Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I think god wants friendship with humans, not for sole reason of becoming their moral authority but just for sake of being in connection with them. In such case, person having possibly incorrect ideas about god wouldn't be so huge deal for god. I also think that if gods spirit has renewing power in moral sense, that can work within wide variety of moral standards.
It is possible that God is just beginning his work on you, but, if so, you will be a lot more conservative by the time he has finished with you.
Do you think its possible that god or gods, when they want to contact people and pull them closer to religion, do so by using whatever religious concept this target person is allready most familiar with, or can naturally connect with? So, every person due to their background or personality, has some default religion that god is going to use for them.
This seems to be closest thing to what I personally believe. I don't think all religions are same, because they do have differencies, but I believe that they all can be used by god(s) to communicate with people. I think religion is not for god, its for men to use as a tool when communicating with divine.
This in turn leads to conclusion that I could aswell make my own religion for myself and it would be just as valid for the purpose than any of the allready existing ones.
If you're referring to becoming conservative Christian, I find it unlikely, but I try to be open-minded and never say never about any possible path in the future. I've allready been through enough to know that life, and especially religious things can end up surprising ways.
You sound a bit like me thirty years ago. As I became gradually more conservative, I resisted it every step of the way, because it meant changing my existing self image, and unsaying things I had previously said. Nevertheless, God always won.
If you're referring to becoming conservative Christian, I find it unlikely, but I try to be open-minded and never say never about any possible path in the future.
Well, that IS the nature of being led by God. If we were leading ourselves, we wouldn't be surprised at there we were headed.
Well, that IS the nature of being led by God. If we were leading ourselves, we wouldn't be surprised at there we were headed.
That's rather close to my view. I think it in a way that ideally, spirituality is born first and then religion is built around it, as a theoretical construction to have words and concepts for spirituality. But it can work other way around too, when becoming familiar with religion sparks spirituality.
I do take issue with religion for that reason, its a theoretical construction (as I said in my prior post) that is subject to a different culture and context, how much of the theory can one put into practice? Of course a person could be mindful of that when reflecting on any particular faith, but I certainly would'nt hand that construction to my kids as a body of work to digest. Better to find those spiritual components and share. I think a person indoctrinated at a young age runs the risk of getting lost in the construction and the interpretation of such, if it runs contrary to what I deem to be the spiritual components.
For me personally, its mostly feeling of presence of god, experience of being guided, visions, dreams, inner sense of being connected to spiritual being etc. Stuff like that. I understand not everyone experiences it same way so it can mean other stuff too.
I've been guided with my understanding of being more aware and embracing a more intuitive life, mostly from meditation, but not with an absence of logic and reason. Also lucid dreams and remembering certain dreams upon waking have been insightful. I'm more guarded these days about the terminology I use and I never normally use the word God in my normal conversations or something like a spiritual being. That's just my outlook. So the bolded part above I would relay as an inner sense of connection, and in that process of connection that I am the spiritual being, a being that is connected. Also that in that moment I am present, as opposed to being in the presence of God.
Of course one could ask 'connected to what', to which I could just say life, a greater connection to life and the experience of it.
If religion is understood to be like language to communicate with divine, then it is.
Language is used to convey a meaning about the human experience, that's as far as I'm prepared to stretch in its relation to religion. I would argue that modern psychology and neuroscience were better ways to convey that perspective of the human experience than religion is, so I align more with the terminologies within those areas more than I would religious ones, given that is the culture and context I find myself within. As for communicating with the divine, well I would hope that religions were about getting in touch with your true nature of self, our whole as a human.
I'm too influenced by western and Christian moral standards to accept such extreme ideas I assume, unless I totally change and lose myself. So possible risk scenarios would be different.
Of course, I used an extreme point to convey my own, but in a lesser educated area or within a reduced moral standard, my point about communicating with God is valid because there are less restrictions on acting with what's in your head, or acting on what's in a book from God. This is why I don't see religions as default, but that spirituality as described in my previous post is.
But there is interesting view point: While it's possible to end up morally lost while being individualistic with religion, if we look in the history of organized religions and see all the stuff organized religions have done, I just think that being organized religion is not any better guarantee of being morally on right path than being individualist is.
I'd agree. As you can see I have my own individualistic outlook, based on a whole number of things.
As for communicating with the divine, well I would hope that religions were about getting in touch with your true nature of self, our whole as a human.
Of course, I used an extreme point to convey my own, but in a lesser educated area or within a reduced moral standard, my point about communicating with God is valid because there are less restrictions on acting with what's in your head, or acting on what's in a book from God. This is why I don't see religions as default, but that spirituality as described in my previous post is.
I think that the natural elements of the world are used to teach mankind about the nature of the divine. It is merely up to man to open his eyes to recognize the patterns in the natural world which teaches him about the greater reality.Do you think its possible that god or gods, when they want to contact people and pull them closer to religion, do so by using whatever religious concept this target person is allready most familiar with, or can naturally connect with? So, every person due to their background or personality, has some default religion that god is going to use for them.
This seems to be closest thing to what I personally believe. I don't think all religions are same, because they do have differencies, but I believe that they all can be used by god(s) to communicate with people. I think religion is not for god, its for men to use as a tool when communicating with divine.
This in turn leads to conclusion that I could aswell make my own religion for myself and it would be just as valid for the purpose than any of the allready existing ones.
It looks like you're describing people who are being led by someone other than God.
It's also the nature of people easily influenced and lacking in self awareness.
It looks like you're describing people who are being led by someone other than God.
Indeed. However, your comment implied that some are led by "God". How can you know that?
It is easy to follow, as you are simply going in circles.If we, or any of us, comes to the knowledge of a truth that we can't know through use of our rational faculties or senses, it's either dumb luck or someone else being responsible for it. If the issue is the existence or nature of God, credit God. That's not so hard to follow.
We seem to have different views on nature of mysticism. I'm personally into theistic mysticism, so for me fundamental part of mysticism is to experience connection with beings outside of my self, like god or lesser spiritual beings.
What you describe is not actually against my views, but in my understanding, exploring mind in meditation etc. is just one part of it. Other part being connection with beings outside of myself.
Of course, each to their own and their own experiences. That said things like communication and connection are not really abstract principles, so if those words are used in relation something outside of yourself then an applied explanation should be required. But then perhaps the mystical is just that, mysterious phenomena.
I understand what you mean, but I have to mention that aswell, it could happen other way around, having conversations with god could aswell spark more peaceful moral standards. I think there are historical examples for this, like in case of Jesus or Francis of Assisi, both of them held religious values which were somewhat alien for their time and people around them. Altho the latter didn't start new religion of his own, but rather interpreted current religion in untrendy manner.
So are we saying conversations with God are not unique, but that moral peaceful standards are. Perhaps the mechanism is not the conversation but what the conversation entails and whether self serving agendas are in action.
It was you who were having the problem following along, remember?It is easy to follow, as you are simply going in circles.
You missed the part about how you determined that you had "knowledge of a truth". Are you infallible?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?