Spiritual paths in religion

[Bo]

many religions have several spiritual paths to guide your way to god. e.g. kabbala, soefi, anthroposophy, are there by chance people here following a spiritual path and could (s)he explain what the differences are with undergoing religeon the normal way?

 

Bo

[Machina80]

I tend to search for the one common interest in all religions then focus on that common belief. Finding a balance for oneself would be what i find most people seeking. Though the ways most try to find it seem long and worned out, which in the end leaves them too torned and scarred to continue beleiveing anymore. I find my belief in Love, being one true, real way.... imo.

[BEAKER]

"How could any one human's death fulfill the punishment for all the sins of all the humans everywhere and forever?

 

The price of death, which would be our natural end; would be paid by the Very One to whom the debt was owed; God Himself - clothed in human flesh".

 

*****************************************

 

We view the world and all it's philosophies through the stained glass window of our personal experience. We decide to accept what our options must be, based on what we think we know has already been.

 

We are individuals who live for a brief moment in time, and attempt to understand during that short moment - all that has been before us; as we endeavor to comprehend what will come after.

 

And all the while, we are told, in an ever increasing deluge of fact and fiction about science; history; religion; and a myriad of other issues - that we have been here so long that it's impossible to ever really know anything for certain; untill we are left with the impression that we might as well say...

 

"eenee - meenee - minee - mo" about practically everything; but especially God.

 

******************************************************************

 

Jesus said "I am the way the truth and the life. No man comes to the Father except by me".

 

People call Jesus a good teacher, even if they don't accept His Divinity, because after all; who can argue with such a (man)?

 

But if Jesus statement about His being the Only way isn't true, He wasn't much of a good teacher.

 

***************************************************************************************

 

So you can try to follow the path of a "good teacher" like Buddah, or Confusious, or any other alternative "teacher" that the world has ever had to offer (and of course the list is virtually endless - including but not limited to; religion, science, metaphysics, etc.,etc., etc.) but unfortunately, they are all still in they're graves. Unless of course they haven't died yet in which case they probably have an awfull lot to say on the subject; and you get to use your free will to choose whether or not to believe them.

 

It's really a beautifull thing!

[sanctus]

Originally posted by: Machina80

I tend to search for the one common interest in all religions then focus on that common belief.

 

You should look into the bahai reliqion, they claim (reducing it to the bones) that all the prophets that existed (Buddha,Mohammed, Jesus and all the the others) were messengers from the same god adapted to the ere where they came to earth.

 

I like very much the bahai believing, because starting from its roots it tries to unify all the believers of any religion. But, I can't force myself to believe, you do it or you don't and I don't: there is lack of proof, but this belongs to another thread.....

[TINNY]

Originally posted by: sanctus

You should look into the bahai reliqion, they claim (reducing it to the bones) that all the prophets that existed (Buddha,Mohammed, Jesus and all the the others) were messengers from the same god adapted to the ere where they came to earth.

 

I like very much the bahai believing, because starting from its roots it tries to unify all the believers of any religion. But, I can't force myself to believe, you do it or you don't and I don't: there is lack of proof, but this belongs to another thread.....

 

This is the first time I've heard of such a major belief.

Yes there is lack of proof. The Qur'an states that Muhammad is the final messenger and that the contents of the Qur'an will be preserved and protected till the end of time. If the Qur'an came from God, then the Baha'i belief is contradictory because Baha'ullah claims to be the last messenger and he claimed that the previous prophets are messengers of God for their times. Plus, if I'm not mistaken, it is does not have its own divine book, all are from the words of him.

[BEAKER]

Isn't Muhammad the decendant of Ishmael, who was Abrahams son - but not the son of promise? Isaac was the son of promise, through whose lineage Jesus was finally born; "at the proper time".

 

Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Freethinker]

Then there was Joseph Smith that was given the Golden Tablets and later still the Urantia.

 

Each makes the same claim. The latest greatest word of typically some all powerful singular entity.

 

And as we see above, all it does is cause conflict between each. And none has anything of substance for validation beyond the claim that their's is the ONLY true one.

 

"Spiritual" paths seem to be painted on the ground by some human (or group there of) with the expectation of others following the arbitrary direction. Any questions that lead one off the path are denegrated as dangerous to survival of the traveller. When in reality it is to the benefit of the traveller to follow the most benefitial path regardless and only the religion suffers because of loss of followers.

 

The biggest problem is the gaurds, often self appointed, that will force, thru threatens including death, those that dare leave any specific path. And also attack those following any other paths.

 

But at it's most basic level:

 

Spirit - from Latin spiritus, literally, breath, from spirare to blow, breathe.

 

Originally a person's spirit was their ability to, and/ or their breath. If you could/ had breath, you were spiritual. Thus your spirit left at death as your ability to breath left.

 

Fortunately at this time I am still very spiritual! And the faster I walk down a path, the more spiritual I become! :-)

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: BEAKER

Isn't Muhammad the decendant of Ishmael, who was Abrahams son - but not the son of promise? Isaac was the son of promise, through whose lineage Jesus was finally born; "at the proper time".

 

Correct me if I'm wrong.

OK I will. With the exception of Muhammad, the rest are all just made up. They do not exist outside of biblical stories.

[sanctus]

Originally posted by: TINNY

 

 

This is the first time I've heard of such a major belief.

Yes there is lack of proof. The Qur'an states that Muhammad is the final messenger and that the contents of the Qur'an will be preserved and protected till the end of time. If the Qur'an came from God, then the Baha'i belief is contradictory because Baha'ullah claims to be the last messenger and he claimed that the previous prophets are messengers of God for their times. Plus, if I'm not mistaken, it is does not have its own divine book, all are from the words of him.

 

 

 

No, this wouldn't mean that the baha'i belief is contradictory! Because, for the people of the time of Muhammad it was neccessary to say that he was the last (as it seemed to be neccessary with Jesus), for the people of today its necceassary to say that Baha'ullah is the last. A neccessity isn't timeless

If you answer by saying that the Qur'an has been written by god (or the bible) then I don't believe you! But we discuss this elsewhere if you want, as it doesn't belong to this post....

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: sanctus

for the people of today its necceassary to say that Baha'ullah is the last.

And the Urantia is even later, which based on your stance, would make it THE accurate source.

[TINNY]

Originally posted by: sanctus

No, this wouldn't mean that the baha'i belief is contradictory!

The bahai acknowledges that the Qur'an is a revelation from god, and the Qur'an explicitly mentions that Muhammad is the last, and that none is after him. So, if the bahai claims he is the last, and still acknowledges the Qur'an, then it is contradictory. Note that it was not Muhammad or his peole who said he was the last.

 

 

for the people of today its necceassary to say that Baha'ullah is the last. A neccessity isn't timeless

sorry, I don't understand what you mean by necessity.

If you answer by saying that the Qur'an has been written by god (or the bible) then I don't believe you

Yes, can argue about htis in another thread which I'm not prepeared to do. The point is, bahai acknowledges the Qur'an, and if he claims he is a messenger, then that is contradictory. Most of the people who claims they are messengers after Muhammad are people of the Shia sect, not the Sunni (which is the majority)

[BEAKER]

With the exception of Muhammad, the rest are all just made up. They do not exist outside of biblical stories.

 

What's your evidence for that?

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: BEAKER

With the exception of Muhammad, the rest are all just made up. They do not exist outside of biblical stories.

What's your evidence for that?

Each and every one of you are part of my "evidence". The fact that not a single one of you can provide even the first shred of contemporary eyewitness confirmation of their existence outside of the source of revelation that makes the claim.

 

Or perhaps I am wrong. Perhaps you are the one to finally provide factual, verifyable, contemporary written eyewitness reports to confirm the existence of these other revelation based mythical stories?

 

I didn't think so.

[BEAKER]

I didn't think so.

 

Check out Josephus; a roman (non Christian) historian who lived around 80 ad.

 

****************************************************************

 

The real question is, "whose gonna chronical your life?"

 

1000 years from now, what proof will there be that you ever existed?

 

Will people carry on the story of your life from generation to generation by word of mouth, and hand written manuscripts through a huge multitude of worshipers who's sole purpose is to pass along your message of love and hope and forgiveness? Will your followers seek to heal the sick and feed the hungry and be willing to give their very lives for the sake of your "cause".?

 

**************************

 

Or will they only say about the few possible artifacts that might still exist to "prove" that you were ever alive..."I don't believe it! Nobody could have ever been that negative".

 

"The legend of Freethinker is nothing more than a myth".

 

100 years from now you'll be lucky if there's enough evidence left of your life for people to say:

 

"He spent his entire life, and all of his great itellect seeking to prove that no intellegence was necessary in the first place".

 

Then he died.

[TINNY]

we're getting off topic here. But hey, FT, what's your reply to beaker?

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: BEAKER

I didn't think so.

Check out Josephus; a roman (non Christian) historian who lived around 80 ad.

Josephus Flavious was born approx 31 CE.

 

Please pay attention to what was requested.

 

1) CONTEMPORARY (living at the same time)

 

2) eyewitness (actually there to see it)

 

3) written report (not someone writing later claiming such and such said such and such)

 

As such Jospehus CAN NOT BE a "contemporary eyewitness".

 

And he did not write about a biblical Jesus the Christ. He DID write about two Joshua's (The actual name, "Jesus" is a Helenized version adopted later) One was a Sea Captain/ Pirate and the other a POLITICAL rabble rouser, son of Sophia, that tried to rob him.

 

Obviously neither was the biblical myth.

 

There is a 3rd mention included in Jospehus's writings of a Jesus, that would support the biblical myths. However it is outright rejected because:

 

1) it does not fit in with the surrounding material, it is out of context and timing

 

2) the writing style is different from everything else Josephus wrote

 

3) it mentions things that happened LATER, that would not have been known at the time it would ahve been written.

 

4) there is no mention of that writting before Eusibus, +300 years later. And Eusibus put in writing that he would intentionally lie to promote his god belief.

The real question is, "whose gonna chronical your life?"

 

1000 years from now, what proof will there be that you ever existed?

Meaningless obfuscation. It is absurd to even suggest the analogy. Suddenly I am as important as a god? (OK not far off!)

 

1) *I*, you or 99.999999% of the population do not do things worth historical notice.

 

2) Jesus was supposedly the ONLY son of a god to ever actually exist. This is not worth writing about?

 

3) there are events which would easily be worth anyone that is chronicalling at the time (and there were many) even in other parts of the world, such as all 2yr old boys slaughtered, the earth standing still, temple splitting in half....NONE of this is written about ANYWHERE outside of the fairytales in the bible.

 

Funny how believers will struggle deperately to claim there IS proof, then hedge their bets by claiming their shouldn't be any!

 

Now do you actually have a

 

CONTEMPORARY, EYEWTINESS, WRITTEN report to confirm the biblical myth of Jesus?

 

 

I didn't think so!

[Freethinker]

Let me add to this, that Josephus DID write about John the Baptist. This makes an interesting case RE writing about actual happenings and what those actual happenings were as seen by someone that DID live close to the time and chronical events.

 

In his mentions of J the B, he does not connect J B with ANY living person of the time. NOTHING about J B promoting anyONE. Obviously J B was NOT pushing the biblical Jesus as is claimed in the bible.

 

Josephus is proof that the biblical Jesus did NOT exist.