The Emerging World Religion

[Yoshua]

"An evil" is not factually at all the same thing as "The Evil One." "The Evil One" is poetry and mythology -- not factual reality. We don't need to be protected from that which does not factually exist. We don't even need to be protected from that which theologically exists, because -- if "Jesus is our Savior," he, then, saves us from "The Evil One" by his very living among us.

How could Jesus become everybody’s Saviour if a person does not come to Him and follow His words?

If we are already protected from the evil one, then why of the following:
1. Why Jesus prayed to protect the Disciples from the evil one?
2. Why Jesus and His disciples showed they cast out the evil-possessed?
3. Why Paul reminded us to wear the armor of God?

Salvation is free but the choice of accepting that salvation is a matter of man’s choice to believe and follow Him.

Thanks

 

[Yoshua]

You quoted it directly to Sojourner and myself telling us we should look at it because it reflects our beliefs. Here's your exact quote and the link to why you pushed our faces into this drivel as though it should be a wake up call for us to check out our beliefs from the pen of this person in the 1920s:

This is not 1920’s, any spiritual beliefs has to do with the same spirit started before Adam and Eve creation.

Let me hold you responsible for your words here. In the quote above you say, "Your concepts of "One word religion" are really not for mystics... I've seen your concepts are the same," What concept of a One World Religion? I don't have that concept. You have that concept and imagine some dark, demonic conspiracy that we do. Then you cite what you did for us to find parallels in our views with what you posted, explicitly stating, "I've seen your concepts are the same." We find hardly any similarity whatsoever!

Why is it so hard for you to accept responsibility and admit that what you linked to does not reflect our views, and that to say what is in that article reflects our aspirations, that they are "the same" as you explicitly said, is plain and simple wrong? I don't suspect you will, but will continue to offer justifications for your false accusations. You need to accept responsibility for your error and your false accusations and admit the link doesn't pertain to anything anyone in this thread is talking about, and that the whole thread itself is based on an argument from the 1920s, not with anyone you're talking with. I would be truly impressed if you were to do so.

Again, this is to clarify with you those statements about the concepts of universal mind and faith, unity in spirit, and God works in many ways, and through many faiths and religious agencies?

“May it not be possible that our present ideas of God, as the Universal Mind, as Love and as Will may be enriched by some new idea or quality for which we have as yet no name or word, and of which we have no slightest understanding.”

“For some years now the spiritual Hierarchy of our planet has been drawing nearer to humanity and its approach is responsible for the great concepts of freedom which are so close to the hearts of men everywhere. The dream of brotherhood, of fellowship, of world cooperation and of a peace based on right human relations, is becoming clearer in our minds. We are also visioning a new and vital world religion, a universal faith which will have its roots in the past, but which will make clear the new dawning beauty and the coming vital revelation.”

“These are the foundational truths upon which the world religion of the future will rest. Its keynote will be Divine Approach. "Draw near to Him and He will draw near to you" (James IV:8) is the great injunction, emanating in new and clear tones from Christ and the spiritual Hierarchy at this time.”

“Today, slowly, the concept of a world religion and the need for its emergence are widely desired and worked for. The fusion of faiths is now a field of discussion. Workers in the field of religion will formulate the universal platform of the new world religion. It is a work of loving synthesis and will emphasise the unity and the fellowship of the spirit. This group is, in a pronounced sense, a channel for the activities of the Christ, the world Teacher. The platform of the new world religion will be built by many groups, working under the inspiration of the Christ.”

There are no related video in the link I posted. Those are just advertisements for the website you can skip over. All you need to do is read the words.

“God works in many ways, through many faiths and religious agencies; this is one reason for the elimination of non-essential doctrines. By the emphasing of the essential doctrines and in their union will the fullness of truth be revealed. This, the new world religion will do and its implementation will proceed apace, after the reappearance of the Christ.”

“Integral, in a sense, would be the ultimate ecumenical movement, if such a thing is even desirable. It would be a spirituality that claimed to leave nothing essential out. It would be a spirituality that in principle could be recognized and even practiced by believers in all the world's religions without abandoning their own essentials. It would be based on what seem to be universal human capacities to interface with the Divine. It would be inclusive and comprehensive, touching on all the bases of this elusive thing called "spirituality." by Wilbur

What a match! Same in concept and principles. How could you explain this?

 

[Yoshua]

I anticipate a response that will have nothing to do with the actual content of what was said.

"But consider where we are in today's modern and postmodern world. We have, for the first time in history, easy access to all of the world's great religions. Examine the many great traditions-from Christianity to Buddhism, Islam to Taoism, Paganism to Neoplatonism"..by Wilbur

Luke 9:23
23And He was saying to them all, "If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross daily and follow Me.

"A person could be attuned to an "integral spirituality" while still be a practicing Christian, Buddhist, New-Age advocate, or Neopagan. This would be something added to one's religion, not subtracted from it. The only thing it would subtract (and there's no way around this) is the belief that one's own path is the only true path to salvation." By Wilbur

So, Wilbur proves that there is no true path of salvation, as like saying that the Father did not sent His only Son Jesus to offer eternal salvation. He is also saying that we can add something to the doctrine of Christ. That is a blatant distorting the truth of Christ.

Deuteronomy 4:2 "You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.

If the Scripture should not be added as commanded by God, whose concept is the integral spirituality? I don’t think Jesus should allow someone to add something to His teachings.

If humanity's attunement to the spiritual patterns of the universe are helped by various practices-which might include prayer, meditation, yoga, contemplation-then modern psychological and psychotherapeutic measures would surely be part of any integral spirituality, since those measures can help increase a person's capacity for various sorts of practice. What do I mean by "psychotherapeutic measures"? This in itself is a large topic, so let me say, for introductory purposes, they are any measures that might be taken if you have an emotional problem and visit the office of a psychologist, psychotherapist, or psychiatrist-all of the measures for treating human psychological issues that have been developed in the last century or so, and that have demonstrated the capacity to help alleviate or remove emotional problems or obstructions. by Wilbur

That’s his ideas . I think he should concentrate in his concepts about psychology rather than jump, and connect it with spirituality because he did not know about Christ’s sufficiency in terms of emotional problems.

Matthew 11:28 “Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.”

Phil 4:13
13. I can do all things through Him who strengthens me.

2. Spirit, although existing "out there," is found "in here," or revealed within to the open heart and mind.
3. Most of us don't realize this Spirit within, however, because we are living in a world of sin, separation, or duality-that is, we are living in a fallen, illusory, or fragmented state. by Wilbur

What is the “Spirit” he is talking about? How come that the “Spirit” is within us?

4. There is a way out of this fallen state (of sin or illusion or disharmony), there is a Path to our liberation.
5. If we follow this Path to its conclusion, the result is a Rebirth or Enlightenment, a direct experience of Spirit within and without, a Supreme Liberation, which
6. marks the end of sin and suffering, and
7. manifests in social action of mercy and compassion on behalf of all sentient beings. by Wilbur

What is the path to our liberation? To absorb Wilbur’s teachings or Christ’s teachings?
Who is the Supreme in liberation?

Thanks

 

[Yoshua]

Yeah, that's all a theology created in modern times by undereducated hacks reading their cultural fears and phobias into the Bible, lacking the context of genuine scholarship. It's all an interpretation of the Bible colorized through a very small and limited anti-modernity, anti-reason, progress-phobic, reactionary context.

And yes you are frightened. Who wouldn't be if you took all of this literally, and accepted the layers of phobia injected into the reading of the texts that hidden governments are at work in league with Satan to make a one world government, to make a one world religion, and seek to destroy you, to get you to trip up and end up with God sending you to hell because you failed him? Very, very paranoid in nature. It's the sort of stuff where those who think like this in society outside religion are given medications for it to help them cope. Or they otherwise find a religion to join with that thinks like they do in order to appear "normal" with all the others who think like them. Just because conspiracy theorists congregate in a group, it doesn't mean their minds are well. And it is my belief, that this sort of stuff can take those who are riding on the edge and take them over into paranoid thinking.

All in all, it's unhealthy. I consider it a type of infection that leads to spiritual disease, one that sees others with suspicion and leads to disunity. The goal of true religion is unity where one "Love God, and Loves their neighbor as themselves". That's unity. That's healthy. That's spiritual. That's the goal. I measure everything else against that standard, including all theological interpretations. How do they measure to that? "By their fruits you shall know them".

Until now, you still can’t reconcile what the “unity” means for Christ. “Unity in Christ” is unity through Him only, and not the whole world religion to be united. You get your own choice of Scriptures like “By their fruits you shall know them,” this is the same verse that quoted by a spiritist that I’ve encountered. Same spirit, same Scriptures of choosing.

If you think it is healthy and spiritual, how come you picked the Scriptures “By their fruits you shall know them” and don’t accept the word of Christ “Deny yourself, carry your own cross and follow Me”, and these verses,

John 8:31
“If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples,” Are you His disciples?

John 14:21
Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him.”
You talked about love, did you keep the commandment to prove that you are loved by the Father?

I don’t’ think Jesus is just making a joke about what He is saying, He is serious about it.

Now, you are telling us that we are afraid, it is illogical to think that a follower of Christ are afraid if we had our protector, Saviour and our Lord beside us. We are not afraid to follow as other non-believers would like to follow their will instead of God’s will, that is very obvious.

Thanks

 

[Yoshua]

Thank you for your reply.

Would you agree that everyone's core identity is also ''I'' and ''me''?

Hi Janardena,

Yes, the core identity is "I" for I am a child of God, I am follower of Christ, and I have given an authority in Christ. For "me," me and Christ are the same in spirit, for God's Spirit is the one who dwell among His believers/followers.

Thanks

 

[Windwalker]

The mere fact that a person who claimed as a believer in Christ, and by following his will rather than abiding in God's words--is leading to a united religion.

First of all, I said a mystic's desire is unity with God. To which you said that proves the mystic wants a one-world-religion, which has nothing to do with what I had just said. Then when I pointed that out to you, you reply with this non-sequitur. Even if we are following our own will, which no true mystic does, it doesn't follow that he wants a one-world-religion. The desire of this mystic is to transcend religion in unity with God, not to unite all religions. We want everyone to have their own religions, follow their own paths to finding God and then move beyond religion and see others beyond religious boundaries, not adopt a new unified one controlled by some ego-maniac at the top!

You refuse to listen to our words. Your's is a willful ignorance, which is sin against God, yourself, and others.

Have’nt you see already those mystical religious leaders including your Wilbur are open to Buddhism, Hindu, and other spiritual enlightenment?

First of all, his last name is spelled Wilber, with an e, not a u. Secondly Ken Wilber is not a religious leader. He is an Integral philosopher. He's not a guru, he's not teaching a path, he's not teaching religious practices, he's not even teaching meditation techniques. If he is a religious leader, he's a pretty poor one! What he does do however is examine multiple disciplines in the sciences and in world religions and creates maps of the territory, showing how they all relate to each other, as well as how they differ and why. He's a theoretician. Get your facts straight, again.

Thirdly, regarding your comment, "Open to Buddhism, Hinduism, and other spiritual enlightenment", why not? Why the hell not? But let me clarify one point first, I'm not sure what you mean by "other spiritual enlightenment". Spiritual enlightenment is spiritual enlightenment. How it manifests itself is both the same, and differently to everyone, even those within the same religion. No two people in the world understand God in the same way because no two people are 100% clones of each other. Each person interprets their experiences differently, even if it is an experience of the same thing.

But in the real world where real people live, we all share our own experiences of the same thing with one another, and we learn from each other's perspectives and interpretations. Other's points of view inform us, and it doesn't matter if it's going to a rock concert together, or experiencing God. So to listen to others who have experienced enlightenment is a good thing. We can learn from them. We should learn from them.

As far "open to Buddhism [and] Hinduism", again, why not? Think about it in terms like this. Let me put in in the argument of one imaginary American scientist to another. "What do you mean you've been reading into the research done by that Japanese physicist! Why are you open to what a scientist from an entirely different country has to say? You're going to be led astray because they speak a different language, eat different food, and have different customs than you do! Come back into the fold of American science and do not let yourself be open to those who have found the truth!"

I rest my case. It's complete stupidity. Why not listen to others who experience the same thing? Again, I consider a closed-mind, as well as a closed-heart, to be a sin against God, yourself, and others.

If a person cannot follow Jesus as He commanded us saying “Follow Me,” this is a gauge in leading Himself to the door of multi-spiritual beliefs.

If someone is following a path to God, they are following Jesus because that's what he did. He opened himself to God and followed that path, and urged others to do the same as he. "Follow me", do what I did. Again, even within Christianity itself, there are multiple spiritual beliefs because there are multiple individuals. There are as many understandings, and unique paths as there are people. Don't deceive yourself believing otherwise. The only thing you are saying is this, that they should all look like how you think and believe. That is why it is in fact you who wants a one-world-religion. Sameness.

See. Your own statement and concept is proving that Jesus’ ministry (Christianity) is a “wideness” concept of spirituality. The truth is—it is not.

The truth is it is. "There is neither Greek nor Jew but all are one in Christ". You on the other hand badly interpret that to mean they become one by converting to a new religion. You mistake "In Christ" for "In Christianity"! Are you actually follow Christ, or a religion in that name, mistaking the one for the other? I say we transcend religion in Unitive Consciousness, a single Heart, or to use another term, "In Christ". It doesn't matter what name it's called. Everyone is allowed to preserve their uniqueness, which includes their own culture's religions. If they find God, they have followed Jesus, even if never by name.

They can remain Greek, they can remain Jew, they can remain Hindu, and so forth. Jesus did not teach a new religious system. He taught love that allowed others to overcome these differences by transcending them in love. You on the other hand insist on conquering others making them the same as you, holding a bible in your hand and screaming, "Submit to God's authority over you! Obey or you shall perish! It's not my word, but God's word!". That's definitely falling short of the mark, the standard that Jesus set. Don't you think?

God sent Jesus Christ to give hope of salvation for us. The choice is to follow Him or not. Yes, there is no religion because God’s offer is to come to Him, follow Him and obey His command. He would like to have a personal relationship (individually) and intimacy with Him.

Okay, now go and do that.

John 8:31
“If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples,”

Whoever abides in love, abides in his word. How they believe with the mind is irrelevant. You make salvation contingent upon correct beliefs and practices. Jesus makes salvation based on what lies in the heart. It doesn't sound to me like you are abiding in his word, which is love.

 

[Windwalker]

Again, this is to clarify with you those statements about the concepts of universal mind and faith, unity in spirit, and God works in many ways, and through many faiths and religious agencies?

Very well. Surprisingly this was a good response from you and one worth my discussing why there are differences. Let me proceed.

“May it not be possible that our present ideas of God, as the Universal Mind, as Love and as Will may be enriched by some new idea or quality for which we have as yet no name or word, and of which we have no slightest understanding.”

This is the quote from that woman in the 1920s. Yes, there are things I do agree with in what she says, no doubt. However what she envisions as the solution is not a point of view I share. That she sees the same things I do is good, and right, and true. I do not reject her recognition of the problem. I applaud it. But her solution of a "fused religion" is untenable. It's fictional, impractical, and unrealistic based on a lack of understanding.

I'll expand on that more in a moment, but I do want to emphasize here that the whole demonization of her was in fact a paranoid reactionary response by fundamentalists that make-believe turned what she and other like here back there where saying into Satan's goal to rule the world, and it is that myth that you are arguing against today which doesn't exist. What I say is in fact NOT the same, even though I do in fact share with her the recognition of the same problem. There's stuff you believe I do too, but that doesn't mean I buy into the rest of the lunacy you believe in.

“For some years now the spiritual Hierarchy of our planet has been drawing nearer to humanity and its approach is responsible for the great concepts of freedom which are so close to the hearts of men everywhere.

Here's where I radically part company with her. She speaks of this so-called "spiritual Hierarchy" as if it was some sort of "entity". I most certainly don't understand Spirit as a "spiritual Hierarchy", whatever the hell that is supposed to mean. Nor do I believe in the sort of mythologized personification of whatever spiritual influences do exist in the way she imagines. It does however fit into your God versus Satan myth structures, hence why those like you got all up in hackles back in the 1920s, with little soldiers as yourself carrying their torches forth into today still arguing against this boogie man that those like myself simply smile quaintly at.

The dream of brotherhood, of fellowship, of world cooperation and of a peace based on right human relations, is becoming clearer in our minds.

As well it should. That's what Jesus was all about in his day too, accomplished by transcending that which divides by listening to and following God who lives in the human heart. So I agree with this. And, it's what Jesus believed in too. So if you want to follow Jesus, you should be agreeing with this.

We are also visioning a new and vital world religion, a universal faith which will have its roots in the past, but which will make clear the new dawning beauty and the coming vital revelation.”

Yeah.... no. Sure, that's what they imagined, but that's a really antiquated and unrealistic idealism. I don't agree with that, anymore than I believe we should all wear the same clothes and hairstyles. But as far as faith being universal? Well, it already is. It has been from the beginning. Faith is part of the human spirit, and everyone on the planet has that in them. How much or how well that access that is the only difference. You have that same faith too, however in you it seems rather buried under the rocks of your religious beliefs you seek for truth in.

“These are the foundational truths upon which the world religion of the future will rest. Its keynote will be Divine Approach. "Draw near to Him and He will draw near to you" (James IV:8) is the great injunction, emanating in new and clear tones from Christ and the spiritual Hierarchy at this time.”

Where I agree is that in all of us God lives, and in listening to that in us, we are able to see ourselves and others as ourselves, exactly as Jesus taught, "Love God, and love your neighbor as yourself". But again, she is imagining this as a religious system with some ruler up at the top - the same damn way you imagine the 2nd coming of Jesus to be! I do not believe this way. The "universal religion" is Love, which transcends religion. It is not a new religious hierarchical system to replace the current ones.

“Today, slowly, the concept of a world religion and the need for its emergence are widely desired and worked for. The fusion of faiths is now a field of discussion.

And right here is exactly why I say we do not believe this! "Fusion of faiths", is a dead idea. I disagree with it. I think it would be detrimental. It would not work, because religions are organically grown to fit the regions there originate in. All religions do this. They are unique for a reason, just as languages are. These are ideas born in the early part of the last century that no longer fit in the world today, except in the minds of the uneducated.

Think of that idea like this. Once upon a time they thought they could create a "one-world language" too. They tried it, and called it Esperanto. Let's look at it's history, and the time frame when it was dreamed up.

"Esperanto was created in the late 1870s and early 1880s by L. L. Zamenhof, a Polish-Jewish ophthalmologist from Białystok, then part of the Russian Empire. According to Zamenhof, he created the language to foster harmony between people from different countries."​

Do you see any similarities here? I do! It never worked out! In a world of 7,000,000,000 people only 2,000,000 speak it. So much for a "one world language"! And so much for a one world religion! Again, you are stuck in the 1920s! This is the year 2015. We don't think like this anymore. Why are you so paranoid and worried this is real, let alone imagining mystics think this? You have bad teachers.

Workers in the field of religion will formulate the universal platform of the new world religion. It is a work of loving synthesis and will emphasise the unity and the fellowship of the spirit. This group is, in a pronounced sense, a channel for the activities of the Christ, the world Teacher. The platform of the new world religion will be built by many groups, working under the inspiration of the Christ.”

She got half of it right. Emphasize fellowship of the spirit. Why wouldn't you want that??? Do you prefer divisions and animosities??? You call that Christian??? Who exactly is it you claim to follow? It doesn't sound like Jesus.

“God works in many ways, through many faiths and religious agencies; this is one reason for the elimination of non-essential doctrines. By the emphasing of the essential doctrines and in their union will the fullness of truth be revealed. This, the new world religion will do and its implementation will proceed apace, after the reappearance of the Christ.”

“Integral, in a sense, would be the ultimate ecumenical movement, if such a thing is even desirable. It would be a spirituality that claimed to leave nothing essential out. It would be a spirituality that in principle could be recognized and even practiced by believers in all the world's religions without abandoning their own essentials. It would be based on what seem to be universal human capacities to interface with the Divine. It would be inclusive and comprehensive, touching on all the bases of this elusive thing called "spirituality." by Wilbur

What a match! Same in concept and principles. How could you explain this?

Easily. It's not a match. A half a key does not unlock the door. Wilber is not speaking of a one world religion. You completely ignored what he said in the paragraph you quoted from him. Let me point it out to you, "Practiced by believers in all the world's religions". This is not some new united religion, a fusion of beliefs. It is preserving the beliefs and practices that make all religions unique. What he is speaking about is the mystic heart that is the same in all religions, and has been from the beginning, including Christian faith. In other words, we wake up to what Jesus realized and taught that Love transcends religions. "Greater faith have I seen nowhere in Israel", said Jesus to someone outside his own damn religion! Wouldn't it be great if we all did that?

 

[Janardena]

Hi Janardena,

Yes, the core identity is "I" for I am a child of God, I am follower of Christ, and I have given an authority in Christ. For "me," me and Christ are the same in spirit, for God's Spirit is the one who dwell among His believers/followers.

Thanks

I tend to think that when we decribe ''I am'' as something (eg. I am a soldier), we run the risk of losing the identity of ''I am''.

 

[Janardena]

Hi Janardena,

Yes, the core identity is "I" for I am a child of God, I am follower of Christ, and I have given an authority in Christ. For "me," me and Christ are the same in spirit, for God's Spirit is the one who dwell among His believers/followers.

Thanks

Before you are a follower of Christ, you are ''I am'', and ''me''.
When Jesus said '' "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.''
Could he be referring to that ''I am'' and ''me'' and not maybe his own self?

 

[Windwalker]

"But consider where we are in today's modern and postmodern world. We have, for the first time in history, easy access to all of the world's great religions. Examine the many great traditions-from Christianity to Buddhism, Islam to Taoism, Paganism to Neoplatonism"..by Wilbur

Luke 9:23
23And He was saying to them all, "If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross daily and follow Me.

I fail to see how what Jesus says in that verse has anything to do with what Wilber (with an e), is saying above. To examine the great religions of the world informs us of how faith works in all the world religions, including Christianity. Jesus doesn't say, "If anyone wished to come after me, he must deny his mind and bury his head in the sand.". Again though, understanding world religions helps us to understand ourselves, and then we follow the path of Jesus, the path of love, regardless of what name you give it.

"A person could be attuned to an "integral spirituality" while still be a practicing Christian, Buddhist, New-Age advocate, or Neopagan. This would be something added to one's religion, not subtracted from it. The only thing it would subtract (and there's no way around this) is the belief that one's own path is the only true path to salvation." By Wilbur

So, Wilbur proves that there is no true path of salvation, as like saying that the Father did not sent His only Son Jesus to offer eternal salvation. He is also saying that we can add something to the doctrine of Christ. That is a blatant distorting the truth of Christ.

Wait, what??? Wilber said we get rid of the belief that one's own path is the only path. How is it you take that to say there is no true path? They're all true paths, if you are following love. There are many religious paths to God, but the true path is the one of the heart.

Deuteronomy 4:2 "You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.

If the Scripture should not be added as commanded by God, whose concept is the integral spirituality? I don’t think Jesus should allow someone to add something to His teachings.

First of all, you're quoting the OT and you already have taken away considerable portions of it in your practices. When was the last time someone in your church stoned their children to death for disobeying them, or at least terrorized them with being put to death? But aside from that obvious fact, "obeying God", is obeying Spirit, and that is a matter of heart. What was being dictated in that verse is NOT spirituality, but law. Have you ever read the NT yet?

If humanity's attunement to the spiritual patterns of the universe are helped by various practices-which might include prayer, meditation, yoga, contemplation-then modern psychological and psychotherapeutic measures would surely be part of any integral spirituality, since those measures can help increase a person's capacity for various sorts of practice. What do I mean by "psychotherapeutic measures"? This in itself is a large topic, so let me say, for introductory purposes, they are any measures that might be taken if you have an emotional problem and visit the office of a psychologist, psychotherapist, or psychiatrist-all of the measures for treating human psychological issues that have been developed in the last century or so, and that have demonstrated the capacity to help alleviate or remove emotional problems or obstructions. by Wilbur

That’s his ideas . I think he should concentrate in his concepts about psychology rather than jump, and connect it with spirituality because he did not know about Christ’s sufficiency in terms of emotional problems.

Matthew 11:28 “Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.”

Of course it ties into psychology! I quote this verse all the time. There is a direct relationship between spirituality and psychology. Simply just "believing" is not spirituality. You have to open with the heart to the deep places within you. And through faith, through emptying your troubles and cares into the Infinite, we find release, we find strength "from above" as it were. Absolutely. This falls straight into my lap and it's something I teach.

Phil 4:13
13. I can do all things through Him who strengthens me.

Absolutely, that's the point. Letting go of trying to "please God", or to "build our egos", and simply resting in the Infinite. Then, we find what we have always already had, which is God within us. When you find that, with the heart, not with the mind believing the bible or some such external thing, but with the heart, then you are free. Then you know peace. Then you know joy. Then you are strengthened by Spirit itself. This is what the mystical experience is all about. And you are absolutely wrong to say it is of our own efforts. It is not. You're trying to "obey God", by following the Bible as if it were a book of laws, like Leviticus was, will never realize what these verses teach.

2. Spirit, although existing "out there," is found "in here," or revealed within to the open heart and mind.
3. Most of us don't realize this Spirit within, however, because we are living in a world of sin, separation, or duality-that is, we are living in a fallen, illusory, or fragmented state. by Wilbur

What is the “Spirit” he is talking about? How come that the “Spirit” is within us?

The only Spirit. The Bible speaks of it as the Holy Spirit. There are plenty of other terms for it used in the world religions. How is it within us? Because there is nowhere it is not, nor cannot be. It's never further away than your own breath. It is not outside of you, but in you and all that is.

4. There is a way out of this fallen state (of sin or illusion or disharmony), there is a Path to our liberation.
5. If we follow this Path to its conclusion, the result is a Rebirth or Enlightenment, a direct experience of Spirit within and without, a Supreme Liberation, which
6. marks the end of sin and suffering, and
7. manifests in social action of mercy and compassion on behalf of all sentient beings. by Wilbur

What is the path to our liberation? To absorb Wilbur’s teachings or Christ’s teachings?
Who is the Supreme in liberation?

Thanks

My God. Liberation is not in what you can learn or believe with your mind. How many tens of thousands of times is it necessary to repeat what I've said from the first time? The path to liberation is to get rid of the separate self and all that creates it, to the point we realize the reality of who we are in God. It is an act of the mind and it's ego-grasping, looking for answers in belief systems, such as you do. But allowing what is within us to be known by us, and for us to live in accord with that Spirit, "obeying" is, as it were, moving with it, as a living, dynamic, flowing, actual reality is spirituality, is liberation, is freedom. "Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberation".

When we try to "believe" our way into it, we are coming in "another way", like Jesus was referring to when he said, "Very truly I tell you Pharisees, anyone who does not enter the sheep pen by the gate, but climbs in by some other way, is a thief and a robber." He was speaking this to those who were religious and insisted on "the right way" which was the way in which they interpreted the law. You do the same, and try to enter another way, and find yourself outside of your own heart.

 

[YmirGF]

First of all, I said a mystic's desire is unity with God. To which you said that proves the mystic wants a one-world-religion, which has nothing to do with what I had just said. Then when I pointed that out to you, you reply with this non-sequitur. Even if we are following our own will, which no true mystic does, it doesn't follow that he wants a one-world-religion. The desire of this mystic is to transcend religion in unity with God, not to unite all religions. We want everyone to have their own religions, follow their own paths to finding God and then move beyond religion and see others beyond religious boundaries, not adopt a new unified one controlled by some ego-maniac at the top!

Forgive me for jumping in this far in your discussion, but I wanted to add my 2 devalued Canadian cents. I agree with much of what you say above but would expand on it slightly. The mystic wants union with god, at first, but if they are rather sharp, they wont stop there. They will continue on with their inner journey until they have left all notions of god far behind. That feature of the mystic's experience pretty well pounds the last nail into the coffin of starting a one-world-religion as the mystic's endeavors break down dogmatic thinking in an endless review of beliefs that are held Therefore, it would be exceptionally hypocritical for a mystic to support an endeavor to create a one-world-relgion, imho.

Thirdly, regarding your comment, "Open to Buddhism, Hinduism, and other spiritual enlightenment", why not? Why the hell not? But let me clarify one point first, I'm not sure what you mean by "other spiritual enlightenment". Spiritual enlightenment is spiritual enlightenment. How it manifests itself is both the same, and differently to everyone, even those within the same religion. No two people in the world understand God in the same way because no two people are 100% clones of each other. Each person interprets their experiences differently, even if it is an experience of the same thing.

Well said.

But in the real world where real people live, we all share our own experiences of the same thing with one another, and we learn from each other's perspectives and interpretations. Other's points of view inform us, and it doesn't matter if it's going to a rock concert together, or experiencing God. So to listen to others who have experienced enlightenment is a good thing. We can learn from them. We should learn from them.

As far "open to Buddhism [and] Hinduism", again, why not? Think about it in terms like this. Let me put in in the argument of one imaginary American scientist to another. "What do you mean you've been reading into the research done by that Japanese physicist! Why are you open to what a scientist from an entirely different country has to say? You're going to be led astray because they speak a different language, eat different food, and have different customs than you do! Come back into the fold of American science and do not let yourself be open to those who have found the truth!"

I rest my case. It's complete stupidity. Why not listen to others who experience the same thing? Again, I consider a closed-mind, as well as a closed-heart, to be a sin against God, yourself, and others.

Indeed. I'd say we need to listen to each other, because others have bits of the puzzle clutched in their little mitts and if we want to continue expanding our thinking it is imperative that we never stop the dialogue. A one-world-religion would be a dialog killer as each would necessarily bend their piece of the puzzle to fit the narrative. That is not progressive.

Now, if you will forgive me, I'm still waking up and need some coffee.

 

[sojourner]

Witchcraft is condemned because it is an attempt to access spiritual power and knowledge apart from God's ordained way, so it is rebellion and opposition to God the Creator. Attempting to achieve spiritual transformation by one's own effort through meditative practices, silencing one's mind, or whatever alternative method is in opposition to God's grace. Therefore it is rebellion, demonstrating an unwillingness to agree with God or acknowledge and submit to His way of transformation solely through the saving work of Jesus Christ on the cross and His resurrection to new life..

"Since the Garden of Eden, Satan’s major focus has been to divert human hearts away from worship of the true God (Genesis 3:1). He entices humans with the suggestions of power, self-realization, and spiritual enlightenment apart from submission to the Lord God. Witchcraft is merely another branch of that enticement. "
http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-witchcraft.html

Completely miunderstood on all counts. Completely.

 

[sojourner]

Sojourner,

Then, how “witchcraft” becomes in opposition to God’s way? Do you believe that witchcraft is a detestable practice forbidden by God?

Thanks

No I don't, and here's why.

Witchcraft is condemned by Levitican Law because witchcraft involves communicating with the dead. The thinking was that if one could communicate with the dead, the dead are not really dead, but alive -- and, if alive, then (in some indeterminate way) deity. Since the Jews were adamant about their monotheism, communication with the dead was seen to challenge that monotheism, hence the injunctions against such practices.

 

[sojourner]

Absolutely the truth of Christ is the truth. Are there any truth that you know aside from God’s truth?

Thanks

That's beside the point of what I'm tryingn to say. What I'm trying to say is that you don't know that you have the truth of Christ. You only believe that you have that truth. Judging by your posts, however, I believe your belief to be in error.

 

[sojourner]

How could Jesus become everybody’s Saviour if a person does not come to Him and follow His words?

If we are already protected from the evil one, then why of the following:
1. Why Jesus prayed to protect the Disciples from the evil one?
2. Why Jesus and His disciples showed they cast out the evil-possessed?
3. Why Paul reminded us to wear the armor of God?

Salvation is free but the choice of accepting that salvation is a matter of man’s choice to believe and follow Him.

Thanks

Because salvation is a systemic paradigm -- not an individual paradigm. In your scenario, salvation would be an act of human beings -- not an act of God, which contradicts what you've said about salvation in the past. Which is it? Act of humanity, or act of God?

 

[Windwalker]

Forgive me for jumping in this far in your discussion, but I wanted to add my 2 devalued Canadian cents. I agree with much of what you say above but would expand on it slightly. The mystic wants union with god, at first, but if they are rather sharp, they wont stop there. They will continue on with their inner journey until they have left all notions of god far behind.

I think when one realizes that union with God, that means there is no "other" remaining. God is not other to self, and self is not other to God. But I don't believe this is the top rung of some ladder necessarily. I the path to God as a path of ascension, but then the realization of that leads not to the end, the high point, but rather the path of return or the path of descension. From the many to the One, and from the One to the many.

On the path upward from the separate self, God is other to the individual, which begins to move closer and closer to Unity as one realizes God in themselves. On the path of descension God becomes the highest expression of the Infinite into manifest reality, the Face of the formless Infinite as it were in manifest form, pure luminance, the Logos, Sachithanandan. God is in this way Saguna Brahman, God with qualities, in contrast to Nirguna Brahman, God without qualities. Nondual realization does not leave God far behind, rather we leave behind the radical duality where God is wholly other to self. We leave behind our ideas of God we held as we peered through the glass darkly. To put of finer point on this.

That feature of the mystic's experience pretty well pounds the last nail into the coffin of starting a one-world-religion as the mystic's endeavors break down dogmatic thinking in an endless review of beliefs that are held Therefore, it would be exceptionally hypocritical for a mystic to support an endeavor to create a one-world-relgion, imho.

I think another way to say essentially the same thing is that the mystic tends to take the apophatic approach, dissolving one's own ideas of God so as not to wall oneself off from ultimate reality by looking to your own beliefs and ideas. To negate God, is to negate your preconceived ideas, which were born out of the dualistic mind in its search for its Source. In that way, to want to make a one world religion likewise works against that as it promotes ideas for others to believe in. Why promote beliefs, when moving beyond beliefs is the goal? It's like promoting freedom by handing out chains and locks.

But to an important point relating this to Christian and other "revealed" religions, they understand revelation in ways which are absolute. What they have behind this is their underlying preconceptions of this ladder, this hierarchy with God at the top rung. Truth comes down to those at the lower rungs which show them the way to climb it to heaven above, the higher realms of angels, the departed dead, and God at the top. Revelation to them are truths which come from these higher domains through the mouths of the special appointed ones, the prophets or oracles of the divine, and it is taken as special information of higher authority. So to have this "one world religion", is in fact following this whole "revealed religion" model. That is exactly what that woman from the 1920s was promoting in her imagining of the "spiritual hierarchy", as she called it.

The mystic does not understand truth "from above" in such radically dualistic ways. I once said to a theologian friend of mine regarding revelation, that I go to that place of the source of revelation all the time. That shut down the conversation in a hurry. What he didn't want to hear was the accessibility of such a thing to anyone. It is mythologized, rarefied in order to create this mythic structure of higher truth as penetrating downward strictly by divine fiat, a special miracle dropped down from above, from this God at the top of the heap of all of creation. The mystic sees revelation in the sense of Light illuminating understanding, allowing the mind to see beyond itself and realize in themselves a higher perspective, a greater, more holistic awareness of Truth manifest in forms. It is not a top-down truth delivered magically from on high to those below, but rather an opening from within and understanding of the obvious illuminated by the light of that understanding. It is not "other" to the thing before them, but the thing before them becomes obvious in that Light. This is not to say the truth of the thing, "in itself", but rather the understanding of it, the mind's understanding, seeing it in radically more aware ways.

The point of all this is to say that the nature of understanding truth itself for the mystic negates this top-down hierarchical model of a dualistic understanding in the so-called revealed religions. The paranoid mind imagines this revealed religion model with an imposter at the top, rather than God. This is why one of the fundamentalists in this discussion said in effect to me, "You better hope you're not gullible in the end times when the imposter comes". But I can't become duped by someone, because I reject the very model, the system of thought itself. I don't need to look for who I should trust. I understand the nature of Truth and revelation is radically different ways. Truth is not static and fixed, and no individual, not even the most enlightened mystic when they speak their understanding should be understood as speaking absolutes.

Indeed. I'd say we need to listen to each other, because others have bits of the puzzle clutched in their little mitts and if we want to continue expanding our thinking it is imperative that we never stop the dialogue. A one-world-religion would be a dialog killer as each would necessarily bend their piece of the puzzle to fit the narrative. That is not progressive.

Exactly. Again, the accusation that the mystic seeks a one world religion is pure paranoid fiction. It runs counter to everything we realize about the relative nature of truth in the light of the Infinite. Religions are not seen as "having the truth". They are seen like like tools. No one in their right mind would say there should be only one screwdriver in the toolchest.

Now, if you will forgive me, I'm still waking up and need some coffee.

Ditto. I'm not sure how coherent what I just typed was, but I'll just post it anyway.

 

[InChrist]

I think when one realizes that union with God, that means there is no "other" remaining. God is not other to self, and self is not other to God. But I don't believe this is the top rung of some ladder necessarily. I the path to God as a path of ascension, but then the realization of that leads not to the end, the high point, but rather the path of return or the path of descension. From the many to the One, and from the One to the many.


Exactly. Again, the accusation that the mystic seeks a one world religion is pure paranoid fiction. It runs counter to everything we realize about the relative nature of truth in the light of the Infinite. Religions are not seen as "having the truth". They are seen like like tools. No one in their right mind would say there should be only one screwdriver in the toolchest.

No one is accusing mystics of seeking a one world religion, at least I'm not. Nevertheless, there are those who do desire such and see it as a good thing whether for benevolent reasons or simply for power and control. The problem is not that you or other mystics are seeking some kind of universal "religion", rather it is your belief as expressed above, "God is not other to self and self is not other to God" along with the view that all religions are simply tools in the tool chest which may be used to experience realization of God. This is what will allow you to be duped by Lucifer, who from behind the scenes, knows how to manipulate the minds desires of humans. It will not be presented (at first) as a world "religion" in the sense of traditional religions, but a higher, enlightened spirituality which encompasses all paths promising peace and unity...concepts already compatible with mysticism. Only later, when everyone is on board, will the real intentions of this global spirituality be manifested, but it will be too late for any who rejected the truth of salvation through the Savior Jesus Christ and the spiritual discernment of God's revealed word. .

"All religions, from the most legalistic to the most liberal to the mystical, have self at the core of one’s achieving a positive consequence regarding life after death. Only biblical Christianity teaches that denying self and turning to Jesus alone for one’s salvation is acceptable to God. The Bible indicates that Satan’s lie that humanity can achieve godhood will ultimately manifest itself in the last days through the Antichrist, who “opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, [showing] himself that he is God” (2 Thessalonians:2:4)"
excerpt from:
http://www.thebereancall.org/content/self-mankind-s-number-one-problem

 

[Windwalker]

No one is accusing mystics of seeking a one world religion, at least I'm not.

This entire thread is about that. From your opening post:

Mysticism is the key to a universal religion because it appeals to people on a broad scale. People of different religions must have a common factor and binding agent for a global religion and that is mystical, contemplative prayer.

Universal religion, global religion.... one world religion. What's the difference? Your friend Yoshua in this thread understands them as the same thing, and he even presented to me that woman from the Theosophist movement from the 1920s who refers to the one world religion to support your claims that mystics are seeking a one world religion. Even he understands what you're saying.

Nevertheless, there are those who do desire such and see it as a good thing whether for benevolent reasons or simply for power and control.

Such as who? Are they from this century? Or is it this battle from the early 1900s that still seen as a relevant enemy in the minds of fundamentalists?

The problem is not that you or other mystics are seeking some kind of universal "religion", rather it is your belief as expressed above, "God is not other to self and self is not other to God" along with the view that all religions are simply tools in the tool chest which may be used to experience realization of God.

I'm quite positive how you interpret what I said has no relationship with what I mean. I know how you think when we say we realize we are God that to you is a great big ego trip sort of thing. Nothing could be further from the truth of it. It is the exact opposite. I can't recall the mystic who said this, but it goes something like this. "The most humble thing a man can say is that he is God".

I know that cannot register in your mind, as to you it's the most arrogant thing he could say. But what he means is that to say you are God, means you have cast off all your own desires, all your own seeking, all your own needs to support and defend you ego. It means you have taken everything you are, your whole self, and laid it down before God is pure surrender. And the result is you awaken to the divine. It is God now that lives in you, and not your small ego self. This is precisely what Paul means when he says, "I live, and yet not I, but Christ in me".

The realization of God comes when you die to yourself. Jesus taught, "Whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it." Those who seek God to "save them" are seeking to save their life, and they will lose it. But those who lose their life for the sake of God, those who lay it down at the altar of sacrifice, emptying their ego out in surrender, 'not my will but thine', find it. It is in fact the goal of the mystic to do just that. Not to seek to be God as their ego-self, but to seek to allow God in themselves to the point all there is is God.

As I said, your understanding of what the mystic does in effect, is completely backwards and upside down. It is not through our own efforts at all. It is through letting go, and allowing alone that one finds God, and finds themselves in God to the point where they themselves are no more, and all that is left, is God.

This is what will allow you to be duped by Lucifer, who from behind the scenes, knows how to manipulate the minds desires of humans.

So, God can be deceived by Lucifer?

It will not be presented (at first) as a world "religion" in the sense of traditional religions, but a higher, enlightened spirituality which encompasses all paths promising peace and unity...concepts already compatible with mysticism. Only later, when everyone is on board, will the real intentions of this global spirituality be manifested, but it will be too late for any who rejected the truth of salvation through the Savior Jesus Christ and the spiritual discernment of God's revealed word. .

Forgive me, but this whole paragraph reads like a conspiracy theory one can see on any topic from conspiracy theorist sites on anything from climate change, to GMOs, to anti vacciners. Honestly, what I hear in you, in this post and all others where you express such fears and suspicions about mystical practices, is someone who does not know how to trust themselves. For me, the spiritual path leads you to both know, and to trust what your heart tells you. The heart, is the core of Jesus' message. It should be the focus of any spiritual path in his name. It is those who look for answers from others, that are vulnerable, not knowing what their own heart can know when the mind fails them.


Regarding the source you cite below:

"All religions, from the most legalistic to the most liberal to the mystical, have self at the core of one’s achieving a positive consequence regarding life after death.

Rubbish.

Only biblical Christianity teaches that denying self and turning to Jesus alone for one’s salvation is acceptable to God.

All mystical practices are about denying one's own self-seeking desires in pursuit of God. None don't.

The Bible indicates that Satan’s lie that humanity can achieve godhood will ultimately manifest itself in the last days through the Antichrist,

I don't know any mystic or religion that teaches this rubbish. Realizing God, is realizing what we all already are. You don't "achieve godhood", like it's a graduate degree! This is just ignorance responding to itself with ignorance.

who “opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, [showing] himself that he is God” (2 Thessalonians:2:4)"
excerpt from:
http://www.thebereancall.org/content/self-mankind-s-number-one-problem

Here's the secret. You cite these sources as voices of authority, and yet they speak rubbish about stuff they only speculate at and do not understand in even the most basic ways. So, by you trusting in external authorities like this, you in fact are the one in this case being deceived.

Do you think you are in a good position then when this antichrist fellow you believe will comes casts his snares, "tickling the ears" of those who want to hear things bad about those whom they taught themselves to fear? Honestly, it is in fact those who do what you do who are the vulnerable ones, and this citation from this site shows that. There's no critical examination of their claims. And here, you have someone who in fact is an authority before you, and you choose to not listen. Who is vulnerable?

 

[Yoshua]

"God cannot lie."
You: "He" can do whatever He wants."
You: "God cannot lie but can if "He" wants. Which is it, cannot or can?
The texts don't say, "God cannot lie but "He" can if "He" wants to."

If "God" doesn't break "God's" own laws, then you have tons of problems with your literal interpretations. . more lies from you.

Ok. Let me ask you this question first. Can you fly like a bird? If your answer is No, please explain why you cannot fly.

A newborn child already KNOWS. Everything is already written on their minds and hearts.

How? How can you prove that the bible (Scriptures) was already in their mind and hearts (literally)?

More lies from you, nowhere in text does it say that a god is an all powerful deity or that "God" is an all powerful deity outside of the images created in your mind. As said, worshiping images of the beast. Already explained.

Who do you think created you and the earth?

Gen. 1:1-2
1. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2. And the earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.

Gen. 1:27
27. And God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

I am not interested in eating the "evil" fruit of lies that come from your dendritic garden. It would also cause someone to believe in more idol images of the beast, literal humans eating literal fruit from a literal tree and literal knowledge that is all somehow exoteric to them. Perhaps denying those images would be a start.

It is not image, but the reality that there is evil.

Thanks

 

[Yoshua]

Every human being has their own inner "Adam" and is responsible for their own "fall."

To think contrary would have you yet again be creating lies that "God" is unjust.

Your own scripture also states it's a lie for those who teach that the resurrection has already happened... In which case, you are doing just that... that it happened a long time ago and once and for all.

Why the resurrection of Jesus becomes a lie? It is not a lie.

So when someone is purified, washed, cleansed by the blood of Christ.... where is this blood? Internal or external?

When we say it is cleansed by the blood, it is a metaphoric way of saying God washed our sins.

1 John 1:7
7. but if we walk in the light as He Himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin.

Literally, the blood is internal.

Deny your beast. It has created a bunch of exoteric vain imaginations and is idolatry.

I have no beast in me. It must be denying oneself for Christ, so they may follow Christ’s will for his life.

Thanks