Religions vs. religions

[Käthe]

Wow. I had no idea that I had "originally" posted some of that stuff. In fact, I'm sure I didn't.

[ili]

Isn' the idea of a supreme being/s, with the ability to looking in on our affairs and thus punish/reward accordingly, a bit far fetched?

And doesn't it say in the Bible that each of us carry the seed of God in us, if that is true doesn't it follow that easch of us has the ability to be God-like?

Therefore, if God/s is there to look after us, shouldn't we look after our fellow humans in the same way? Because if we don't do it, who will?

ili

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by ili

Isn' the idea of a supreme being/s, with the ability to looking in on our affairs and thus punish/reward accordingly, a bit far fetched?

And doesn't it say in the Bible that each of us carry the seed of God in us, if that is true doesn't it follow that easch of us has the ability to be God-like?

Therefore, if God/s is there to look after us, shouldn't we look after our fellow humans in the same way? Because if we don't do it, who will?

ili

Well, when scripture states that God knew us BEFORE we were stitched together in the womb, I'd say no. It seems God has a "personal" interest in each of us. I mean, literally He was there while our blueprints were still drying on the drawing board.

I do not know where the Bible says man carries the seed of God within, but He does command us to be godly.

We are suppose to look after our fellow man ("what so ever you do to the least of these my brethren, you do unto me.") However, if we do not give praise to God, then the Bible also states that the trees, the hills, even the rocks will cry out His name in glory.

As far as who will look out for our fellow man if we don't (or can't), well this may not be much, but I have witnessed dolphins push small children to shore, when they were taken out past the breakers due to a rip tide (and parents not paying attention). And I have read stories of animals wrapping themselves around people who were freezing to death, and quite literally saving their lives. And I experienced bottle nose's attacking black tip sharks that had me pinned to the bottom of the sea, and intending to have me for lunch when my air ran out...

Just because man isn't around, doesn't mean God is absent...

v/r

Q

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Käthe

Wow. I had no idea that I had "originally" posted some of that stuff. In fact, I'm sure I didn't.

....ghost writing, that must be it...

v/r

Q

[Obvious Child]

Sorry, I can't find the edit function to get the right names in the right places

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, ili, and welcome to CR!

And doesn't it say in the Bible that each of us carry the seed of God in us, if that is true doesn't it follow that easch of us has the ability to be God-like?

Having read the KJV through, and several other versions as reference, I do not recall this anywhere. Would you mind quoting chapter and verse?

Therefore, if God/s is there to look after us, shouldn't we look after our fellow humans in the same way? Because if we don't do it, who will?

I like to hold the old adage, G-d helps those who help themselves. In that sense, you are correct.

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Kindest Regards, ili, and welcome to CR!

Having read the KJV through, and several other versions as reference, I do not recall this anywhere. Would you mind quoting chapter and verse?

The closest that comes to my mind is 1 John 3, specifically verse 9, but the chapter talks about distinguishing between those with the spirit of truth, and those with the spirit of error.

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Seattlegal!

Love your posts, BTW!

The closest that comes to my mind is 1 John 3, specifically verse 9, but the chapter talks about distinguishing between those with the spirit of truth, and those with the spirit of error.

Yes, I see what you are saying there, but the comment I responded to stated "doesn't it follow that easch of us has the ability to be God-like?" I suppose in the sense that if we choose the "path of righteousness" we are much more "in tune" with what G-d has in mind for us. But even these folks, IMHO, are not able to "become as G-d." As for the rest of us, well, we need a little assistance from time to time to even remain in good graces. That is the purpose of Christ's sacrifice, at least to Christians.

[taijasi]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Yes, I see what you are saying there, but the comment I responded to stated "doesn't it follow that easch of us has the ability to be God-like?" I suppose in the sense that if we choose the "path of righteousness" we are much more "in tune" with what G-d has in mind for us. But even these folks, IMHO, are not able to "become as G-d." As for the rest of us, well, we need a little assistance from time to time to even remain in good graces. That is the purpose of Christ's sacrifice, at least to Christians.

So then ... what is the meaning and nature of Christ's injunction, where He Himself is but quoting existing Teaching, saying:

"Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?" (John 10:34)

and more poignantly:

"Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." (Matthew 5:48)

Why ... I bet we could wrangle something out of that if we shake it hard enough. In fact, anything you like!

What disturbs me, however, is that the Son of God would deceive us this way. You know, the proverbial carrot at the end of the stick trick. Sure, it'll get us closer to peace and happiness and harmony if we all strive to be righteous ... but since we can never attain or accomplish what The Master Himself has asked us to do, why should we bother? Just to make him happy? To prevent the incurring of so-called "divine wrath" (a fiction if ever there was one!)? Just why exactly is it again that we have been asked to be godlike, since we can never be God?

I'm playing devil's advocate a bit, since personally I am happy with the approach suggested by His Holiness the Dalai Lama, who believes in no Christian God, yet encourages and inspires us to follow the Golden Rule. Why would he advocate this, if not a Christian, and not coming from a strictly Christian perspective? Simply because it makes Good Sense! Why on earth would we actually want to go around killing each other and hurting each other, living only for ourselves while those around us suffer? The way we live intimately affects those around us, argue folks like HHDL - and the Mother Teresas, Ghandis, and Dr. MLK, Jr.s. If this is so, then we should treat each other well simply for practical, and even selfish reasons. Because we stand to gain (!) ... from treating our Brothers as Brothers!

It's incredibly practical, easy to understand, sensible and sound. But of course, it does require that we actually "give a sh*t," and sadly, many are just apathetic - or else derive a sick thrill from watching others suffer. The oil wells make all of this possible, and I'll be damned if I'm gonna give up my SUV that gets 3mpg, with its twelve color TV sets, deluxe leather sofa, and dedicated corresponding satellite. No, I don't care if you have to bomb twelve more godless heathen countries, I'm in the process of classifying them as terrorist, too ...

--So much for brotherhood in action. WHAT HAPPENED?

Religions, plural, enable us to fight over who is holier, who is more redeemed, who God "favors" (what a thoroughly disgusting concept), and how we shall all worship in the Brave New World that awaits us. Religion, singlular, can offer us hope from day to day, hope for the future, the incentive to live righteously in order to avoid practical consequences ... and best of all, religion can help us to live Responsibly, as we look to the various role-models Who have presented to us the Ideal throughout history.

There is a vast difference between these two forces - one is definitely pernicious, and is what Christians would call "of the devil." It leads to separativeness, greed, and a smug self-righteousness that is the antithesis of what the Founders intend. But the other, religion as it can and should be, in the perfect antidote to separtiveness, materialism, and a certain meaninglessness which would otherwise characterize all (human) life on this planet. And because of Religion (singular), philosophies such as Communism - which are otherwise positive in many regards - are at the same time a deadly poison ... to the human spirit. So when Chairman Mao told His Holiness the Dalai Lama that "religion is poison," he but projected the status of his own Communism, pure & simple.

Personally, the spiritual Ideal of Christhood - though a "fur piece down the road" from where I now know myself to stand ... is nevertheless probably the greatest inspiration which I could possibly have toward Right Living (Buddha's Noble Eightfold Path, summarily expressed). Now, just because it will take me many, many lives to reach Christhood, does not mean that I should shrug, let out a sigh, and go on about being a miserable louse. Those who have confused the `Wheel of Rebirth' for some kind of absurd system of infinite opportunity, with no consequences, no meaning, no purpose, and no modus operandi ... are like those who see the sun rise every day - and know Earth to be the center of Cosmos. How easy - to misconstrue, and so utterly fail to grasp the true nature of things.

If I have several lives, by the way - not to dawdle, but rather, to Master my own life and circumstances - then who's to say that Godhood/Godhead is not precisely why I'm here ... why we're all here? Jesus said so. But of course, that's not good enough for some people. They'll insist in one breath that if it's in their Holy Book, and if Jesus said it, then it's absolute, perfect, unalterable truth from the very mouth of God and the Lord strike me dead if there's any two ways about it! Oh, umm, but - umm, like, not this part right here ... cuz, ya see, THIS is what God meant here, because - well, you know, if you don't look at it this way, it - well, umm, you know - it just doesn't fit with everything else I've come to believe. So there!

Okay, okay, whatever floats your boat. But then we slip, headlong, back down that slope to "my religion" and "your religion" and pretty soon - we got 6 billion of 'em ... or even just six ... and often enough, no two can seem to get along. Wait, are we talking about religions here, or people? Hmmm.

'Nuff editorial ... I just thought I'd weigh in with the proverbial tuppence.

andrew

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, taijasi!

Thank you for your post!

"Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?" (John 10:34)

Yes, I expected this to be quoted in support. And I am grateful you pasted it as it is written, "gods" in the lower case, not G-d in the upper case.

Simply consider the implications, rather than me making them for you.

Oh, umm, but - umm, like, not this part right here ... cuz, ya see, THIS is what God meant here, because - well, you know, if you don't look at it this way, it - well, umm, you know - it just doesn't fit with everything else I've come to believe. So there!

Of course, you do realize this sword cuts both ways?

"Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." (Matthew 5:48)

It is also written, let he among you who is perfect cast the first stone. I'm not perfect, are you? That doesn't stop me from trying the best I know how to be the best I can be. But I am only human, I am not "god." And I will never be "G-d," no matter how hard I try.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Kindest Regards, taijasi!

Thank you for your post!


Yes, I expected this to be quoted in support. And I am grateful you pasted it as it is written, "gods" in the lower case, not G-d in the upper case.

Simply consider the implications, rather than me making them for you.


Of course, you do realize this sword cuts both ways?

Oh, I can't let this go. When Adam was created, he was created in the image and likeness of God...hence a "god". That is what man was supposed to be in the beginning...

v/r

Q

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Q!

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Oh, I can't let this go. When Adam was created, he was created in the image and likeness of God...hence a "god". That is what man was supposed to be in the beginning...

Indeed. Yet, how quickly Adam fell from that pedestal...and we have yet to regain it. That will certainly not come about by our own efforts alone.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Kindest Regards, Q!


Indeed. Yet, how quickly Adam fell from that pedestal...and we have yet to regain it. That will certainly not come about by our own efforts alone.

My point as well. We are not there yet...

[taijasi]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Kindest Regards, Q!


Indeed. Yet, how quickly Adam fell from that pedestal...and we have yet to regain it. That will certainly not come about by our own efforts alone.

ADAM KADMON - look it up here (WIKI! - for starters). And I definitely believe in Adam ...
Apples are so tasty. Gee, could it all be allegory?

As a side note, if esotericists regard some Logoi as "Imperfect Gods" (such as Mars, and Earth), relative to the Perfect ones (Vulcan, Venus, Saturn, etc.) ... then what does that make us? Gods in but embryo - and that is all that is asserted. The mistake, imho, of new agers is to express what is purely potential - as if it were already manifest. Wishful thinking, will not cook the rice. And Quahom just said as much ...

andrew

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by taijasi

ADAM KADMON - look it up here (WIKI! - for starters). And I definitely believe in Adam ...

andrew

Sorry, the Biblical "Adam" means ruddy man, or reddish in skin color (as in red like the clay of the ground). You can check that in the Hebrew and Greek versions of the Old testament.

v/r

q