The Emerging World Religion

[sojourner]

Yes, we may all witnessed to some supernatural things around us. Miracles happened. What is important to know is where does the "supernatural" originated? Is it from God or from the evil one? How could you detect the light and darkness?

The authority (supernatural) should be coming from God.

Thanks

"Evil One?" What "Evil One?" Rush Limbaugh? Jesse Duplantis? Gene Simmons? Frankenfurter?

 

[sojourner]

Then show us the evidence that they are the same (exactly) same as Christ's Holy Spirit, and under the teachings of Christ.

Thanks

Show us the evidence that they're not.

 

[sojourner]

I think if mysticism leads one to a God of one's vain imagination (and I believe it does), then it does supplant God

Operative terms here" "I think." "I believe."

 

[sojourner]

It matters how we envision God because He desires we know Him for who He is, not who we make Him out to be. Actually, I think it is this attitude of creating a God out of our imaginations, making God whatever we want God to be, allowing for whatever differences without regard to truth which brings confusion and division.

It matters only to the degree that we work within a particular mythology that makes sense and that retains it's particular theolgoical flavor. God is "who we make [God] out to be." That's the only way we can know God, is through our own perceptions. God is encountered, primarily, through our imaginations; there's nothing wrong -- and everything right with that, since there is no external evidence for God. Not even the bible (to cut you off at the pass before you go there to that ridiculous and tired old excuse) is external evidence, because it was written from internal experience to begin with.

As I said at the beginning, differences do matter, but only where they serve to keep particular perspectives separate, so that the metaphors we use are consistent and don't lose the flavor we're trying to convey. You're so hung up on "God MUST be how I envision God to be (from reading the bible)" that you cannot see that other people have other perspectives and visions of who God is, that are just as valid as yours! You insist that your way is the "right" way, and that everyone else is wrong. So, who's the one brining confusion and division here?

 

[sojourner]

I think this begs the question, 'What god are mystics encountering during their mystical experiences?". And like I said they may not be outright claiming to be exalting themselves or saying they are greater than whatever oneness they are experiencing, but they do trust themselves as their own highest authority with adequate wisdom to judge the spiritual realm.

Yes, but we all do that to some degree. We gotta remember that religion is largely a product of culture. That's why there are so many religions, and one reason why there are so many denominations within religions. How many sects are there in Christianity, Islam, hinduism, Buddhism, and Native American religion? These are due largely to cultural differences. Only when one is mature enough to appreciate the validity of cultures other than one's own can one come to appreciate the deep, mythological truths each culture fosters, in its own way. And only then can one begin to draw similarities between those different mythological constructions. Only then does religion become less a cultural story and more a story of humanity. and that maturity is a product of the individual -- not some external, religious authority. History has proven that imposing religion on different cultures doesn't work. When it happens, the religion changes -- at least somewhat. That has happened to Christianity over and over again, as it moves from culture to culture. It has happened to every other religion, too. It's when an individual with a less developed cultural lens begins to say, "My way, or the highway," that they become the highest authority and believe themselves (with their attendant "proofs" -- such as the bible) to have "adequate wisdom" to judge the spiritual realm. It's when we come to the conclusion that we don't have all the answers at our fingertips that we decide to begin to embrace other perspectives to see what larger picture of God and humanity we can draw.

 

[InChrist]

It matters only to the degree that we work within a particular mythology that makes sense and that retains it's particular theolgoical flavor. God is "who we make [God] out to be." That's the only way we can know God, is through our own perceptions. God is encountered, primarily, through our imaginations; there's nothing wrong -- and everything right with that, since there is no external evidence for God. Not even the bible (to cut you off at the pass before you go there to that ridiculous and tired old excuse) is external evidence, because it was written from internal experience to begin with.

As I said at the beginning, differences do matter, but only where they serve to keep particular perspectives separate, so that the metaphors we use are consistent and don't lose the flavor we're trying to convey. You're so hung up on "God MUST be how I envision God to be (from reading the bible)" that you cannot see that other people have other perspectives and visions of who God is, that are just as valid as yours! You insist that your way is the "right" way, and that everyone else is wrong. So, who's the one brining confusion and division here?

I don't think humans have any chance of knowing God through mythology and have no way of knowing God by their own ability. Therefore the necessity of God to provide revelation which He has done through creation, His word in the scriptures, and the incarnation of the Son becoming human in the Person of Jesus Christ all for the purpose of communicating Who He is so that we are not left to our own vain imagination and foolish ideas, or deception. Of course I see that people have other perspectives and versions of who God is. That is the problem, not only is it illogical and inconsistent to have so many versions of God and then claim they are all valid, reasonably they cannot all be correct and false gods or concepts of God become idolatry. I don't insist my way is right. I only say that God is right and He has a right to be known for Who He actually is, not just anything humans want to create or believe Him to be. It really doesn't matter how much you discount the Bible as God's word I know it to be His revealed truth.

And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’” Ex. 3:14

 

[InChrist]

Yes, but we all do that to some degree. We gotta remember that religion is largely a product of culture. That's why there are so many religions, and one reason why there are so many denominations within religions. How many sects are there in Christianity, Islam, hinduism, Buddhism, and Native American religion? These are due largely to cultural differences. Only when one is mature enough to appreciate the validity of cultures other than one's own can one come to appreciate the deep, mythological truths each culture fosters, in its own way. And only then can one begin to draw similarities between those different mythological constructions. Only then does religion become less a cultural story and more a story of humanity. and that maturity is a product of the individual -- not some external, religious authority. History has proven that imposing religion on different cultures doesn't work. When it happens, the religion changes -- at least somewhat. That has happened to Christianity over and over again, as it moves from culture to culture. It has happened to every other religion, too. It's when an individual with a less developed cultural lens begins to say, "My way, or the highway," that they become the highest authority and believe themselves (with their attendant "proofs" -- such as the bible) to have "adequate wisdom" to judge the spiritual realm. It's when we come to the conclusion that we don't have all the answers at our fingertips that we decide to begin to embrace other perspectives to see what larger picture of God and humanity we can draw.

Religion (almost universally) is enforced by those in power in an attempt to maintain, increase, or abuse their power over others. Religion is a system of beliefs or a code of moral conduct that judges (qualifies or disqualifies) a person based on their adherence and obedience to certain codes, rules, laws, traditions, or the performance of required acts. I think religion can be and has been a dangerous distraction.
The difference between the message of the Bible and every other faith in the world, even cultural Christianity and it various denominations, is that all religions are about humans trying to reach up to God. Biblical Christianity is about God reaching down to humanity, therefore the importance of seeking and knowing this true God.

 

[Unification]

I use the Bible, God's word. How could any finite human beings even begin to think they could understand the realities of the spiritual realm if the information were not revealed and provided by God?

Acquiring external knowledge of "God" by reading a book literally, as opposed to knowing/direct inner experience and realizing the book is about the human being. The book isn't even needed, why must "God" be limited to a book? The human being has the source within them.

Because the source lies within them. Information is revealed within someone. The spiritual realm is an inner realm.

 

[Unification]

I think it is so much easier and sensible to read in context and see the scriptures for what they say. In this case, anyone who has the Son of God, Jesus, who John was writing about, has eternal life.

You don't have "him" though and neither does anyone else, where is "he" other than internally? Is Jesus locked in your closet, or is there a literal guy living inside of you?

Man loves to think outside of themselves. Things of the spirit are inner/within.

Where is the source of your life, outside of you or inside of you?

 

[Unification]

I don't think humans have any chance of knowing God through mythology and have no way of knowing God by their own ability. Therefore the necessity of God to provide revelation which He has done through creation, His word in the scriptures, and the incarnation of the Son becoming human in the Person of Jesus Christ all for the purpose of communicating Who He is so that we are not left to our own vain imagination and foolish ideas, or deception. Of course I see that people have other perspectives and versions of who God is. That is the problem, not only is it illogical and inconsistent to have so many versions of God and then claim they are all valid, reasonably they cannot all be correct and false gods or concepts of God become idolatry. I don't insist my way is right. I only say that God is right and He has a right to be known for Who He actually is, not just anything humans want to create or believe Him to be. It really doesn't matter how much you discount the Bible as God's word I know it to be His revealed truth.

And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’” Ex. 3:14

If I see a literal woman as equal with literal man in all ways, am I creating "God" how I want "God" to be or should I centralize more on seeing man ahead and above woman, and as literal women created for the literal man to be more in line with knowing who "he" actually is?

 

[Unification]

Hi Sees,

Those are actually what is really happening to different faiths/beliefs. If I may attached some part of the conclusion, here it is :

True Christians interpret all religious experience by the normative revelation of God recorded for them in the Holy Bible. The wicked love darkness; but God's people love the Light! Mystics have not scrupled openly to equate the true God with “the god” within. They have thought to divest themselves of God Himself by turning to inward self-realization and enlightenment. Rather, the values that they set are based on personal inner feelings that are often incapable of reasoned explanation.

The Gospel is the exact opposite, the historical message of the Cross of Christ for a lost world. The Gospel proclaims Christ Himself, and the God and Father of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, who in His love gave His Son to die for sinners. There is no valid excuse for true believers to be deceived by “false apostles,” who transform themselves into the “apostles of Christ,” "for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light."[38]

There are many false prophets gone out into the world, if we study diligently these things, which God has recorded for our safeguard against the subtle deceptions of Satan, we will not mislead nor be misled. True believers in Christ must take to heart solemn warnings of the Apostle Paul,

"Be not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you."[39]

"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them."[40]christiananswers.net/q-eden/mysticism-bennett.html

This is the truth. Thanks

What do you think it means to see the light? Or to awaken?

 

[Unification]

I think if mysticism leads one to a God of one's vain imagination (and I believe it does), then it does supplant God. It matters how we envision God because He desires we know Him for who He is, not who we make Him out to be. Actually, I think it is this attitude of creating a God out of our imaginations, making God whatever we want God to be, allowing for whatever differences without regard to truth which brings confusion and division.

If "God" is no respector of persons, then why are you making "God" out to be a respector of persons?

Is "God" a "he?" A gender respector?

Have you made "God" a "him?"

Could those be all vain imaginations?

 

[sojourner]

I don't think humans have any chance of knowing God through mythology and have no way of knowing God by their own ability. Therefore the necessity of God to provide revelation which He has done through creation, His word in the scriptures, and the incarnation of the Son becoming human in the Person of Jesus Christ all for the purpose of communicating Who He is so that we are not left to our own vain imagination and foolish ideas, or deception

So... the quesiton I inevitably end up asking is: What did people do for revelatory information 1) before they could read, 2) before there was written language, and 3) before Jesus?

Because there certainly were people and religion before any of these things. And people all over the world have access to the same creation that the Hebrews had access to -- and the Christians.

Even with written language, creation, and Jesus, people still have to rely on their imaginations to perceive God, because not all who saw Jesus perceived God, and not all who perceive creation perceive God. Imagination is required. And our imagination is kept from running away with us through cultural constraint -- that is, the perception of God begins with the individual, but is fleshed out, generally, through "the sense of the people." That's really all the bible is -- the sense of the people. And that's all the religion is -- the sense of the people.

 

[sojourner]

That is the problem, not only is it illogical and inconsistent to have so many versions of God and then claim they are all valid, reasonably they cannot all be correct and false gods or concepts of God become idolatry

They only become illogical and inconsistent when people begin to use them as definitions and not descriptions, and when those "definitions" become narrow and implacable.

 

[sojourner]

don't insist my way is right. I only say that God is right and He has a right to be known for Who He actually is, not just anything humans want to create or believe Him to be. It really doesn't matter how much you discount the Bible as God's word I know it to be His revealed truth.

No, you believe the bible to be God's "revealed truth." You don't know any such thing, because in order to know it, there would have to be external, objective evidence that that's the case. There is no such evidence.

God is known for who God actually is, in the varied imaginations of the human family. Are you familiar with the Alfred Burt carol, Some Children See Him? People tend to perceive Deity in a way that's easiest for them to. therefore, God is best perceived as a reflection in the eyes of humanity -- for no one can see God face-to-face and live.

 

[sojourner]

Religion (almost universally) is enforced by those in power in an attempt to maintain, increase, or abuse their power over others. Religion is a system of beliefs or a code of moral conduct that judges (qualifies or disqualifies) a person based on their adherence and obedience to certain codes, rules, laws, traditions, or the performance of required acts. I think religion can be and has been a dangerous distraction

Wow. What a sad outlook that is. Who is it, do you think, who's "in power" in the church? What is it, do you think that "disqualifies" a person? I think thes accusations are a dangerous distraction.

 

[sojourner]

The difference between the message of the Bible and every other faith in the world, even cultural Christianity and it various denominations, is that all religions are about humans trying to reach up to God

I think you'e making an indefensible accusation that the church is at odds with some alleged "biblical message."

 

[Windwalker]

What I find particularly bizarre about this topic in tying it to mysticism is to say that the mysticism's goal is to make a new religion, a "one world religion" on top of it. Nothing could be further from the truth. What lies at the heart of the mystical experience is the ultimate transcending of one's own religion, in fact the transcending all religions. It is the exact opposite of forming a new religion.

What mysticism is able to do is to preserve the unique qualities of each religion, to respect the differences, while at the same time being able to see one another beyond the religious labels we all wear, to see beyond what divides and embrace what unities. This is not some imagined new "one world religion". It's simply realizing we are more than the labels we apply to ourselves and see each other not as enemies of one another, but spiritual brothers and sisters together, each within our own respective cultures, or religious, or nonreligious contexts. It recognizes the relative nature of these things, as well as their importance to each person. It unites through a unitive consciousness, as opposed to divide through an exclusive mind that focuses on the differences and shouts, "You're not like us!". The latter is the ego-mind trying to find itself by external identifiers, that which marks differences between themselves and others. The former is an inclusive mind which sees all as being more than our differences and embrace one another in that which transcends all boundaries.

It is in fact the exact opposite that is the truth. It is not the mystic who seeks to make all world religions one. It is the fundamentalist who does. The fundamentalist seeks to destroy all other religions, all differences, and make their own the dominant world force to control what is believed and practiced. That is in fact the very reality of it. That is why the fundamentalist despises the mystic. The mystic removes such aspirations, valuing differences. The fundamentalist despises differences and seeks uniformity through their elimination. The mystic seeks unity while preserving differences. If we want to put mythological faces upon this, the mystic heart is the heart of God bringing and holding all together in their infinite array of diversity into a unity within One Heart, whereas the fundamentalist is the mind of Satan seeking to destroy unity through division, imposing itself, its own image upon others to make the world one it is own image. The one seeking a "one world religion" is not the mystic, but the fundamentalist.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Yet, while it [mysticism] entices many from “Christianity” it is something that can never be reconciled with the biblical message of the existence of One transcendent God, the Cross, and the claim of Jesus Christ as the only Savior.

That says it all for me.

 

[sojourner]

What I find particularly bizarre about this topic in tying it to mysticism is to say that the mysticism's goal is to make a new religion, a "one world religion" on top of it. Nothing could be further from the truth. What lies at the heart of the mystical experience is the ultimate transcending of one's own religion, in fact the transcending all religions. It is the exact opposite of forming a new religion.

What mysticism is able to do is to preserve the unique qualities of each religion, to respect the differences, while at the same time being able to see one another beyond the religious labels we all wear, to see beyond what divides and embrace what unities. This is not some imagined new "one world religion". It's simply realizing we are more than the labels we apply to ourselves and see each other not as enemies of one another, but spiritual brothers and sisters together, each within our own respective cultures, or religious, or nonreligious contexts. It recognizes the relative nature of these things, as well as their importance to each person. It unites through a unitive consciousness, as opposed to divide through an exclusive mind that focuses on the differences and shouts, "You're not like us!". The latter is the ego-mind trying to find itself by external identifiers, that which marks differences between themselves and others. The former is an inclusive mind which sees all as being more than our differences and embrace one another in that which transcends all boundaries.

It is in fact the exact opposite that is the truth. It is not the mystic who seeks to make all world religions one. It is the fundamentalist who does. The fundamentalist seeks to destroy all other religions, all differences, and make their own the dominant world force to control what is believed and practiced. That is in fact the very reality of it. That is why the fundamentalist despises the mystic. The mystic removes such aspirations, valuing differences. The fundamentalist despises differences and seeks uniformity through their elimination. The mystic seeks unity while preserving differences. If we want to put mythological faces upon this, the mystic heart is the heart of God bringing and holding all together in their infinite array of diversity into a unity within One Heart, whereas the fundamentalist is the mind of Satan seeking to destroy unity through division, imposing itself, its own image upon others to make the world one it is own image. The one seeking a "one world religion" is not the mystic, but the fundamentalist.

One thing you said stuck out for me. That's the issue of control. fundamentalists are all about conformity, believing correctly, and "obeying God." For the fundamentalist, God seeks to control God's creation through the conformity of all things -- including human beings. The fundamentalist would be very quick to jump on the band wagon of the statement that "God is in control."

What they seem to ignore is the fact that control is, of necessity, an external force intruding itself upon some other thing external to that force. But God isn't external to us. If that were the case, we'd be able to prove God's existence through external means. God doesn't control us. God doesn't "want" to control us. God wants to love us, and love is the opposite of control.

God doesn't "control" us -- or the universe. Only when God "controls" the universe is theodicy an issue. I think it makes more sense to have a model where, instead of creating the universe "out here" in front of God's self, God created the universe within God's self, and instead of "controlling" the universe, God "empowers" the universe. God lets us be who we are. And mysticism, seeking the freedom of the individual and community to be, rejects control in favor of freedom. This threatens the fundamentalist whose hermeneutic is control-based, rather than life-based.