Let's have a discussion about all things spiritual and religious oriented HERE'S THE CATCH.

No one is allowed to "quote" the bible or mention the bible after this post.

Now - paraphrasing is ok - stating beliefs is ok - but nowhere in THIS thread should the bible come up.

All other religious scripture or documents that are not included in the Christian Bible are allowed.

Here's a suggestion for Christians - try reading the Book of Mormon - here's an on line version
http://bookofmormononline.net/

and here's an example - It reads a lot like something that should be familiar. There may be quotes here that can be substituted for throught and words that simply don't come to mind without that other book.



In the mean time - here are some thoughts on spirit beings.

to my understanding angels are spirits, ghosts of dead humans are spirits and there are spirits called poltergeists and there are demon spirits.

So where did all these spirits come from - are they of one species or many?

If you believe in God did he create the spirit first and then the body or the body and then the spirit. AND can a dead human's spirit become a Demon spirit?

OH AND NO FAIR ASKING SOMEONE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF A BELIEF IF THE ANSWER REQUIRES USING "The Book"...

I believe angels are seperate from humans. I Think humans have spirits which may live on eternally after their flesh has died. I think God created the body 'dust' and then breathed life'the spirit' into it.

How does the dust get up there?

Seriously, when the sperm penetrates the egg is a spirit waiting? When, in the whole process does that happen?

Of couse I could more logical and ask how God 'breathes' at all, but this is about spiritual stuff so I'll stick to the questions above.

How about Mingle removes the General religion chat from this forum?Since 98% of what is posted in the General religion chat involves some form of degrading and slandering of Christianity there is really no need to discuss it.Furthermore these topics are against Mingles own rules that specificity say....

"In this forum, we will not allow users to bash other users for either believing or not believing in a specific religion.

We know that religion is a topic that many people feel extremely passionate about, both believers and non-believers. However, if you wish to participate in this forum, discussions must remain civil at ALL times. If you wish to have a reasoned discussion about religion, the existence or non-existence of God, etc., you may do so, but users who resort to insults or attacks in either direction as part of these discussions will be banned without notice.

Also, topics which are designated for response exclusively from one religion or belief system, or which may cause that type of polarization, will be deleted. The concept behind these forums is to encourage anyone to participate and post their opinions and thoughts as long as they are on-topic. Topics which do not adhere to that philosophy will be removed, and the poster may lose his/her posting privileges.

Thanks in advance for your cooperation".



Currently you have these topics on the first page alone specificity targeted Christianity in a hateful or negative way.


Were they really Hung like a Horse in Bible?

This christmas!

How Religion Is Killing Our Most Vulnerable Youth

Religious pictures from the 1930's

Most Bizarre Bible Quotes

Transgender woman says DMV clerk warned of hell

hysterical rhetoric

I agree with Thomas. This "General Religion Chat" is primarily about insulting Christians.

It's inflammatory and almost always used to specifically target the Christian faith.

It's constantly used by certain posters to rant about Christianity and consistently allows the forum rules to be ignored and neglected.

One form of spirituality I have noticed is selflessness or putting another self above one's self. Particularly but not always concerning maternal instincts. And not always with just humans. Such as a wolf raising a human child or more recently at work with an older resident forming an attachment with a doll. And not always with the same doll I might add. One might call it personification of an inanimate object. The phenomena was also a transference where one resident considered it to be real in the first case a woman and then when she gave it to the man he saw it the same way since that is the way she saw it. To both of them it then became real temporarily as it was like the doll only had that existence as long as they both saw it that way. It reminded me of one episode of Star Trek and the Companion.

Cochrane was born in 2030 (or 2013, according to the First Contact novelization). He constructed humanity's first warp-capable vessel, the Phoenix, in Bozeman, Montana, out of an old Titan II nuclear missile. He started the project for financial gain, and found the accounts of his future accolades as told by the crew of the Enterprise-E from the future deeply disturbing.

On April 5, 2063, Cochrane made Earth's first warp flight, playing Steppenwolf's "Magic Carpet Ride" during blast-off. The Phoenix's warp flight is detected by a Vulcan survey ship, the T'Plana Hath, which then makes peaceful first contact with humans, including Cochrane, at the Phoenix's launch site.

The aphorism "Don't try to be a great man, just be a man. And let history make its own judgments" is attributed to Cochrane, who is said to have uttered it in 2073. In the early 22nd century, Cochrane was present at the dedication of Earth's first Warp 5 Complex, where he stated, "This engine will let us go boldly where no man has gone before", making him the earliest known person in the fictional timeline of Trek to do so.

The Phoenix's launch facility became a historical monument. A 20-meter marble statue was erected there, depicting Cochrane heroically reaching toward the future. Cochrane's name became revered throughout the known galaxy, with entire universities, cities and planets named after him. Enterprise-E Chief Engineer Geordi La Forge, for example, attended Zefram Cochrane High School.

According to the TOS episode "Metamorphosis", Cochrane was presumed dead after disappearing from Alpha Centauri in 2117. James T. Kirk, Spock, and Leonard McCoy find Cochrane living on an asteroid with a being he calls the Companion, an ethereal presence of pure energy who rejuvenated the aged, dying Cochrane 150 years earlier, and has held him captive—and in a state of youth and vigor—ever since. Traveling with the three Starfleet officers is an ill Federation commissioner. The Companion, who loves Cochrane, merges with the commissioner, ridding her of her illness and providing the Companion with a corporeal (but now mortal) form. The combined entity no longer has power to force Cochrane to stay with her, but Cochrane chooses to stay out of love and gratitude. Before departing, Kirk, Spock, and McCoy promise not to reveal Cochrane's existence.

Thomas is right. I almost never see anyone asking a simple bible question. Or discussing biblical topics.

Shouldn't the people who break the rules be banned? Or at least warned?

Where in this post does she slander or degrade christianity?

All she asked is that there be a religious discussion that isn't quoted directly from the bible. Is that too much? Can't christians confirm their beliefs without using the bible?

People have asked simple questions only to be torn apart by the people that use the bible for everything. I would think that there would be other ways to follow a belief without resorting to the bible.

Maybe if christians weren't so convinced that everyone is out to ruin their religion they would be able to have a discussion that doesn't fall into "well the bible says..."

discussing christianity without referring to the bible is like discussing relativity without referring to einstein or discussing gravity without reference to newton


most things people have learned they have READ from some trusted source even though not all people trust the same source

spirituality is a different topic than christianity, a much broader topic that is more founded in personal 'feelings' than anything people have learned from any book


,,but there is no reason that learning from a book should be discarded or looked down upon , its how most of us DO learn most of what we know


in regards to reds second question about dust, the dust comes from the ground

Nicely put! That's why when someone (Or anything for that matter dies it turns to dust. That's what it's made out of.

Here's the deal. Now I'm not a scientist I'm not a religious scolar or a teacher. I'm just estimating here but lets see what these fingers and this brain of mine can do shall we?

Question one! How does the dust get up there?
By "Up there" I assume you mean the birth canal?
Well Man is made of dust. As I said above. the sperm reaches the egg releases the enzimes and penetrates. At this time we get rapid cell division. Now at some point God creates the spirit.
I believe the body is like an egg. The spirit is inside! The body is the shell. He probably inserts it at the time the fetus is given blood because the life is in the blood.

Now you ask how does God breath? Well let's answer that with another question, How do you breath? Since we are all made in the image of God Body,Soul,Spirit then you need only look at yourself. In so doing you will see how God breathes.

A more intelligent question would be "What is the deal with airline food"? I mean really they only give you a bag of nuts and some water. Will that fill anyone up?

Remember to tip your waitresses!

What a wonderful thread. Spiritual feelings as especially to when Diane mentioned demons in her OP. I sure have had my fair share of demons. I even had to get them taken them out of me. I felt them like cooties in the general religion chat. It was like they were crawling all over me. One of the reasons I try to stay out of the general religion chat. As a matter of fact I became so infatuated with this one lady while trying to save her in the Christian way and began trying to save her for myself in a natural way. One can get so involved in one's work so to speak that one can become oblivious to one's own feelings. Scientifically speaking then one has messed up the experiment because one has introduced variables into the experiment that are impure. Of course, this is neither fair to the recipient or to the one doing the experiment. One might even say that it would go against the prime directive of noninterference in another culture. From a forums point of view it might even be considered the "Thrill of the Chase". One might even consider it a midlife crisis. But I digress. Suffice it to say that it could be considered a dishonest attempt in the dating game. Which if you go by the oft quoted standby of, "All is fair in love and war" one might even have to question the assumption of that validity.

We can go to places in our own mind that can scare the believing Jesus out of us. There is a term I have encountered but can't remember where and would certainly have to be from a local source.

That book has given me so much comfort in times of distress and answers that I really haven't found elsewhere not to say that they don't exist. Living in the book belt I find it quite common. Monsters of the id is what movie called it referring to monsters we can conceive in our imaginations.

But I also have found strength in other books such as my NA and AA texts. Heck, I even created a God when I was deep into the intellectual phase of my development. I called him Scientol. I figured if God could create man in his image then why couldn't man create God in his image. Thankfully, I abandoned the project because it drove me quite mad to say the least.

LOOK - the biggest issue (as I have witnessed it)is the constant battle of THE BOOK

THIS TOPIC IS RELATED TO "GENERAL RELIGION" I have not restricted that EXCEPT for the one element that always seems to generate the greatest amount of animosity.

And about all those who feel slandered or degraded PLEASE REMEMBER

The FREEDOM to ACT in accordance with your believes IN NO WAY infringes on MY FREEDOM or that of others to their FREE SPEECH.

THAT is a claim consistantly made by many of those who also consistantly say the speech of others, here is slandering and degrading - WELL JOIN THE CLUB OF those who don't believe as you do.

And by the way - there is a dedicated CHRISTIAN forum if you wish to exchange opinions on scriptures related to your favorite book.

BACK TO THE TOPIC NOW PLEASE.

Right back to the topic at hand! That being, a discussion on all things spiritual! I always wondered. When you watch those shows about ghosts and they hear voices and things get knocked around.
Do you think the ghosts fight each other?

Also, why don't they just go on to the spiritual plane? You know like heaven or hell. Did they meet mr death or an angel and say that they are not ready yet? Did they use kung fu and break out of hell?

Can you break out of hell? I always wondered.

I have not asked for discussion of CHRISTIANITY - the discussion is about spirits. ALL are welcome to bring their beliefs into this discussion but if an individual cannot convey personal beliefs without the aid of a book then how does that person even know what their beliefs are?

This is not a thread dedicated to learning about any particular book or scripture but rather (for once) it is only exploration of others opinions whether or not the opinion is derived from a religious belief makes no difference.

If someone questions a particular opinion like the basis behind it - it would suffice to say you learned it through Christian doctrine - trust me, everyone here will know what that means.

But I can't guanantee that others won't jump on someone who cannot explain WHY they hold a particular opinion if the basis of the opinion is 'WELL THAT'S WHAT I WAS TOLD OR TAUGHT' especially if that person belittles or puts down another person's opinion.

Sorry not in my control - but if freedom of religion and freedom of speech are something a person claims for his or herself then it must be granted to all others.

Also, what about ghost sex?

Very interesting. I remeber this Star Trek adventure. I don't know from your post if you believe in spiritual entities but if you so, do you think that a spirit being, like Companion would be able to menifest itself in with another physical form?

Would it be a sybiotic relationship or a permanent one, like Companion?

In terms of a beginning, in which the universe and earth were created first, I can understand a reference to the first pair of any creature being formed from the dirt.

Scientifically, the comparison has some validity, even Carl Sagan made an association to that effect,(paraphrased) we are the stuff of stars.

If humans were formed to be a vessel for a spirit, then as I would understand it, the first pair would have been fully formed prior to being inhabited by a spirit.

But the questions still remain - did the spirit exist before the humans or was it created afterwards?

And secondly, since every generation, after the first pair, was not hand-made from the dirt, would it be correct to assume the spirit does not enter the body until it is fully formed and 'delivered' as the first pair were before they receive the spirit?

I was responding to this statement/question

'All she asked is that there be a religious discussion that isn't quoted directly from the bible. Is that too much? Can't christians confirm their beliefs without using the bible?'


as to why people believe what they do, a great bit of it is from what they have been told or read and the rest is how much their environment has reinforced or negated those lessons

I was pointing out that there should be no stigma placed on using books as a foundation for any type of knowledge one might have which serves as a basis for their 'beliefs' or their 'questions'


what a 'belief' is would be a whole other topic of discussion, but just qualifying a belief as religious directly ties it to religion which is going to indirectly tie it to teachings of a book or word of mouth tradition and practices,,,,each of which seem to be sources that both sides often belittle and disregard as valid

with God, the possibilities are limitless,,

a third option exists that the dust and the spirit were simultaneously formed into the 'human'

that the dust existed and the spirit existed and once joined became the human,,,,

secondly, an assumption that 'the spirit does not enter the body until it is fully formed and 'delivered' as the first pair were before they receive the spirit? '

would be correct, in my opinion, only if it left open for debate what the definition of 'fully formed' is

it could be assumed that the spirit is already fully formed and although the first MATERIAL used to transfer the spirit was dust, the other material is up to debate, whether it be a sperm, an egg, or a fertilized egg