Hi Lon,....that depends on point of view
The old man will look at it one way. One who is a new creation Ephesian 2:10, will look at it differently, by necessity. Because of this, I worry about you because it is true and there is no greater context here either.
This was a bit extensive so I skipped responding to it, but will skim over a few pointers.....
It repeats somewhat too, the echo's of the post were: 1) no greater context than a complete truth 2) we all must live with duality, we all have things we accept and reject 3) God speaks to us in absolute terms on a good many issues 4) it is not good to be a cosmic thinker (as differentiated from a universalist and it's separate complications) if our sin condition is packed for the trip too.
Coming from a viewpiont that sees truth at two levels, both 'absolute' and 'relative', there is no problem here in seeing this seeming 'duality' in the greater context of total reality. Total reality includes all duality, multiplicity, appearances, illusions, perception, etc. 'Duality' is inevitable in a world of space-time relativity.
Duality is the difference between what we accept and what we reject. Because we are cursed by the first Adam, we are drowning in sin and need a Savior to pull us out. He creates a duality in giving us His nature.
Jesus saying he was the way, truth and life, is a relative statement...for it can only be 'related' within the context of the writers intent and preconceived theology
I disagree for He continued..."
no one comes to the Father but by me!"
My former statement [is assessed sufficient for me].
See the difference between His statement and your's, here? One is relative and the other is absolute.
You're assuming according to your own definition of 'sin' and interjecting the concept where it is unnecessary.
Being one to traipse the cosmos, I believe you could and should have dealt substantially here. It was a philosophical invitation and an open door which you promptly closed. Forgive a slight :chuckle: from me. The irony muse hit me.
Going on about 'sin' again.......
Forgive me yet another chuckle, I just can't help myself:
This was a bit extensive so I skipped responding to it, but will skim over a few pointers.....
Hopefully, you are doing a :chuckle: over this irony too (it might be your way of ignoring/skipping, I just tend to cut it out with an intial sentence at the beginning saying so, so my chuckle is a bit of projection here)
And they did not die physically, but were enlightened to know both good and evil, an essential cognitive ability that enables true learning and progressive evolution. So they did become 'gods' in a sense. In one Gnostic perspective,...Sophia (divine wisdom) posed as the snake luring the couple to accept their divine birthright and liberate themselves from the captivity of the Demiurge (Yhwh). The Demiuge did not want the couple to recognize their true divine potential, but strangely tempted them into making the forbidden fruit more appealing, an odd tactic to say the least.
I wouldn't call knowing how to sin 'enlightened.' Also, they indeed did die physically. Picking at this is nearly the same as a debate about dying 'instantly.' It doesn't have to be this instant or even the next instant but it should be in close proximately. Adam and Eve
surely died.
The gnostics didn't have to rewrite it with sophia because it is still the same story and only confuses. Rather, it is whether this was a good thing or a bad thing in interpretation. As such, it needs no rewrite.
Also note Jesus quotes from the Psalms affirming that 'God' calls men 'gods', and that such a reference to 'elohim' is a proper title for the
children of God, or a
son of God such as himself. Therefore they persecuting him for being called the Son of God was unjustified. Being created in the same image and likeness of 'God' and possessing the same cognitive and creative powers of a parent Deity has its 'entitlement'
If I were an elohim, then I've lost all hope. The hope of all of scripture is that God is working to fix our dilemma and make us like Him 1 John 3:1-3
Still going on about 'sin'......
Still funny, but why wouldn't I? It is the mark of dualism for me. I do not want a universe where sin is still present there within me. To miss this is to miss the entire gospel story.
Yes, I usually interpret a text in a way most logically comprehensible within its context. I have that right and responsiblity. 'God' gave it to me.
It is frustrating talking to a universalist at times....this is one of them.
Jesus when speaking, was using himself naturally as a 'focal-point' of truth, revealing 'God' to them. He wasnt 'wrong' but pointing to himself as the expression and embodiment of 'God' in their very midst. One full of God and radiating pure God-consciousness can do the same.
This creates a 'you as good as Jesus' frustration between clashing philosphies. We are entitled to our own opinions but not entitled to our own facts. 1) You have to play nice with others else the discussion isn't the same one between those disagreeing 2) You have to recognize others' truths even if you've rejected them 3) Then meet the objection in a meaningful way else it is seen as idiocy.
That said, I see where you are coming from but I believe you have to negate scripture in order to entertain your conclusion and that alone will keep this part of the debate from proceeding. The rest of us see a distinct and stark contrast between ourselves and the Christ who was with God and was God. In my sin condition, I was neither with nor was. As a new creation, I am 'with' but not Him (
pre-debate explanations).
Its not a matter of me telling a so called 'God' anything, but using my own God-intelligence to define a matter.
"So-called?" How far away are you, PJ?
There are times I wonder you are here rather than a Jonathan Livingstone Seagull forum.
As far as quoting Yoda,...didnt you know I'm a charter member of the Jedi Council? - love the little guy. My path has never included hatred, so it goes without saying with its fruits, what frequency level my position hails from. Remember,....'God' is pure LIGHT. - naturally in a world of duality, ...there appears to be 'good' and 'evil' (light & shadow)...hence the existence of a so called 'darkside'. But you know that the existence of 'evil' exists because a so called 'good' does, and God's omnipresence includes or allows BOTH to appear in a world where there is 'relativity'. Duality arises as a phenomena within the Infinite One. - such is the way of 'perception'.
You can't get more dualistic than Yoda...
The message of Star Wars: "I wanted people to know there is a God and a Devil. That there is good and evil, and you
have to choose between the two." -George Lucas
To the bold above....you're getting warm
- the 'God-presence' in me is prior to and transcends any dualism whatsoever, since it is pure God, before any association, duality or relativity. It is pure 'light' beyond definition or conditioning. Where there is not two (which is what "Advaita" {non-duality} means)...there is only 'God'. 'God' is that one universal non-dual reality behind all appearances of duality. 'God' is the prior reality before any concept of 'sin' or sense of 'seperation'. The ego has seperated itself by its own illusion of seperation.
Er...if you are God, I'm turning in my membership card. Please don't feel too slighted, I'd just be incredibly disappointed. Prophet Lorenzo Snow said "As God is man will become, as man is God once was." I wouldn't be a Mormon for 30 million dollars. Now you are giving me another god to follow? I'm no god. I will die because of sin.
Oh dear. Of course its impossible in this dimension of existence and language-medium to relate anything that is not more or less 'dualistic' because all in this space-time dimension is more or less
'relative',...it is a world of relations, appearances, forms, objectivity and subjectivity,...a seeming duality of 'observer' and 'observed', 'this' or 'that', 'up' and 'down', 'light' and 'dark', 'me' and 'you', etc. This is a world of plural perceptions, distortion,
maya.
The point again: My dualism and your dualism are two different things.
Another way of saying it: For the trip, you are packing different items. The fight is because I deem the items you are packing offensive and giving off a stench.
Assumptions. I may start a new 'Non-Duality' thread, - its important to understand the essence of 'Advaita', and realize that oneness of Being at the Heart of all, the 'Self'. 'Brahman' is 'Atman', there is no seperation. This is of course from that
point of view, as one abides
as the unborn, undying, unchanging essence within.
That 'presence' is 'God' (Brahman/atman). This is the central view of the
Advaita Vedanta school. There is ONLY that PRESENCE. It is not only 'One' but 'All'.
Hopefully you are seeing some familiarity from me, that I understand where you are coming from. The problem that I see, is, in your universal approach, you are adopting a broader picture and context "for me (too)" that I reject.
There are more 'dualistic' schools within Hinduism that are more like judeo-christian understandings of the relationship between God and souls (being seperate, uniquely different in certain respects, while alike in others), etc. One who studies such will recognize and discern the differences, where these are 'assumed' anyways.
You've kind of cut 'sin' out of our discussions. In so doing, that is trying to place me into that "broader" context. I reject that as marrying up to a lie. A gray world holds no appeal for me.
My former statement stands
- God makes
all available or possible. This is a truth. How do you know, besides a religious assumption or 'belief' that a lie was told in the Garden? Have you cared to research it again? or have you the final ultimate conclusion on it and everything else? Research can do wonders.
Again, it is not okay if a fly with crap on his feet lands on my sandwich.
As far as becoming like 'God',....isnt this the ultimate, most respectful, noble and inspiring ideal to strive towards??? Didn't Jesus say to be 'perfect' as our Heavenly Father is 'perfect'? Doesn't God want us to strive towards excellence, progress, growth, integrity, unfolding our divine potential, our capacity for creation, our experience of joy and happiness, to share in His divine nature? If you think of eternity and infinity....there is an endless vista of Life and realities beyond our imagination over every horizon point. Infinity has no finish. In Reality, there is no beginning or end. Only we assign time-points to anything that 'comes' and 'goes'...being 'events' as they arise. But what is that in which they arise..that never comes or goes?
Again, not if it means eating tainted food. A true universalist wouldn't care.
Aloha
