Verses in the New Testament against wizardry, so forth?

[Desert Snake]

The premise is to explore any verses against wizardry, talking to spirits, practicing, magic, that sort of thing.

 

[Ellen Brown]

The premise is to explore any verses against wizardry, talking to spirits, practicing, magic, that sort of thing.

If you think this is sinful, don't do it.

 

[Desert Snake]

The premise is to explore any verses against wizardry, talking to spirits, practicing, magic, that sort of thing.

^

If you think this is sinful, don't do it.

 

[Desert Snake]

If you think this is sinful, don't do it.

I find that a bit vague. Unless, that is literally 'your belief', concerning this, how you regard this, in totality.

 

[Ellen Brown]

I find that a bit vague. Unless, that is literally 'your belief', concerning this, how you regard this, in totality.

I find that folks who rave and get all ranty about these sorts of issues, likely enjoy them vicariously, and are in denial about it.

 

[ChristineM]

The premise is to explore any verses against wizardry, talking to spirits, practicing, magic, that sort of thing.

Yet christians perform spells all their lives in order to agic themselves an eternal life.

Yet Christians talk to a spirit every time they pray

Praying for someone who is ill is tantamount to practicing magic, invoking magic spirits to heal them.

So why is it that the bible should talk against what it clearly and concisely promotes?

 

[pearl]

The Testament (Deut 18:10-14; cf. also Ex 22:17; Lev 19:31; 20:6, 27). A most famous instance is the evocation of the spirit of Samuel (’ôbôt) on the part of King Saul (1 Sam 28:3-25) to which Scripture attributes both the rejection and the death of Saul: “Saul died because he committed evil inasmuch as he transgressed the divine mandate, failing to observe it, and, what is more, consulted ghosts and not the Lord for guidance. And the Lord killed him and transferred his kingdom to David, the son of Jesse” (1 Chron 10:13-14). In the New Testament the Apostles sustain this prohibition and banish all magical practices (Acts 13:6-12; 16:16-18; 19:11-20).

 

[Desert Snake]

The Testament (Deut 18:10-14; cf. also Ex 22:17; Lev 19:31; 20:6, 27). A most famous instance is the evocation of the spirit of Samuel (’ôbôt) on the part of King Saul (1 Sam 28:3-25) to which Scripture attributes both the rejection and the death of Saul: “Saul died because he committed evil inasmuch as he transgressed the divine mandate, failing to observe it, and, what is more, consulted ghosts and not the Lord for guidance. And the Lord killed him and transferred his kingdom to David, the son of Jesse” (1 Chron 10:13-14). In the New Testament the Apostles sustain this prohibition and banish all magical practices (Acts 13:6-12; 16:16-18; 19:11-20).

Do you believe that there is a distinction, between, evil and forbidden wizardry, and, wizardry, broadly speaking, in general? And, what would those distinctions be, at least generally, if so?

'All magical acts', seems very broad, so by default, I could take that as your general definition, though, again, is somewhat broad in meaning.

 

[Desert Snake]

Acts of the Apostles 13:6
Acts of the Apostles 13:8

References to wizardry, albeit somewhat broadly.

 

[Desert Snake]

Yet christians perform spells all their lives in order to agic themselves an eternal life.

Yet Christians talk to a spirit every time they pray

Traditionally, Christians would not consider this the same type of spirit.

Praying for someone who is ill is tantamount to practicing magic, invoking magic spirits to heal them.

So why is it that the bible should talk against what it clearly and concisely promotes?

One might say that this is inferenced, from the texts. So, parsing would seem to be necessary, to avoid contradictions. That is the idea, anyway.

 

[ChristineM]

Traditionally, Christians would not consider this the same type of spirit.



One might say that this is inferenced, from the texts. So, parsing would seem to be necessary, to avoid contradictions. That is the idea, anyway.

Of course they wouldn't, hypocrisy is strong in religion

As above

 

[Desert Snake]

Of course they wouldn't, hypocrisy is strong in religion

As above

I don't believe that that, is actually hypocrisy. The traditional belief, being an inference, to that delineation.

You may not agree with that delineation, however hypocrisy implies something more direct.

As in, if the texts, did not make that delineation. However the texts do clearly make that delineation, between what 'spirit', might mean, contextually.

 

[ChristineM]

I don't believe that that, is actuslly hypocrisy. The traditional belief, being an inference, to that delineation.

You may not agree with that delineation, however hypocrisy implies something more direct.

As in, if the texts, did not make that delineation. However the texts do clearly make that delineation, between what 'spirit', might mean, contextually.

What is not hypocrisy in saying your spirit is bad and mine is good?

Guess who wrote the texts?

 

[pearl]

Do you believe that there is a distinction, between, evil and forbidden wizardry, and, wizardry, broadly speaking, in general? And, what would those distinctions be, at least generally, if so?

The biblical accounts refer a practice called necromancy, contacting the dead in order to predict the future. Personally, I do not believe in any form of wizardry or magic. Not even a fan of Harry Potter.

 

[Desert Snake]

What is not hypocrisy in saying your spirit is bad and mine is good?

Guess who wrote the texts?

What you wrote doesn't prelude to this argument.

 

[ChristineM]

What you wrote doesn't prelude to this argument.

Actually it does, for one group to invoke spirits etc and admonish another group for doing the same is hypocrisy at its finest.

 

[Desert Snake]

Actually it does, for one group to invoke spirits etc and admonish another group for doing the same is hypocrisy at its finest.

Delineation of spirits itself, isn't hypocrisy.

So, what there is, is parsing and determining, the variables, here.

The subject specifically, is also contextual, as when we note the 'Bible', it tends to contextuality.

That is why it also is in same faith debate context.

 

[ChristineM]

Delineation of spirits itself, isn't hypocrisy.

So, what there is, is parsing and determining, the variables, here.

The subject specifically, is also contextual, as when we note the 'Bible', it tends to contextuality.

That is why it also is in same faith debate context.

Of course not, i have never said otherwise so please do not muddying the discussion.

I was replying to your OP showing that the christian faith shows hypocrisy to dis other faiths for doing exactly the same as they do.

However if you do not want to discuss this aspect of christinity then please let me know and i will withdraw

 

[Desert Snake]

Of course not, i have never said otherwise so please do not muddying the discussion.

I was replying to your OP showing that the christian faith shows hypocrisy to dis other faiths for doing exactly the same as they do.

However if you do not want to discuss this aspect of christinity then please let me know and i will withdraw

No actually, that's fine. However delineation of spirit, isn't hypocrisy. As a Syncretist, this not only is done, it's a necessity, by default. Even if the belief syncretic belief system isn't changed via any personal methodology, the concept, and knowledge of, is there.

 

[ChristineM]

No actually, that's fine. However delineation of spirit, isn't hypocrisy. As a Syncretist, this not only is done, it's a necessity, by default. Even if the belief syncretic belief system isn't changed via any personal methodology, the concept, and knowledge of, is there.

Like i said, the spirit is irrelevant to my argument. The hypocrisy comes from denying others the same freedoms of communicating with their beliefs