But if my intuition is to act like Jesus? In my opinion you ARE telling us to be a certain way and not another. I have no problem with this, but I'm wondering why this is not so in your opinion (it is opinion in my point of view)
It is perfectly good if your intuition guides you more towards Jesus, however his cussing at a fig tree and the destruction in the Temple should show that Jesus is not perfect - you can strive to something greater due to his imperfections. This is actually commanded in one of the apocrypha directly, although I forget which book says it.
Also, I would point out that Jesus and Christianity is not the same, Christianity has been molded by the Councils and this is where a lot of the dogma stems rather than coming from Jesus. Be weary of this, they have decided for you what is important and what should be ignored but they themselves have had a vested interest in the decisions. You have a situation where those that do not know have decided what you should know, and thus the purity of Jesus is lost to their personal motivations towards power.
This is not unique to Christianity, Christianity is merely the current topic and I don't feel it is useful to expand on how others have veered at this time.
I'm not very familiar with any holy text but I haven't heard of them as such. And yes, I have decided that the position is special. When their actions affect the decisions of so many people around them.
And as you would equate your position to theirs I would say you put yourself in a special position.
It hasn't affected that many people during their times, though. It has been the conversions after their death which have affected humanities destiny, each has had a relatively small following during life. Not that this says much, I mean, Hitler had a pretty large following during his life, would you say he is special based on this?
My truth and theirs are the same, how existence chooses to utilize this grace I do not know. I do not consider them special because I do not consider myself special, although I acknowledge that 90% of the world follows such a person. For me, what I have attained or been blessed with - however you wish to look at it - is the natural state of all humans, they have merely forgotten it because they have clung so tightly to the illusions of life.
What is wrong with the word defend? People constantly criticise what you write here, how is defending what you say a bad thing?
And how can't people deny your truth (please let me call it your truth for simplicity, it IS different from other peoples truths), the entire world dose, doesn't it?
And it's good that you are trying to help, but you are, in my opinion, telling people what they do is flawed and they should do what you have experienced to be correct. You aren't making them, but you are telling them what to do.
I have not said defense is a bad thing, I simply have not engaged in defensiveness because I have nothing to justify. If you refuse what I say it does not make it not so, you take nothing away from my knowing you only deny an opportunity for yourself to grow. I can accept that not everyone wants to hear what I have to say, I am not here for them.
It is actually not at all different, but as you wish. People are only willing to accept within their own capacities, and religions are not willing to increase that. Organizations have gone about declaring special stations for their founders and said you must go through them to approach God. This is normal, of course, for if they say you can go to God directly, what is the point of them in the first place? This is the whole problem, though, we depend on scholarly people because they sound like they know, but the very scholarly method they use ensures they are probably more distanced from God than the average person. They are on a whole ego tip, they crave power and the majesty afforded to their position. When the entire system is ran by the essentially ignorant, is it any surprise that those who depend on them remain so themselves? You might ask how a scholarly person can be called ignorant, but memorizing texts does not mean you understand their ramification - I was watching a show last night, a competition of Qu'ran reciting... many of the contestants didn't even speak Arabic, had no clue at all what they were saying, and yet they had the entire book memorized. It is not so different with the priests, they do not know the language of the Lord, they only know human words.
I am merely saying that aligning to a certain religious founder is flawed, I am saying that each has their own shining light and each actually are pointing to the same moon. I am saying there is a greater opportunity for you to find the moon if you follow each finger which points there without bias. I am saying that if you go to a living master, they can make it more plain and can adjust to what is blocking your vision. I do not want people to cling to what I say instead of their founder, this is no more useful than the prior situation. Each knower can only elaborate on their course towards truth, but if you are open to many knowers and learn to decipher their truth from what is not helpful without personal bias, you can walk your own path and know for yourself. This is better because now it is not a guideline, it is something deep within you which creates a truly holy situation. It is no longer a question of doubting or discomfort, you no longer have to study their words because you understand their message completely. Nothing unnatural can exist within you without a certain rebellion towards it, I merely say that you can create a naturalness to religion by approaching truth for yourself rather than a third party creating a bridge.
