, it must be understand that we see Truth as something to be "unveiled" not "discovered".
An ancient truth? That sounds very dogmatic. That's probably the main dogma of Theosophy, and I thought Theosophy isn't dogmatic. Read Rene Guenon, he wrote a detailed critique of Theosophy titled "Theosophy: history of a pseudo-religion". Excuse me, but you cannot compare the gift of prophesy with channeling in New Age and Theosophy. An adulter can use channeling, everbody can do it. The prophecy of 2012, 21 Dec. that there would be an great change in the world, a new era etc. was also said by many, many New Ager who got this information by canneling with "masters", avatars, etc. A prophecy from the holy spirit cannot not be fulfilled.
New Ager thinks that the impersonal God is also present in "cosmic energies", and then they try to tap this energy and to use it for their own will. That's awful. I could cry. That's a high level of pride. Instead that they're servants, they behave as if they're supergods.

While purity is necessary in following Truth to the fullest degree, your logic is a bit circular. If purity of heart and mind are necessary to see Truth (and thus become Orthodox), what of Orthodoxy's role as the hospital of man. How could an impure man find Truth? Would a man pure enough to find truth need the hospital to being with? This is one of the many reasons I am a Theosophist. By our understanding, each individual is born not only as a consequence of karmic law, but also in a position to overcome wickedness (perhaps an aspect of evilness in particular) and grow spiritually. Rebirth continues until one is truly able to say "not my will, but yours, be done"
John 8,32: "“If you hold to my teaching/commandments, you are really my disciples. 32 Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”"
The more I repent, the more I've contrition in my heart, the more I cry- the more I see that the orthodoxy is the truth. Repentance, contrition in heart, humility- these are the tools by which I purify my heart and mind. It's the most effective weapon against the EGO: See: http://www.enlightennext.org/magazine/j17/dionysios.asp?page=3 . I follow these persons who purified themselves truly.
The concept of impurity is very weak in Theosophy and New Age. It's like: "I'm impure, so what? I'll get free of that with absorbing spirituality." There're no true consciousness of our state. Therefore it's hard to get humility. Only Christ can release us from our impurity and sin(or in your term: karma).


But for a Theosophist that lived with love and humility, read H.P.B. The Extraordinary Life & Influence of Helena Blavatsky Founder of the Modern Theosophical Movement by Sylvia Cranston. It is a wonderful book not only for its well researched content, but its refutation of the malicious lies and slander directed towards Blavatsky. People who actually knew her felt that same sense of love and peace Klaus Kenneth felt from Mother Teresa and Elder Sophrony
There's book In Memory of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky  some of her pupils write about her. And cannot really find something so that I could say that she's on the same spiritual level like Mother Theresa or Elder Sophrony. For example Charles Johnston writes: "The first and earliest impression I received from Madame Blavatsky was the feeling of the power and largeness of her individuality" or of another pupil: "she was the practical personification of charity and forgiveness."etc.But this are more descriptions of her charisma than an living deep experience of her spirit. What had they been receiving from her spirit? For example when Klaus(who saw and lived with many buddhist and hindu "masters" in Asia) met Elder Sophrony, he was so humbled by his love that he had cried the next three days at home for hours. In his presence people felt to received a great power to have the will to fight against their passions etc. To be charismatic- that's not hard. An atheist can be that. I can be that. A person for example told me that I'm the most kind person he ever met, but that's so ridiculous, that's bullshit. My spiritual father almost gave me up.
In his book Robert Tod Carroll wrote in his book (2003)wrote that Blavatsky used trickery into deceiving others into thinking she had paranormal powers. that Blavatsky had faked a materialization of a tea cup and saucer as well as written the messages from her masters herself. And that's quite strange to demonstrate your paranormal powers to others. And  many of theirs supernatural gifts seems to be very useless for the benefit of others and for herself. When I was a New Ager, I had for example the "gift" or rather the occult power to control the flame of a candle. But when I think back that's so ridiculous.  
Have you read the life of Elder Porphyrios? You'll never read about a person who had more divine supernatural gifts. The 20 century is so full of beautiful models and saints in orthodoxy; there're really many. Theosophy, New Age can really not keep up with it.



I suppose that you hadn't been for a long time orthodox, because you couldn't never forget the smell of penitent humility. I suppose also that my weak, bold words will not convince you. So go just your way you started to go- at the beginning it's always bloomy; especially for the mind. If you want to rethink one time New Age then I offer you to read this book:
THE PEARL OF GREAT PRICE- by Veronica Hughes. She was a former New Ager. And I repeat again: There're so many who converted from New Age/Theosophy to the living Christ and there's hardly a vice versa tendency. Please don't make the same, similiar fault like Elder Sophrony: After he was pious orthodox, he left it to practice eastern religions for seven tears- but then returned to orthodoxy and repented his fault in the ocean or rather "hell" of contrition.
Forgive me.
 

Jetavan

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
7,007
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
www.esoteric.msu.edu
Nathanael said:
When for example a buddhist have compassion then he does it more intellectual, he try to put himself in his shoes, but he's at the same time quite carefull with compassionate fellings, because he want to avoid suffering.
A Bodhisattva, in Theravada Buddhism, is someone who chooses eons of suffering (physical, emotional, mental, etc.), for the sake of the awakening of sentient beings.
 

Asteriktos

Hypatos
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
39,123
Reaction score
45
Points
48
Age
41
orthonorm isn't online right now, but he shared his results with me in private and gave me permission to post them:

Martin Heidegger (98%)
Niklas Luhmann (98%)
Moses (88%)
Eastern Orthodox Church (42%)
Jesuits (31%)
Achronos (1%)
 

Nathanael

High Elder
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
539
Reaction score
6
Points
18
A Bodhisattva, in Theravada Buddhism, is someone who chooses eons of suffering (physical, emotional, mental, etc.), for the sake of the awakening of sentient beings.
I know, I read a bit about it. But have you ever read about a buddhist monk who is crying his soul out day and night for humankind with the deepest pain? I've searched, but I couldn't find it. It seems to describe similiar things, but the experience could be a quite different one.
Do you have an informative link for me?
 

Nathanael

High Elder
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
539
Reaction score
6
Points
18
Asteriktos said:
orthonorm isn't online right now, but he shared his results with me in private and gave me permission to post them:

Martin Heidegger (98%)
Niklas Luhmann (98%)
Moses (88%)
Eastern Orthodox Church (42%)
Jesuits (31%)
Achronos (1%)
:D
 

orthonorm

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jul 24, 2010
Messages
17,715
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Asteriktos said:
orthonorm isn't online right now, but he shared his results with me in private and gave me permission to post them:

Martin Heidegger (98%)
Niklas Luhmann (98%)
Moses (88%)
Eastern Orthodox Church (42%)
Jesuits (31%)
Achronos (1%)
LOL!

When did I possibly mention Luhmann to you? Weird. In any case, try reading him.
 

Asteriktos

Hypatos
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
39,123
Reaction score
45
Points
48
Age
41
orthonorm said:
When did I possibly mention Luhmann to you? Weird. In any case, try reading him.
It was in the unofficial chat, before the powers-that-be here tried to distance themselves from it. Anything in particular by Luhmann? Is any translated into English?  I also realised after I made the post that I should have had a separate one for St. Paul...
 

orthonorm

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jul 24, 2010
Messages
17,715
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Asteriktos said:
orthonorm said:
When did I possibly mention Luhmann to you? Weird. In any case, try reading him.
It was in the unofficial chat, before the powers-that-be here tried to distance themselves from it. Anything in particular by Luhmann? Is any translated into English?  I also realised after I made the post that I should have had a separate one for St. Paul...
After I wrote that I nearly added don't ask me what. Will look over what is in English and how accessible those works are.

He is not that important in the Anglo-American world (his reception seems a little better in Latin America).

Frankly, it is difficult and I am not sure how well I understand him.

From the 20th century, there are two people who I would like to understand but probably will never have the time nor ability to do so:

Deleuze
Luhmann
 

Jetavan

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
7,007
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Website
www.esoteric.msu.edu
Nathanael said:
A Bodhisattva, in Theravada Buddhism, is someone who chooses eons of suffering (physical, emotional, mental, etc.), for the sake of the awakening of sentient beings.
I know, I read a bit about it. But have you ever read about a buddhist monk who is crying his soul out day and night for humankind with the deepest pain?
Do you mean crying with tears? Or just a deep emotional feeling?
 

JamesRottnek

Taxiarches
Joined
Feb 4, 2010
Messages
6,256
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
26
Location
Mesa, AZ
Nathanael said:
A Bodhisattva, in Theravada Buddhism, is someone who chooses eons of suffering (physical, emotional, mental, etc.), for the sake of the awakening of sentient beings.
I know, I read a bit about it. But have you ever read about a buddhist monk who is crying his soul out day and night for humankind with the deepest pain? I've searched, but I couldn't find it. It seems to describe similiar things, but the experience could be a quite different one.
Do you have an informative link for me?
And how many Christians - monastics or otherwise - do this?
 

Nathanael

High Elder
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
539
Reaction score
6
Points
18
JamesRottnek said:
Nathanael said:
A Bodhisattva, in Theravada Buddhism, is someone who chooses eons of suffering (physical, emotional, mental, etc.), for the sake of the awakening of sentient beings.
I know, I read a bit about it. But have you ever read about a buddhist monk who is crying his soul out day and night for humankind with the deepest pain? I've searched, but I couldn't find it. It seems to describe similiar things, but the experience could be a quite different one.
Do you have an informative link for me?
And how many Christians - monastics or otherwise - do this?
I cannot charge that, unfortunately. A monastic should follow the principle "the hidden man of the heart"- Christians as well. I just know from a monk, who answered to a friend when he was asked why he's so joyful the whole day: "Because I'm crying the whole night".
 
Top