Religion

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: ntdz

If you believe in God, you are right in your assessment. But what if the Christian God isn't the true God? What if Buddhism is the real religion? What if some African religion is the true religion? How do you KNOW your religion is the one true religion? The mere fact that there are hundreds of religions is proof enough that religion is a falsity.

No, that just shows that men interpret things differently. The validity of religion is not based upon peoples interpretation. Same with any other ideal. As for other religions possibly being the correct religion, anything is possible. That's why I asked God.

And how did God respond?

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: shira

Ok, I'll correct you:

If you're wrong, and God does not exist, then you've wasted your finite existence living a fantasy. Perhaps that means you didn't achieve all that you could have. Perhaps that means you chose a mate with religious beliefs similar to yours, but who was only marginally compatible, over a differnt woman with different beliefs, but who was far more suitable. Perhaps your group of friends would have been far different had you not based some of your choices on religious convictions. In short, there are innumerable ways your life might have been different if in fact God does not exist and you lived your life as though he didn't.

And if your life might have been far different, it might have been far better.

Thus, in a universe in which all there is is the physical, you may suffer huge physical and emotional losses by living your life as a theist.

But the same is true for atheist. If they're wrong, and God does exist, their life could have been better.

However, my choice in friends and my wife were not based upon religion. Personally, religion provides me with hope and a belief that life doesn't end after the death of my body, but that I may continue to live together with my family forever. Nothing else in my life could provide me with such a great though or hope. Nothing in my life means more to me than my family. Therefore, again, I see no way in which I lose.

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: ntdz

If you believe in God, you are right in your assessment. But what if the Christian God isn't the true God? What if Buddhism is the real religion? What if some African religion is the true religion? How do you KNOW your religion is the one true religion? The mere fact that there are hundreds of religions is proof enough that religion is a falsity.

No, that just shows that men interpret things differently. The validity of religion is not based upon peoples interpretation. Same with any other ideal. As for other religions possibly being the correct religion, anything is possible. That's why I asked God.

And how did God respond?

He responded by confirming my beliefs. Confirmations appear to different people in different ways. To me, it's a burning feeling in my chest. To others, it may be something different.

This may be considered hocus pocus to some, or just plain stupidity to others. However, I've followed every similar prompting since and it has never lead me wrong. So I'll continue to do so till the day I die.

 

[Cerb]

Originally posted by: themusgrat

Originally posted by: DVK916

I didn't say that removing all theist would remove all of our problems. I said it would make the world a better place, not a perfect place. Of course there are bad atheists as well, but the proportion of athiest who do harm to the world is far less than theist .

No. People who follow the Bible are less likely to harm others than those who don't. I'm not sure at all where you are pulling all this from. Obviously, someone misinformed you to the point of outright lying. Many times, atheists believe that since there is no higher standard, that they are not accountable to anybody, that there are no rules in life, they can do whatever. Have you ever heard the humanists/atheists that say, "what is right for you may not be right for me?" This is the kind of thinking that gets people like Stalin started. If you can gain support, you can do whatever you want to to the world. If you got the support of half the world to kill all theists, would that make it right to do so? If so, you should think hard about the consequences of that. If not, there is some absolute standard. And a standard that applies to humanity cannot be made up by humanity, and still be a true and absolute standard.

No, it can't. But what standards do we have that you can prove have not been made up by us?

Where did that come from? I know that it is in the Bible, but where else?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule_%28ethics%29

A longer read for you:
http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/mccabe02.htm

 

[themusgrat]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: ntdz

Whatever evidence you see of God might be evidence to you, but real evidence is something you can show to someone else and prove it to them as well. I'm not going to argue your beliefs, but you have done nothing to convince me that there is a God. Quite frankly, the burdon of proof is up to the theists to show there is a God, not Athiests or Agnostics who only believe what they see and what they've been show, and the theists have failed miserably.

If theist are wrong, there is no consequence. If atheist are wrong, there is a consequence for them. Either way, there is no burdon on theist. If you don't accept the idea of a God, that's your deal. I'm not responsible to change your mind. Therefore, I see absolutely no burdon on theist to prove anything. We have nothing to lose. Correct me if I'm wrong.

If you believe in God, you are right in your assessment. But what if the Christian God isn't the true God? What if Buddhism is the real religion? What if some African religion is the true religion? How do you KNOW your religion is the one true religion? The mere fact that there are hundreds of religions is proof enough that religion is a falsity.

If you're going to sit here and tell me a God exists, you're gonna have to show me or tell me something that somehow proves that. I have yet to meet anyone that even comes close to that. BTW, the unexplainable IS NOT evidence of God.

I think, like engineereeyore, that God will find you if you look for Him. In my church, we have a saying. "Take one step toward God and He will run to you." I see God in grass, in the order of the universe, in beauty, in love. How do these things happen or exist without a God?

I cannot offer you any real proof of anything older than I am. I think that God gave these laws to us, but I cannot prove it any more than I can prove that there is a God. The proof of His existence is unexplainable.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: themusgrat

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: ntdz

Whatever evidence you see of God might be evidence to you, but real evidence is something you can show to someone else and prove it to them as well. I'm not going to argue your beliefs, but you have done nothing to convince me that there is a God. Quite frankly, the burdon of proof is up to the theists to show there is a God, not Athiests or Agnostics who only believe what they see and what they've been show, and the theists have failed miserably.

If theist are wrong, there is no consequence. If atheist are wrong, there is a consequence for them. Either way, there is no burdon on theist. If you don't accept the idea of a God, that's your deal. I'm not responsible to change your mind. Therefore, I see absolutely no burdon on theist to prove anything. We have nothing to lose. Correct me if I'm wrong.

If you believe in God, you are right in your assessment. But what if the Christian God isn't the true God? What if Buddhism is the real religion? What if some African religion is the true religion? How do you KNOW your religion is the one true religion? The mere fact that there are hundreds of religions is proof enough that religion is a falsity.

If you're going to sit here and tell me a God exists, you're gonna have to show me or tell me something that somehow proves that. I have yet to meet anyone that even comes close to that. BTW, the unexplainable IS NOT evidence of God.

I think, like engineereeyore, that God will find you if you look for Him. In my church, we have a saying. "Take one step toward God and He will run to you." I see God in grass, in the order of the universe, in beauty, in love. How do these things happen or exist without a God?

That's exactly what I believe God is. He is something people use to explain things they don't understand or are afraid of (like death). Like I said, the unexplainable IS NOT evidence of God.

Do you see God in suffering, in terrorism, in starving Africans, in babies born with HIV, with kids that have cancer?

One more question, how did "God" happen to be, to come into existance? If you believe in creationism, wouldn't there have to be something higher to create him? Afterall, things can't be made without God, right?

 

[themusgrat]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Do you see God in suffering, in terrorism, in starving Africans, in babies born with HIV, with kids that have cancer?

No, I see the absence of God, because we sinned. I see man's free will.

God has always been. He created time, and though I cannot comprehend this, it is logical. If there is a real God, He must be higher and older than anything, even time itself.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: themusgrat

Originally posted by: ntdz

Do you see God in suffering, in terrorism, in starving Africans, in babies born with HIV, with kids that have cancer?

No, I see the absence of God, because we sinned. I see man's free will.

So then God has nothing to do with our lives then, since Eve sinned? I didn't know a baby sinned...

And what does HIV and Cancer have to do with man's free will? It's God's Earth...he created it and knows the path it's going to take, right?

 

[wjcott]

I am not religious in the sense that I do not follow any religion. However, I do believe that there is a God. The complexity of even the simplest DNA is too great for me to believe that it is naturally formed.

With that said, I believe that given the astronomical number of "truths" that are possible, I doubt that any religion that has ever existed has been significantly correct in their beliefs.

 

[themusgrat]

He does, some, but for the most part, He leaves sin alone. The baby goes to heaven because he/she has done no wrong. If I kill someone, do you really think that you can attribute that to them? or God? Babies do not sin, but they are born in sin. Again, I don't really understand this, but everything that comes from sinners is boron in sin.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: themusgrat
He does, some, but for the most part, He leaves sin alone. The baby goes to heaven because he/she has done no wrong. If I kill someone, do you really think that you can attribute that to them? or God? Babies do not sin, but they are born in sin. Again, I don't really understand this, but everything that comes from sinners is boron in sin.

Who goes to heaven...a child rapist/murderer who has repented and asked forgiveness from God or an Athiest who lived a rather good life? Now...whos the better person?

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: ntdz

Whatever evidence you see of God might be evidence to you, but real evidence is something you can show to someone else and prove it to them as well. I'm not going to argue your beliefs, but you have done nothing to convince me that there is a God. Quite frankly, the burdon of proof is up to the theists to show there is a God, not Athiests or Agnostics who only believe what they see and what they've been show, and the theists have failed miserably.

If theist are wrong, there is no consequence. If atheist are wrong, there is a consequence for them. Either way, there is no burdon on theist. If you don't accept the idea of a God, that's your deal. I'm not responsible to change your mind. Therefore, I see absolutely no burdon on theist to prove anything. We have nothing to lose. Correct me if I'm wrong.

If you believe in God, you are right in your assessment. But what if the Christian God isn't the true God? What if Buddhism is the real religion? What if some African religion is the true religion? How do you KNOW your religion is the one true religion? The mere fact that there are hundreds of religions is proof enough that religion is a falsity.

If you're going to sit here and tell me a God exists, you're gonna have to show me or tell me something that somehow proves that. I have yet to meet anyone that even comes close to that. BTW, the unexplainable IS NOT evidence of God.

I believe there is only one religion. Only the title (Christian, Muslim, Jew, etc.) is hereditary. The only religion is that of Love.

"There are many paths up the mountian, but only one view from the top."

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: ntdz

That's exactly what I believe God is. He is something people use to explain things they don't understand or are afraid of (like death). Like I said, the unexplainable IS NOT evidence of God.

Do you see God in suffering, in terrorism, in starving Africans, in babies born with HIV, with kids that have cancer?

One more question, how did "God" happen to be, to come into existance? If you believe in creationism, wouldn't there have to be something higher to create him? Afterall, things can't be made without God, right?

Actually, I do see God, or an absence thereof, in everything, including the items you've listed. However, what also needs to be considered is the fact that every person who ever lived has the freedom of choice. Because on person abuses that freedom does not make his actions God's responsibility. It's not God's fault that people do things like that.

If you don't believe in life after death, it's easy to think that God is a horrible person/thing/object when you see events such as those that you listed. It is also easy to try and shift the blame for these events upon God as apposed to the actual people responsible.

The question of how God happened to be is a good one. I plan to ask him someday. I guess the similar question in science would deal with the conservation of energy. If there is energy now, and we know there is, where did it come from? Energy can not be created or destroyed, only changed. So where did the original energy come from?

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Cerb

Originally posted by: bamacre

I think the resurrection spoken of in religion refers to another kind of death and rebirth, one that opens the realization that this right here is heaven.

You may have confused me here.

That the second coming myths that exist the world over are metaphors for mass personal/social advancement in consciousness.

I see. Although I would think it would take some kind of miraculous miracle for that to happen.

Hehe, would that include grace?

Let me see if I can give my own answer to this sequence of thoughts for which I will go back to a previous post:

========================

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Moonbeam

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Harvey
God created man in his own image, and man, being a gentleman, returned the compliment.

- Mark Twain
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



So true. As Meister Eckhart said, ?The eye with which I see God is the same eye with which God sees me?

So if for you there is no God, it doesn't speak very highly of your self. But then again, what self is that?

As he also said. "To be empty of things is to be full of God.?

Isn't the self that is empty of things the self that retains only what the self can never loose? What is the self that has died to all that it is not? The intoxication of wine is known only to those who taste. Bottoms up, friend!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



To be empty is to be empty of selfish desires. No one is completely empty. Once, we were empty, until Adam and Eve tasted the apple. Because of that, we know death.

=====================

themusgrat claims that nobody can be completely empty and brings up the Garden of Eden, a story which has profound significance to me. I see in it a very apt description of the human condition. But what could that myth possibly mean if something other than the literal? This is my opinion on that:

Man dwelt in the garden of Eden at two times in the past. He dwelt there perhaps a hundred thousand years ago before he developed language. Without language there can be no self reflection in the form of thoughts about what we observe. Where there is no thought there is no meaning to time. The past and the future are abstractions created by thought. Without thought time does not exist. Without time there is only being. Long ago man was present in experience in the now because thought could not abstract him. He and the universe were one. Without thoughts and language one cannot name the self or the boundaries of self either. Into this perfection came language and the concept of good and evil.

And that's where the trouble began because language can inflict pain. When you call your dog stupid he doesn't care a whit so long as those words do not have tonalities of threatening feeling. But once you have language you have division, the duality of right and wrong, good and bad, up and down, and on and on you can use words to make people, children, feel bad. You can use words to create belief and illusion. You can make people believe they are evil. You can easily destroy the natural loving trust of children, and we have.

We have all been made to feel that we are the worst person in the world because each of us has felt pain to the maximum that pain can be felt because we were made to feel as bad as we can feel by being put down before we had any defenses. Without defense against pain you feel it fully.

In fact the pain was so great that we can't remember. It was suppressed by our ability to erect defenses and is now buried deeply beneath them. We sold out our real selves in order to survive and it couldn't have been otherwise. So the fall of man from grace happened to humanity long ago, and to each of us again in childhood as we learned the meaning of negative words.

So the question is, can man return to the garden of undivided consciousness. I think he can and has many times. In the Christian West one man who I think did so is often referred to as God.

To begin with, man's consciousness is divided because he does not know what he feels. He avoids the consciousness that he feels the worst in the world. I think one reason Jesus preached to the meek and worthless among us is because they have less pretension about this. The separation of awareness caused by denial of what we are actually feeling dissolves when we suffer. To suffer is to heal and become whole again. The man who has suffered again all that he has suffered can remember who he is. To suffer again the separation of the real self into the false pretender takes one back to the fork in the road where one separated oneself from the ALL. The self that has spent its tears and rage at what was lost can let go and die to the pain. To grieve profoundly is to awaken love, the infinite joy in being a funny kind of monkey.

So to say "No one is completely empty." is really a statement about the ego. The ego can never let go of the ego. And that's where your business of a miracle comes in. The ego is thought and time and God is BEING. Thought stops, time ends, and the monkey and the Garden of Eden are one again, this heaven that has always been and always will be. The self that is empty is not a no one or an ego. The self that is empty is God. And God cannot know death because God is BEING.

 

[themusgrat]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: ntdz

That's exactly what I believe God is. He is something people use to explain things they don't understand or are afraid of (like death). Like I said, the unexplainable IS NOT evidence of God.

Do you see God in suffering, in terrorism, in starving Africans, in babies born with HIV, with kids that have cancer?

One more question, how did "God" happen to be, to come into existance? If you believe in creationism, wouldn't there have to be something higher to create him? Afterall, things can't be made without God, right?

Actually, I do see God, or an absence thereof, in everything, including the items you've listed. However, what also needs to be considered is the fact that every person who ever lived has the freedom of choice. Because on person abuses that freedom does not make his actions God's responsibility. It's not God's fault that people do things like that.

If you don't believe in life after death, it's easy to think that God is a horrible person/thing/object when you see events such as those that you listed. It is also easy to try and shift the blame for these events upon God as apposed to the actual people responsible.

The question of how God happened to be is a good one. I plan to ask him someday. I guess the similar question in science would deal with the conservation of energy. If there is energy now, and we know there is, where did it come from? Energy can not be created or destroyed, only changed. So where did the original energy come from?

But if God is God, He can create and destroy anything.

EDIT: To Moonbeam, I agree with a lot, but not all. I did not mean to make a statement about ego, just to say that you will always have some part of yourself. In the original Greek, when Jesus referred to such things, the words had a "selfless" connotation. Where is any of this stuff found in the Bible? The Bible only leads to one Garden of one time.

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: themusgrat
He does, some, but for the most part, He leaves sin alone. The baby goes to heaven because he/she has done no wrong. If I kill someone, do you really think that you can attribute that to them? or God? Babies do not sin, but they are born in sin. Again, I don't really understand this, but everything that comes from sinners is boron in sin.

Who goes to heaven...a child rapist/murderer who has repented and asked forgiveness from God or an Athiest who lived a rather good life? Now...whos the better person?

Which ever one, or both, that accept God's plan when it is taught to them. All people who ever lived will have the opportunity to hear the true Gospel of Jesus Christ before the Judgement Day. Whether or not they accept it and agree to live by it will determine where they go. Plus, I believe you are assuming that all of Heaven is the same. This may not actually be the case.

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: themusgrat

But if God is God, He can create and destroy anything.

That's why I say, I intend to ask him someday exactly how it all works.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: ntdz

That's exactly what I believe God is. He is something people use to explain things they don't understand or are afraid of (like death). Like I said, the unexplainable IS NOT evidence of God.

Do you see God in suffering, in terrorism, in starving Africans, in babies born with HIV, with kids that have cancer?

One more question, how did "God" happen to be, to come into existance? If you believe in creationism, wouldn't there have to be something higher to create him? Afterall, things can't be made without God, right?

Actually, I do see God, or an absence thereof, in everything, including the items you've listed. However, what also needs to be considered is the fact that every person who ever lived has the freedom of choice. Because on person abuses that freedom does not make his actions God's responsibility. It's not God's fault that people do things like that.

If you don't believe in life after death, it's easy to think that God is a horrible person/thing/object when you see events such as those that you listed. It is also easy to try and shift the blame for these events upon God as apposed to the actual people responsible.

The question of how God happened to be is a good one. I plan to ask him someday. I guess the similar question in science would deal with the conservation of energy. If there is energy now, and we know there is, where did it come from? Energy can not be created or destroyed, only changed. So where did the original energy come from?

But what does freedom of choice given to humans have to do with Cancer and HIV? Neither are man made, and since God created us, he could have created us without the susceptability to them.

I don't believe God exists, so I don't think something I don't even think exists is horrible or evil. I don't see how anyone is responsible for a little kid getting braincancer, do you? It's part of the nature God created. If God exists, it's all on him that that kid suffered.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: shira

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: ntdz

Whatever evidence you see of God might be evidence to you, but real evidence is something you can show to someone else and prove it to them as well. I'm not going to argue your beliefs, but you have done nothing to convince me that there is a God. Quite frankly, the burdon of proof is up to the theists to show there is a God, not Athiests or Agnostics who only believe what they see and what they've been show, and the theists have failed miserably.

If theist are wrong, there is no consequence. If atheist are wrong, there is a consequence for them. Either way, there is no burdon on theist. If you don't accept the idea of a God, that's your deal. I'm not responsible to change your mind. Therefore, I see absolutely no burdon on theist to prove anything. We have nothing to lose. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Ok, I'll correct you:

If you're wrong, and God does not exist, then you've wasted your finite existence living a fantasy.

Not true. My beliefs have caused me to live a happier life. God does not want you to live a horrible life, for it is precious, and beautiful, and is to be appreciated.

Perhaps that means you didn't achieve all that you could have. Perhaps that means you chose a mate with religious beliefs similar to yours, but who was only marginally compatible, over a differnt woman with different beliefs, but who was far more suitable. Perhaps your group of friends would have been far different had you not based some of your choices on religious convictions. In short, there are innumerable ways your life might have been different if in fact God does not exist and you lived your life as though he didn't.

In the words of Moonbeam, "who chooses who he loves?" I could not imagine better friends nor a better family.

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: ntdz

So then God has nothing to do with our lives then, since Eve sinned? I didn't know a baby sinned...

And what does HIV and Cancer have to do with man's free will? It's God's Earth...he created it and knows the path it's going to take, right?

Sorry, missed this one.

God has as much to do with our lives as we allow him to. I don't personally believe a baby has sinned. Personally, I believe sin requires knowledge, which a baby doesn't have. For this reason, I believe in an age of accountability at which time the child knows enough to be able to sin. My religion considers this age to be 8.

As for HIV and Cancer, I believe that God's promise to reunite families that accept his plan compensates for this. It's much easier to accept the passing of a family member, regardless or reason or age, if you carry with you God's promise that you can and will be reunited with that person again in the next life.

EDIT: Sorry, forgot this. It is important to remember that the child you have belonged to God before it belonged to you. Another promised offered by God is that any child we lose, we will have the opportunity to help and watch them grow and develop into full maturity in the next life.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: themusgrat
He does, some, but for the most part, He leaves sin alone. The baby goes to heaven because he/she has done no wrong. If I kill someone, do you really think that you can attribute that to them? or God? Babies do not sin, but they are born in sin. Again, I don't really understand this, but everything that comes from sinners is boron in sin.

Who goes to heaven...a child rapist/murderer who has repented and asked forgiveness from God or an Athiest who lived a rather good life? Now...whos the better person?

Which ever one, or both, that accept God's plan when it is taught to them. All people who ever lived will have the opportunity to hear the true Gospel of Jesus Christ before the Judgement Day. Whether or not they accept it and agree to live by it will determine where they go. Plus, I believe you are assuming that all of Heaven is the same. This may not actually be the case.

Let's assume the athiest never accepts the Gospel...does he go to hell? That whole premise makes zero sense to me. Why should accepting the Gospel be a free pass into heaven?

Do people in rural areas of China ever get a chance to hear the teachings of Christ? Even if they did, what would compel them to all of the sudden become Christian? Do they go to hell too?

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Let's assume the athiest never accepts the Gospel...does he go to hell? That whole premise makes zero sense to me. Why should accepting the Gospel be a free pass into heaven?

Do people in rural areas of China ever get a chance to hear the teachings of Christ? Even if they did, what would compel them to all of the sudden become Christian? Do they go to hell too?

My religion doesn't accept the tranditional view of one heaven and one hell. Rather, we believe heaven to be divided into 3 different "glories". People, based upon their beliefs and their actions in this life, will be assigned to one of these glories. Hell, or Outer Darkness as I call it, is reserved only for the most foul of beings, those who have committed the unpardonable sin. In order to commit that, you had to have had a pure knowledge of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and then turned and fought against it with all your might. This being the case, I doubt many atheist would have to worry about going to hell.

As for everyone hearing the gospel, yes, I believe everyone will have the opportunity to hear the true gospel of Jesus Christ. Everyone. This will all happen before the Judgement Day so that people have the opportunity to accept this gospel and repent before they are judged.

Another interesting twist would be to wonder if you existed before you came here to Earth. If so, that would change things a great deal after we die and realize what happened before we went to Earth.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Cerb

Originally posted by: bamacre

I think the resurrection spoken of in religion refers to another kind of death and rebirth, one that opens the realization that this right here is heaven.

You may have confused me here.

That the second coming myths that exist the world over are metaphors for mass personal/social advancement in consciousness.

I see. Although I would think it would take some kind of miraculous miracle for that to happen.

Hehe, would that include grace?

Let me see if I can give my own answer to this sequence of thoughts for which I will go back to a previous post:

========================

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Moonbeam

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Harvey
God created man in his own image, and man, being a gentleman, returned the compliment.

- Mark Twain
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



So true. As Meister Eckhart said, ?The eye with which I see God is the same eye with which God sees me?

So if for you there is no God, it doesn't speak very highly of your self. But then again, what self is that?

As he also said. "To be empty of things is to be full of God.?

Isn't the self that is empty of things the self that retains only what the self can never loose? What is the self that has died to all that it is not? The intoxication of wine is known only to those who taste. Bottoms up, friend!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



To be empty is to be empty of selfish desires. No one is completely empty. Once, we were empty, until Adam and Eve tasted the apple. Because of that, we know death.

=====================

themusgrat claims that nobody can be completely empty and brings up the Garden of Eden, a story which has profound significance to me. I see in it a very apt description of the human condition. But what could that myth possibly mean if something other than the literal? This is my opinion on that:

Man dwelt in the garden of Eden at two times in the past. He dwelt there perhaps a hundred thousand years ago before he developed language. Without language there can be no self reflection in the form of thoughts about what we observe. Where there is no thought there is no meaning to time. The past and the future are abstractions created by thought. Without thought time does not exist. Without time there is only being. Long ago man was present in experience in the now because thought could not abstract him. He and the universe were one. Without thoughts and language one cannot name the self or the boundaries of self either. Into this perfection came language and the concept of good and evil.

And that's where the trouble began because language can inflict pain. When you call your dog stupid he doesn't care a whit so long as those words do not have tonalities of threatening feeling. But once you have language you have division, the duality of right and wrong, good and bad, up and down, and on and on you can use words to make people, children, feel bad. You can use words to create belief and illusion. You can make people believe they are evil. You can easily destroy the natural loving trust of children, and we have.

We have all been made to feel that we are the worst person in the world because each of us has felt pain to the maximum that pain can be felt because we were made to feel as bad as we can feel by being put down before we had any defenses. Without defense against pain you feel it fully.

In fact the pain was so great that we can't remember. It was suppressed by our ability to erect defenses and is now buried deeply beneath them. We sold out our real selves in order to survive and it couldn't have been otherwise. So the fall of man from grace happened to humanity long ago, and to each of us again in childhood as we learned the meaning of negative words.

So the question is, can man return to the garden of undivided consciousness. I think he can and has many times. In the Christian West one man who I think did so is often referred to as God.

To begin with, man's consciousness is divided because he does not know what he feels. He avoids the consciousness that he feels the worst in the world. I think one reason Jesus preached to the meek and worthless among us is because they have less pretension about this. The separation of awareness caused by denial of what we are actually feeling dissolves when we suffer. To suffer is to heal and become whole again. The man who has suffered again all that he has suffered can remember who he is. To suffer again the separation of the real self into the false pretender takes one back to the fork in the road where one separated oneself from the ALL. The self that has spent its tears and rage at what was lost can let go and die to the pain. To grieve profoundly is to awaken love, the infinite joy in being a funny kind of monkey.

So to say "No one is completely empty." is really a statement about the ego. The ego can never let go of the ego. And that's where your business of a miracle comes in. The ego is thought and time and God is BEING. Thought stops, time ends, and the monkey and the Garden of Eden are one again, this heaven that has always been and always will be. The self that is empty is not a no one or an ego. The self that is empty is God. And God cannot know death because God is BEING.

Wow. That was incredibly interesting. :Q

You've put my years of thoughts into words.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Cerb

Originally posted by: bamacre

I think the resurrection spoken of in religion refers to another kind of death and rebirth, one that opens the realization that this right here is heaven.

You may have confused me here.

That the second coming myths that exist the world over are metaphors for mass personal/social advancement in consciousness.

I see. Although I would think it would take some kind of miraculous miracle for that to happen.

Hehe, would that include grace?

Let me see if I can give my own answer to this sequence of thoughts for which I will go back to a previous post:

========================

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Moonbeam

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Harvey
God created man in his own image, and man, being a gentleman, returned the compliment.

- Mark Twain
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



So true. As Meister Eckhart said, ?The eye with which I see God is the same eye with which God sees me?

So if for you there is no God, it doesn't speak very highly of your self. But then again, what self is that?

As he also said. "To be empty of things is to be full of God.?

Isn't the self that is empty of things the self that retains only what the self can never loose? What is the self that has died to all that it is not? The intoxication of wine is known only to those who taste. Bottoms up, friend!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



To be empty is to be empty of selfish desires. No one is completely empty. Once, we were empty, until Adam and Eve tasted the apple. Because of that, we know death.

=====================

themusgrat claims that nobody can be completely empty and brings up the Garden of Eden, a story which has profound significance to me. I see in it a very apt description of the human condition. But what could that myth possibly mean if something other than the literal? This is my opinion on that:

Man dwelt in the garden of Eden at two times in the past. He dwelt there perhaps a hundred thousand years ago before he developed language. Without language there can be no self reflection in the form of thoughts about what we observe. Where there is no thought there is no meaning to time. The past and the future are abstractions created by thought. Without thought time does not exist. Without time there is only being. Long ago man was present in experience in the now because thought could not abstract him. He and the universe were one. Without thoughts and language one cannot name the self or the boundaries of self either. Into this perfection came language and the concept of good and evil.

And that's where the trouble began because language can inflict pain. When you call your dog stupid he doesn't care a whit so long as those words do not have tonalities of threatening feeling. But once you have language you have division, the duality of right and wrong, good and bad, up and down, and on and on you can use words to make people, children, feel bad. You can use words to create belief and illusion. You can make people believe they are evil. You can easily destroy the natural loving trust of children, and we have.

We have all been made to feel that we are the worst person in the world because each of us has felt pain to the maximum that pain can be felt because we were made to feel as bad as we can feel by being put down before we had any defenses. Without defense against pain you feel it fully.

In fact the pain was so great that we can't remember. It was suppressed by our ability to erect defenses and is now buried deeply beneath them. We sold out our real selves in order to survive and it couldn't have been otherwise. So the fall of man from grace happened to humanity long ago, and to each of us again in childhood as we learned the meaning of negative words.

So the question is, can man return to the garden of undivided consciousness. I think he can and has many times. In the Christian West one man who I think did so is often referred to as God.

To begin with, man's consciousness is divided because he does not know what he feels. He avoids the consciousness that he feels the worst in the world. I think one reason Jesus preached to the meek and worthless among us is because they have less pretension about this. The separation of awareness caused by denial of what we are actually feeling dissolves when we suffer. To suffer is to heal and become whole again. The man who has suffered again all that he has suffered can remember who he is. To suffer again the separation of the real self into the false pretender takes one back to the fork in the road where one separated oneself from the ALL. The self that has spent its tears and rage at what was lost can let go and die to the pain. To grieve profoundly is to awaken love, the infinite joy in being a funny kind of monkey.

So to say "No one is completely empty." is really a statement about the ego. The ego can never let go of the ego. And that's where your business of a miracle comes in. The ego is thought and time and God is BEING. Thought stops, time ends, and the monkey and the Garden of Eden are one again, this heaven that has always been and always will be. The self that is empty is not a no one or an ego. The self that is empty is God. And God cannot know death because God is BEING.

Wow. That was incredibly interesting. :Q

You've put my years of thoughts into words.

Yes, that was really interesting indeed...

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: themusgrat
He does, some, but for the most part, He leaves sin alone. The baby goes to heaven because he/she has done no wrong. If I kill someone, do you really think that you can attribute that to them? or God? Babies do not sin, but they are born in sin. Again, I don't really understand this, but everything that comes from sinners is boron in sin.

Who goes to heaven...a child rapist/murderer who has repented and asked forgiveness from God or an Athiest who lived a rather good life? Now...whos the better person?

Which ever one, or both, that accept God's plan when it is taught to them. All people who ever lived will have the opportunity to hear the true Gospel of Jesus Christ before the Judgement Day. Whether or not they accept it and agree to live by it will determine where they go. Plus, I believe you are assuming that all of Heaven is the same. This may not actually be the case.

Let's assume the athiest never accepts the Gospel...does he go to hell? That whole premise makes zero sense to me. Why should accepting the Gospel be a free pass into heaven?

Do people in rural areas of China ever get a chance to hear the teachings of Christ? Even if they did, what would compel them to all of the sudden become Christian? Do they go to hell too?

You must understand that, I believe, God does not judge others by comparison to others. He is the only one who understand you, even more so than you.

To say that this person could be saved, and this person could not, is irrelevent. For we know not what He knows. In this sense, we are ignorant.

That said, I believe it is possible than one who even refers to himself as an atheist could very well be saved.

Judgement is not ours'.