|
|
Post by Cambist on Mar 27, 2009 10:02:36 GMT -5
I remember having a conversation some time back about religion and the differences in beliefs, practices, traditions and faiths around the world.
We also discussed similarities between those systems and the times in which religous systems were born.
My question....is God regional? Does God only show him/herself to a certain part of the world? If yes, then why? If no, then does he manifest in regional context?
For instance, God wouldn't show him/herself to Nordic peoples by walking around in sandals and a linen galabiyya?
So the other question is this, for those in the Judeo-Christian Systems, did God give law and/or direction to any other place in the world?
Speak on it.....
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Mar 27, 2009 11:35:19 GMT -5
Hmmmm... is truth regional? Is wisdom regional? Is love regional? Is zero regional? These are the questions I ask myself when contemplating your question and the answer is no. I believe these are manifestations of God (that we puny humans can understand) and they are everywhere- and that would be consistent with an onmi-potent omni-present God.
When I was young once, the question you're raising right now caused my first crisis in faith. We were reading a book about in school about some post-modern day world where society had basically been killed off (by what I can't remember) and a new society started anew. That got me to wondering how would anyone know who God was if the church had disappeared too? If none of the old society was remembered how would they know about God?
IMO we would find God (even if modern society was wiped out) because He would reveal Himself to us as we continued to ask "why?" to the things we saw in and around us. Why is the sky blue? Why are there stars in the sky? Why does grass grow? Why am I here? The desire to know the truth and to seek it is not a regional phenomena. THAT is what I think God gave to everyone - a desire to find the answers to the questions - who or what God sends to us as a messenger to tell us where the answers lie is entirely up to Him. Who that message reaches first is entirely up to Him... but IMO God makes His presence known. Sandals not required. 
|
|
|
|
Post by Noble Work on Mar 27, 2009 12:11:27 GMT -5
Some would say that God is in us and OF us. Thus we carry God within us from region to region. But I don't think God is Regional. Man has certainly had his part in God's doing when it came to the different types of Religions and we are living in the outcomes of it. Mankind has carried god within him but his interpretation of Gods word could be different from the next man.
But to answer:
So the other question is this, for those in the Judeo-Christian Systems, did God give law and/or direction to any other place in the world?
I believe God did give instructions. There are certainly instructions in the Bible. I haven't read the Koran ect...and other books but I really do believe there are sets of instructions in those as well. The may not be the same word for word, some may even be their old World Language, or different dialect but I think they mean the same. They may not be laid out in order or something that will jump out at you or perhaps in the same chapter/story...but I would like to think that God had to put something in there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cambist on Mar 27, 2009 14:01:58 GMT -5
So Damie (aka St. Anselm Jr. LOL)- do you believe God sent messages and messengers to other parts of the world before Moses?
As a Christian (for those who profess that) do you recognize any other religion as valid? Can you?
If not, does that mean that the God of Christianity and the teachings thereof are the only Truth?
|
|
|
|
Post by huey on Mar 27, 2009 14:43:34 GMT -5
So Damie (aka St. Anselm Jr. LOL)- do you believe God sent messages and messengers to other parts of the world before Moses? As a Christian (for those who profess that) do you recognize any other religion as valid? Can you? If not, does that mean that the God of Christianity and the teachings thereof are the only Truth? I can't speak for Christians, but in Islam it is the belief that God sent messages and messengers to other parts of the world before Moses. Some prophets we know of and are named in the Koran, Bible, etc, some we do not know. But that doesn't mean any other religion is valid, just like Muslims don't accept Christianity as 100 % valid. |
|
|
|
Post by Cambist on Mar 27, 2009 14:51:18 GMT -5
Thanks huey...
So Islam recognizes that God sent messages to other parts of the world and that those messages, although they come from the same God, are not universal?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kryptik on Mar 27, 2009 15:20:20 GMT -5
I too think that God has sent "messages and messengers" to ALL of his people, the only problem is that man has messed up, lost, or confused his teachings.
|
|
|
|
Post by huey on Mar 27, 2009 15:42:35 GMT -5
Cam, it's kinda more in line in what Kryptik is saying. Speaking of Moses, the story of The Sin of the Calf showcases why.
"When Moses went up onto Mount Sinai to receive the Ten Commandments (Exodus 19:20), he left the Israelites for forty days and forty nights (Exodus 24:18). The Israelites feared that he would not return and asked Aaron to make gods for them (Exodus 32:1). Aaron complied and gathered up the Israelites' golden earrings. He melted them and constructed the golden calf. Aaron also built an altar before the calf. and the next day, the Israelites made offerings and celebrated."
From Wikipedia.
When the messenger leaves, it doesn't take long before people go astray, people distort, add to or take from the messenger's teachings.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kryptik on Mar 27, 2009 15:52:01 GMT -5
Exactly Huey...
If you examine the teachings of most of the World's religions you find that there are so many similar themes, teachings, and beliefs that one can't easily say that they did not either influence each other or grow from the same roots.
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Mar 27, 2009 18:19:26 GMT -5
So Damie (aka St. Anselm Jr. LOL)- do you believe God sent messages and messengers to other parts of the world before Moses? As a Christian (for those who profess that) do you recognize any other religion as valid? Can you? If not, does that mean that the God of Christianity and the teachings thereof are the only Truth?
To answer your second question - I don't believe ANY religion is valid. As you recall there was a pretty well established "religion" already in place when Jesus arrived - and IT was part of the problem.
Jesus' teaching leads to compassion. Religion leads to ritual.
Jesus' teaching leads to obedience. Religion leads to ritual.
Jesus' teaching leads to mercy. Religion leads to ritual.
Jesus' teaching leads to love. Religion leads to ritual.
Seeing a pattern? Consider Luke 6:7
Luke 6:7
The Pharisees and the teachers of the law were looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, so they watched him closely to see if he would heal on the Sabbath.
The religion the Pharisees followed could only impart ritual. The ritual said you don't do labor on the Sabbath. In breaking from ritual Jesus takes actions that demonstrates compassion, obedience to God, mercy and love. Now which one of these is the true foot-print of Christian-Judeo principles? The teachings or the religion?
I say all that to say Jesus started no religion... He simply taught... we (humans) created religion around those teachings ( emphasizing rules instead of relationships). To try to answer your question I say no teachings that are contrary to what Jesus taught are true. This will put me at odds with some Christians because the bible obviously contains more than just Jesus' teachings - and while I do not reject other books of the bible - the only ones I hold as absolute truth are the teachings of Jesus. Anyone or anything contrary to that - is contrary - PERIOD.
So what do YOU say Cam? Is God regional? Do you think if you're a decent person that that's enough? Do you think that religions around the world merely represent different paths to the same destination?
|
|
|
|
Post by Cambist on Mar 28, 2009 1:21:07 GMT -5
So what do YOU say Cam? Is God regional?1 Do you think if you're a decent person that that's enough?2 Do you think that religions around the world merely represent different paths to the same destination?3
1. No. God can no more be "regional" than the chemical formula for water is regional. Pure water has not taste or odor but how often does pure water exist in nature? God cannot be "regional" because God is.....God exists without chemical formula or molecular makeup. There can be no difference between God in Ancient Egypt and God in Ancient China. God existed in the teachings of the ancient Native Americans the same way he existed in the Ancient parts of what is now the Middle East. God is and has always been the same. The interpretation of God is the only thing that changes. Religion is mans way of organizing and making sense of God sense of God. To man, God is a construct and Religion is it's manifestation...an interpretation of how we should EXPERIENCE God. Therefore, like all social practices, it is and can only be explained through our experience and the limits by which humans can comprehend a concept such as God. So is God regional? No. Is the understanding of God regional? Of course. 2. Decent person? That's really ambiguous. To some, I could be decent if I don't kill someone regardless of the fact that i'm stingy and keep to myself. I do no harm so therefore i'm decent. Do I think that our works and our interaction with humanity is important? Yes. With that, I understand that as Christians, there is a requirement to not only DO the work of Christ but also to believe and confess. So the Christian answer to your question would be no. The question I have is, do you think that everyone who doesn't accept by professing His divinity is doomed to burn in the dreadful lake of fire?My answer would be no. 3. Do I believe that different religions are merely different routes to the same destination? Hmmm...that's kinda the point of the original questions in the thread...to get people to answer this question. The hard answer would be yes. I believe that in the end, we all will come "before" God....whatever that state or place may be. In the end, we will find out who was right and who was wrong and noone wants to be on the wrong side. Personally, I don't feel like there is a wrong side of love and it is there that God exists. He must or else all Christianity means nothing. Mercy is a function of love. Grace is a function of love. So God does not just promote love....God IS love. If in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God then God represents the most basic fundamental element in existance. Look at the beliefs of the most primitave of humans. They all exist FOR EACH OTHER. That communal property of life is, in my most humble opinion, the fundamentals of any God. I don't believe that God intended to make things so complicated that the dumbest of us had to ask someone else to help us to understand. Humans, if left alone, should find, in their resting state, God. Period. IMMHO, God is not complicated. God is not convoluted and difficult. We even admit that in our complicated religious "speak". Most Christians will tell you that when times got tough they had to "let go" or "give it up to God". They stop relying "on their own understanding" and start "leaning on God". We let go. So..... God is the Alpha and Omega...truly. He is the beginning and end meaning that he is before and after our understanding. Even the fool can hear his voice and maybe the fool can hear is better because he doesn't have much clouding his "vision" or hearing. Religion, as you stated is ritual. As I said earlier, religion is our interpretation of how we SHOULD experience God. That's all. |
|
|
|
Post by water on Mar 29, 2009 2:32:59 GMT -5
Yahshua Himself said: "I Am the Way, the Truth, and Life. NO MAN comes to Yahweh/God except through Me." (John 14:6 JNT)  |
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Mar 29, 2009 14:44:01 GMT -5
Aetheism and Agnosticism are belief systems too Cam. Those are interpretations based on the limited comprehension of man as well... do these paths lead to God also? I hear you when you say that the interpretation of God is the only thing that changes... but in the context in which you're examining it I would submit to you that it's also the only thing that matters. You give the same map to 20 different people who interpret it 20 different ways they'll end up 20 different places even though there is only ONE map. Having the same map does NOT necessarily put you in the same destination.
I do not hold that other religions necessarily represent different paths to the same God based on my belief that works do not necessarily articulate rationales. For example - the Christian motivation for feeding the hungry is far different than the Political motivation for feeding the hungry and I believe it makes a difference.
But your question was about acceptance of Jesus divinity and lakes of fire <insert slippery slope>. In attempting to answer your question I eventually asked myself, "What belief system espouses an alternative to itself?" The more I thought about it the more entangled it became. For example: you believe that all paths lead to God, could you also accept an alternative to that? The alternative is that NOT all paths lead to God. So it seems either you retain your original belief or you reject the alternative - they cannot both be true. Do I see the point you're driving at - yes, but the critique you're elevating becomes circuitous and applies to EVERY system (not just belief systems but systems in general) because they ALL have criterion - they ALL prescribe something.
If a man lives up to all the principles and ideas of being an Alpha is he an Alpha? He can go to every community service event you go to, and live an upstanding life, have many achievements, serve the community etc. - but when it comes time to have a chapter meeting can he attend? Can he participate in an Alpha step team? Can he chant? Can he vote? The next question you might ask is what really makes an Alpha? Is is just the ritual or is it something more? On the question does action trump ideology - you simply chase your tail until you get tired or just decide it's some combination of both answers.
However to at long last answer your question I believe that anyone that rejects Jesus is doomed.
Just because God is not regional doesn't mean He doesn't have order.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cambist on Mar 30, 2009 9:12:05 GMT -5
However to at long last answer your question I believe that anyone that rejects Jesus is doomed.
So one doesn't necessarily have to accept Him, just not reject Him? Wouldn't you reject by default if you failed to accept?
Just because God is not regional doesn't mean He doesn't have order.
Order? Of course but my question stems from the idea that primitave beliefs outdate Christianity by thousands, tens of thousands and maybe millions of years.
To say that a system that has only existed for 2k (in the case of Christianity) and possibly 3600 for Judaism is the only "right" path for all people around the world is presumptuous to be kind but more like belligerently arrogant on behalf of the system itself. <my opinion of course>
Don't get me wrong, i'm not saying that any system is invalid. I'm only saying that for us to believe that God came to one part of the world and offered the only means of "salvation" in the form of a single person and then wrote the instructions in a regional context.....can we not assume that God did the same thing in China 50,000 years ago?
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Mar 30, 2009 16:19:44 GMT -5
I've been thinking about it all this weekend trying to reason this through. Then Cam you mentioned God is love. So I'll repeat that I believe if you reject Jesus then you are doomed. If that sounds presumptious ... replace Jesus with love.
If you reject love you are doomed. Do you disagree with that?
If you reject wisdom you are doomed. Do you disagree with that?
If you reject mercy you are doomed. Any disagreements?
If you reject compassion you are doomed. Any disagreements?
Any of those sound belligerently arrogant? As to the chronology of pre-existing system's of belief: alchemy predates Metallurgy... if the design of your airplane was to be based on one - which would you choose? Blood letting predates most Modern Medicine in disease prevention - which one would you want to bet on?
Some might argue that essentially you are. Each system prescribes something for the adherant and purports to teach some truth. The absolute reality is that either a system conveys the truth or it doesn't. They cannot offer the truth AND an alternative at the same time. The alternative to the truth is falsehood. This is a zero sum game... if one path is "The Way" by definition the other paths are NOT. To any non-adherant to that system the presumptive arrogance OF that system is already built in. And correct me if I'm wrong - it is on that basis that you make your protest now - is it not?
Your assertion above puts you on that slippery slope as well my friend. Let me ask you this: On what basis do you assert that there is only one God? Your argument seems to discount polytheistic systems (which predate your own belief system) - on what basis do you do this? Can we not assume that earth is actually just a tenament with different deity landlords who take turns watching over humanity with the lease turning over each millenia or so and that's why we have so many religions?
|
|
|
|
Post by Cambist on Mar 31, 2009 7:48:25 GMT -5
Your argument is assuming that there is a universal belief (across different religions) that Jesus = God. It's begging the question when you assert that by rejecting or not accepting Jesus is rejecting God and therefore rejecting Love itself. If one is a follower of a belief system that has a different concept of God, then they cannot accept Jesus = God and therefore Jesus may not be the personification of Love. I would absolutely agree that religious systems are governed by absolutism. If you are a Christian and you accept the Bible as inerrant and infallible then you MUST accept that a failure to accept Jesus is to be doomed. I agree. The PATH or as you stated, "The Way" requires a follower to commit. Where I disagree is with the notion that truth, itself, is the path. Truth, in my opinion, is the destination and each path to that destination is sprinkled with some truth but does not represent Truth itself. I would even go as far as to say that what people believe is "THE END" may not necessarily be accurate. How can it be? No one who has been there has ever come back to make report. That is unless you count Jesus and that's where the discussion becomes circular. We can enter into a discussion where polytheism is real if you wish but I am enjoying the comfort of the premise that we are discussing monotheistic systems. So I am still of the belief that there is one God, one absolute TRUTH. Interestingly, many polytheistic systems have a supreme god and then "minor" gods that are, or could be interpreted as, expressions of an aspect of that supreme god moreso than individual sovereigns. Much like the Holy Spirit does not act in a capacity that is sovereign from God. |
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Mar 31, 2009 10:58:28 GMT -5
To clarify I am assuming no univeral belief at all - only my own. It's not that I don't understand your argument - I just don't understand where or why it's relevant.
Belief systems are governed by absolutism. From a logical framework, believing Jesus is the only way is no more ridiculous than believing every path is the way. So then what is the point?
You mentioned I was begging the question earlier in equating Jesus to God and God to love. For my part, I note that the title of your thread is "Is God Regional". Doesn't that presuppose that there is just one, or even one at all? Anything you conclude based on what you believe, by definition, begs the question to the non-believer - regardless of the belief system. An atheist would read this thread and say the entire THING begs the question. That being the case - what is the point? *Not said in a snarky way - seriously - what is the point*
|
|
|
|
Post by water on Mar 31, 2009 23:46:29 GMT -5
Is God regional? Yes he is that is if Your God is Satan....
|
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Apr 1, 2009 22:18:32 GMT -5
Well personally I feel "God" is Universal. More time than not Man has created God in an attempt to make sense of his ignorance as in concern to the origins of Life and Death. Now you have 2 paths that you see in these series of attempts to make sense of this ignorance. One path is through erecting a benevolent body as submission to those who have created this world. Usually there is one or a successive priesthood of Leaders whom supposedly have been in contact with the "God" or "Gods". To prove themselves they bend and or break a few the laws(sometimes using trickery and are not breaking anything at all) man are bound to in this physical world. They sometimes use ritual sacrifices as offerings etc. Your stories are then passed on and a promise is given for all who have faith that they too will receive this "knowledge" When in reality the makers of this path are "hoping" the designers of this realm will reveal themselves. Over time the makers realize they can have power over the adherents just as the designers do over man and the path becomes one of domination over the people. Lastly to spread the path it is usually done with the sword. The path makers still hold out hope that the designers will reveal themselves but in the mean time they live as kings and queens with abundance of resources bestowed upon them by the people. They fear no reprisal of breaking any of the laws contained in the path as they are but mere submissive symbolism to get the designers to reveal themselves. You also see path makers within the path copy or sometimes destroy a path to make another.
The second and older less traveled path encompasses at one end none but at the other some if not all of the aforementioned but this path is more so a rebellion. You sometimes find traces of this in pockets of the first path as well. The makers of this path seek to bend and or break every law and rule of the physical realm. This is attempted so that the designers seeing disorder in what they have built manifest to patch the loopholes and reveal the truth. See when I look at Kemet and the Pyramids I see it as a fuck you gesture to the designers. It is a symbol of rebellion that we have a piece of your wisdom and here is the proof. We have done what you have in "heaven" and made it manifest on earth. fuck you. We speak to the dead with the Opening of the Mouth...again fuck You. IFA, Vudu, Obeah, Akan, Dogon all a big fuck you to the designers. We start watching and counting the stars the moon the sun we develop math from the heavens and the one amongst us whom is the female( which is why the female is seen as the sacred feminine her clock naturally in tune with various phenomenon of the cosmos so they in some circles are synonymous). So this path bends and breaks the laws but still has not the answer to the age old questions.. Why do these laws exist in the first place? Why are we here? Where are we going? Why are we going? Do we go at all? Are we here right now? Is this real? Can I trust the five senses I have to know what is real and what isn't? If I can then why can't my five senses "see" the designers?
Both paths Man will and has become beset with greed. Greed to the point that the path of his construction is the right and only path. Greed also by hiding the true nature and foundations in which the knowledge that he has comes from. This is not but an attempt to be the sole receiver of the truth when the designers reveal themselves. Just another form of control and practice emulating what the designers do to man, man then seeks to do to his fellow man as well. Use the unseen to keep the people ignorant.
So do I think "God" is universal... As per my above definition... Yes I do. Do I believe those who are amongst the designers have broken ranks at times to help man along with bits and pieces of info? Surely do. The cold vein is in the end the above questions and many more are not answered. The sciences that we have and coordinates are hypothesis and haven't been confirmed by the maker of this existence. We may know how to break and bend laws but we still don't know why they exist and from whence they have came. As long as this exists then we will continue to see man and his series of attempts to make sense of this ignorance. Which path will you decide to take? Will you submit or rebel?
I figure whats worse than conscious ignorance? Not even torture or death for infinity is worse. Therefore I choose to side in the rebellion. It is a better shot than submitting and using "faith" hoping that truth will be revealed.
|
|
|
|
Post by LogAKAlly <3'n Keef on Apr 2, 2009 8:58:54 GMT -5
:lurks:
|
|
|
|
Post by Oldskool on Apr 2, 2009 10:54:00 GMT -5
<-------lurking with log n'em
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Apr 2, 2009 10:56:11 GMT -5
Well personally I feel "God" is Universal. More time than not Man has created God in an attempt to make sense of his ignorance as in concern to the origins of Life and Death. Now you have 2 paths that you see in these series of attempts to make sense of this ignorance. One path is through erecting a benevolent body as submission to those who have created this world. Usually there is one or a successive priesthood of Leaders whom supposedly have been in contact with the "God" or "Gods". To prove themselves they bend and or break a few the laws(sometimes using trickery and are not breaking anything at all) man are bound to in this physical world. They sometimes use ritual sacrifices as offerings etc. Your stories are then passed on and a promise is given for all who have faith that they too will receive this "knowledge" When in reality the makers of this path are "hoping" the designers of this realm will reveal themselves. Over time the makers realize they can have power over the adherents just as the designers do over man and the path becomes one of domination over the people. Lastly to spread the path it is usually done with the sword. The path makers still hold out hope that the designers will reveal themselves but in the mean time they live as kings and queens with abundance of resources bestowed upon them by the people. They fear no reprisal of breaking any of the laws contained in the path as they are but mere submissive symbolism to get the designers to reveal themselves. You also see path makers within the path copy or sometimes destroy a path to make another.
The second and older less traveled path encompasses at one end none but at the other some if not all of the aforementioned but this path is more so a rebellion. You sometimes find traces of this in pockets of the first path as well. The makers of this path seek to bend and or break every law and rule of the physical realm. This is attempted so that the designers seeing disorder in what they have built manifest to patch the loopholes and reveal the truth. See when I look at Kemet and the Pyramids I see it as a fuck you gesture to the designers. It is a symbol of rebellion that we have a piece of your wisdom and here is the proof. We have done what you have in "heaven" and made it manifest on earth. fuck you. We speak to the dead with the Opening of the Mouth...again fuck You. IFA, Vudu, Obeah, Akan, Dogon all a big fuck you to the designers. We start watching and counting the stars the moon the sun we develop math from the heavens and the one amongst us whom is the female( which is why the female is seen as the sacred feminine her clock naturally in tune with various phenomenon of the cosmos so they in some circles are synonymous). So this path bends and breaks the laws but still has not the answer to the age old questions.. Why do these laws exist in the first place? Why are we here? Where are we going? Why are we going? Do we go at all? Are we here right now? Is this real? Can I trust the five senses I have to know what is real and what isn't? If I can then why can't my five senses "see" the designers?
Both paths Man will and has become beset with greed. Greed to the point that the path of his construction is the right and only path. Greed also by hiding the true nature and foundations in which the knowledge that he has comes from. This is not but an attempt to be the sole receiver of the truth when the designers reveal themselves. Just another form of control and practice emulating what the designers do to man, man then seeks to do to his fellow man as well. Use the unseen to keep the people ignorant.
So do I think "God" is universal... As per my above definition... Yes I do. Do I believe those who are amongst the designers have broken ranks at times to help man along with bits and pieces of info? Surely do. The cold vein is in the end the above questions and many more are not answered. The sciences that we have and coordinates are hypothesis and haven't been confirmed by the maker of this existence. We may know how to break and bend laws but we still don't know why they exist and from whence they have came. As long as this exists then we will continue to see man and his series of attempts to make sense of this ignorance. Which path will you decide to take? Will you submit or rebel?
I figure whats worse than conscious ignorance? Not even torture or death for infinity is worse. Therefore I choose to side in the rebellion. It is a better shot than submitting and using "faith" hoping that truth will be revealed.
Question: If the answers are not revealed by rebellion or submission - what are they revealed by? |
|
|
|
Post by LogAKAlly <3'n Keef on Apr 2, 2009 10:59:37 GMT -5
<-------lurking with log n'em <~<~hands OldSkool a bag of Lays |
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Apr 2, 2009 11:58:08 GMT -5
Well personally I feel "God" is Universal. More time than not Man has created God in an attempt to make sense of his ignorance as in concern to the origins of Life and Death. Now you have 2 paths that you see in these series of attempts to make sense of this ignorance. One path is through erecting a benevolent body as submission to those who have created this world. Usually there is one or a successive priesthood of Leaders whom supposedly have been in contact with the "God" or "Gods". To prove themselves they bend and or break a few the laws(sometimes using trickery and are not breaking anything at all) man are bound to in this physical world. They sometimes use ritual sacrifices as offerings etc. Your stories are then passed on and a promise is given for all who have faith that they too will receive this "knowledge" When in reality the makers of this path are "hoping" the designers of this realm will reveal themselves. Over time the makers realize they can have power over the adherents just as the designers do over man and the path becomes one of domination over the people. Lastly to spread the path it is usually done with the sword. The path makers still hold out hope that the designers will reveal themselves but in the mean time they live as kings and queens with abundance of resources bestowed upon them by the people. They fear no reprisal of breaking any of the laws contained in the path as they are but mere submissive symbolism to get the designers to reveal themselves. You also see path makers within the path copy or sometimes destroy a path to make another.
The second and older less traveled path encompasses at one end none but at the other some if not all of the aforementioned but this path is more so a rebellion. You sometimes find traces of this in pockets of the first path as well. The makers of this path seek to bend and or break every law and rule of the physical realm. This is attempted so that the designers seeing disorder in what they have built manifest to patch the loopholes and reveal the truth. See when I look at Kemet and the Pyramids I see it as a fuck you gesture to the designers. It is a symbol of rebellion that we have a piece of your wisdom and here is the proof. We have done what you have in "heaven" and made it manifest on earth. fuck you. We speak to the dead with the Opening of the Mouth...again fuck You. IFA, Vudu, Obeah, Akan, Dogon all a big fuck you to the designers. We start watching and counting the stars the moon the sun we develop math from the heavens and the one amongst us whom is the female( which is why the female is seen as the sacred feminine her clock naturally in tune with various phenomenon of the cosmos so they in some circles are synonymous). So this path bends and breaks the laws but still has not the answer to the age old questions.. Why do these laws exist in the first place? Why are we here? Where are we going? Why are we going? Do we go at all? Are we here right now? Is this real? Can I trust the five senses I have to know what is real and what isn't? If I can then why can't my five senses "see" the designers?
Both paths Man will and has become beset with greed. Greed to the point that the path of his construction is the right and only path. Greed also by hiding the true nature and foundations in which the knowledge that he has comes from. This is not but an attempt to be the sole receiver of the truth when the designers reveal themselves. Just another form of control and practice emulating what the designers do to man, man then seeks to do to his fellow man as well. Use the unseen to keep the people ignorant.
So do I think "God" is universal... As per my above definition... Yes I do. Do I believe those who are amongst the designers have broken ranks at times to help man along with bits and pieces of info? Surely do. The cold vein is in the end the above questions and many more are not answered. The sciences that we have and coordinates are hypothesis and haven't been confirmed by the maker of this existence. We may know how to break and bend laws but we still don't know why they exist and from whence they have came. As long as this exists then we will continue to see man and his series of attempts to make sense of this ignorance. Which path will you decide to take? Will you submit or rebel?
I figure whats worse than conscious ignorance? Not even torture or death for infinity is worse. Therefore I choose to side in the rebellion. It is a better shot than submitting and using "faith" hoping that truth will be revealed.
Question: If the answers are not revealed by rebellion or submission - what are they revealed by? |
|
|
|
Post by Kryptik on Apr 2, 2009 15:45:42 GMT -5
You guys have all made some great points...
I personally feel, just from a purely academic point of view, that "God" has to be "Regional". The reason I say this is that when we consider "God", everyone's view can differ. Even if we subscribe to a particular faith, our personal walks with God will always vary from others of the same faith. Of all the religions in the world, I dare say that you couldn't find two individual followers that had the same "understanding" of, or relationship with "God", meaning that in actuality "God" would be different for each individual... thus "Regional".
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Apr 2, 2009 15:54:56 GMT -5
Interesting take...
Question: If the answers are not revealed by rebellion or submission - what are they revealed by? Every choice is at least binary - to act or not to act... thus doing nothing is still a choice (in my eyes). I don't know if that's what you call indifference - but I would just call that inaction. I don't know that that leads to the truth either. Would it be fair to say we can:
Submit to the truth
Rebel from the truth
Be indifferent to the truth
If so why so? If not why not? |
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Apr 2, 2009 17:51:03 GMT -5
I can honestly say I don't know... I mean everything is but a binary choice correct? To me indifference isn't a third option but more of a lukewarm attempt to cover both choices at the foundation and side with the winner. Every choice is at least binary - to act or not to act... thus doing nothing is still a choice (in my eyes). I don't know if that's what you call indifference - but I would just call that inaction. I don't know that that leads to the truth either. Would it be fair to say we can:
Submit to the truth
Rebel from the truth
Be indifferent to the truth
If so why so? If not why not? |
|
|
|
Post by Cambist on Apr 2, 2009 20:10:14 GMT -5
If you had a choice to accept Jesus, reject Jesus or just be indifferent.....is there a difference between one's indifference and rejection?
If we are/were discussing a fraternity meeting the indifference may have a different character but in the sense of a religious choice....one leading to a mode of salvation then (IMHO) indifference = de facto rejection...or failure to accept.
Example: Reign sticks his fist out to Cold for dap. Cold has 3 choices, two of which have the same consequences.
1. Accept Reigns offer of friendly dap
2. Tell Reign to take his dap and DIP!
3. Simply do nothing- essentially leaving Reign hanging
By refusing to accept he has rejected Reigns offer.
Also, by purposfully ignoring Reign, he has also rejected Reigns offer.
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Apr 2, 2009 22:51:59 GMT -5
Every choice is at least binary - to act or not to act... thus doing nothing is still a choice (in my eyes). I don't know if that's what you call indifference - but I would just call that inaction. I don't know that that leads to the truth either. Would it be fair to say we can:
Submit to the truth
Rebel from the truth
Be indifferent to the truth
If so why so? If not why not? |
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Apr 2, 2009 23:23:25 GMT -5
If you had a choice to accept Jesus, reject Jesus or just be indifferent.....is there a difference between one's indifference and rejection? If we are/were discussing a fraternity meeting the indifference may have a different character but in the sense of a religious choice....one leading to a mode of salvation then (IMHO) indifference = de facto rejection...or failure to accept. Example: Reign sticks his fist out to Cold for dap. Cold has 3 choices, two of which have the same consequences. 1. Accept Reigns offer of friendly dap 2. Tell Reign to take his dap and DIP! 3. Simply do nothing- essentially leaving Reign hanging By refusing to accept he has rejected Reigns offer. Also, by purposfully ignoring Reign, he has also rejected Reigns offer.
Example... I can walk 2 steps forward, or I can NOT walk 2 steps forward... but that is not the same as walking 2 steps back. The binary of an act, is to do the act, or not do the act... the opposite act is NOT apart of a default binary.
But even that's not what you're talking about. You seem to be talking cause and effect, and equating cause based on effect
A results in Z
B results in X
C results in X
Therefore B is C.
And of course that's a logical fallacy. If B is shooting yourself in the brain and C is allowing yourself to be beheaded the acts are vastly different even though the result is likely to be the same. Thus indifference and rejection are not the same act because they result in a similar outcome.
To make the case that one is de facto the other (based on consequence) you have to beg the question yet again. If you are an atheist, what is rebellion, submission, or indifference to you? They result in the same consequence in your mind and that is, "NO consequence". Can we then logically conclude that they are in fact synonymous with one another? No we can't. It depends on what belief system you already adhere to.
Want an example without an atheist? Alright... Cam... do YOU believe you can indifferent to what the Bible says about salvation through Jesus alone and still receive God? Would YOU assert that you have rejected Jesus in the process?
|
|
