Already answered. They worship him as an incarnation of God.
Fair enough. You would have to ask someone who worships him why they do. I'm not a bhakti.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Pagan vs Christian
- Thread starter The Hammer
- Start date
The way I look at it. There is only one religion of truth, but it's hidden right now. So God will just see how sincere people are to whatever truth they can achieve given the conjecture of falsehoods and hiddenness of the complete truth.
A believer is one who believes in God and his signs. In theory, a believing loving of God person would not reject a Messenger of God. However, propaganda can make it difficult to see the truth. So God is the best of judges.
Keeping in mind Messengers use to come in quick succession to one another till Isa (a) which was the first time there was significant vacuum period of a Messenger in public.
And now the Ghayba of Imam (a) is longer then that. So miracles were a thing and meant to be a thing. They can be sought from God now hiddenly and we ought to pray. But to ready yourself for miracles often needs Nubuwa and Resalah to be acknowledge to prepare. Sometimes it's not needed though.
At the end, God knows every human and what they had to work with. He will reward those who attain the truth higher then the seekers of truth who didn't attain, the latter just falling short of righteousness, but they will all enter heaven by his grace and be forgiven.
A believer is one who believes in God and his signs. In theory, a believing loving of God person would not reject a Messenger of God. However, propaganda can make it difficult to see the truth. So God is the best of judges.
Keeping in mind Messengers use to come in quick succession to one another till Isa (a) which was the first time there was significant vacuum period of a Messenger in public.
And now the Ghayba of Imam (a) is longer then that. So miracles were a thing and meant to be a thing. They can be sought from God now hiddenly and we ought to pray. But to ready yourself for miracles often needs Nubuwa and Resalah to be acknowledge to prepare. Sometimes it's not needed though.
At the end, God knows every human and what they had to work with. He will reward those who attain the truth higher then the seekers of truth who didn't attain, the latter just falling short of righteousness, but they will all enter heaven by his grace and be forgiven.
If that's correct, why have a religion or even a god belief? And if you want to avoid collecting falsehoods and instead collect demonstrably correct ideas that can make a life better, there's a much better method than belief by faith.
Yet you called it illogical anyway without that. Your words were, "the reason why I see a problem with those that worship pluralistically, is that I think it is illogical." I understand your use of the word illogical in this context to mean that it contradicts the dogma I've accepted by faith.
Probably for the same reason I don't. I have no reason to believe that somebody named Jesus claimed or believed that, but even if I knew for a fact that such a person lived and did say such things, I still would have no reason to believe him.
Abrahamic religion demeans man (and nature). Humanism is the name of the worldview that sees man as capable of nobility. It's named after humanity. And science reveals that we are all related through common descent, and not just to other human beings, but that the tree of life is one big family worthy of our respect and protection.
The hiddenness is relative. I should say it's manifest to some, hidden to others. It's not completely hidden, and there is pathway to it. How manifest the truth is or how hidden is relative. However, I believe till Imam Mahdi (a) rises, it won't be fully manifest.
Kelly of the Phoenix
Well-Known Member
As I age, I realize that heaven is the worst hell for evil people.
Can you expand?
Alien826
No religious beliefs
You're probably familiar with Pascal's Wager? I'll set it out for anyone that is not familiar.
The idea is that if you are not sure if God exists, the safer bet is to believe in God. If there is no God then you haven't lost anything, but if there is a God, then you have avoided going to hell.
There are several weaknesses to this line of thinking.
- You can't just make yourself believe in something. He addressed that by suggesting a kind of "fake it until you make it" approach. If that doesn't work, wouldn't God know that you were faking it?
- Which God do you worship? This is a very real problem, though he was coming form a Christian point of view where there was a binary heaven/hell result depending on your belief. Nevertheless it is a a problem. What if the God of Islam is the true God and it punishes Christians for false belief? What if God actually doesn't care what you believe? What if God values honest lack of belief higher than a pretended observance? And so on.
- It's a mistake to say that you lose nothing by worshiping a non-existent God. What about the time that could have been better spent in other ways? What about obeying religious dictates that you feel are immoral or unnecessary? What about all the money you gave to support a falsehood?
He has chapters saying do not fake it, and explains this is not what he means.
You would search the truth and you would only stop if you become certain. So if you are certain God won't punish, that's fine per the wager. Then you are not wagering.
He didn't say you lose nothing. He said, the losses are incomparable to infinite forever potential loss. So just from this standpoint, sacrificing for truth seeking, is worth it.
Alien826
No religious beliefs
Maybe you know more about it than I, but I seem to remember something about effectively going through the motions (attending worship services and so on) while faith kind of grows. In any case if he didn't mean fake it, then the point about not being able to force belief is stronger.
Well, exactly (I think). If you are sure then it's not a wager. A wager is when you don't know what is going to happen. You can bet on either of two horses and though you can do some research you can't know for sure which will win until the race is actually run. I suppose the wager is like betting on the horse with the longest odds against it as the reward, if it wins, is greater.
OK. I guess it all comes down to probability in the end, just like the horse race. To take an extreme example, one might choose to meditate in a cave the whole of one's life to gain infinite bliss after death*. I'd want to be every sure about the bliss, wouldn't you?
* That's not intended to represent any "real" religious practice. Buddhists would probably say that the bliss is very much "here and now".
I don't really see any contradictions with pluralistically worshipping as a modern Pagan myself.
The wager is on the onset. The lifestyle once certainty is attained is not the wager. The wager is that for all you know, you might search indefinitely (for example if there is no way to know if God exists or not), but it's better to try and sacrifice precious time we have, for the potential consequence and potential reward if we avoid seeking truth. There is for all you know a way to know with certainty the proper religion and attain salvation. Given you don't know who or what God is on the onset, it's better to wager to seek him as you are going to find him then wager he doesn't exist and risk hell and losing paradise.
That is whatever sacrifices of pleasures we do for seeking truth, given there is none, is not worth risking forever time of punishment or loss of reward given there is a hell and paradise and properly proven religion.
Bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do, whatcha gonna do when they come for you.If the bhakti are the "good boys," then we are the "bad boys" that balance us out.
Seriously, that's a good point about the diversity and balancing. What I meant is that I can't sit still for meditation, so jñāna mārga/jñāna yoga isn't the path for me. I seem to be drawn to karma yoga and bhakti mārga. I do respect those who follow jñāna mārga/jñāna yoga, because it's difficult for me. As Sri Krishna told Arjuna, if you can't concentrate and meditate, then do something nice. If you can't do even that, then just always think of Me. If you do even just that you become closer to God.
I think it can depend on what are you worshiping. Please tell, what do you worship and why?
Kelly of the Phoenix
Well-Known Member
Evil people will get what is available in hell. A truer hell would be to put them in heaven and make them unable to participate in it. They have to spend eternity watching everyone else find bliss without them. The cenobite stuff usually associated with hell is cliche and boring. Torture by neglect in heaven is much better for causing pain.