Kelly, slow day at work, so I got to this faster than I thought. I also reduced the 17 pages to 13.
I want to start out by saying that quotations used from the Bible are secondary source material not primary. As Reed already expressed, it is indeed a pity that Jesus Christ did not write, for then there would be many absolute truths.
To argue philosophically, the Bible is one of several source documents of the retelling of the events that occurred that can be used. The Romans were meticulous record keepers and Pontius Pilate made a record of the events of the “Christusâ€. So, we know that through the Romans and through secondary source materials that Jesus Christ indeed walked the earth…with faith, the rest must come.
Luke 10: 20-22 ~
However, do not rejoice that the spirits submit to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven."
At that time Jesus, full of joy through the Holy Spirit, said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure.
"All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows who the Son is except the Father, and no one knows who the Father is except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him."
Can you give some examples of Absolute truths in Christianity? These are truths about everything.
God is the beginning and the end.
We [Children of God] are all one.
Unconditional love is the greatest Commandment.
Understanding the nature of God is 100% consciously reasoned. Understanding is rational, by definition. When it comes down to it, there's no other way to know what is absolutely true and logical.....
While I accept that “understanding†is a reasoning process, I agree that reason is the only way to “prove†what is absolutely true and logical, but I disagree that reason is the be all, end all to conscious awareness. If we go down this road where reason and logic is the only way to prove what I am talking about, then we may need to end this conversation here. Beliefs, which are not absolutes, cannot be philosophically argued. It’s as simple as that.
Quote:
Accepting Christ just so that you will get eternal life if you don’t comprehend the magnitude of what you are doing is meaningless, no?
Pardon me, but how on earth can you "get" eternal life, if there is no beginning or ending to what's eternal?
Misinterpretation, I wasn’t clear. If someone accepts Christ because that is the only way they can obtain eternal life, then it is meaningless. Jesus Christ taught a way of life, he intended people to follow this way of life...to open their eyes and see that Heaven is before them. The notion of accepting Jesus Christ as their Savior and then doing as they please is meaningless. It is not truth.
Let's open this up to rational examination. According to this statement which was supposedly made by Jesus, a person can say "I am a prophet, a righteous man, a disciple of Christ" and automatically he is Christ. The other way to interpret it is, a person is recognised by someone else to be a prophet, righteous man, or a disciple of Christ, and automatically he is Christ. Now, neither of these two declarations actually mean that the person is actually Christ (a Son of God). So the quote is actually pointless.
The only way a person can know what it means to be a Son of God, is to be one. That means, having come to 100% certainty about God. And God is either a finite thing, or the Infinite. This is absolutely logical and true.
The latter of your two interpretations would be more correct. However, I do not see where we disagree. True, it does not take another to recognize and affirm that you are a child of God. But if another person receives you (acknowledges) as a child of God, then they acknowledge Jesus Christ and further God, therefore, they too, are children of God. The person being received already knows. Jesus Christ was both finite and infinite. He was the Messiah foretold in prophecy. We are not the finite Jesus Christ, the Son of God, but part of the Infinite Jesus Christ through the Spirit…as I am with you.
John 1: 11-13 ~
He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God.
Mark 3:31-35~
Then Jesus' mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, "Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you." "Who are my mother and my brothers?" he asked. Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother."
But unless one understands this, though he be a finite thing within the Infinite, the Infinite is meaningless to him…it simply does not exist.
Also, when Jesus says, "I will come to you", this is exactly the same as having Jesus' understanding. That's all. No apocalypse, no "second coming", no trumpets sounding.
This is one part of Christianity that I have dropped away from, so the Apocalypse, to me is when the finite becomes Infinite or, in the case of those finites who refused to acknowledge the Infinite, become dust upon physical death. Just so we are clear on this one, one can be part of the Infinite if one acknowledges its existence while still physically alive, but upon death only the spirit remains. If one does not acknowledge this while living, his mind dies and nothing remains.
By the very fact of following someone's teaching and recognising someone as a prophet, without thinking to check whether it's true or not, a person is denied Christ (being a Son of God, or having an understanding of God). That's not so hard to understand, i hope.
The whole herd of devotees could be wallowing in pointless nonsense. It would be foolish to follow along without trying to fathom any sense in it.
The someone you are describing was me. The circumstances that led me to the narrow gate was like going through Hell to find Heaven. However, while the statement I made may seem broad, it was not intended to be so. I must add that this is an area that puzzles me greatly. I have a hard time believing that if you aren’t a rubberstamped Christian you will not find the Infinite…but many, many Christians will tell you that you cannot have eternal life without recognizing Christ as your Savior.
And it all goes back to the discussion earlier that if you do not understand the magnitude of the Infinite, then what is being a Christian other than a man-made exclusivity club. Perhaps it is just that simple, but I can’t swallow that line anymore.
If you only answer a single question, answer this one:
Is God finite or Infinite?
God is Infinite, but I want to remind you of the one thing I asked you to reflect upon. If God is all things, which includes being not logical, not subject to reason and not rational, then how do you propose to “understand†that part of God unless it is revealed to you in some other means?
Quote:
who are we to judge a man?
You're making the (illogical) judgment that no one should judge.
One cannot help judging. One's aim ought to be: judge logically.
Yes, it is a weakness to find fault in one without looking inward first, however, chaos would truly reign if man did not judge. It is another quagmire in which I am stuck. One question is by whose authority do you judge? Whose logic? Whose reason? If we believe in causality, does good win over evil? If man did live in chaos without judges, would truth and goodness prevail…if God is good alone? If the Infinite is the final judge, then who are we to interfere?
Quote:
The Holy Spirit leads me and I follow. But is this notion of a Holy Spirit lost on this board?
If you are following the spirit of Absolute Truth, then we have something in common. So far, i frankly doubt this. But defend your ideas, by any means, if you can.
I know you have listed, or at least Carl has listed some of your absolute truths all in one place. Why don’t you confirm the top ten and we will see if we have something in common?
If you believe in absolute truths guiding your life, then you are missing out on the essence of the spirit and that is “understanding with your soul†aka faith, those things that cannot be absolutely proven. I may have in common with you these absolute truths, but I may also be living with something more.
Are you saying that any truth that a human thinks up, is disqualifiable?
Not necessarily, but can it be just theory, absolutely. No one lives to tell what happens after the heart stops beating. While alive, I think that what one goes through spiritually, is very personal, cannot be explained and most likely shouldn’t be lest it manifests itself in the ego and become meaningless. However, I am as guilty as the next guy for trying to understand when perhaps, I should just let it be.
Do you ascribe to that popular hearsay-phemy: "Oh, some person way, way back heard it from God directly" ? If so, how do you know that "prophet" wasn't hallucinating, power-mongering, lying, or just plain crazy?
Not without further study...and you don't know that they were not delusional...but read on. I am working slowly on a writing project that will hopefully one day help me to understand these people better as I relate what they went through to my own life. I have read St. John of the Cross and am currently reading the autobiography of St. Theresa of Avila. I have read other works of fiction that incorporated the philosophy of the writers (Dostoevsky, Hesse, Rand, Lewis and others) and will continue studying, reading, talking and thinking until I reach a consensus of what I believe to be true with regard to these people and some better grasp of Truth.
I am hoping to study other religions in the future, but that is further down the line. I’ve got to get a grip on the one I know the most about…and that is slim. In so doing, I hope to gain a better understanding of their experiences. If I can relate to their experiences and they and I are deemed delusional, then I will die delusional.
In Acts of the Apostles there is a story about the Apostles being brought before a judge because they practiced Christianity which was forbidden…Peter and the Apostles stated to the Sanhedrin: We must obey God rather than men. The Sanhedrin wanted to put them to death, but one by the name of Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, reminded them to be careful of what they do to them. He reminded them of other times when a group had raised up and claimed importance only to be disbanded. He further said: Have nothing to do with these men, and let them go. For if this endeavor or this activity is of human origin, it will destroy itself. But if it comes from God, you will not be able to destroy them; you may even find yourselves fighting against God.
Since this [The Sermon on the Mount] "lays it all out", we'd better have a look at it. I'm going to use the New International Version. It's non-denominational, it's the one i'm familiar with, and it is the version most commonly used by mainstream society.
I want to preface the future comments with a thank you for taking the time to “interpret†this in the language that several of you use. It has been most helpful in allowing me to see the similarities in what we think. Only the issues with which I wanted to make a note, request further explanation or offer further explanation are below, the rest I have no disagreement and deleted from the post.
14 "You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. 15 Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. 16 In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven.
If enlightened, then it will show. However, others will NOT see it, unless they too are enlightened.
Here again we have this enlightenment issue. Are there stages of enlightenment? Can someone “see†this light that is not fully enlightened and who do you consider to be fully enlightened? I wish I understood that concept a little better, it sure is tossed about frequently.
25 "Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still together on the way, or your adversary may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison. 26 Truly I tell you, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny.
x
If the adversary was a sage and the sage was educating the grasshopper who balked at his advice, the sage would have to turn the grasshopper over to his ego to suffer the consequences of his failure to see the Truth until he does.
Love for Enemies
43 "You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor [h] and hate your enemy.' 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
Everything is perfect, nothing is inherently more or less valuable
Explain further.
Giving to the Needy
1 "Be careful not to do your 'acts of righteousness' in front of others, to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.
Empty yourself of the belief that you, or wisdom, inherently exist
I would say that one should not allow an act of perfection to be tainted by ego. This outward gesture would reflect attachment to others praise and adulation.
2 "So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. 3 But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4 so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.
If you think there is an inherently existing giver, you'd be mistaken
Truly, what you are giving was but given to you.
Prayer
5 "And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. 6 But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. 7 And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. 8 Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.
Just think logically
Explain further. I would have thought you meditated. But what of that as well?
your Father knows what you need = cause and effect
Judging Others
1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
x (with the qualification that the last sentence is blatantly obvious)
How I take this from you is that you would not mind being judged by the same standards as you judge? You are that detached and free from all things that could render judgment by one who is more enlightened? In some ways, I can understand that the acceptance of one’s “punishment†if they are found judge-worthy is good, but do you not think that we are judged by cause and effect anyhow? Do you think that the effects we reap are by the choices we make? Choices~Causes. I posted a reply to the "God is good alone" thread that I later went back in and deleted because I wasn’t truly prepared to argue it very well, and here it is anyhow…interesting.
3 "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in someone else's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye?
5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from the other person's eye.
6 "Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.
Most people aren't ready for truths about the Infinite. But don't lie.
How do you know that you have heard all the truths yourself? I take this quote to mean: What if the plank is in your own eye? You, who think you know them all. It is one thing to say what is true, but understand that self-awareness must be very keen to insure that you know and live the complete truth, so that you are not a hypocrite. Being a hypocrite is as equally bad as lying and leads people away from enlightenment. I know this to be very true based on experience. Paul also brought this up:
1 Corinthians 10: 23-33
"Everything is permissible"—but not everything is beneficial.
"Everything is permissible"—but not everything is constructive.
Nobody should seek his own good, but the good of others.
Eat anything sold in the meat market without raising questions of conscience, for, "The earth is the Lord's, and everything in it."
If some unbeliever invites you to a meal and you want to go, eat whatever is put before you without raising questions of conscience. But if anyone says to you, "This has been offered in sacrifice," then do not eat it, both for the sake of the man who told you and for conscience' sake— the other man's conscience, I mean, not yours. For why should my freedom be judged by another's conscience? If I take part in the meal with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of something I thank God for?
So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God. Do not cause anyone to stumble, whether Jews, Greeks or the church of God— even as I try to please everybody in every way. For I am not seeking my own good but the good of many, so that they may be saved.
Phew. Hanging in there?
Yes, are you? ;-)
Please share your insight on how a single cause --- which is a finite thing, that is not everything, and therefore dependent on what it isn't, for its existence --- ..... is not itself caused.
Well, when you say it like that …it doesn’t exist. Envision a bowling alley that is all set up for a game [Ultimate Reality], God picks up the ball and rolls it down the alley to begin what will be an infinite number of games. To conceive of a purposeless Ultimate Reality is almost impossible for me. It is easy to accept infinity as the creator but there has to be a higher “something†because we cannot do what that higher “something†can do in and throughout eternity…we are only a part of it all.
Quote:
Surely if you follow his teachings you will do no harm to anyone. The only one to lose anything, if possible, would be you. By faith, it is the most logical absolute of all.
Let's suppose that faith is the Absolute (meaning, everything). Because the Absolute includes everything, it cannot itself be a single thing with a relative identity. Therefore, "faith" has absolutely no particular identifying characteristic.
Is that what you define faith as?
I am not sure I am educated enough in philosophy to know how to answer this question, however, I will give it a go. Yes. Give me an example of what you mean by a single thing with a relative identity…like Jesus Christ?
You didn't understand my explanation of reincarnation. I never mentioned that it meant a soul entered another finite being upon physical death. I simply said it meant the endless creation of finite things. Ie. boundless cause and effect.
You can state all kinds of beliefs, but if you don't have any specific reasoning to back them up, it's nonsense.
So, where's your reasoning to back up these statements?
Here I was making a broad statement and shouldn’t have. The term “reincarnation†I was using was the one I defined, not the one you defined. Frankly your definition of reincarnation is very plausible, but I don’t think it complete.
As to backing up my statements…well, if anyone who is reincarnated (not by your definition but by mine) can prove to me that they are, I will listen to their theory…but the Shirley McClaines of this world leave one a little leery of the subject. As for the dust theory, again this is based on faith, the fact that we come from God and go back to God…the higher “somethingâ€, the What Is that breathed life into us to begin with. This is something that cannot be reasoned…it is through experiences in life that lead me to know that What Is exists and that It is something more than just a can of Play-doh.
There is a distinction that must be drawn between finite and the Infinite and that is that the finite is part of the Infinite but is not the Infinite, just like a square can be a rectangle but a rectangle cannot be a square…we are the rectangles but not the square. We are not God but we are part of God. Reed suggested that Christians do philosophy gymnastics when it comes to their own divinity. There is a fine line and I want you to explain which side you are on…it is very important that I understand this one thing.
If you answer only this one question, let it be this one. ;-)
Quote:
Kelly: There is no purpose to God because that attributes a finite quality to God. It ignores the truth that God is responsible for purpose and not-purpose.
Passthrough: You lost me here.
Kelly: I define God as the Infinite (everything). That means that God is responsible for everything. The Infinite is not confined to intention or purpose, for where then would not-intention, and not-purpose come from?
If this is true, then the Infinite is not confined to logic, reason or rational thought either. Therefore, one cannot, through the use of one’s mind, understand the Totality of the Infinite…it takes something more.
How can something not be intended and exist? A mistake? Does God make mistakes? I thought God was perfect.
Are you saying Mass Consciousness has absolutely no single identifying characteristic? Not even mass consciousness?
If God had identifying characteristics then there would be no argument because we would all know the answer. God cannot be more conscious of God, but we can become more conscious of God. The notion that God is Everything is a philosophical one because we are limited by the constraints of mind which leads us to understand God in a limited way. So, how does one get to know the whole? You might even question if there is anything more than what the mind envisions…that anything more is a delusion or illusion of something that isn’t really there. Have you ever questioned your own limitations of understanding?
I cannot prove a word I am about to say, but there have been times throughout my life where, for a brief moment, there was illumination…a peace that made the world harmonious, in sync. Even in the darkest times of my life, these experiences occurred…it could be compared to a freedom from a weight that had been lifted. I know that I am not the only one to which these things have happened. Is it delusion or is there something more out there that is not to be grasped, explained or identified, but accepted as being. What if what we understand is of relatively little importance in the grander scheme of God? How do we know otherwise?
Quote:
As to Jesus' desire for us to test the truth, it brings to mind Revelations 3: 14-16
Quote:
"To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God's creation. I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm, neither hot nor cold, I am about to spit you out of my mouth.
It just means: know what accords with reason, and live by it. In other words: Choose. Don't dilly-dally.
Yes it does, doesn’t it. So, in answer to your question does Jesus Christ desire us to test His truth, absolutely, but we must choose…his way or not his way. Jesus Christ said that if a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand. You say that what he means is that one must choose that which accords with reason, but who’s reason? Who sets the bar? If God is everything then a certain standard of reason is relative and not absolute.
To say his way or not his way, indicates that there are other ways which lead somewhere else…where? The unconscious? And if there exists other ways and God is everything, then where is the logic in Jesus Christ?
Jesus Christ was accused of being the devil when he was dispelling demons. He proved he was not by making the statement: would Satan drive out Satan…the source of the quote: a house divided against itself does not stand. So, he was stating who he was not, thus acknowledging that Satan existed.
If God is everything, is God Satan? I’m not sure about the true idea of Satan however. I think truly that absence of God is “Satanâ€. Therefore either you are part of God or you are not…If you are not, you cease to exist.
It is easy to say that God is everything, but do we understand what everything is? Kelly, there is something greater than what we know, otherwise there is too much contradiction of terms.
And a warning: it's time to sharpen the wits, to think! A characteristic of wisdom is the ability to move freely in any context. So this may test whether you have that ability or no....
How’d I fair? Is there hope for me yet? *smile*
Edit: to clarify a position.
