Discussion in 'Belief and Spirituality' started by KnowSelf, Dec 15, 2019.
Can't avoid original sin?
I'll take a strawberry shake with two helpings of guilt.
Guilt? Sorry for living?
We cannot avoid killing in order to live, but we can tread lightly? We cannot just disregard the idea of original sin?
And sometimes the tiny creatures kill us.
Yours is an unusual twist on the concept, one I haven't encountered before. I've seen you write about it but never understood you in this context.
I have some difficulty fitting it into my mental picture of Christianity, though. Who committed this sin, then? It is very straightforward to put the blame at the creator's feet, who arranged it all to be this way, no? How does it work within Christianity?
It is expressed in the story of Adam, after some event in a spiritual dimension, Man was born into nature, into a 'coat of skin.' The idea of sin/guilt is an addition by inference. In fact sin is what separates Man from God? Most Christians don't like my 'take'. But there it is, lol?
Thanks! I love this place. So many takes on existence.
Jesus opened the door to salvation and through His sacrifice all who believe they are forgiven are forgiven. it is interesting that one must believe in Jesus and believe they are forgiven to reap the benefits of salvation. I support RJM that sin block our relationship to God and Jesus forgives that our relationship to God is restored
I fully agree with all of that. I believe that Jesus was a Manifestation of God who was both divine and human and as such He could bridge the gap between God and man, bring them together.
I do not believe Jesus was "just" a prophet or a Messenger; Jesus was more than that because Jesus spoke as the Voice of God. But I believe that Jesus was also a Messenger of God, since Jesus brought a message to humanity.
I believe in the promises in the Bible and that there will be a Kingdom of God built on earth, so in the future there will be a completely different world than we see today where justice and equity will prevail. I believe that humans will build that world, brick by brick.
I also believe that this world is a testing place and a place to learn and become enlightened but I do not believe there will ever be an end to suffering in this world because suffering is inherent in a material world. The best we can do is try to rise above the suffering by focusing on the spiritual rather than the material, which is the cause of most suffering.
In a sense I believe the same thing. It is our physical nature that leads us to sin. Our spiritual nature is purely good.
Will the new world where justice prevails, built by humans, still be subject to suffering? Not sure I got that correctly.
There will be a lot less suffering when economic as well as social justice prevails, but there will always be 'some' suffering in a material world because the material world is the source of most suffering. Maybe this will help explain what I am trying to say:
PAIN AND SORROW
Thank you. Yes we do seem broadly to have a common understanding, except the building a perfect fair world thing, which I believe is the work of politics and sociology etc, not religion. I am strongly against theocratic government, much less world government?
The Buddhist attitude is that suffering comes from desire. Freedom from desire is inner peace. From that place inside, good comes. I think?
Its a bit like Christ's advice to take the block out of my own eye before trying to take the splinter out of my neighbour's eye.
Many people strongly believe their own faith is the right one. But the attempt to rule it on others is the cause of huge problems?
I also agree the work will be accomplished by sociologists and politicians although I believe they might adopt some of the principles set forth by my religion, and future governments might be patterned after the institutions the Baha'i Faith has established. Any changes that take place in the future would be strictly voluntary, never imposed or brought about by force. It would not be a theocracy, but closer to a democracy as we know it now, although not exactly the same.
As long as they don't pattern all-male governing bodies or the ban on gay marriage or the centralized power hierarchy.
Given the Baha'i community's own experience of grabs for office (starting in Babi times), intrigue, legal struggles, the dark sides of dynastic leadership, and difficulties keeping unsuitable candidates (like Remey) from the positions of great centralized power inherent in hierarchies - do you really think this track record means you have got the problem of power figured out so well that others will want to emulate you?
Exactly. You have expressed it much better than I tried to do, in the comment above which I've now erased.
It's the difference between real democracy and a deciding cabal that 'allows' democracy. Imo
It is too much of an assumption to say 'No need to worry because the heirarchy will always be topped by the good people' -- when every page of history demonstrates how very seldomn that happens?
Power corrupts: the old proverb?
Yours was phrased in a much nicer way. You should have left it there.
I'm frustrated with this discussion once again, it is taking place in a weird borderline area of personal belief and public policy. In a political discussion I'd go full on, but as it touches religious beliefs, I want to exercise restraint. I am probably coming across in a very weird way.
Carry on @Cino
What's not to like about a religion that aims to change the world and says it will happen by democracy, while its all powerful ruling cabal denies 50% of the human race (women) a say and their rulings then become the unquestionable Word of God?
Regardless of members' assurances, it sets alarm bells jangling loudly in my mind.
No offence meant to anyone. It is an open discussion. Looking forward to it continuing.
Personally my difficulty is not with the religion and who runs it and whatever rules and beliefs -- but with the mission statement to 'change the world'. It's at that point that it starts to affect me?
Still, its going to be a long time in the future these effects really start to matter.
It's good that people want to make a better world. Without them there probably would never be any improvement, imo.
Well all religious organizations I know about have issues with power and male superiority. Some also cross over into the political arena.
I think the separation of church and state is the one most important result of the political development of the past centuries. Without it, we would never have gotten rid of the divine right of kings, or introduces freedom of speech and universal suffrage and so on. So what's jarring to me is a relatively young religion having baked into it all the tendencies against this hard-won freedom - and like you say, their members shrugging it aeay.
End of rant. There seems to be this soap box here...
I have the same objection to any of them crossing over into politics.
You seem to have quite a wide knowledge of Bahai. You are right to point out some of the difficultues to people like me who know very little about it. Which is a good reason for me to back-up now, lol
Separate names with a comma.