Can not all righteousness be traced back to men's subjective minds?
And, as such, is it just an act of faith to say that these specific men in time and place had the knowledge of the exact things to write or say which were directly linked to God or "the divine"?
Paul, Muhammad, the Gospel writers, Buddha, Lao Tze, the Psalmists, Joseph Smith. All these people are men, like you and I, with minds and childhoods and subjective experiences growing up in a specific culture at a specific time. If you do not give yourself the authority to follow your own logic because you have not escaped the confines of your private and limited mind to access the unlimited and universal divine then why do you place your faith that these mere men did just that which you claim you cannot do?
As an example, Paul was a man. He wrote things down with authority: commands and directives. He was a leader. But is it on faith that you trust that his writings were not deluded by his subjective prison and is it on faith that you trust that he had an authority higher than yours so he was allowed to think for himself under the direction of God and reach purposeful conclusions but you are not because you must simply follow him on faith? Yet he was a mere man! So the righteousness of God that he proclaims has been traced back to one subjective mind of a man, no different, no more perfect, no less selfish, no less egoistic, no less driven by culture, no less driven by personal experience than you or I.
The same can be said of any spiritual writings. The source is a human being who is ultimately trapped in his own mind unable to escape subjectivity, just like you and I. A mere limited and private human mind in the seething masses.
All righteousness can be traced back to human minds. So do I not have the authority to claim that I have found a source of God and righteousness? For Paul did just that and was he not presumptuous or self-righteous to claim such a thing?
And, as such, is it just an act of faith to say that these specific men in time and place had the knowledge of the exact things to write or say which were directly linked to God or "the divine"?
Paul, Muhammad, the Gospel writers, Buddha, Lao Tze, the Psalmists, Joseph Smith. All these people are men, like you and I, with minds and childhoods and subjective experiences growing up in a specific culture at a specific time. If you do not give yourself the authority to follow your own logic because you have not escaped the confines of your private and limited mind to access the unlimited and universal divine then why do you place your faith that these mere men did just that which you claim you cannot do?
As an example, Paul was a man. He wrote things down with authority: commands and directives. He was a leader. But is it on faith that you trust that his writings were not deluded by his subjective prison and is it on faith that you trust that he had an authority higher than yours so he was allowed to think for himself under the direction of God and reach purposeful conclusions but you are not because you must simply follow him on faith? Yet he was a mere man! So the righteousness of God that he proclaims has been traced back to one subjective mind of a man, no different, no more perfect, no less selfish, no less egoistic, no less driven by culture, no less driven by personal experience than you or I.
The same can be said of any spiritual writings. The source is a human being who is ultimately trapped in his own mind unable to escape subjectivity, just like you and I. A mere limited and private human mind in the seething masses.
All righteousness can be traced back to human minds. So do I not have the authority to claim that I have found a source of God and righteousness? For Paul did just that and was he not presumptuous or self-righteous to claim such a thing?
ABBA'S FOOL,
