Did people overcomplicate salvation?

[Tumah]

Not really, Jews used it before. Christians use it more often, doesn't mean it started with Christianity. Zoroastrians used it as well when describing the end times. There is more than one definition for it as well. What would the Buddha be called? One could say that he gave salvation to those who were in the endless cycle of life death and rebirth, by giving them a means to escape the cycle. Or the Mahavira in Jainism. There's other ways to define it.

1. liberation from ignorance or illusion
   
   
2. preservation from destruction or failure : deliverance from danger or difficulty

In Judaism, salvation doesn't have the same connotations at all. It just means to be saved when you're in a tight spot.

Have to turn in a huge project tomorrow that you haven't even started yet and the teacher just eloped with her new husband to France? You've just been salvated Judah-style.

 

[Tumah]

I never really thought salvation was attained by believing in a certain god, following a certain set of rules, obtaining a certain amount of knowledge, or even going through lots of meditation and shunning material things. I always thought salvation was pretty simple. Be good.

Don't hurt others and don't hurt yourself. I always thought salvation to the otherworld was obtained by being a good and moral person. The more good you do in your life, the higher you get in the totem pole. And of course you would get extra brownie points for doing something great, like saving a bunch of people's lives.

I don't think it's necessary to follow a certain religion or abstaining from many material things. I feel that being good is all that's really necessary.

Why?

 

[Theweirdtophat]

Why?

Karma.

You want good things, you have to be good. Every action comes back to you eventually in someway, shape or form, whether it is in this life or the next.

Where did all the souls end up before the gods met humans? They had to go somewhere. I don't think humans were allowed into heaven until a god told them they could by believing in him, or the cycle would be broken by nirvana or acheving knowledge like in gnostic religioms. Using good energy gives you good energy in return.

I never felt sinners get tortured. Rather they would look at their sins and many would lament and eventually regret it. Being farther away from the divine is torture enough. They would start lower on the town pole

Is there even an end to the cycle.? Don't know. Everything else seems to be in a cycle. Why would the afterlife be the exception?

 

[Tumah]

Karma.

You want good things, you have to be good. Every action comes back to you eventually in someway, shape or form, whether it is in this life or the next.

Where did all the souls end up before the gods met humans? They had to go somewhere. I don't think humans were allowed into heaven until a god told them they could by believing in him, or the cycle would be broken by nirvana or acheving knowledge like in gnostic religioms. Using good energy gives you good energy in return.

I never felt sinners get tortured. Rather they would look at their sins and many would lament and eventually regret it. Being farther away from the divine is torture enough. They would start lower on the town pole

Is there even an end to the cycle.? Don't know. Everything else seems to be in a cycle. Why would the afterlife be the exception?

It seems that your beliefs about salvation are based on concepts you already believe. Theres no reason why someone who doesn't believe in the same basics as you would come to the same concept about salvation.
So what you're saying isn't really self-evident as the tone of your OP implies it should be.

 

[psychoslice]

In my way of thinking, I believe that most religions have completely over-complicated everything about spirituality, how hard is it, we are all one with the Source of the Cosmos, call that God or whatever, its really that simple, the rest is all made up.

 

[serp777]

I never really thought salvation was attained by believing in a certain god, following a certain set of rules, obtaining a certain amount of knowledge, or even going through lots of meditation and shunning material things. I always thought salvation was pretty simple. Be good.

Don't hurt others and don't hurt yourself. I always thought salvation to the otherworld was obtained by being a good and moral person. The more good you do in your life, the higher you get in the totem pole. And of course you would get extra brownie points for doing something great, like saving a bunch of people's lives.

I don't think it's necessary to follow a certain religion or abstaining from many material things. I feel that being good is all that's really necessary.

Why is good defined that way? Morality is not simple whatsoever. Coming up with a consistent, clear, and rational morality has been extremely difficult since the inception of human civilization.

Anytime you try to simplify things like this, it quickly becomes exponentially complicated when you ask simple quesions. For example, what if by not hurting yourself you're hurting others, and vice versa? How do you calculate or assign weights to what "hurt" means? Why is "hurt" necesserily a bad thing? Maybe people need to be hurt in order to grow as people. Maybe without some pain or suffering people become weak, spoiled, and boring. And then what's this arbitrary totem pole? What action correlate with an increase in your height on the totem pole? How do you know what actions you should do in an unclear situations like when the ends justify the means?

EIther way this is garbage--simplications of morality and salvation never work.

 

[Theweirdtophat]

It seems that your beliefs about salvation are based on concepts you already believe. Theres no reason why someone who doesn't believe in the same basics as you would come to the same concept about salvation.
So what you're saying isn't really self-evident as the tone of your OP implies it should be.

There are different definitions of salvation. I'm just pointing out that being good is really all that's needed

 

[Theweirdtophat]

Why is good defined that way? Morality is not simple whatsoever. Coming up with a consistent, clear, and rational morality has been extremely difficult since the inception of human civilization.

Anytime you try to simplify things like this, it quickly becomes exponentially complicated when you ask simple quesions. For example, what if by not hurting yourself you're hurting others, and vice versa? How do you calculate or assign weights to what "hurt" means? Why is "hurt" necesserily a bad thing? Maybe people need to be hurt in order to grow as people. Maybe without some pain or suffering people become weak, spoiled, and boring. And then what's this arbitrary totem pole? What action correlate with an increase in your height on the totem pole? How do you know what actions you should do in an unclear situations like when the ends justify the means?

EIther way this is garbage--simplications of morality and salvation never work.

Being hurt is not good or bad in itself. Being hurt is natural. We will end up getting hurt in this life. What's not natural is people going out of their way to hurt others for their own personal gain or amusement. That should be pretty obvious.

If someone does some pretty bad to achieve a supposedly noble goal, than no, the end does not justify the means. Again, should be pretty obvious to anyone who knows the definition of right and wrong.

What do you even base this on? Things are rather simple when you actually look at it from a certain point of view. But things get overcomplicated when they were simple all along.

 

[fantome profane]

In Judaism, salvation doesn't have the same connotations at all. It just means to be saved when you're in a tight spot.

Have to turn in a huge project tomorrow that you haven't even started yet and the teacher just eloped with her new husband to France? You've just been salvated Judah-style.

 

[Tumah]

There are different definitions of salvation. I'm just pointing out that being good is really all that's needed

And so I am repeating, that this is only true according to the basis that you believe in. Someone who doesn't believe in karma or that a god did create souls, etc. may not come to the same conclusion as you did. As I didn't.

 

[roger1440]

According to the Bible, salvation is very simple. All that is required is to allow oneself to be guided by God. To do so one must first trust God. And in the end he will protect us. Remember the story of Moses and his magic stick? When ever he held it up high the Jews won there battles. The stick may represent the power and authority of God.

 

[Theweirdtophat]

And so I am repeating, that this is only true according to the basis that you believe in. Someone who doesn't believe in karma or that a god did create souls, etc. may not come to the same conclusion as you did. As I didn't.

I don't expect everyone to believe me. I know that one religion does not have all the answers but many have some answers, meaning there are afterlives described like in the Bible but karma and reincarnation take place like in Dharmic faiths.

 

[Tumah]

I don't expect everyone to believe me. I know that one religion does not have all the answers but many have some answers, meaning there are afterlives described like in the Bible but karma and reincarnation take place like in Dharmic faiths.

This is also your belief. There's no difference between you saying karma exists and a Muslim saying it doesn't. This is your belief and that's theirs.
But for some reason you think your belief is more obvious.

 

[Theweirdtophat]

This is also your belief. There's no difference between you saying karma exists and a Muslim saying it doesn't. This is your belief and that's theirs.
But for some reason you think your belief is more obvious.

So how are you any different?

We all have our beliefs. I feel like it's more likely reincarnation takes place. Not to mention, I don't think it's strange that most religions believe in reincarnation. Even some Jewish groups have been known to. I feel like it makes more sense to me, that's all.

 

[Tumah]

So how are you any different?

We all have our beliefs. I feel like it's more likely reincarnation takes place. Not to mention, I don't think it's strange that most religions believe in reincarnation. Even some Jewish groups have been known to. I feel like it makes more sense to me, that's all.

A hundred percent. Its just that you wrote this thread as though your position is the most obvious one and then questioned other faiths based on that position. Which doesn't seem like a valid argument.

 

[serp777]

Being hurt is not good or bad in itself. Being hurt is natural. We will end up getting hurt in this life. What's not natural is people going out of their way to hurt others for their own personal gain or amusement. That should be pretty obvious.

If someone does some pretty bad to achieve a supposedly noble goal, than no, the end does not justify the means. Again, should be pretty obvious to anyone who knows the definition of right and wrong.

What do you even base this on? Things are rather simple when you actually look at it from a certain point of view. But things get overcomplicated when they were simple all along.

There is no agreed upon definition of right or wrong. It depends on philosophy, religion, culture, and a variety of other factors. Morality is relative and changes over time and by geographical location.

What's not natural is people going out of their way to hurt others for their own personal gain or amusement. That should be pretty obvious.

Its not obvious at all. Who are you to say that someone's personal gain or amusement is less important that someone being hurt? How do you weigh those things? What if its only hurt a little bit for a lot of personal amusement? Its just a matter of opinion. Explain how its obvious.

But things get overcomplicated when they were simple all along.

THis makes no sense.

 

[arthra]

In my belief salvation is both personal and social... that is, they complement one another. If the social teachings are implemented and education and social institutions reflect high moral and ethical standards then it makes it easier for us to have personal salvation. If you personally have high moral and ethical standards then you are more likely to take a stand and fight for better conditions for humanity and abolish racial and class prejudices.

"The records of all extant revealed religions show clearly that in the beginning of each great Faith social progress was the concern of religion just as was spiritual salvation."

(BW - Baha'i World Volumes, Volume 14, p. 612)

 

[Theweirdtophat]

There is no agreed upon definition of right or wrong. It depends on philosophy, religion, culture, and a variety of other factors. Morality is relative and changes over time and by geographical location.



Its not obvious at all. Who are you to say that someone's personal gain or amusement is less important that someone being hurt? How do you weigh those things? What if its only hurt a little bit for a lot of personal amusement? Its just a matter of opinion. Explain how its obvious.


THis makes no sense.

You are making up excuses. You know what the difference between right and wrong is. People will say that there is no right and wrong as an excuse to do what they want and justify it. Who are to say someone's amusement is more important than someone getting hurt? I could say the same thing, too you know

 

[serp777]

You are making up excuses. You know what the difference between right and wrong is. People will say that there is no right and wrong as an excuse to do what they want and justify it. Who are to say someone's amusement is more important than someone getting hurt? I could say the same thing, too you know

That's not an argument. That's an appeal to emotion. Anyways, you're making up rationalizations and assertions for your morality.

Who are to say someone's amusement is more important than someone getting hurt?

I didn't say it was more important. I was asking how you knew. You seem incredibly confused--what is the logical argument for why someone getting hurt is more important than someone's amusement? You made a strawman to an argument I wasn't making; i wasn't saying that someone's amusement is more important than someone getting hurt. I'm saying I don't know what's moral logically. Actually read my argument this time.

 

[Muffled]

I never really thought salvation was attained by believing in a certain god, following a certain set of rules, obtaining a certain amount of knowledge, or even going through lots of meditation and shunning material things. I always thought salvation was pretty simple. Be good.

Don't hurt others and don't hurt yourself. I always thought salvation to the otherworld was obtained by being a good and moral person. The more good you do in your life, the higher you get in the totem pole. And of course you would get extra brownie points for doing something great, like saving a bunch of people's lives.

I don't think it's necessary to follow a certain religion or abstaining from many material things. I feel that being good is all that's really necessary.

I believe only God is good.

I don't believe there is a totem pole accept with men of course. I believe those who seek good will be rewarded with it and those who seek evil will be punished by it.

God who is Lord and Master of all things expects to be pleased. Those who displease Him tend to face His wrath.