All paths lead to God?

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by Andreas

Just like there is only one universe and one set of physical laws, just so is there only one path to God and that is the path that goes through the I-feeling or individual consciousness.

It's an interesting statement.

[Pathless]

Originally Posted by Andreas
Just like there is only one universe and one set of physical laws, just so is there only one path to God and that is the path that goes through the I-feeling or individual consciousness.

Originally Posted by I, Brian

It's an interesting statement.

It's a very general statement. It's pretty abstract.
What, exactly, does it mean, that "the path to God is the path that goes through... individual consciousness?"
I am hoping to hear responses from anyone who felt a resonance with Andreas's statement.

[Avinash]

It's a very general statement. It's pretty abstract.
What, exactly, does it mean, that "the path to God is the path that goes through the I-feeling or individual consciousness?"

I suppose Buddhists would not underwrite such a description because they don't recognize such a thing as an 'I' or 'individual consciousness' nor a God for that matter.
It means that God is a state of mind which is an expansion of your own small self (I am 'That'). So you cannot find God by searching outside but only by going within your own mind. This can also be found in the original (reconstructed) teachings of Jesus.

Andrew

[StrangeQuark]

Andrew:

I'm just full of questions (there's so much I need to learn), I know!

By "reconstructed," do you mean the Bible in its present form, or something else? I ask because the term reminds me of "reconstructionist" movements, which I am only a little familiar with because I have had acquaintances and friends who participate in reconstructionism.

[Avinash]

Originally Posted by StrangeQuark

Andrew:
By "reconstructed," do you mean the Bible in its present form, or something else?

No, not the Bible, but the actual teachings of Jesus as they appeared (in corrupted form) in the lost gospel 'Q' which was copied and edited by the authors of Matthew and Luke.

Because the authors of the Q-gospel had also done some editing of their own, reconstructing the original sayings is in places hard. Nevertheless, the original sayings of Jesus are much more powerful and spiritually significant than any of the edited stuff.

I've made my own reconstruction of the sayings on the basis of the already reconstructed Q-gospel (with its extra sayings added by the editors).

Andrew

[StrangeQuark]

This is very interesting. I was given to understand that at least Matthew did not actually write the gospel attributed to his name, but rather took notes throughout his life that were later compiled by Christian scholars. This "Q-gospel" is new to me however. Do you know where I might learn more about it?

And, just out of curiosity, how can we be sure that anything reveals the original words of Christ?

[Avinash]

Originally Posted by StrangeQuark

And, just out of curiosity, how can we be sure that anything reveals the original words of Christ?

We can't be sure but there are techniques to seperate the editorial layers. The rest is intuition and best guessing.

I will look for some links to Q later (the Vatican has already acknowledged that Mark and Q were used by the authors of Matthew and Luke).

Andrew

[StrangeQuark]

Originally Posted by Andreas

We can't be sure but there are techniques to seperate the editorial layers. The rest is intuition and best guessing.

I will look for some links to Q later (the Vatican has already acknowledged that Mark and Q were used by the authors of Matthew and Luke).

Andrew

Thank you, Andrew. I deeply appreciate the information.

[Avinash]

Originally Posted by StrangeQuark

This "Q-gospel" is new to me however. Do you know where I might learn more about it?

Namaskar,

Here's a page I found some time ago by a dutchman called Wim van den Dungen. He has also made his own interpretation of the teachings of Jesus as found in (part of) 'Q'. When I contacted him, I found out he is doing the same type of meditation as I'm doing (small world!).

http://www.sofiatopia.org/equiaeon/jesus4.htm

[Vajradhara]

Namaste,

here's a great link to a huge array of sources for early Biblical texts... though i recognize the controversy surrounding this group, i leave it for the reader to determine for themselves.

http://religion.rutgers.edu/jseminar/complete.html

[I, Brian]

And don't forget that CR also hosts the largest single collection of Christian Apocrypha online:

http://www.comparative-religion.com/...ity/apocrypha/

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by Vajradhara

Namaste,

here's a great link to a huge array of sources for early Biblical texts... though i recognize the controversy surrounding this group, i leave it for the reader to determine for themselves.

http://religion.rutgers.edu/jseminar/complete.html

I am not a religious studies scholar but my understanding is that the researchers in the Jesus Seminar are using academically sound methods to find out which parts of the New Testament are historically authentic. I haven't read a lot of their anaylsis (I would like to read more), but what I have read strengthens my faith. I like to see religous text rigorously examined because if it is from God it will withstand the examination. For example, I read (or should I say, slogged through) Dominick Crossan's The Birth of Christianity recently. I don't just automatically believe all that anyone, scholars included, might say about scripture, but the process of trying to think about the Bible in a new way was invigorating. Sometimes I can read the Bible just randomly and feel inspired or comforted. But when my brain is challenged with analysis, that's when I really am able to write the Word on my heart. My impression is that this is done a lot more in Judaism than in Christianity.

Nothing makes me start to reject a religion faster than apologetics.

[Avinash]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

I am not a religious studies scholar but my understanding is that the researchers in the Jesus Seminar are using academically sound methods to find out which parts of the New Testament are historically authentic. I haven't read a lot of their anaylsis (I would like to read more), but what I have read strengthens my faith.

I studied their selections and was disappointed although I sympathize with their good intentions.

[alexa]

Originally Posted by brian

The "popular" saying "All paths lead to God" is one of my personal principles.

Just as there is one world, one sky, one sun - each with many names and expressions - so I see that there is only one Divinity, with a myriad of expressions and names.

However, this is not a belief everybody will share.

I'm curious as to how many people here see the world's religions as existing to explain one Divinity, but through different means that make most sense to different people.

Or is there only one True Path to God, that a single Religion - perhaps even denomination - has sole privileged rights to?

I agree with you, Brian, when you say that "All paths lead to God". Not all the people are alike. So we cannot ask to everybody to behave the same way. This is impossible ! So each of us find finally his own way to God.

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by brian

The "popular" saying "All paths lead to God" is one of my personal principles.

Just as there is one world, one sky, one sun - each with many names and expressions - so I see that there is only one Divinity, with a myriad of expressions and names.

However, this is not a belief everybody will share.

I'm curious as to how many people here see the world's religions as existing to explain one Divinity, but through different means that make most sense to different people.

Or is there only one True Path to God, that a single Religion - perhaps even denomination - has sole privileged rights to?

I agree with you. All the religions are describing the same One and the apparently different paths lead to the same destination. The first time I heard this idea put in the words "All paths lead to God" was from a Muslim at an interfaith panel discussion. I thought that was pretty neat.