Religion thread #58,934

[Castout]

People need to be able to differentiate between religion, God, beliefs, faith, formal ritualistic prayer or heart felt prayer, being mindful of motives and conscience or simply adherence to formal religious laws/rituals.

Religion doesn't equal to God. God stands alone from any religion. The experience of God is always personal whether in individual level, family or simply a group of people.

And I just want to TESTIFY that God is REAL and UNIVERSAL whether one admits that or otherwise, whether one knows Him or otherwise. Any one man who claims he or she is enlightened and says that there is no God is either a liar and or a fool. I know this words mean nothing to you but I still write it so that you can remember when the time comes for you to know God.

God may not be for everyone . . . . . . . the fact that most people have no clue about God and that every person who has lived(except Christ) has no natural knowledge of God it is only logical to say that God is not for everyone and not for most to know. So go about your business. God is out of reach to most people. Or to be more accurate, most people have made themselves out of reach(unworthy) of the knowledge of God. We are dust in the wind. We are nothing, undeserving to know pure, greatest love, compassion and mercy. So there is God but you don't have to believe in Him, He doesn't demand that and if he had demanded it, that why do you still not believe? So he must have not demanded faith and even obedience. So there is God but go back to your own business and whatever beliefs you CHOOSE to believe. Life is too short to hate something you don't even know or understand. Go about your business. And most importantly. BE HAPPY whatever the condition is.

[MH]

So shell be writen so shell be done.

[Castout]

Originally Posted by MH

So shell be writen so shell be done.

Proper English: So shall it be written and so shall it be done.


Though you must have meant sarcasm somewhat but please write it right.

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by Castout

And I just want to TESTIFY that God is REAL and UNIVERSAL whether one admits that or otherwise, whether one knows Him or otherwise. Any one man who claims he or she is enlightened and says that there is no God is either a liar and or a fool. I know this words mean nothing to you but I still write it so that you can remember when the time comes for you to know God.

Ah, but therein lies the paradox and one of the real difficulties here: in terms of REAL and UNIVERSAL, you can only TESTIFY your own experience, but never 'reality' or 'universality' as such. If God is an individual pursuit, then as an individual you can't ever testify outside of your own field of experience, which precludes anything that's universal by default. Human experience can't adequately get at anything universal, and no amount of testimony will do anyone any good. In that sense, I wish that's another thing that I wish religious/spiritual people conceded: there's always a chance that what they see is universal is something that only comes to them, and may come in a very different form to others. If you believe God is something everyone has to have a personal relationship with, then you have to acknowledge that the experience of God can be completely different from one person to the next. If present at all. Otherwise, this becomes not about God universal but about proving your own little version of it as right.

The good news, though, is that a truly universal God can perfectly well speak on his own behalf and doesn't need spokespersons to do his bidding.

[Castout]

Originally Posted by CCIP

Ah, but therein lies the paradox and one of the real difficulties here: in terms of REAL and UNIVERSAL, you can only TESTIFY your own experience, but never 'reality' or 'universality' as such. If God is an individual pursuit, then as an individual you can't ever testify outside of your own field of experience, which precludes anything that's universal by default. Human experience can't adequately get at anything universal, and no amount of testimony will do anyone any good. In that sense, I wish that's another thing that I wish religious/spiritual people conceded: there's always a chance that what they see is universal is something that only comes to them, and may come in a very different form to others. If you believe God is something everyone has to have a personal relationship with, then you have to acknowledge that the experience of God can be completely different from one person to the next. If present at all. Otherwise, this becomes not about God universal but about proving your own little version of it as right.

The good news, though, is that a truly universal God can perfectly well speak on his own behalf and doesn't need spokespersons to do his bidding.

You assumed human experience is needed to know UNIVERSAL God. It takes a divine experience from the part of God to know God. No man can reach God. You don't get to God, God get to you.

I'm not claiming to be a spokesperson and never did. So where did you take that weird conclusion from. You assumed too much. And as a witness I'm obligated to tell anyone my testimony for reason I've stated above.

My own version of God huh so you judged me based on what? based on the words I've written? To prove have I not written that I don't intend what I wrote to convince anyone and for the sole purpose of what I've stated instead. You passed a judgment on me. Okay.

I assumed you appointed yourself to be the judge of another person experience. Well since everybody can do whatever they wish I can't possibly object so I must accept your judgement. I think it is unwise and false but I must accept it nonetheless. After all what has been given cannot be taken back.

[CCIP]

I'm not judging at all, just pointing out an argumentative flaw that many people in religion sadly abuse. I'm not saying that you're abusing it in this case, but it's exactly that kind of universalist logic that causes people to force interpretations on others. Everyone has access to the same sort of spiritual stuff, but you have to be wary about interpreting an individual experience of it as the 'right' one. In principle, if you look up my previous post in this thread, you'll see that I more or less agree with your views.

[MH]

Originally Posted by Castout

You assumed human experience is needed to know UNIVERSAL God. It takes a divine experience from the part of God to know God. No man can reach God. You don't get to God, God get to you.

I'm not claiming to be a spokesperson and never did. So where did you take that weird conclusion from. You assumed too much. And as a witness I'm obligated to tell anyone my testimony for reason I've stated above.

My own version of God huh so you judged me based on what? based on the words I've written? To prove have I not written that I don't intend what I wrote to convince anyone and for the sole purpose of what I've stated instead. You passed a judgment on me. Okay.

I assumed you appointed yourself to be the judge of another person experience. Well since everybody can do whatever they wish I can't possibly object so I must accept your judgement. I think it is unwise and false but I must accept it nonetheless. After all what has been given cannot be taken back.

Hey Castout you have real talent.
Instead of proving your point in this thread you should go straight for the book as such blessed man you are.
It does not seem that any one will convince you but you convinced many......

[razark]

Originally Posted by Castout

You assumed human experience is needed to know UNIVERSAL God. It takes a divine experience from the part of God to know God. No man can reach God. You don't get to God, God get to you.

So, God chooses who to reveal himself to and I cannot, on my own, gain direct knowledge of him?

Yet earlier you say:

Originally Posted by Castout

Any one man who... says that there is no God is either a liar and or a fool.

So, you call me a liar and a fool for not knowing God, knowledge that can only come from God.

Therefore, I am a fool for God choosing for me not to believe in him?


If God is omniscient and omnipotent, he knows what evidence would convince me, and he has the power to show it to me. Therefore, the fact that he has not done so would be evidence that he wishes for me to not believe in him.

That's why personal testimony and anecdotal evidence make poor tools for converting people.

[MH]

Originally Posted by razark

If God is omniscient and omnipotent, he knows what evidence would convince me, and he has the power to show it to me. Therefore, the fact that he has not done so would be evidence that he wishes for me to not believe in him.

That's why personal testimony and anecdotal evidence make poor tools for converting people.

No self respecting religious figure(Rabi or Priest) will claim such a thing now days.
Its more your choice to turn to god by your free will.
Its up to you how you live your life but usually there some minimal requirements.
At the end you are judged not necessary by the strict religious life you had and what strict rules you followed.
its more the over roll how you did as human being.
Actually this solves all the Almighty free will issue...but well the believing is up to you.
No hard convincing.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Castout

People need to be able to differentiate between religion, God, beliefs, faith, formal ritualistic prayer or heart felt prayer, being mindful of motives and conscience or simply adherence to formal religious laws/rituals.

Religion doesn't equal to God. God stands alone from any religion. The experience of God is always personal whether in individual level, family or simply a group of people.

And I just want to TESTIFY that God is REAL and UNIVERSAL whether one admits that or otherwise, whether one knows Him or otherwise. Any one man who claims he or she is enlightened and says that there is no God is either a liar and or a fool. I know this words mean nothing to you but I still write it so that you can remember when the time comes for you to know God.

God may not be for everyone . . . . . . . the fact that most people have no clue about God and that every person who has lived(except Christ) has no natural knowledge of God it is only logical to say that God is not for everyone and not for most to know. So go about your business. God is out of reach to most people. Or to be more accurate, most people have made themselves out of reach(unworthy) of the knowledge of God. We are dust in the wind. We are nothing, undeserving to know pure, greatest love, compassion and mercy. So there is God but you don't have to believe in Him, He doesn't demand that and if he had demanded it, that why do you still not believe? So he must have not demanded faith and even obedience. So there is God but go back to your own business and whatever beliefs you CHOOSE to believe. Life is too short to hate something you don't even know or understand. Go about your business. And most importantly. BE HAPPY whatever the condition is.

And there you just have head-jumped into the trap again that your dualistic mind has set up for you!

Ease the heavy load in your head so that it becomes much lighter. It improves your balance by lowering the centre of gravity.

All - probably inadequate - translations by me, from my German copies.


Therefore, I am the cause of myself according to my essential being which is eternal, but not according to my developing appearance, which is temporal. And therefore, I am unborn, and according to that I never can die. By the way of not being born I have existed since all times, and I do exist now, and will exist forever. What I am by the way of my developing appearance will die and will be ruined, because it is mortal; therefore it will be shattered by time. - Meister Eckehard


Letting go all ideas of God and all religious thoughts one is fond of, is an absolute prerequisite for true mystical experience. But experience has shown that the letting go of personal idols and religious symbols is especially difficult for those, whose personality structure shows the strongest egocentricity and focussing on themselves. They are afraid to lose everything, and therefore they cling to their small, mortal self with all their might. When one is looking closer to it, one will recognize that most people are not about a living experience of the divine essence, but are more about a maintaining of their personal ideas of God they are fond of, and about wallowing religious feelings. But true mystic has nothing to do with emotional rapture and inappropriate holiness, these belong to the realm of mysticism, which only is a distortion of true and pure mystic. Man in general tends to fooling himself and looking for a short-cut, a religion of superficial consolation, an ideal world without problems and challenges, where everything falls into its correct place. The clinging to superficial forms and religious practices is one of the greatest dangers on the spiritual way. They are shackles which bind us to signs and symbols which actually should only show us the way inwards. Therefore every symbol shows towards something that is be-yond itself and that cannot be named or displayed. To go beyond religious signs and symbols therefore does not mean to refuse these symbols, but to strive for what they are pointing at. - Zensho Wolfgang Kopp


The law of Buddha does not need endeavours. It consists of the ordinary life and has no goal: to sh!t and to piss, getting dressed, eating and sleeping when one is tired. The simple-minded may laugh about me the wise know about it. My friends, I tell you: there is no Buddha, no teaching, no training, and no insight. What are you chasing for so bitterly? Do you want to put a second head on top of your own, you blind idiots? Your head is exactly where it should be. What are you missing, then? - Lin Chi (jap. Rinzai)


The One Essence that could be known,
Is not the Essence of the Unknowable.
The idea that could be imagined,
Is not the image of the Eternal.
Nameless is the all-One, is inner essence.
Known by names is the all-Many, is outer form.
Resting without desires means to learn the invis-ible inside.
Acting with desires means to stay by the limited outside.
All-the-One and all-the-Many are of the same origin,
Different only in appearance and name.
What they have in common is the wonder of being.
The secret of this wonder
Is the gate to all understanding.
- Tao Te King -


While he entered the assembly hall, master Huang-Po said: The possession of many kinds of knowledge does not compare to giving up searching for them. That is the best of all things. There are no different kinds of mind, and there are no teachings that could be expressed in words. Since there is nothing more to say, the assembly is closed. - Huang Po

As long as we do not have true self-knowledge, our wish to act rightly often creates nothing but problems. Because in our blindness we act within a world that by its appearance we still perceive as a dualistic one, and with our well-meant good deeds we try hard to give expression only to one of the two poles in every pair of opposites. What we consider to be of light, we try to make everlasting, and we reject what we believe is of darkness. But by that we behave exactly like the being that we believe we are: our ego has polarized ourselves as being good, by that it keeps on to increase the dualism and the imagined polarity in the world as we see it.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Castout

Any one man who claims he or she is enlightened and says that there is no God is either a liar and or a fool.

Why wouldn't the reverse be true also? Any one who claims he or she is enlightened and says that there is a god is either a liar and or a fool.

What evidence supports one hypothesis and refutes the other?

Can both hypotheses be true? Can both be false?

Can there be a third hypotheses that refutes both?