|
|
Post by Paul A. Kaiser on Mar 28, 2009 1:53:05 GMT -5
Are all the world religions "equally valid" and do they all lead to God?
|
|
drakim
Full Member
Two hands working do more than a thousand hands clasped in prayer
Posts: 177
|
Post by drakim on Mar 28, 2009 15:00:47 GMT -5
Also, I wonder greatly if this includes me, who lacks a religion D:
|
|
|
|
Post by reformeddogmatist on Apr 1, 2009 14:47:37 GMT -5
Well, Colloquially, some would think that you do, but with careful examination and definition, Christianity is the only religion.
|
|
drakim
Full Member
Two hands working do more than a thousand hands clasped in prayer
Posts: 177
|
Post by drakim on Apr 1, 2009 14:56:09 GMT -5
Maybe according to your beliefs, but, since Steve is the one we are asking, it's his definition of "religion" that we will have to use.
|
|
|
|
Post by reformeddogmatist on Apr 1, 2009 14:59:49 GMT -5
Hence the reason I said that it is used that way colloquially.
|
|
steve
New Member
Posts: 9
|
Post by steve on Apr 6, 2009 23:04:47 GMT -5
First I must be clear and define my view of God. My definition of God is, God is love. Love as I have come to know it is, love is the spiritually divine energy that connects all living things together as one. When people and other life come together and form synergy (unification of masculine and feminine forces), the outcome is a very unique and balanced abstraction that is progressive and evolving (spiritually evolving).
Religion if I am correct is defined as the beliefs about God. Belief in God or trust in God is faith.
When I look at different religions and their view of God, I consider all of their points of view to be valid in the context of the doctrines, principles, scriptures, and teachings all contribute to our understanding of God. I do not discriminate religion in terms of one religion being better than another, however I will question some of the teachings and principles if I notice contradictions or very ambiguous meanings. Nonetheless I still consider them. I do say that each person has their own path to God. I do not put myself above to say anyone's path does or does not lead to God based on my criteria of what I see God as. Each path is different and I respect it as such.
A very close friend of mine once told me a philosophy of his which I consider quite often when dealing with different directions is "When you have a certain path to reach a specific goal, it doesn't matter which path is taken, it could be squiggly, it could be straight, it could be zig zags, it may be short, it may be long, but no matter which path is taken, the goal is still met so long as there is focus and perseverance."
|
|
drakim
Full Member
Two hands working do more than a thousand hands clasped in prayer
Posts: 177
|
Post by drakim on Sept 13, 2009 9:41:16 GMT -5
First I must be clear and define my view of God. My definition of God is, God is love. Love as I have come to know it is, love is the spiritually divine energy that connects all living things together as one. When people and other life come together and form synergy (unification of masculine and feminine forces), the outcome is a very unique and balanced abstraction that is progressive and evolving (spiritually evolving). Religion if I am correct is defined as the beliefs about God. Belief in God or trust in God is faith. I take it then that you don't define atheism as a religion? since I hold neither belief in God nor trust in God. What about religions where there is no focus on God? You can be a Buddhist and believe in God, but there is no place or position for God within Buddhism. What about Humanism, a world-view with humanity in focus? And lastly, what about say, Satanism? Even in cases where your knowledge might be wrong? I mean, I hate to draw forth the Nazis in an internet discussion, but didn't Hitler work towards his goal with focus and perseverance? |
|
steve
New Member
Posts: 9
|
Post by steve on Sept 15, 2009 9:26:37 GMT -5
Yeah, I don't consider atheism a religion.
I should really be a bit more clear about my statements more often since, I'm constantly evolving, adding, and adjusting my viewpoints when I research, contemplate, and learn new things from discussing with other people and such.
I look at religions from a metaphorical/archetypal point of view where the personality, intent, of whichever figure it is is the focus and how it relates to us and nature. I'm glad you brought up satanism because that's an interesting example. So from an archetypal standpoint, you have the self, the ego, and the persona. The self is basically who you truly are aside from any sort of fettered amalgamation of things you wish to portray to others, kinda like a baby when it's born. It's at its purest unconditional loving state and doesn't have any identities. The ego on the other hand is somewhat like the darker side of things (as very distinctly expressed in satanism). From what I've read in the Satanic Bible and discussed with some Satanists themselves, the foundation of it is based on worshiping one's ego and themselves and Satan is a symbol of the ego. And the persona is a wall of different personalities to cover up the self such as someone who skateboards would wear clothes, shoes, symbols, conform to dialogue and gestures and actions and have gear associated with skateboards and would then identify themselves as a 'skater'. Now the ego and the self can essentially be considered the same thing as far as we can express our naturalistic state of being which is more associated with being compassionate, appreciative of the little things in nature, non-materialistic, leans toward the betterment of themselves and everyone else (interdependency). The ego is a more irrational side to us that can be synthetically developed that is based on materialistic wants, eye for an eye mentality, dominance, only cares about those who fit within their circle, but would reject those outside of their circle (collective ego).
So how does this all relate in terms of different religions and their Gods? Well we as humans tend to take things like, "good and evil rule the universe" and anthropomorphize those abstract ideas/concepts into figureheads and take traits from each personality and attach them according to the appropriate figure. Hypothetically assume that God contains all traits of which are equally attributed to good and contain no elements of evil. God=Love, compassion, articulate, non-violent, interdependent. And likewise for Satan, that he contains all traits equally attributed to evil and contains no elements of good. Satan= Destructive, egocentric, non-compassionate/non-loving, tyrannical, genocidal, fearmongor. Well when we erase the anthropomorphization we have these traits, personalities, intents that give off certain vibes and energies. Rather than so much a man in the sky or a serpent-like creature below, it's the personality and intent behind the figurehead that is being acknowledged. And this is the reason why I say that I don't see one religion being better than another since their scriptures are defining these personalities and traits and if that is what they are basing their Gods on, then looking at each different element about these gods is essential to understand how these are related and how we can understand God.
Now I personally don't go along with the literal supernatural being, ghostly spirit in the sky that talks to us, or all of these underworld doom and gloom demons possessing and slaying the throats of everyone in the depths of hell since I haven't been given a strong, well-supported argument or any fact. I think it may have come across that when I mentioned I was 'spiritual' (even though I really don't like to label myself that) that I was into superstitions or ghosts of some kind. That is actually not what I mean. What I mean is, at the core of the onion, beyond the atom, the protons and neutrons, and quarks, you have energy. The very core of every atom. Now from a scientific standpoint, it is said that humans have 64 amino acids and 20 of those are normally active. Individuals who experience fear, anxiety, and chronic stress can induce sickness, have ulcers, and go through the state of fight or flight where certain systems of the body tend to stop functioning and some of those amino acids are shut down so your body is using less of them. When individuals are in a state of love, bliss, happiness, even sadness (since this is associated with love/caring for others), more of those 20 amino acids are activated and being utilized. Now if I take this from a biblical standpoint, "The spirit of God hovered over the waters and then God said let there be light." Light, which is a form of energy, related to creation. Now considering what I said above about fear and what it does to the human body, I would have to say that nothing could have been created out of fear if God were as literal as the Bible claims, love, which is a combination of masculine and feminine energy is what connects all living things together as one. Like taking a plant seed an water, and then the sum of those creates a plant that bears fruit. That pulchritude that comes from this is what I consider God/love. Again to make it clear, I don't see God as a supernatural man in the sky, but rather the natural order/state of things.
As far as that quote I mentioned, the context was intended for individuals who are seeking an understanding of their lives and the afterlife, like saying once we die, we will go to wherever we thought we believed we were going to. Though, feel free to disregard the quote since it's a bit jumbled and I think I didn't quote it very well.
One could argue that Hitler may have worked towards his goal with focus and perseverance, but did he fully take over the world/succeed in wiping out all Jews? though I think this would go into another topic/thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul A. Kaiser on Sept 17, 2009 1:22:46 GMT -5
I'll have to review this when I have time tomorrow
|
|
