One major theological debates within Christianity is about"free will"vs.”predestination.”
—- In firstname.lastname@example.org," jagbir
>"Christianity is so theologically fragmented and dogmatically divisive
> that it boggles the mind. There are literally hundreds of verses and
> more than 22,000 splintered sects to split hairs over an entire lifetime.”
Dear Jagbir and All,
One of the major theological debates within Christianity, is the one about"free will"vs.”predestination.”
Advocates of 'Pre-destination' believe that certain people are pre-destined by God to come to spiritual liberation and others are not. Alternatively... advocates of"Free Will"believe that every human being has the opportunity to turn to God at any time, and that God does not pre-destine this for them.
Logically speaking... God cannot"pre-destine"A person's choice in advance... and then still claim to be giving that person their"free will"! However, God has implemented reincarnation, so that people will re-'incarnate' lifetime after lifetime, until they learn all the spiritual lessons, that finally lead to their salvation or spiritual liberation. Then... at the end of a Cosmic Cycle... comes the Time of Last Judgment and Resurrection. It is the Harvest Time.
At this Time, those who have learned their spiritual lessons... will graduate. God takes them into His Granary, after separating the 'wheat' from the 'chaff'. Those who have not yet learned their lessons after a whole Cosmic Cycle of incarnating again and again... will have to go through a new Cosmic Cycle with all its stages from 'cultivation' to 'planting' to 'harvest'. According to the Mayans, the Cosmic Evolutionary Cycle is 26,000 years.
The Great Evolutionary Cycle is the"Great Grace of God"In bringing all people into spiritual liberation. In it are the elements of both"free will and pre-destination.” Yes... we are"pre-destined"through our"free will"to come to our salvation; to our spiritual liberation. This all happens through "re-incarnation.” One lifetime is not enough time to 'reap' what a person 'sows'. If a person 'sows the good seed'... they will 'reap the good harvest'. If a person 'sows the bad seed'... they will 'reap the bad harvest'. It is the 'reincarnational law of life' that Shri Jesus and Shri Mataji have taught.
However Christians are taught to reject this spiritual law of reincarnation... even though in reality and unbeknownst to them... they"Are"Actually reincarnating. To deny the Doctrine of Reincarnation does not do away with the fact of reincarnation. Just one of the defences Christians give for not accepting the Doctrine of Reincarnation is:
"It can't be right because if people believe they have more than one lifetime to live, then they will continue to sin, and then the death of Jesus on the cross will have been in vain.”
Most Christians do not even know the real reason why they don't believe in reincarnation. i will tell them the real reason. The real reason is that it was scrapped at the Council of Nicea, because the priesthood did not like it. The reason the priesthood did not like it was because"reincarnation"gave the people too much spiritual liberty. It suited the priests for the people to be subject to them. They instilled into the people that they only have one life to live to 'get it right'... and if they did not 'get it right' that then they would be subject to eternal damnation. That gave them a lot of power over the people. Shri Mataji has taught that this is a devilish thing that the priesthood have exercised over the people.
So... the real reason why most Christians reject reincarnation... is because the Christian Priesthood wanted them to. Therefore, i can only re-iterate that: "I also think all the problems between followers is because of incomplete and immature knowledge of human about religions and God. But no one can know ..... unless someone comes down from heaven and marks the right road. And the incarnation of the Shakti/Spirit/Ruh has come down from heaven with the Divine Message to mark the right road for all humanity.”
The Council of Nicea
In June 325 the council opened and continued for two months, with Constantine attending. The bishops modified an existing creed to fit their purposes. The creed, with some changes made at a later fourth century council, is still given today in many churches. The Nicene Creed, as it came to be called, takes elaborate care by repeating several redundancies to identify the Son with the Father rather than with the creation:
"We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten of his Father, of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father. By whom all things were made ... Who ... was incarnate and was made human...”
Only two bishops, along with Arius, refused to sign the creed. Constantine banished them from the empire, while the other bishops went on to celebrate their unity in a great feast at the imperial palace.
The creed is much more than an affirmation of Jesus' divinity. It is also an affirmation of our separation from God and Christ. It takes great pains to describe Jesus as God in order to deny that he is part of God's creation. He is "begotten, not made," therefore totally separate from us, the created beings. As scholar George Leonard Prestige writes, the Nicene Creed's description of Jesus tells us"that the Son of God bears no resemblance to the ... creatures.”
The description of Jesus as the only Son of God is carried forward in the Apostles' Creed, which is used in many Protestant churches today. It reads: "I believe in God, the Father Almighty... I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord.”But even that language - calling Jesus God's only Son - denies that we can ever attain the sonship that Jesus did.
Christians may be interested to know that many scholars analyzing the Bible now believe that Jesus never claimed to be the only Son of God. This was a later development based on a misinterpretation of the gospel of John.
There is further evidence to suggest that Jesus believed all people could achieve the goal of becoming Sons of God. But the churches, by retaining these creeds, remain in bondage to Constantine and his three hundred bishops.
Some of the bishops who attended the council were uncomfortable with the council's definition of the Son and thought they might have gone too far. But the emperor, in a letter sent to the bishops who were not in attendance at Nicea, required that they accept"This truly Divine injunction.”
Constantine said that since the council's decision had been"determined in the holy assemblies of the bishops," the Church officials must regard it as "Indicative of the Divine will.”
The Roman god Constantine had spoken. Clearly, he had concluded that the orthodox position was more conducive to a strong and unified Church than the Arian position and that it therefore must be upheld.
Constantine also took the opportunity to inaugurate the first systematic government persecution of dissident Christians. He issued an edict against "heretics," calling them"haters and enemies of truth and life, in league with destruction.”
Even though he had begun his reign with an edict of religious toleration, he now forbade the heretics (mostly Arians) to assemble in any public or private place, including private homes, and ordered that they be deprived of"every gathering point for [their] superstitious meetings," including"All the houses of prayer.” These were to be given to the orthodox Church.
There heretical teachers were forced to flee, and many of their students were coerced back into the orthodox fold. The emperor also ordered a search for their books, which were to be confiscated and destroyed. Hiding the works of Arius carried a severe penalty - the death sentence.
Nicea, nevertheless, marked the beginning of the end of the concepts of both preexistence, reincarnation, and salvation through union with God in Christian doctrine. It took another two hundred years for the ideas to be expunged.
But Constantine had given the Church the tools with which to do it when he molded Christianity in his own image and made Jesus the only Son of God. From now on, the Church would become representative of a capricious and autocratic God - a God who was not unlike Constantine and other Roman emperors.
Tertullian, a stanch anti-Origenian and a father of the Church, had this to say about those who believed in reincarnation and not the resurrection of the dead: "What a panorama of spectacle on that day (the Resurrection)! What sight should I turn to first to laugh and applaud? ... Wise philosophers, blushing before their students as they burn together, the followers to whom they taught that the world is no concern of God's, whom they assured that either they had no souls at all or that what souls they had would never return to their former bodies? .... These are things of greater delight, I believe, than a circus, both kinds of theater, and any stadium.”Tertullian was a great influence in having so-called "heretics"put to death.
The Long Forgotten Doctrine
Does it make any ultimate difference in the religious life whether or not one believes in reincarnation? I believe there are much greater priorities in a spiritual life than whether one does or does not accept a particular theological tenet. Those who are still irresolute on the question of reincarnation, or indeed those who are emphatically resolute in one direction or another, possess no special advantage before God. The only possible advantage that the reincarnationist may claim over those who are unresolved or opposed is that he has a reasonable and consistent theory to account for the prenatal and postmortem life of the soul as well as an explanation for the apparent absurdities in the dispensation of divine justice.
Archives of FAQs and Articles on Shakti/Last Judgment/Qiyamah
Disclaimer: Our material may be copied, printed and distributed by referring to this site. This site also contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the education and research provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance freedom of inquiry for a better understanding of religious, spiritual and inter-faith issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.