adamswildhoney
ONE love, blood, life
KhanadaRhodes said:
KhanadaRhodes said:
joyfulgirl said:
My interpretation is that he was the way, the truth, the life for the people in his sphere at that time and that there is always a living son of god present serving different cultures at different times. Hence, the great masters of all religions. Sadly, they are often not recognized by the masses until they are long dead.
Too Much Asleep said:and joyfulgirl, let me be clear that if I sound a little frustrated, it's only with the enigma of Jesus, not with you or your interpretation. It's all good.
Too Much Asleep said:
Then why didn't Jesus just tell it that way? I don't get the guy. Why didn't he just say, "look, I'm the way the truth and the life, no one in this culture at this time gets to the Father, except through me." For goodness sake, he said this less than 24 hours before he was killed. "His time" only had a day left. I mean, he had to know that people were gonna write this stuff down, and it would get heard by people in other cultures and other times. His own disciples started telling people from other cultures this stuff within a couple weeks of his death. It sure seems like he meant this for everyone.
And in the verse we all know thanks to the signs at every public event, John 3:16, Jesus said he was the ONLY Son of God.
I think Jesus was totally intolerant of other religions. And yet, he claimed to be all about love.
Again I ask, what's up with that?
Too Much Asleep said:
And yet there are many that do.
Jesus himself said "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."
What's up with that?
Se7en said:I am the way, the truth, and the light. No one gets to the Father except through me.
...that being the very first thing that came to mind upon reading this thread title.
I personally don't really understand how all religions, who all worship different gods, are all "right." If they're all "right," then don't all of these gods exist? And if all of these gods exist...oh no i've gone cross eyed.
joyfulgirl said:
I believe there is one ubiquitous God expressing Itself in all languages, in all cultures, through different sons of God (masters, saints, teachers etc.) Devotees of many different teachers have exactly the same kinds of experiences today and throughout history with their teachers as the disciples did with Jesus.
KingPin said:
Are you sure about that?
People these days are seeing their teachers use a picnic basket to feed over 5,000 people? People are seeing their teachers walk on water? People are watching their teachers die, and then watching them walk around a few days later?
We aren't seeing those things everyday.
joyfulgirl said:
People are experiencing miracles with their teachers everyday, yes, and always have. I doubt Buddhism would exist were it not for the miracles Buddha's students experienced, and the same for the masters in India today and elsewhere. But no, you won't see it on TV. It's sacred.
speedracer said:
Well, Buddha never claimed divinity and never said that his death and resurrection would be the sole means by which humankind could be saved from sin. Jesus did. So Jesus can't possibly be one of many equal avatars. Either he was who he said he was--The Son of God--or he was something incredibly terrible, either a liar or a lunatic.
joyfulgirl said:
Buddha pointed the way to enlightenment and demonstrated by example. Masters/avatars/saints/sons of god have their own unique way of teaching Truth within their own culture and time period. We won't agree on this, my friend, so I don't think there's any point in going back and forth on it. I respect your views and in fact used to share them, but I don't anymore.
joyfulgirl said:
sons of god
Moonlit_Angel said:It's like, um...if someone doesn't believe in God, they don't believe in heaven or hell, either, so how can they be condemned by a god they do not feel exists to a place they don't believe exists?
Danospano, I can't argue anything you've said here, in a literal sense, but you've contradicted yourself by including your last sentence. At the beginning of your post, you imply that we don't "know" what happens after death because there is no proof either way. However, in your last sentence you state that there is a dependency factor (based on which "'man-made' doctrine you profess to believe in") that determines whether you know what will happen after death -- and that's contradicting your earlier implication. Now, I think I do know what you mean, but I had to point that out!Danospano said:I've reached a conclusion concerning religious speculation. It's a conclusion that each and every one of us have contemplated before, yet tried to ignored due to our hopes that heaven and hell actually exist.
Since no one has proof that their is a heaven or hell, we can't have a debate on the subject. It's THAT simple.
Can we move on, and stop wasting our time on earth. I based this assumption on life ending on earth and our time being limited, because we KNOW this to be true. We know that life ends, but what happens afterward is out of our hands, and depending on what "man-made" doctrine you profess to believe in, you'll never know what will happen until that day when you cease to exist.
I completely understood! It's just that, quite often, the term "know" seems to be used when we really mean "believe" -- which I guess is what we were both actually saying!Danospano said:Michael,
There was a touch of sarcasm in the final sentence of my last post. "Man-made" religion. Beliefs based on speculations rather than hard facts. It is a fact that humans cease to exist in their current state when they die. All faith's expectation of the "afterworld" are mere speculation, and that's the point I was trying to make.
Cheers
Angela Harlem said:Sorry to be contrary fors, but just because you DO believe in something doesn't mean its fact either. Religion is all about faith after all. None of us will know until the end what is really going on so to condemn (as a figure of speech) someone to something based on faith is a tough call. But still, you are right that belief aside, if you are denying the existance of something that is indeed true, makes no difference in the end.