The One Universal Religion Of Love

Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
2,622
Yes we can, which is the Trinity/Godhead, a core Christian doctrine.
Just saying "yes we can" doesn't make for valid doctrines, beliefs or philosophies (and then, seeing that your defense of it is to distort philosophical concepts such as "Substance").

The soul is also man's consciousness pertaining to feelings, thoughts and memories, which are of the mind.
You're confusing concepts here.

YHWH is the Trinity/Godhead.
Then you've just made the Trinity redundant, haven't you? :rolleyes:
 

Axl888

Established
Joined
Jul 29, 2019
Messages
413
Just saying "yes we can" doesn't make for valid doctrines, beliefs or philosophies (and then, seeing that your defense of it is to distort philosophical concepts such as "Substance").
It is valid for Christians, to those who have faith, if others think otherwise, it is not my problem anymore but i do respect their opinion.

You're confusing concepts here.
Perhaps a neuroscientist can explain it to you (this article is actually addressed to evolutionists/atheists but might as well relevant to you)

https://evolutionnews.org/2019/06/egnor-why-neuroscience-points-to-a-soul/
"Is the mind simply another word for the brain, an organ in the head that fools us into thinking that the self, the “inescapable I,” is a genuine entity? Dr. Egnor explains the materialist view in its several successive historical manifestations, and why, despite its pervasive influence, it hardly qualifies as a serious perspective. Egnor details the findings of his own field, neuroscience. These indicate that something extra, something immaterial, is joined with the material body to form the complete human being. That something extra is traditionally designated as the soul."



Then you've just made the Trinity redundant, haven't you? :rolleyes:
I don't think so.
 
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
2,622
@Infinityloop - has it occurred to you that God may not be waiting for your comprehension or permission to be precisely who He is?
Everyone who is not a Christian would state the same thing about you. You should know this very well by now.

At the very best, this is pareidolia. But it's not even close to being that, just both unsourced and irrelevant speculation based off a distant pictograph script that was never even used. Just thought I'd let you know.

However, if you have any knowledge of Hebrew at all and you wanted to do some better pareidolia magic on your confirmation bias, a better version would be:

Tav < He < Vav

Which would be three instead of four as well (matching the bogus trinity at that!).

This better three letter word would directly spell out, within your same unused pictograph script: Nail > Man > Cross (actual cross too, because Tav looks like a cross in many Hebrew variant scripts)
 
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
2,622
It is valid for Christians, to those who have faith, if others think otherwise, it is not my problem anymore but i do respect their opinion.
Sure but whether you "have faith" or not is not, is not what is being discussed here. Three persons cannot have one substance.
And then when it gets into metaphysics, when we start breaking God up into pieces at all, we turn Monotheism into Polytheism.

Perhaps a neuroscientist can explain it to you (this article is actually addressed to evolutionists/atheists but might as well relevant to you)

https://evolutionnews.org/2019/06/egnor-why-neuroscience-points-to-a-soul/
"Is the mind simply another word for the brain, an organ in the head that fools us into thinking that the self, the “inescapable I,” is a genuine entity? Dr. Egnor explains the materialist view in its several successive historical manifestations, and why, despite its pervasive influence, it hardly qualifies as a serious perspective. Egnor details the findings of his own field, neuroscience. These indicate that something extra, something immaterial, is joined with the material body to form the complete human being. That something extra is traditionally designated as the soul."
Sure, cool, but that has nothing to do with what I said. I spoke about your miscomprension of the Bible's terminology and what it denotes.

I don't think so.
Why not? The Trinity is not the God of the Old Testament (or the NT either, but that's another topic) and, at that, if you are to resort to stating that the Trinity is just another reconfiguration of YHWH (which would indicate that the NT, in your view, is actually a completely different deity), then you are making the very idea of the Trinity itself redundant to the more superior Old Testament view of One God (YHWH) without such unnecessarily complicated, contradictory Catholic/Protestant-invented doctrines which have very little difference to Polytheism.
 
Last edited:

Axl888

Established
Joined
Jul 29, 2019
Messages
413
Sure but whether you "have faith" or not is not, is not what is being discussed here. Three persons cannot have one substance.
And then when it gets into metaphysics, when we start breaking God up into pieces at all, we turn Monotheism into Polytheism.
It is only you that think we are breaking up God into pieces, again if you don't understand or refuse to understand the doctrine, it is not my problem anymore.

Sure, cool, but that has nothing to do with what I said.
Yes it is...you tried to refute that the soul is the consciousness/feelings/thoughts of the man which is also of the mind, and I gave you proof, yet you still refuse to understand.

Why not? The Trinity is not the God of the Old Testament (or the NT either, but that's another topic) and, at that, if you are to resort to stating that the Trinity is just another reconfiguration of YHWH (which would indicate that the NT, in your view, is actually a completely different deity), then you are making the very idea of the Trinity itself redundant to the more superior Old Testament view of One God (YHWH) without such unnecessarily complicated, contradictory Catholic/Protestant-invented doctrines which have very little difference to Polytheism.
The Trinity/Godhead is YHWH in the old testament, Genesis 1:26-27 gave you a hint "Let US (plural) make man in OUR (plural) image".
 
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
2,622
It is only you that think we are breaking up God into pieces, again if you don't understand or refuse to understand the doctrine, it is not my problem anymore.
Give another explanation then, this "three persons, one substance" trite is failing miserably.

Yes it is...you tried to refute that the soul is the consciousness/feelings/thoughts of the man which is also of the mind, and I gave you proof, yet you still refuse to understand.
Not at all, this Soul/Spirit discussion is a semantic conversation. Your link was interesting, sure, but not relevant in any way, shape or form.

The Trinity/Godhead is YHWH in the old testament, Genesis 1:26-27 gave you a hint "Let US (plural) make man in OUR (plural) image".
Seeing you like apologetics and polemics, and the rest of that. Try this for size:

The doctrine of the Trinity has no greater foe than the Hebrew Scriptures. It is on the strength of this sacred oracle that the Jew has preserved the concept of One, single, unique Creator God Who alone is worthy of worship. Missionaries undertake an daunting and unholy task as they scour the Jewish Scriptures in search of any text that can be construed as consistent with the doctrine of the Trinity.

No prophet remained silent on the uncompromising radical monotheism demanded by the God of Israel. The Jewish people, therefore, to whom these sublime declarations about the nature of the Almighty were given, knew nothing about a trinity of persons in the godhead.

Because the prophets relayed their divine message on the nature of God with such timeless, transparent, clarity, very few verses in Tanach could be summoned by the Church to corroborate their alien teachings on the doctrine of the Trinity. Understandably, though, the defenders of Christendom parade the few verses that they insist support the notion that there is a plurality in the godhead.

One of the most popular verses used by missionaries as a proof text in support of the doctrine of the Trinity is Genesis 1:26. This verse appears frequently in missionary literature despite of the fact that this argument has been answered countless times throughout the centuries and numerous Christian scholars have long abandoned it. Let’s examine the creation of man as described in the Torah:

And God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and they shall rule over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the sky, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.”
(Genesis 1:26)
With limited knowledge of the Jewish Scriptures, missionaries submit the above verse as evidence that there was a plurality in the godhead that participated in creation of our first parent. What other explanation could adequately account for the Torah’s use of the plural pronouns such as “us” and “our” in this verse?

This argument, however, is deeply flawed, and, accordingly, a great number of Trinitarian theologians have long rejected the notion that Genesis 1:26 implies a plurality of persons in the godhead. Rather, Christian scholars overwhelmingly agree that the plural pronoun in this verse is a reference to God’s ministering angels who were created previously, and the Almighty spoke majestically in the plural, consulting His heavenly court. Let’s read the comments of a number of preeminent Trinitarian Bible scholars on this subject.

For example, the evangelical Christian author Gordon J. Wenham, who is no foe of the Trinity and authored a widely respected two-volume commentary on the Book of Genesis, writes on this verse,

Christians have traditionally seen [Genesis 1:26] as adumbrating [foreshadowing] the Trinity. It is now universally admitted that this was not what the plural meant to the original author.1
If you had attended any one of my lectures you would know that the New International Version is hardly a Bible that can be construed as being friendly to Judaism. Yet, the NIV Study Bible also confirms in its commentary on Genesis 1:26,

Us… Our… Our. God speaks as the Creator-king, announcing His crowning work to the members of His heavenly court (see 3:22; 11:7; Isaiah 6:8; I Kings 22:19-23; Job 15:8; Jeremiah 23:18).2
Charles Caldwell Ryrie, a highly regarded Dispensationalist professor of Biblical Studies at the Philadelphia College of Bible and author of the widely read Bible commentary, The Ryrie Study Bible, writes in his short and to-the-point annotation on Genesis 1:26,

Us…Our. Plurals of majesty.3
The Liberty Annotated Study Bible, a Bible commentary published by the fundamentalist Reverend Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University, similarly remarks on this verse,

The plural pronoun “Us” is most likely a majestic plural from the standpoint of Hebrew grammar and syntax.4
The exhaustive 10-volume commentary by Keil and Delitzsch is considered by many to be the most influential exposition on the “Old Testament” in evangelical circles. Yet in Keil and Delitzsch’s commentary on Genesis 1:26, we find,

The plural “We” was regarded by the fathers and earlier theologians almost unanimously as indicative of the Tr ini ty; modern commentators, on the contrary, regard it either as pluralis majestatis … No other explanation is left, therefore, than to regard it as pluralis majestatis…5
The question that immediately comes to mind is: What would compel these conservative scholars – all of whom are devout Trinitarians – to categorically reject the notion that Genesis 1:26 supports the doctrine of Trinity? Why do they conclude that God is speaking in this famed verse in His majestic address to the angelic hosts of Heaven? Why are the commentaries of the above conservative Christian writers completely consistent with the age-old Jewish teaching on this verse?

The answer emerges from the Torah and its Prophets. If you search the Hebrew Bible you will find that when the Almighty speaks of “us” or “our,” He is addressing His ministering angels. In fact, only two chapters later, God continues to use the pronoun “us” as He speaks with His angels. At the end of the third chapter of Genesis the Almighty relates to His angels that Adam and his wife have eaten from the Tree of Knowledge and must therefore be prevented from eating from the Tree of Life as well; for if man would gain access to the Tree of Life he will “become like one of us.” The Creator then instructs his burning angels, known as Cherubim, to stand at the entrance to the gate of the Garden of Eden, waving a flaming sword to prevent man from entering the Garden and eating from the Tree of Life. Let’s examine this famed text:

Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever” – therefore the Lord God sent him out of the Garden of Eden to till the ground from which he was taken. So He drove out the man; and He placed cherubim at the east of the Garden of Eden, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to guard the way to the tree of life.
(Genesis 3:22-24)
This use of the majestic plural in Genesis 3:22-24 is what contributed the NIV Study Bible’s annotation on Genesis 1:26 (above). At the end of its comment on this verse, the NIV Study Bible provides a number of biblical sources from the Jewish Scriptures to support its position that:

“God speaks as the Creator-king, announcing His crowning work to the members of His heavenly court.” The verses cited are: Genesis 3:22, 11:7, Isaiah 6:8, I Kings 22:19-23, Job 15:8, and Jeremiah 23:18. These verses convey to the attentive Bible reader that the heavenly abode of the Creator is filled with the ministering angels who attend the Almighty and to whom He repeatedly refers when using the plural pronoun “Us.”6
Again, the NIV Study Bible’s concession in its commentary on Genesis 1:26 is particularly significant because this work of the product of conservative, Trinitarian commentary on the Bible. Its contributing authors had no incentive to support the Jewish interpretation of this verse. Its annotation relies on the simple context and exegesis of this verse.

I will close this letter with one final note.

Outsiders often wonder what powerful force binds the Jewish people united in faith. This is not so odd a question when we consider the internal conflicts that has followed our people throughout our troubled history. Bear in mind, regardless of the turbulent quarrels that fester among us, the oneness of God remains the binding thread which unites the Jewish people in history and witness. The teachings of the Torah were designed to set forever in the national conscience of the Jewish people the idea that God is one alone. Accordingly, He is the only Savior worthy of our devotion and worship.



__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

God said: "Let us make man in our image . . ." (Genesis 1:26) ((Genesis 1:26)) and "Come, let us go down, and there confound their language" (Genesis 11:7)((Genesis 11:7)). To whom does the "us" refer? Is it talking about the Trinity or about Gods connection to Humanity? Find out in this post.

Here Is The Answer To That Question
Trinitarian Christians maintain that Genesis 1:26 and Genesis 11:7 are proof-texts of an alleged tri-unity god, but this claim is erroneous. The inference that "Let us make man in our image" ((Genesis 1:26)) refers to the plurality of God is refuted by the subsequent verse, which relates the creation of man to a singular God, "And God created man in His image" ((Genesis 1:27)).

In this verse the Hebrew verb "created" appears in the singular form. If "let us make man" indicates a numerical plurality, it would be followed in the NEXT verse by, "And they created man in their image." Obviously, the plural form is used in the same way as in the divine appellation 'Elohim, to indicate the all-inclusiveness of God's attributes of authority and power, the plurality of majesty. It is customary for one in authority to speak of himself as if he were a plurality.

Hence, Absalom said to Ahithophel, "Give your counsel what we shall do" ((2 Samuel 16:20)). The context shows that he was seeking advice for himself' yet he refers to himself as "we" ((see also Ezra 4:16-19)).

God Manifesting His Humility
There is another possible reason for the use of the plural on the part of God, and that is to manifest His humility. God addresses Himself to the angels and says to them, "Let us make man in our image." It is not that He invites their help, but as a matter of modesty and courtesy, God associates them with the creation of man. This teaches us that a great man should act humbly and consult with those lower than him.

It is not unusual for God to refer to His heavenly court (angels) as "us," as we see in Isaiah 6:8, "And I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, 'Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?'" Although God often acts without assistance, He makes His intentions known to His servants. Thus, we find "Shall I conceal from Abraham that which I am doing" ((Genesis 18:17)); "He made known His ways to Moses, His doings to the children of Israel" ((Psalms 103:7)); "For the Lord God will do nothing without revealing His counsel to His servants the prophets" ((Amos 3:7)).

A misconception similar to that concerning Genesis 1:27 is held by trinitarian Christians with reference to the verse, "Come, let us go down, and there confound their language" ((Genesis 11:7)). Here, too, the confounding of the language is related in verse 9 to God alone, ". . . because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth." In this verse the Hebrew verb "did" appears in the singular form.

The Singularity of God
Also, the descent is credited in verse 5 to the Lord alone, "And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower." In this verse the Hebrew verb "came down" appears in the singular form. If a doctrine of plurality of persons is to be based on the grammatical form of words, the frequent interchanging of the singular and the plural should vitiate such an attempt as being without foundation or merit. We may safely conclude that the Bible refutes most emphatically every opinion, which deviates from the concept of an indivisible unity of God.

Chapter 45 of Isaiah, using the Tetragrammaton, unequivocally asserts that the Lord alone is the creator and ruler of all things in the universe. The six uses of 'Elohim in this chapter ((verses 3, 5, 14, 15, 18, 21)) show that the term 'Elohim is synonymous with the Tetragrammaton, and that both epithets refer to the absolute one-and-only God. The singularity of God, expressed in the first-person singular in verse 12, clearly shows who is meant by the phrase, "Let us create man in our image": "I, even I, have made the earth, and created man upon it; I, even My hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded."

As for the Messiah, of him God says, "And I will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, even My servant David; he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd. And I the Lord will be their God, and My servant David prince among them; I the Lord have spoken" ((Ezekiel 34:23-24)). The Lord alone will be worshiped as God, while the Messiah, as the servant of God, lives with the people. God and the Messiah are not and cannot be equals, for it is God alone who gives the Messiah power to rule in the capacity of His appointed servant.
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
13,933
Everyone who is not a Christian would state the same thing about you. You should know this very well by now.



At the very best, this is pareidolia. But it's not even close to being that, just both unsourced and irrelevant speculation based off a distant pictograph script that was never even used. Just thought I'd let you know.

However, if you have any knowledge of Hebrew at all and you wanted to do some better pareidolia magic on your confirmation bias, a better version would be:

Tav < He < Vav

Which would be three instead of four as well (matching the bogus trinity at that!).

This better three letter word would directly spell out, within your same unused pictograph script: Nail > Man > Cross (actual cross too, because Tav looks like a cross in many Hebrew variant scripts)
Interesting that I was listening to this passage this morning...


The Word of Promise® NKJV Audio Bible

Exodus 6:1-3

1 Then the LORD said to Moses, “Now you shall see what I will do to Pharaoh. For with a strong hand he will let them go, and with a strong hand he will drive them out of his land.”
2 And God spoke to Moses and said to him: “I am the LORD.
3 I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty, but by My name LORD [YHVH] I was not known to them.

The “type” of Pharaoh is invoked as an example of someone with a hard, impenetrable heart. To begin with he chose to harden his heart, and eventually having chose many times to do so, YHVH “strengthened” him in the decision of hardness he had been continually making.

Please don’t be like Pharaoh @Infinityloop
 
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
2,622
Interesting that I was listening to this passage this morning...


The Word of Promise® NKJV Audio Bible

Exodus 6:1-3

1 Then the LORD said to Moses, “Now you shall see what I will do to Pharaoh. For with a strong hand he will let them go, and with a strong hand he will drive them out of his land.”
2 And God spoke to Moses and said to him: “I am the LORD.
3 I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty, but by My name LORD [YHVH] I was not known to them.

The “type” of Pharaoh is invoked as an example of someone with a hard, impenetrable heart. To begin with he chose to harden his heart, and eventually having chose many times to do so, YHVH “strengthened” him in the decision of hardness he had been continually making.

Please don’t be like Pharaoh @Infinityloop
I was reading Parsha Kedoshim (from Leviticus) today and these verses struck me as relevant to your post:


"You shall not steal; you shall not deal deceitfully or falsely with one another.
You shall not swear falsely by My name, profaning the name of your God: I am YHWH."

- Leviticus 19:11-12

Now, you could easily apologize or admit your fault, God does not appreciate liars or those that blaspheme his sacred name (YHWH).

Alternatively, you could easily just own up to the fact that you know nothing about Hebrew and that I had a better idea to convey your desperate attempt there (Tav < He < Vav would be far more convincing in that script, if only Vav He Tav was the tetragrammaton, or "Trigrammaton" more accurately :D)
 

Axl888

Established
Joined
Jul 29, 2019
Messages
413
I was reading Parsha Kedoshim (from Leviticus) today and these verses struck me as relevant to your post:


"You shall not steal; you shall not deal deceitfully or falsely with one another.

You shall not swear falsely by My name, profaning the name of your God: I am YHWH."

- Leviticus 19:11-12

Now, you could easily apologize or admit your fault, God does not appreciate liars or those that blaspheme his sacred name (YHWH).

Alternatively, you could easily just own up to the fact that you know nothing about Hebrew and that I had a better idea to convey your desperate attempt there (Tav < He < Vav would be far more convincing in that script, if only Vav He Tav was the tetragrammaton, or "Trigrammaton" more accurately :D)
Then why you call your god allah then? Don't be a hypocrite.
 
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
2,622
Then why you call your god allah then? Don't be a hypocrite.
My theology is not the same as yours whatsoever. I do not worship names, symbols, images and idols like you do.

Alongside that I do not give your Bible even the slightest of credibility that you seem to, but I really should warn you about replying with such non-sequitors. Red Sky At Morning's dishonesty back here: https://vigilantcitizenforums.com/threads/the-one-universal-religion-of-love.6454/post-239955 is what my replies to him here are about. Got that?
https://vigilantcitizenforums.com/threads/the-one-universal-religion-of-love.6454/post-239966
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
13,933
My theology is not the same as yours whatsoever. I do not worship names, symbols, images and idols like you do.

Alongside that I do not give your Bible even the slightest of credibility that you seem to, but I really should warn you about replying with such non-sequitors. Red Sky At Morning's dishonesty back here: https://vigilantcitizenforums.com/threads/the-one-universal-religion-of-love.6454/post-239955 is what my replies to him here are about. Got that?
https://vigilantcitizenforums.com/threads/the-one-universal-religion-of-love.6454/post-239966
As the lawyers say, “I put it to you” @Infinityloop that you don’t see the message in the revealed name of God (YHVH) because you don’t want to.

Unfortunately, it is not within my power to “make” you see, so just like Moses had to do with Pharaoh, I will sadly have to leave you to find out in other ways.

Regardless of my frustration, I have to respect your choice and leave you to it. God bless.
 
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
2,622
Then why you call your god allah then? Don't be a hypocrite.
And also, along with the above, what you have done here is provided a genetic fallacy.
At no point in this thread have I, or my religion been the subject of discussion. Throwing a genetic fallacy at me (and in regards to the above as well), is a very low attempt at diverting the discussion, which is afterall about pictographs, https://vigilantcitizenforums.com/threads/the-one-universal-religion-of-love.6454/post-239955

You, are just attempting to confuse the thread here, after Red Sky At Morning did previously by randomly quoting Exodus 6:1-3 to ignore the discussion.
After all is said and done here, Red Sky At Morning posting the pathetic pictograph post was likely just a lazy attempt at derailing the thread, after you and I had been discussing this: https://vigilantcitizenforums.com/threads/the-one-universal-religion-of-love.6454/post-239906 of which you clearly have no actual answer to, only excuses.

You cannot have "three persons, one substance", you can only have 'one substance' and still retain what could be logically regarded as "God". The irony which has constantly shown it's face is (and in regards to your genetic fallacy reply quoted) that Islam itself affirms the Jewish position that God is One and Absolute, with no division. (Trinitarian) Christianity is the odd one out, which diverted from true monotheism, with a theology worse than what could be found on the back of a breakfast cereal package.
 
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
2,622
As the lawyers say, “I put it to you” @Infinityloop that you don’t see the message in the revealed name of God (YHVH) because you don’t want to.

Unfortunately, it is not within my power to “make” you see, so just like Moses had to do with Pharaoh, I will sadly have to leave you to find out in other ways.

Regardless of my frustration, I have to respect your choice and leave you to it. God bless.
@Red Sky at Morning - has it occurred to you that God may not be waiting for your comprehension or permission to be precisely who He is?
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
13,933
@Red Sky at Morning - has it occurred to you that God may not be waiting for your comprehension or permission to be precisely who He is?
If course! One of my favourite passages on God’s free sovereignty:-

Joshua 5

13And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, behold, there stood a man over against him with his sword drawn in his hand: and Joshua went unto him, and said unto him, Art thou for us, or for our adversaries? 14And he said, Nay; but as captain of the host of the LORD am I now come. And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and did worship, and said unto him, What saith my lord unto his servant? 15And the captain of the LORD'S host said unto Joshua, Loose thy shoe from off thy foot; for the place whereon thou standest is holy. And Joshua did so.
 

shankara

Star
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
1,322
Interesting that I was listening to this passage this morning...


The Word of Promise® NKJV Audio Bible

Exodus 6:1-3

1 Then the LORD said to Moses, “Now you shall see what I will do to Pharaoh. For with a strong hand he will let them go, and with a strong hand he will drive them out of his land.”
2 And God spoke to Moses and said to him: “I am the LORD.
3 I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty, but by My name LORD [YHVH] I was not known to them.

The “type” of Pharaoh is invoked as an example of someone with a hard, impenetrable heart. To begin with he chose to harden his heart, and eventually having chose many times to do so, YHVH “strengthened” him in the decision of hardness he had been continually making.

Please don’t be like Pharaoh @Infinityloop
Honestly I think this applies more to you @Red Sky at Morning than to @Infinityloop ... You think it is the people you are arguing with who are rejecting the "one true way" but actually you are refusing to see any kind of sense and reason. You are completely closed to any idea which doesn't fit in with your notion about what reality is. You are the one(s) who need to open your heart(s) and mind(s).

Why can't you? I'd say it's for one because you are absolutely terrified of Eternal Hell and like the comfort of knowing that you are among the saved, the elect, the people who will live in Paradise forever. It's difficult to deal with the insecurity of being a human being, to know that deeds count and salvation is not assured except through one's own struggles. Embrace it. Let go of the comforting fairytales.
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
13,933
Honestly I think this applies more to you @Red Sky at Morning than to @Infinityloop ... You think it is the people you are arguing with who are rejecting the "one true way" but actually you are refusing to see any kind of sense and reason. You are completely closed to any idea which doesn't fit in with your notion about what reality is. You are the one(s) who need to open your heart(s) and mind(s).

Why can't you? I'd say it's for one because you are absolutely terrified of Eternal Hell and like the comfort of knowing that you are among the saved, the elect, the people who will live in Paradise forever. It's difficult to deal with the insecurity of being a human being, to know that deeds count and salvation is not assured except through one's own struggles. Embrace it. Let go of the comforting fairytales.
Lol! imagine somebody telling you to let go of the “comforting notion” that the man who brought you up was actually your biological father! They might tell you not to be so narrow and regard yourself as the metaphorical son of all older men ;-)
 

DavidSon

Star
Joined
Jan 10, 2019
Messages
2,006
...here's the lataif system
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lataif-e-sitta
Akhfa corresponds to the Essence of God, the 'unknowable Father' and in hinduism is Brahman.
Khafi corresponds to the Image/Word/Logos ie the Son and in hinduism is Vishnu.
Sirr is the third one as I mentioned.
This third level which corresponds to the holy spirit is the level of causation aswell as dissolution eg the 'first and the last'. In hinduism it is Brahma and Shiva.

The metaphysics are the same, only our interpretations differ.
Not to chop apart your reasoning but taking a glance the "6 Subtleties" is an exciting example of universal concepts that have bled into our diverse religious paths. The "centers" are very similar to the fundamentals of Kabbalah and Hinduism. I thought this description is wonderfully true of spiritual activity:

"Purification of the elementary passionate nature (tazkiyat an-nafs), cleansing the spiritual heart (tazkiyat al-qalb), becoming a receptacle of divine love (ishq), illumination of the spirit (tajjali ar-ruh), emptying egocentric drives (taqliyyat as-sirr) and remembering the divine attributes, often through repetition of the names of God, (dhikr) are a process by which the dervish is said to reach a certain type of "completion" in the opening of the last two faculties, khafi and akhfa."

It's another way of explaining the state of mind that an adept such as Jesus was speaking from (that you've discussed before) which is Ihsan (excellence).

It's a bit sad to read a few of the comments and realize how mainstream/popular Christianity has indoctrinated the masses to be immature, afraid, and frankly unenlightened. I can see why a figure like the Christ is worshiped as God when the experience He detailed is so far from their core understanding.

The OP was about seeing with the heart; the universal nature of spiritual belief. You really sense a lot from where people's imagination travels. No one wants to take away your sweet Jesus lol. This thread should be about how to unify within multiple paths, celebrating what we have in common. Unfortunately the masses are too immature to take a seat at the table.
 

shankara

Star
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
1,322
Lol! imagine somebody telling you to let go of the “comforting notion” that the man who brought you up was actually your biological father! They might tell you not to be so narrow and regard yourself as the metaphorical son of all older men ;-)
Your metaphor doesn't really make sense. I was talking about the kind of psychological comfort which people derive from such fixed beliefs. It's good to know that you are assured eternal happiness, it's good to feel that you are part of an elect. Ok so maybe now and again you might have to listen to a preacher criticizing your vices, but guess what, that's found in all religions and some of them more strongly than in Protestantism. It's human to require comfort, to be scared of insecurity, to cling to things which make us feel good and reject things that we find troubling. Opening up is scary, as the Gospel of Thomas says "when you find, you will become troubled".

But returning to your metaphor, I'm personally not suggesting that there are multiple Gods, at least not in the sense of any kind of strict Polytheism. I don't have a problem with the Tibetans or Hindus worshipping different deities because I think ultimately that worship is actually directed at God through an intermediary, indeed there's something kind of humble about accepting that God is so far beyond our understanding that we're better off trying to understand some particular aspect, after all - "But He said, “You cannot see My face; for no man shall see Me, and live.

Anyway what I'm trying to say is that we can approach the One Divinity in different ways, He has many Names, many ways of being understood. Each of those ways has some particular wisdom, some particular kind of insight. We should go beyond words, seek LIVED EXPERIENCE, using the techniques of whatever legitimate tradition (and there are illegitimate traditions, too) we find ourselves in harmony with.
 
Top