The Debate of God.

[Ben Dhyan]

Throughout the world, you'll find that where ignorance and evil is greatest, beings more readily accept fundamentalist authority as Truth.

Hmmm my friend Prophet, are you saying then that your own claim to the fundamental authority of God influences the ignorant and evil people to more readily accept your prophetic authority... "I thought it was rather obvious that I am claiming to be a representative of God."

 

[Prophet]

Hmmm my friend Prophet, are you saying then that your own claim to the fundamental authority of God influences the ignorant and evil people to more readily accept your prophetic authority... "I thought it was rather obvious that I am claiming to be a representative of God."

I never ask others to blindly accept my arguments based upon my own authority. Rather, I choose to present a deducible argument that can be falsified if it is false to invite rational discussion. What fundamentalist adherents do instead is blow hot air that means nothing and cannot be disproven.

I believe your comparison is a failed one.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I never ask others to blindly accept my arguments based upon my own authority. If I did, your comparison might be apt.

Ahhh, not on your own authority, but the authority of God you claim to be speaking on behalf of!

 

[Prophet]

You are misconstruing my view to lend false strength to your own.

 

[godnotgod]

Paganism is simply the carrying forward of the past events in past cycles of Creation.

It is shunned by God because that brings in knowledge and ideas that are out of context for the playing out of a new cycle of creation.

And that is exactly what happened to Christianity! Roman pagan doctrines were introduced into the pure teachings of Yeshu the mystic (actually, Yeshu's teachings were overwritten by them) suppressing and stifling them and foisting a rigid, frozen view upon the world.

 

[godnotgod]

There's no way available to me currently to deduce the ancient original author's meaning.

The meaning is clear. Here is Genesis 1:26 again:

Genesis 1:26

26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

...the key phrase being 'so that'.

I can tell you what is true. All sentient life forms are made in God's image. Not just mankind.

Which brings us back to my original question to Thief:

God looked like animals and humans before they evolved on earth?

My understanding is that evolution is not a planned series of events. It is, you might say, something that occurs on the cutting edge as a dynamic process. If that is so, the images of man and animals would not have been known even to God prior to their appearance. Is'nt that what occurs in the creative process? Things gel as they emerge in the living present, and it is the living present where one finds the divine nature.

 

[Thief]

I cannot blindly accept your assertion that I should allow you to speak beliefs into me because you profess to know God's point of view (or Truth, to state it simply).



The reason why you claim God's point of view becomes obvious when I read this. None of this is deducible. You make assumptions and proceed to extrapolate more assumptions from these assumptions. Do you have some concept of how weak this looks from a rational standpoint? This is the heart of what is wrong with fundamentalist doctrine.

Fundamentalism is a psychological condition that causes its adherents to accept assertions made by authorities without questioning or true understanding of the underlying principles. Because the authorities themselves do not understand any underlying principles, they assert their favor with God is sufficient.

Throughout the world, you'll find that where ignorance and evil is greatest, beings more readily accept fundamentalist authority as Truth.

You made way too many assumptions here.
I am a rogue theologian....note my banner.
I have no congregation and no one follows me.

I am not a fundamentalist.

Ignorant...not hardly....have an above average ig.

What really stymies this world in the inability of my fellowman to shift his perspective and then see things differently.

You should have been able to follow the outline I posted.
Most people can.

btw...ALL religion is based on assumption...as it is there can be no 'proof'.

I assume there is life after death...and then proceed.

 

[godnotgod]

btw...ALL religion is based on assumption...as it is there can be no 'proof'.

I assume there is life after death...and then proceed.

Proceed where?

Religion comes after the spiritual experience.

The spiritual experience does not involve belief or assumption of any kind.

Then peripheral people misinterpret the message of the spiritual experience and begin to set up a doctrine around it, and then a belief system to support the doctrine designed to give them comfort and security about the unknown. The belief system is the empty shell of the spiritual experience. It is a distorted view.

In the spiritual experience, 'life after death' occurs in the living present where there is no time. In the belief system, it occurs in linear time as an assumption; a belief based on personal needs and fears called 'metaphysical anxiety'.

The belief system leads you on and on, when what we seek is right in front of us all the while, full and complete at every moment.

You seek heavenly reward after death when the gifts of the Incarnation have already been given to you in this eternal present.


When the Tao is lost, there is goodness.
When goodness is lost, there is morality.
When morality is lost, there is ritual.
Ritual is the husk of true faith,
the beginning of chaos.

Therefore the Master concerns himself
with the depths and not the surface,
with the fruit and not the flower.
He has no will of his own.
He dwells in reality,
and lets all illusions go.

Tao te Ching
Chapter 38

 

[Prophet]

You made way too many assumptions here.
I am a rogue theologian....note my banner.
I have no congregation and no one follows me.

I am not a fundamentalist.

Ignorant...not hardly....have an above average ig.

What really stymies this world in the inability of my fellowman to shift his perspective and then see things differently.

You should have been able to follow the outline I posted.
Most people can.

btw...ALL religion is based on assumption...as it is there can be no 'proof'.

I assume there is life after death...and then proceed.

The problem with your defense is that fundamentalism has nothing to do with followers and leaders. Whether anyone follows you is irrelevant.

Fundamentalism reduced to basics is a claim of knowledge without understanding. Well-known examples of such false knowledge are the literalist interpretations of ancient books, which often stand against social and scientific progress.

Because fundamentalism does not have true knowledge behind it, it is left with only assumptions and further extrapolations upon these assumptions, redoubling upon its own error without conscience, making any and all mental and moral gymnastics necessary to keep its doctrines possible.

There is no truth or understanding behind the words of a fundamentalist. In this state of blindness, fundamentalists can only become powerful by forming a large consensus.

You say that you cannot be a fundamentalist because you have no following. I disagree. You present your world view in words that mean nothing concrete to avoid being falsifiable. If you present more of your ideas, you will further demonstrate attachment to a set of irreducible beliefs and ignorance enablers such as "all religions are a bunch of assumptions and hot air so why should I be any different?"

You are a fundamentalist. Just not a powerful one.

 

[Prophet]

The meaning is clear. Here is Genesis 1:26 again:

Genesis 1:26

26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

...the key phrase being 'so that'.

Which brings us back to my original question to Thief:

God looked like animals and humans before they evolved on earth?

My understanding is that evolution is not a planned series of events. It is, you might say, something that occurs on the cutting edge as a dynamic process. If that is so, the images of man and animals would not have been known even to God prior to their appearance. Is'nt that what occurs in the creative process? Things gel as they emerge in the living present, and it is the living present where one finds the divine nature.

I'm relatively sure man being made in God's image is said quite a few times in the Bible by multiple authors outside of Genesis. Futhermore, I'm debating another person here in regards to this who may think of this concept in a completely different way. I don't think you can make a case for there being an official Biblical doctrine on man being made in God's image.

For this reason, I attempt to understand the world views of individuals by inquiry, rather than assuming they must adhere to some official doctrine list of their religion.

 

[Thief]

Religion comes after the spiritual experience.

The spiritual experience does not involve belief or assumption of any kind.

The belief system leads you on and on, when what we seek is right in front of us all the while, full and complete at every moment.

You seek heavenly reward after death when the gifts of the Incarnation have already been given to you in this eternal present.

The first two lines don't agree.

Many people have religion and no spiritual experience.

Believing in something you cannot see requires thought.

I seek no reward. I have no religion.

 

[godnotgod]

The first two lines don't agree.

Many people have religion and no spiritual experience.

Exactly why Yeshu said:
39 You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me.

John 5:39

...which suggests they get the spiritual experience first, and THEN use THAT to read and understand the scriptures; NOT the other way around, which is the way most people have it, ie; the cart before the horse.

Believing in something you cannot see requires thought.

Yes, 'thought' which formulates concepts, which distort reality. The spiritual experience is without thought; it is direct, so there is no belief; no doctrine.

I seek no reward. I have no religion.

...and yet you want to 'stand up from the dust' so that you can 'walk with the angels' and go to your heavenly reward. You believe in 'life after death'. That is a religion.

 

[Thief]

Exactly why Yeshu said:
39 You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me.

John 5:39

...which suggests they get the spiritual experience first, and THEN use THAT to read and understand the scriptures; NOT the other way around, which is the way most people have it, ie; the cart before the horse.

Yes, 'thought' which formulates concepts, which distort reality. The spiritual experience is without thought; it is direct, so there is no belief; no doctrine.

...and yet you want to 'stand up from the dust' so that you can 'walk with the angels' and go to your heavenly reward. You believe in 'life after death'. That is a religion.

Nay to all points.

In the practice of religion, some people find that experience they seek.

On RARE occasion, someone will have an experience and profess it loudly to all that will listen....and that becomes a religion.

Religion is a practice. An outward effort of what you believe.

If it pleases you, I have but one doctrine....
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

The portion of your post I highlighted is my belief....not my religion.

I have no ritual, no recital of prayer, no congregation...no one follows me.
No religion.

 

[godnotgod]

I'm relatively sure man being made in God's image is said quite a few times in the Bible by multiple authors outside of Genesis. Furthermore, I'm debating another person here in regards to this who may think of this concept in a completely different way. I don't think you can make a case for there being an official Biblical doctrine on man being made in God's image.

While all of that is true, the first allusion to it is in Genesis, and the one most everyone uses as a basis for their understanding. While 'image and likeness' can indeed be interpreted in a few different ways, they don't stray far from each other. You yourself use the phrase in a way that suggests certainty:

"I can tell you what is true. All sentient life forms are made in God's image. Not just mankind."

....which I still want to bring into question. What exactly is it that YOU mean by such a statement?

 

[godnotgod]

Nay to all points.

In the practice of religion, some people find that experience they seek.

On RARE occasion, someone will have an experience and profess it loudly to all that will listen....and that becomes a religion.

Religion is a practice. An outward effort of what you believe.

If it pleases you, I have but one doctrine....
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

The portion of your post I highlighted is my belief....not my religion.

I have no ritual, no recital of prayer, no congregation...no one follows me.
No religion.

Your belief system is a religion. It just does'nt include ritual.

 

[Thief]

Your belief system is a religion. It just does'nt include ritual.

That's a rather broad line of definition.

Perhaps a quick look in Webster's?.......uhmmmmmmmm
Only one item MIGHT describe my approach.

But then, the long list of synonyms do not.

I know of no religion that would have my text as truth.

If it pleases you for the moment in this thread....you could say...
ANY belief in God is religion.
and THEN say I am religious?

No one else will do so.

 

[Prophet]

While all of that is true, the first allusion to it is in Genesis, and the one most everyone uses as a basis for their understanding. While 'image and likeness' can indeed be interpreted in a few different ways, they don't stray far from each other. You yourself use the phrase in a way that suggests certainty:



....which I still want to bring into question. What exactly is it that YOU mean by such a statement?

The comparison certainly isn't physical. I'm talking about minds. All sentient beings possess a divine, immortal Consciousness which is a mirror image of God Himself.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

That's a rather broad line of definition.

Perhaps a quick look in Webster's?.......uhmmmmmmmm
Only one item MIGHT describe my approach.

But then, the long list of synonyms do not.

I know of no religion that would have my text as truth.

If it pleases you for the moment in this thread....you could say...
ANY belief in God is religion.
and THEN say I am religious?

No one else will do so.

Actually you know I would as well.

Be that as it may... what bad attributes of 'religion' make you wish to separate yourself from being classified as religious, that you think you don't already follow being whatever it is you think you actually are?

 

[Thief]

Actually you know I would as well.

Be that as it may... what bad attributes of 'religion' make you wish to separate yourself from being classified as religious, that you think you don't already follow being whatever it is you think you actually are?

Note each religion you can think of....and then look at the practice.

I'm not there.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Be that as it may... what bad attributes of 'religion' make you wish to separate yourself from being classified as religious, that you think you don't already follow being whatever it is you think you actually are?