I completely disagree with the whole premise that humans are inherently screwed up. I don't think a baby is born into original sin but original goodness. The problems we have are due to ignorance and a general misunderstanding of who we are individually and who we are collectively, too often creating boundaries between the two because our eyes have not been open to the truth. The reasons we hurt ourselves and others and live in ways which don't help and heal are complex reasons involving emotional immaturity, generationally passed on ignorance, and an economic, health and leisure environment which has been created by those from a different world, ignorant of the issues facing the modern world. I think the reasons the world appears so screwed up from a big picture viewpoint has nothing to do with any sort of 'sin' or punishment passed on in our conception, but more to do with the environment we are raised in, with two major themes causing the problems, ignorance and lack of progression. We are created from the pure spirit or consciousness of God and we are inherently beautiful and good, everyone of us, the reasons for the problems are complicated, but have nothing to do with a 'sin' from an ancestor.
Dondi
Well-Known Member
If we are so inherently good, then why isn't this evident in the world? Why do we do bad? Why is there murder, greed, lust, envy, jealousies, and hatred? Is all that a product of our environment or is it deeply rooted in the human psyche? If it is in the environment, then two people in the same environment ought to behave the same way, but that isn't the case.
You tell us that we are inherently good, but by what do you measure good?
I believe it is very evident in the world. The whole way in which you view the world, and the nature of reality is a whole other thread, but I personally see the world and the people in it as a beautiful place. Sure there is ample sin, but I don't believe the original christians saw sin in the context that organised christendom see's sin. The word sin comes from the greek and simply means to miss the mark. To act in a way which contradicts the pure consciousness, pure goodness that you where breathed from. The gospel is not about a set of rules which we must follow to become good, it is about discovering our own nature so that we can live and breathe in the pure perspective, the pure perception, 'moksha', nirvana, the kingdom of heavan etc
The only thing that lies under the human psyche is the one. the one consciousness of god, purity, we are all formed from it.
Two people raised in the same environment obviously often behave different, but are those two people ever in the same environment, for starters they will be in a different body, they will have different levels of perception of messages relayed to them etc etc, the one thing they do have in common is that they are inherently beautiful and good, they don't need to be saved from a sure path to hell passed down from their dads sperm, they need to recognise who they are in God/Goddess, and recognise the brother/sister hood of love they have been given to care for, relate to and learn from, as they are also from the same eternal beautiful consciousness even if they haven't realised it yet.
As a side point, I think throughout the ages a major chunk of the evil that has taken place can be put down to the influence of literalist religion, including literalist christianity.
The only thing that lies under the human psyche is the one. the one consciousness of god, purity, we are all formed from it.
Two people raised in the same environment obviously often behave different, but are those two people ever in the same environment, for starters they will be in a different body, they will have different levels of perception of messages relayed to them etc etc, the one thing they do have in common is that they are inherently beautiful and good, they don't need to be saved from a sure path to hell passed down from their dads sperm, they need to recognise who they are in God/Goddess, and recognise the brother/sister hood of love they have been given to care for, relate to and learn from, as they are also from the same eternal beautiful consciousness even if they haven't realised it yet.
As a side point, I think throughout the ages a major chunk of the evil that has taken place can be put down to the influence of literalist religion, including literalist christianity.
Dondi
Well-Known Member
Plato said:
I whole heartly agree that the gospel is not just about following a set of rules. It is based on a relationship with God in which operating within the Law of God will bring a realization of God's love and purpose for one's life.
So sin means miss the mark. I agree. But what is the mark?
For one, recognize that this is a Christian board. Be aware that when one introduces the concept of God/Goddess one has departed from the basic Christian tenets. If you wish to discuss beliefs aberrent to the historic Christian faith, the Liberal Christianity board is really the better place for this type of discussion.
That aside, what you are talking about is a collective consciousness being parts of the whole One. But in doing so, you introduce the idea that we can all agree in beautiful harmony, which simply won't be the case. Relative morals tend to clash. There has to be a benchmark.
I agree. But I would say this applies even to non-literalist religion and non-literalist Christianity.
OK fair point, I will transfer this type of discussion to the liberal christianity board, I wasn't aware that this board was purely literalist/fundamentalist. However when do you consider the historic christian faith to have begun? Are the books outside of the canon worthy of being included in a discussion of the historic christian faith? There is plenty of information about the Goddess in the other gospels. Denying people a feminine side to the divine is just plain facsism IMHO. It's never really worked anyway, look at the way Mary is exhonerated, people need a mother a carer a lover aswell as a protector powerhouse, exterminator (a good name for jehovah I think)!!
This obsession with objective morality does my head-in. Sure we don't all agree on what we should be doing with our lives because each of us is made for something different, does God want us all to be clones? What we all should agree on is the need to discover who we really are, once we discover who we really are and realise the goodness that we where breathed from we will live in beautiful harmony.
Fair call though, my non-literalist gnostic tendencies are becoming evident and I will refrain from speaking of them on this page, however I would like to ask you some things before I go. Why would a loving God want anybody to burn in hell? Also, why did Jehovah have to literally send his son into the flesh to slaughter in order for us to be saved? Why couldn't he just forgive us? Also, if I spill my sperm on the ground tonight while having sex, do I deserve to be slaughtered? Perhaps even if the whole world is dying in a flood The ALmighty will find time to do me in for that sin. One other thing on my mind, if Jehovah tells me to evacuate my city tonight that I've lived in all my life and to not look back. So I do and I am running away but I want to get one last look at my city before it burns to the ground, and I figure hey that aint that bad God won't mind, I mean I am running and all, and so I look back, and then I get turned into a pillar of salt, did I really deserve that? was that a just punishment? Just wondering how you reconcile your literalist views with an age of reason, an age that has progressed, perhaps these words where never meant to be taken literally at all? Perhaps by taking them literally we are committing idolatory, exhonorating the menu over the feast or something like that?
This obsession with objective morality does my head-in. Sure we don't all agree on what we should be doing with our lives because each of us is made for something different, does God want us all to be clones? What we all should agree on is the need to discover who we really are, once we discover who we really are and realise the goodness that we where breathed from we will live in beautiful harmony.
Fair call though, my non-literalist gnostic tendencies are becoming evident and I will refrain from speaking of them on this page, however I would like to ask you some things before I go. Why would a loving God want anybody to burn in hell? Also, why did Jehovah have to literally send his son into the flesh to slaughter in order for us to be saved? Why couldn't he just forgive us? Also, if I spill my sperm on the ground tonight while having sex, do I deserve to be slaughtered? Perhaps even if the whole world is dying in a flood The ALmighty will find time to do me in for that sin. One other thing on my mind, if Jehovah tells me to evacuate my city tonight that I've lived in all my life and to not look back. So I do and I am running away but I want to get one last look at my city before it burns to the ground, and I figure hey that aint that bad God won't mind, I mean I am running and all, and so I look back, and then I get turned into a pillar of salt, did I really deserve that? was that a just punishment? Just wondering how you reconcile your literalist views with an age of reason, an age that has progressed, perhaps these words where never meant to be taken literally at all? Perhaps by taking them literally we are committing idolatory, exhonorating the menu over the feast or something like that?
Quote:
I whole heartly agree that the gospel is not just about following a set of rules. It is based on a relationship with God in which operating within the Law of God will bring a realization of God's love and purpose for one's life.
So sin means miss the mark. I agree. But what is the mark?
Missing the mark is not acting in alignment with the pure consciousness your body was breathed from. I don't believe there to be a specific mark or 'benchmark'. It's not about laws from letters but from the spirit or consciousness of God. It's different for everyone. You wouldn't expect a disabled person to be able to rescue an enemy from a fire, however an able person could well do that even if he risks his life. When we miss the mark we aren't doing the best we can usually due to an ill recognition of who we really are.
Quote:
For one, recognize that this is a Christian board. Be aware that when one introduces the concept of God/Goddess one has departed from the basic Christian tenets. If you wish to discuss beliefs aberrent to the historic Christian faith, the Liberal Christianity board is really the better place for this type of discussion.
That aside, what you are talking about is a collective consciousness being parts of the whole One. But in doing so, you introduce the idea that we can all agree in beautiful harmony, which simply won't be the case. Relative morals tend to clash. There has to be a benchmark.
Fair call, I will refrain from mentioning Sophia on this board. I didn't realise this board was only devoted to a literal interpretation of the canon. However I think denying our beautiful spirit a feminine side robs many from the carer, nurturer, erotic lover side of our God, we are left with a powerful, exterminator! It hasn't worked anyway, look at the way Mary is exhonerated in the original literal church, we need a mother aswell as a father.
I didn't say that presently we all agree in beautiful harmony, our spirits do underneath the materialism that has polluted us, also I realise literalism stands firmly in the way of our brotherhood of love, my prayer and belief is that the literal church is moving towards gnosis, slowy but surely that is my prayer.
I whole heartly agree that the gospel is not just about following a set of rules. It is based on a relationship with God in which operating within the Law of God will bring a realization of God's love and purpose for one's life.
So sin means miss the mark. I agree. But what is the mark?
Missing the mark is not acting in alignment with the pure consciousness your body was breathed from. I don't believe there to be a specific mark or 'benchmark'. It's not about laws from letters but from the spirit or consciousness of God. It's different for everyone. You wouldn't expect a disabled person to be able to rescue an enemy from a fire, however an able person could well do that even if he risks his life. When we miss the mark we aren't doing the best we can usually due to an ill recognition of who we really are.
Quote:
For one, recognize that this is a Christian board. Be aware that when one introduces the concept of God/Goddess one has departed from the basic Christian tenets. If you wish to discuss beliefs aberrent to the historic Christian faith, the Liberal Christianity board is really the better place for this type of discussion.
That aside, what you are talking about is a collective consciousness being parts of the whole One. But in doing so, you introduce the idea that we can all agree in beautiful harmony, which simply won't be the case. Relative morals tend to clash. There has to be a benchmark.
Fair call, I will refrain from mentioning Sophia on this board. I didn't realise this board was only devoted to a literal interpretation of the canon. However I think denying our beautiful spirit a feminine side robs many from the carer, nurturer, erotic lover side of our God, we are left with a powerful, exterminator! It hasn't worked anyway, look at the way Mary is exhonerated in the original literal church, we need a mother aswell as a father.
I didn't say that presently we all agree in beautiful harmony, our spirits do underneath the materialism that has polluted us, also I realise literalism stands firmly in the way of our brotherhood of love, my prayer and belief is that the literal church is moving towards gnosis, slowy but surely that is my prayer.
Dondi
Well-Known Member
Plato said:
If sin is missing the mark, as you've said, then there must be a target we are aiming for. Without a target, you know what we are shooting for?.....nothing.
Even in your statement above, you admit that we miss the mark when aren't doing the best due to a ill recognition of who we are. Well, you just named your target: the ideal of who we really are. So there is a dichonomy of who we are now and who we can become. You don't go building a house without a blueprint, else you'll come out with a poorly built house. If we are progressing to some goal, we need to know what that goal is. What is you blueprint?
Where do you get the misconception that fathers cannot express nurturing love? You seem to think that if there is no feminine side all you are left with is a paternal tyrant. Are you a father?
Besides that, even though God in the Bible is referred to in the masculine, He really is neutral. Genesis 1 tells us that He created man and woman in His own image:
"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." - Genesis 1:27
So the feminine aspects of God are including in that image. From a Christian point of view, there is the suggestion that the Holy Spirit possess a maternal persona. For example, the term Shechinah, which descibes the presence of God in the Tabernacle of Moses, is feminine in form. In Proverbs 4, we have Wisdom personified, suggesting the Spirit's inspiration of the scriptures having a feminine touch.
And then there is Jesus' comment about Jerusalem:
"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!" - Matthew 23:37
Certainly, Jesus is expressing a motherly affection toward His people.
I think there ought to be a happy medium. I do not believe the material world is intrinsically evil. Evil comes from the heart of man, not matter. And that is a spiritual problem.
greymare
Well-Known Member
we are gods of our own universe. responsibile for our own destiny and path whether it be good, bad or otherwise. We need to take responsibility for it all. Not leave it in the hands of some God or another. If we didnt we would be like the petty criminal in court blaming his poor up bringing for the acts he commits as an adult. you know right from wrong. you have a choice. take responsibility
Dondi
Well-Known Member
Well, that's really what Judgment Day is all about. God gave the dominion of this world in the hands of men and we are blowing it. We will all be accountable to all our actions.
MindFreak666
Established Member
- Messages
- 38
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
I dont think that people are born good and the world around us screws us up, and I also dont believe that people are necessarily born screwed up. But there are certain latent tendencies and impressions on the mind from various past lives that come over with us, so each person is born at a different stage, spiritually, depending on our previous lives. And the experiences in our lives shape us and influence us, and determine how we will act in the future, aka Karma.
pattimax
Somewhat returning
It would seem that you are approaching this as if your thoughts determine the outcome of your life. Has it ever crossed your mind that you may be wrong?
Karma is only one piece of this eternal puzzle.
pattimax
Somewhat returning
We are NOT Gods. While I whole-heartedly agree that we need to to take responsibility for our actions, we are NOT Gods.
MindFreak666
Established Member
- Messages
- 38
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
I never said that our thoughts determine the outcome of our lives but they do play a part. Its our experiences, thoughts, and actions that determine the outcome, in short karma. And yes Karma is only one part of the puzzle but the way to solve that puzzle is inside the human mind.
pattimax
Somewhat returning
The human mind alone? Are you really, really sure? The stakes are fairly high.
MindFreak666
Established Member
- Messages
- 38
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
The mind is where reality lies. nothing exists outside of the mind.
Although, I dont see what you mean by the stakes are fairly high. Not sure what stakes you are talking about.
Although, I dont see what you mean by the stakes are fairly high. Not sure what stakes you are talking about.
pattimax
Somewhat returning
Reality lies in the truth. 
For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: whose end is destruction, whose god is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame—who set their mind on earthly things.
Phillipians 3:18-19
For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: whose end is destruction, whose god is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame—who set their mind on earthly things.
Phillipians 3:18-19
pattimax
Somewhat returning
If that strikes you as harsh or one dimensional, it isn't. Christians only have your best interest at heart.
Christianity is a way of life. It took me a long time to realize that.
Christianity is a way of life. It took me a long time to realize that.
MindFreak666
Established Member
- Messages
- 38
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Reality doesn't lie in the truth. reality is the truth, and truth is reality. If its not truth than it cant be real, therefore it cant be reality.
As you know Im not christian in any way, but Buddha also taught not to set our minds on worldly things. To "wake up", achieve enlightenment, bodhi, awakening, call it what you will, you need to detach yourself from worldly things that are temporary and will not bring you any lasting happiness, and instead set your mind on spiritual things, set your mind on the higher reality, the truth.
Buddhism is also a way of life but buddhism also teaches that you cannot and should not force someone to believe something . I don't believe that Christians are taught the same thing but correct me if Im wrong.
As you know Im not christian in any way, but Buddha also taught not to set our minds on worldly things. To "wake up", achieve enlightenment, bodhi, awakening, call it what you will, you need to detach yourself from worldly things that are temporary and will not bring you any lasting happiness, and instead set your mind on spiritual things, set your mind on the higher reality, the truth.
Buddhism is also a way of life but buddhism also teaches that you cannot and should not force someone to believe something . I don't believe that Christians are taught the same thing but correct me if Im wrong.
pattimax
Somewhat returning
whew, I'm glad we got that straightened out. (Reality IS the truth.) LOL
Buddhism definitely doesn’t force you to believe anything. No heaven, no hell, no self, no soul, no God (in the sense of a personal being that created the universe) – just reincarnation over and over again until you finally get it right and then (who knows?) you may see nirvana.
I told you at the beginning that Buddhism teaches some really enlightening things, but it just stops. When you really look and examine it, there is nothing to it.
Christianity teaches the grace that comes along with being God’s children. Yes, admitting to God that you know that you were created imperfectly and accept the gift that he has given you are prerequisites. He sent His son for a reason, so that all might believe and take advantage of what is waiting. This earth isn’t all there is.
BTW: Siddartha Guatamo (the Buddha) was only a prophet who died. Jesus Christ is Lord and lives. Very important!
Buddhism definitely doesn’t force you to believe anything. No heaven, no hell, no self, no soul, no God (in the sense of a personal being that created the universe) – just reincarnation over and over again until you finally get it right and then (who knows?) you may see nirvana.
I told you at the beginning that Buddhism teaches some really enlightening things, but it just stops. When you really look and examine it, there is nothing to it.
Christianity teaches the grace that comes along with being God’s children. Yes, admitting to God that you know that you were created imperfectly and accept the gift that he has given you are prerequisites. He sent His son for a reason, so that all might believe and take advantage of what is waiting. This earth isn’t all there is.
BTW: Siddartha Guatamo (the Buddha) was only a prophet who died. Jesus Christ is Lord and lives. Very important!
juantoo3
....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
Kindest Regards, Mindfreak!
If I may,
While I agree there must be an underlying reality that can rightly be called objective truth, I sense each of the major world faiths and religions approach from somewhat different angles.
I have used the example of an ancient tree before, with you standing on one side, and me on another. While we both are looking at the same tree of truth, what you focus on and what I focus on may be entirely different. Perhaps you admire the birds nesting, perhaps I enjoy the shade. We both see the same truth, but from different perspectives, our subjective truths. Even if we both focus on the same part of the tree, even standing side by side, what you see will differ from what I see. We both have truth, but neither of us can see the entirety, and we cannot even if we move around the tree, because the tree changes every moment.
Then there is the old standby example of the elephant and the blind men...
While I can understand your sentiment towards active Christian expansion, there are also Christians like myself who are content to allow whomever to believe as they will, encouraging by example rather than mere words which can often ring hollow and seem untrue. There is a wonderful thread around here somewhere that somebody took time to put together showing the basic moral constructs of the world religions...and every one of them, including Buddhism, had some version of the Golden Rule; "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you."
Like I said before, all the rest is merely to drive the basic points home.
Your truth is a truth, and is valid, for you. My truth is a truth, and it is valid, for me. Did not the Buddha say something quite similar, regarding the (what was it?) 88 doors or gates? (*I stand corrected, it is 84,000 doors*)
What is important is not which version of truth you hold to, but what you do with that truth in your possession. I might tell you all manner of how to act goodly and righteously, but if I cannot conduct my own earthly affairs in some manner pretty doggone close to what I preach, then my words are empty and hollow, are they not?
The menu is not the food. Have you eaten your rice gruel? Good! Now, go and clean your bowl.
If I may,
Truth is a sticky subject. We've touched on it in various threads here before. Truth tends to be subjective. What may appear true to you may not seem so to me, and vice-versa.
While I agree there must be an underlying reality that can rightly be called objective truth, I sense each of the major world faiths and religions approach from somewhat different angles.
I have used the example of an ancient tree before, with you standing on one side, and me on another. While we both are looking at the same tree of truth, what you focus on and what I focus on may be entirely different. Perhaps you admire the birds nesting, perhaps I enjoy the shade. We both see the same truth, but from different perspectives, our subjective truths. Even if we both focus on the same part of the tree, even standing side by side, what you see will differ from what I see. We both have truth, but neither of us can see the entirety, and we cannot even if we move around the tree, because the tree changes every moment.
Then there is the old standby example of the elephant and the blind men...
As you know, I'm not Buddhist in any way, but Jesus also taught not to set our minds on worldly things. To "wake up," we need to detach ourselves from worldly things that are temporary and will not bring any lasting happiness, and instead set our minds on spiritual things, set our minds (and hearts) on the higher reality, the truth. Hmmm....
I believe you are referring to the commission to spread the Word. While I must admit, Buddhism seems not to be quite as outwardly insistent in its zeal to spread, it is difficult to deny Buddhism also accepts those it might sway to its teachings. Your efforts on the Christianity board seem to me to be directed in just such a direction.
While I can understand your sentiment towards active Christian expansion, there are also Christians like myself who are content to allow whomever to believe as they will, encouraging by example rather than mere words which can often ring hollow and seem untrue. There is a wonderful thread around here somewhere that somebody took time to put together showing the basic moral constructs of the world religions...and every one of them, including Buddhism, had some version of the Golden Rule; "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you."
Like I said before, all the rest is merely to drive the basic points home.
Your truth is a truth, and is valid, for you. My truth is a truth, and it is valid, for me. Did not the Buddha say something quite similar, regarding the (what was it?) 88 doors or gates? (*I stand corrected, it is 84,000 doors*)
What is important is not which version of truth you hold to, but what you do with that truth in your possession. I might tell you all manner of how to act goodly and righteously, but if I cannot conduct my own earthly affairs in some manner pretty doggone close to what I preach, then my words are empty and hollow, are they not?
The menu is not the food. Have you eaten your rice gruel? Good! Now, go and clean your bowl.
Last edited: