mix-and-match spirituality

Namasté Sacredstar,

Thanks for sharing that insight; you know, I never thought of that, but your statement about Jesus makes a lot of sense! Jesus DID vibrate at an extremely high frequency--to prove it, one of the Apostles try to approach him after His resurrection and he couldn't.

When Jesus said, "I am in this world but not of this world", I think it was wise advice that He taught all of us, notably, that we should belong in this world, but not to confuse this with identifying with the world". Another way of saying this is to say that we are spiritual beings on a human journey--we are experiencing what it is to be human, but not to confuse our identity with worldly affairs, whatever they may be.
 
Dear Ryuuko

Oh I so agree.

Also the illusion of death etc......

The more research that I have done, the more sure I am that the church fathers did not truly understand the deeper meaning of many of the teachings, so they were left and continued to be shrouded in mystery in the lost gospels. I read in one of St. Jerome's letters that the purpose of the bible was to show the reason for the Life of Jesus and the resurrection. Hence why it concentrates on prophecy, revelation and sin.

I imagine this is the reason that important teachings were swept aside. The bible compilers never had the original intent of concentrating on the wisdom that Jesus conveyed.

I love this quote from the Gospel of Truth

"For you are the Gnosis of the heart that is manifest"

Do I view a Reiki symbol?

Love beyond measure

Sacredstar
 
Namasté Sacredstar,

This may or may not be a bit aside, but what upset me the most about Gibson's The Passion was a reminder that Christians will often place far greater emphasis on Jesus' final hours on this earth versus the 30 years of teachings that He left behind. To illustrate this, why do we not have any account of His teachings during the 30 years of His life? The Bible briefly describes Jesus baffling the greatest scholars at a very young age, and then unfortunately we know very little until the last year or so of His life. I would much rather see a big-budget Jesus movie that showed His life than a horrifying, grueling depiction of His crucifixion.

The Bible, as with all sacred texts, contain levels of truth accessible to anyone that is willing to learn more about it. As you've mentioned, I also think that the Bible has teachings that are only surfacing today. It also makes me wonder what we'll find in the next ten years!

And yes, that is a Reiki symbol. :D
 
"For you are the Gnosis of the heart that is manifest."

That is the 'heart' of the matter! Well quoted Sacred...

All faith is of the heart. It is personal. It resides within the affective nature and nurture of the individual. It necessitates no proof or evidence beyond self in the material world, beyond the observed actions of the individual which others can judge as they will. If it had 'proofs' beyond the personal affirmation and validation within the individual, there in fact would be no necessity for the word 'Faith'. The 'matter' would be objective fact.
;)
 
Gibson's The Passion

You are quite right about this R.

All I see in it is evidence for Gibson's own peculiar fundamentalist religious views and a sadistic concentration upon physical violence to the detriment of all else that can be appreciated of the purported life and sayings of Jesus of Nazareth.
 
mix-and-match spirituality to the roots

I'm not to hot on that film either. There are some crazy films out there. What I would like to say is somewhat not of the matter or of the point. It relates to the mix and match issue.

Lets go back up the thread to Vajradhara's post.
I admit I am taking this quote out of its original context, but i'm trying to focus on one aspect of Vajradhara's post
what is the purpose in picking teachings from within a certain religious context, removing them from said context, and integrating them within a completely different ideology? i confess that i do not really know what the purpose of engaging in this behavior is.
Click to expand...
I would argue that everyones context is different. Plus everyones context is constantly changing. Therefore I don't think everyone can fit into a religious context unless we change it in the same way we have changed. What i'm trying to say - without using the word context - is that religions fit into a certan time just as Vajradhara's post fits into a certan thread but if we change some words around or write it out differently we can be saying the same thing but in a different way. This is in the same way as different religions say different things in different ways but may mean the same thing.

For me (who seems to have started as a spiritualist and then got more and more rational as the days went by) For me things that make sense like science - when you understand it - Are truths. The fact that when I press this # on a keyboard that it comes up on the screen is a Truth and I can make my opinions based on what I know to be true. Sometimes I just don't see the point on the balance of life on the scales of

1. Things that make your life worth living
and
2. Things that make your life really bad

of having practices which someone has told you Do help you get 1, when actually you find they give you 2. But I suppose that's the risk. Thats what learning involves. You find someone you trust and you do what exercises they say and if you find your getting too much of 2 and too little of 1 you stop trusting them and you want to stop your lessons. Plain and simple.

For me probably because I have a stable family (not horses) with everything I really need available I don't have the same context of hardship and insecurity as other people did who took up different religions. For example Black americans who picked up christianity when they were brought to the USA by force will have a different experience of Christianity that I can never have. Therefore however much I might listern to their preachings I just won't be getting all the comfort and safe feelings to know that God Loves Me.

Thats alot for me to chew on so you people can probably pick it up in no time. If you want you can mix and match what i've said and quote me out of context. :D

Peace
 
Dear Ryuuko

Agreed with all that you say.

I couldn't bare to watch the film, I am waiting for the two Jesus and Magdalene films to come out next year. Historical romance is much more my line of film then killing and violence. Seriously though I feel this film as caused more trouble then the money that it earnt. I can just imagine God with his chin on his hands saying 'boring'.....big smiles! From what I hear it has caused a lot of rift and separation. I was thinking last night, that I could not think of anywhere in the UK, that I could not live, but yet in ths US I could not live in the bible belt. I count my blessings and I look forward to seeing films of unity, caring, sharing and the true heart and the love of Jesus. 'When two or more come together in my name I will be among them'

Ah...we have the power of the universe here now!

Dear Blue

Agreed

Dear Kaspar

Great post thank you for sharing.

I must share this, tonight young children came and sang Christmas carols on my doorstep and it really warmed my heart on this cold winters night in the UK. A blessing indeed!

Love beyond measure

Sacredstar
 
An excellent response, I thought, Painter.

There is no question of mix and matching.

Spiritual responses are always ruled by the affective nature and nurture of the individual. If something in Taoist thought, or Buddhism appeals and gels with a personal affective aspect of an individual, it does; if it doesn't, it doesn't. (very 'Soph' like don't you think?)

It is only by seeking out similarities in spiritual responses that any advances will ever made from blind dogmas and doctrines, so often based in half understood translations of ancient texts from the Middle East and elsewhere.

;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top