Faith: Belief vs. Knowing

[Paladin]

You'll have to ask Jesus about military figures yourself when you meet him mate, but as for rejecting the world, it's clear enough-

Jesus said:- "The world wants you to dance to its tune......God has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners...to release the oppressed" (Matt 11:16/17,Luke 4:18 )

"Jesus saved you from the empty way of life handed you by your forefathers" (1 Pet 1:18 )

"Don't conform to the pattern of this world" (Rom 12:2)

"As a soldier of Christ, please only God and not the world" (2 Tim 2:3/4)

"Don't love the world or the things in it,otherwise the love of God is not in you" (1 John 2:15-17)

"Set your mind on things above,not on things on the earth" (Col 3:2)

"You were bought at a price,don't serve men" (1 Cor 7:23)

"A friend of the world is the enemy of God" (James 4:4)

"You died with Christ from this world, so don't keep submitting to its rules" (Col 2:20)

"You were dead when you followed the ways of the world" (Eph 2:1/2)

If I have learned anything over the years it is that, if you go seeking something in a text you will surely find it. Very few I have met have found little else. Only a very rare breed can read a text and look for nothing, and then find everything.

 

[Lunitik]

Which of those Eastern traditions provide proof that it's the correct one?

Hinduism and Buddhism both provide methods for attaining experience, including meditation and various effective contemplations. Why can't they all be correct? Fundamentally, religions are just enlightened people explaining their own experience, since the reality of enlightenment is the same then we merely must find the guide which is most effective for our own temprement.

Regarding Christianity, Jesus was solid flesh and blood seen performing mind-blowing miracles by the entire nation of Israel plus the Roman military garrison, so I'd say his credentials are pretty good as proof goes..

These aren't proof, they are heresay... every tradition contains explanations of miracles, many even explain how we might attain them our self. The most common name for performing these miracles is "manifesting".

 

[Lunitik]

Mohammed said to stone adulterers, we can see it on youtube even today, is that "enlightenment"?
I think I prefer Jesus's brand of enlightenment above anybody elses..

I am certainly not a fan of mainstream Islam, when I speak of Islam I refer to Sufi's.

It is interesting, however, that there is a hadith that explains how Muhammad came up with this very law. Muhammad asked Jewish Rabbi's about this law, they attempted to hide it from him and of course he was illiterate, but finally they told him what the Bible says and he knew it was correct.

It is funny Christians point at this when you consider this... it is right in your own book! It also isn't followed through in all Muslim societies...

 

[Snoopy]

I think, here, it is useful to understand correctly the nature of the word "religion", it means re-bind.

No, this is part of the etymology of the word, its roots but not its meaning today.

Online Etymology Dictionary

>> "Etymologies are not definitions; they're explanations of what our words meant and how they sounded 600 or 2,000 years ago."

Etymology of "religion":

Online Etymology Dictionary

>> c.1200, "state of life bound by monastic vows," also "conduct indicating a belief in a divine power," from Anglo-Fr. religiun (11c.), from O.Fr. religion "religious community," from L. religionem (nom. religio) "respect for what is sacred, reverence for the gods," in L.L. "monastic life" (5c.); according to Cicero, derived from relegare "go through again, read again," from re- "again" + legere "read" (see lecture). However, popular etymology among the later ancients (and many modern writers) connects it with religare "to bind fast" (see rely), via notion of "place an obligation on," or "bond between humans and gods." Another possible origin is religiens "careful," opposite of negligens. Meaning "particular system of faith" is recorded from c.1300.

 

[luecy7]

If I have learned anything over the years it is that, if you go seeking something in a text you will surely find it. Very few I have met have found little else. Only a very rare breed can read a text and look for nothing, and then find everything.

I hope for the sake of others that you are correct, that it is very rare a person comes to believe they can find everything in a text, or to find everything by looking for nothing.

 

[Paladin]

I hope for the sake of others that you are correct, that it is very rare a person comes to believe they can find everything in a text, or to find everything by looking for nothing.

I don't think we are talking about the same thing

 

[Lunitik]

No, this is part of the etymology of the word, its roots but not its meaning today.

You are partly correct, of course, words are used to convey an idea and if the intended idea changes then its etymology is no longer valid.

I ask you though, is it right to do this? These words stem from a long line, Latin is not the oldest language on earth either. Always, it has conveyed a particular thing, but because we use it differently we fail to understand the original intent. This is my reason for bringing up the formulation of the word, to arrive back at the original purpose.

We have aligned this word "religion" to particular peoples experience of this binding, yet now we worship that which has bound to the Ultimate rather than the Ultimate itself. We have lost our way, we see these descriptions as competitive and at odds with one another, this is the nature of the new intent to the word. They are all pointing at the same thing, but we cling to the pointer rather than looking at what is being pointed to.

The redefining of this word "religion" is probably the greatest crime ever committed within the realm of spirituality - yes, I am including things like the crusades here, for if you understand the truth of this binding it is not possible to harm or kill that which emanates from it.

Perhaps it would be better to drop this word "religion" and substitute something like "unity" or "union" instead, for this is the true nature of all religions. Religion is acting on unity and striving for union, love is the glue.

 

[Dream]

If I have learned anything over the years it is that, if you go seeking something in a text you will surely find it. Very few I have met have found little else. Only a very rare breed can read a text and look for nothing, and then find everything.

Great point. Really great point. I just don't get how some people start reading things just for the hell of it. Who sits down and starts reading Kant for the heck of it? Who gives a dam about electron orbitals?

 

[Snoopy]

Electron orbitals are very important. Doesn't mean you've got to read about them.

 

[Dream]

You don't have to read about them, yet they are very important. bot.

 

[Snoopy]

You don't have to read about them, yet they are very important. bot.

Desiring to keep yourself alive means that you believe that your life has value, and it does. You can invest the balance of that life instead of have it just disappear. It is natural to want to be of some benefit, because being of benefit is success. That comes from valuing your life. Your desire is a good and natural desire that in others has benefited you sometimes in the past, and now you desire to do what they have done for you. I have seen a man dying before, satisfied with his life because of his contribution. He was satisfied, and it was as if his life was not disappearing with him; because he invested his life before he died. In his case, he had given it to his children. The life of your body ends, but it can be invested before it ends into a life form of its own. Love is something we can give that goes on for a very long time, and it can compound over time like a chain reaction long after we are gone -- perhaps forever. Put the balance of your life into that, and that is as good as or better than dying for a cause.

 

[Dream]

Desiring to keep yourself alive means that you believe that your life has value, and it does. You can invest the balance of that life instead of have it just disappear. It is natural to want to be of some benefit, because being of benefit is success. That comes from valuing your life. Your desire is a good and natural desire that in others has benefited you sometimes in the past, and now you desire to do what they have done for you. I have seen a man dying before, satisfied with his life because of his contribution. He was satisfied, and it was as if his life was not disappearing with him; because he invested his life before he died. In his case, he had given it to his children. The life of your body ends, but it can be invested before it ends into a life form of its own. Love is something we can give that goes on for a very long time, and it can compound over time like a chain reaction long after we are gone -- perhaps forever. Put the balance of your life into that, and that is as good as or better than dying for a cause.

Long winded and annoying. Barely read the first sentence, which was nearly a life sentence in and of itself.

 

[Snoopy]

Long winded and annoying. Barely read the first sentence, which was nearly a life sentence in and of itself.

I agree. On the plus side, you've improved since then.

 

[Waymarker]

Originally Posted by Waymarker-
Which of those Eastern traditions provide proof that it's the correct one?

Hinduism and Buddhism both provide methods for attaining experience, including meditation and various effective contemplations. Why can't they all be correct?..

Hinduism lets the Caste System go on under its nose which holds that the low-born are not as equal as everybody else and that beggars must stay in the gutter.Sorry but I therefore see no 'enlightenment' in Hinduism and think I prefer Christianity-
"[God] raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill, to set them among princes, and to make them inherit the throne of glory:" (1 Samuel 2:8 KJV)

Untouchable @ National Geographic Magazine
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As regards Buddhism, Buddha was just a mortal man giving us his own thoughts and words, whereas Jesus gave us Gods, THAT's the major difference between Buddhism and Christianity.
Jesus said -
"For I have not spoken on my own authority; but the Father who sent me gave me a command, what I should say and what I should speak" (John 12:49)

No disrespect to Buddha, but why on earth should we listen to him rather than the Son of God?

 

[Snoopy]

As a human, I would listen to a human who has addressed the human condition rather than concern myself with a fictional entity.

 

[Paladin]

Great point. Really great point. I just don't get how some people start reading things just for the hell of it. Who sits down and starts reading Kant for the heck of it? Who gives a dam about electron orbitals?

I guess you just have to be a geek who enjoys that sort of thing. When I was very young I read Jack London's Martin Eden just for the heck of it, but it stays with me even today.

 

[Paladin]

No disrespect to Buddha, but why on earth should we listen to him rather than the Son of God?

I think this is rhetorical, but I simply must ask: Would you sincerely like to know, really and truly? Because if you ask a question like this in the true spirit of inquiry it could lead you to understand many things, and you would grow like corn in the night.

Or, you could be satisfied with the answer you already have. Most people I meet are.

 

[Waymarker]

As a human, I would listen to a human who has addressed the human condition [Buddha] rather than concern myself with a fictional entity.

But Jesus was human too, and gave us some pointers from God that seem to work like it says on the tin, that's why we never see a jumpy, irritable fearful Christian, they don't exist..

 

[Waymarker]

Waymarker quote- No disrespect to Buddha, but why on earth should we listen to him rather than the Son of God?

I think this is rhetorical, but I simply must ask: Would you sincerely like to know, really and truly?..

Yup, I'm asking not just for myself but for the popcorn-munching audience who are following this thread with fascination.
Now tell us why Buddhism is better than any other religion..

 

[Snoopy]

But Jesus was human too, and gave us some pointers from God that seem to work like it says on the tin, that's why we never see a jumpy, irritable fearful Christian, they don't exist..

I wasn't referring to Jesus; sorry I thought that would be obvious.