![]() |
|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#41
|
|||
|
|||
|
The evidence from the Bible that Jesus Christ is God and should be worshipped is pretty strong. Many of the proofs are in this thread and there is also an article on the names of God that shows that both God the Father and Jesus Christ share the Hebrew name for God that is translated LORD in the King James Version (or what Jehovah's Witnesses say is "Jehovah").
However, though the Bible speaks of the Holy Spirit as being divine and coming from God the Father and Jesus Christ and is an expression of God's power, that is, how God acts in His creation, I think there is not strong evidence in the Bible that the Holy Spirit is a person. In many places it seems that when the Holy Spirit is said to be doing something or saying something, it is God the Father or Jesus Christ who is doing or saying it through the power of the Holy Spirit. Here is an analogy. If I write a letter to someone, and someone asks, what did the letter say, the person who received the letter might reply, "the letter said that...". But this is figurative language. The letter itself is not a person who speaks. It is the person who wrote the letter who did the communicating. Likewise, when the Bible says that the Holy Spirit sent the apostles to this place or that place, this might simply mean that God the Father or Jesus Christ sent them using the power of the Holy Spirit to communicate with them, just as I would use a letter to communicate with someone. I do not think there is strong evidence in the Bible for the concept of the trinity or that the Holy Spirit is a distinct person as God the Father and Jesus Christ are distinct persons. Rather, the Bible seems to teach that God is a family (one God = one God family) presently made up of the Father and Christ into which humans can be born through a resurrection from the dead. The Bible calls us sons of God, brothers of Jesus Christ, and the church is described as the bride of Christ that will marry Christ at His return. These are all family relationships. |
|
#42
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Matthew 1 23Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. |
|
#43
|
||||
|
||||
|
As I'm usually classed as one who doesn't believe in it (since I don't believe the only true God to be a mush of persons, modes, parts and/or members, nor to be a society, but rather a he, as in unipersonal), I guess I'm qualified to answer. Yeah, he should be worshipped. The term worship itself doesn't really mean that much though, the prophet Nathan for example worshipped king David. What is meant with it is what counts.
Last edited by Lucian; 08-02-2008 at 03:56 AM.. |
|
#44
|
||||
|
||||
|
You could have a canteen by your side in the desert, yet die because you were too busy studying and honoring the beauty of the lavish leather surrounding the canteen, while missing the living water which sits untouched within. In other words, you can put your faith in the external and find beauty therein, but never forget to search for the meaning of the "Living Water" of Jesus' teachings, which are far more important for spiritual progress.
__________________
“It has been said, 'the truth will make men free.' The truth alone has never made anyone free. It is only doubt which will bring mental emancipation.” Anton Szandor LaVey |
|
#45
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
This is the Almighty of whom I stand in awe and reverence. It is He to whom I look in fear and trembling. It is He whom I worship and unto whom I give honor and praise and glory. He is my Heavenly Father, who has invited me to come unto Him in prayer, to speak with Him, with the promised assurance that He will hear and respond. Gordon B. Hinckley, “In These Three I Believe,” Ensign, Jul 2006, 2–8 |
|
#46
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
John 14:28 Jesus Christ himself said, "Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto theFather: for my Father is greater than I." John 20:17 He said to Mary when she first saw Him as a resurrected being, "Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended tomy Father: but go tomy brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God." Quote:
We believe the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are "one in will and purpose, one in mind and heart, and one in power and glory." It would be impossible to explain, or even to understand, the degree of their unity. It is perfect; it is absolute. They think, feel and act as "one God." Because of this perfect unity, and because they share the title of "God," we think of them together in this way. It would be impossible for us to worship one of them without also worshipping the other. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." ~Rudyard Kipling ~
Last edited by Katzpur; 08-16-2008 at 10:23 PM.. |
|
#47
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#48
|
||||
|
||||
|
In more objective terms, what, exactly, is the worship of the alleged human deity known as Jesus?
In the field of psychology, there is a condition known as "Apparent Love" [not being real love] divided into what is known as the Five Egotistical States. One of them is known as "Idolatrous Love": [Please read carefully] I. Apparent Love of Others by Projection of the Ego: "This is Idolatrous Love, in which the ego is projected onto another being [ie; "Jesus"]. The pretension to divinity as 'distinct' has left my organism and is now fixed on to the organism of the other.* The affective situation resembles that above, with the difference that the other has taken my place in my scale of values. I desire the existence of the other-idol, against everything that is opposed to him. I no longer love my own organism except in so far as it is the faithful servant of the idol; apart from that I have no further sentiments towards my organism, I am indifferent to it, and, if necessary, I can give my life for the the safety of my idol (I can sacrifice my organism to my Ego fixed on the idol; like Empedocles throwing himself down the crater of Mt. Etna in order to immortalize his Ego). As for the rest of the world, I hate it if it is hostile to my idol; if it is not hostile and if my contemplation of the idol fills me with joy (that is to say, with egotistical affirmation), I love indiscriminately all the rest of the world. If the idolized being rejects me to the point of forbidding me all possession of my Ego in him, the apparent love can be turned to hate." from: "Zen and the Psychology of Transformation: The Supreme Doctrine", by Hubert Benoit; Pantheon Books; ISBN 0-89281-272-9 *It is for this reason that the orthodox Christian cannot think of himself as having a divine nature. All that is divine has been projected onto a concept that, in his mind, lies only outside his own being. The realization of one's own divinity has been blocked by the threat of punishment for the sin of blasphemy. The idea that the divine nature lies outside one's own being is further complicated by what is known as the artifact view of the creation of the world. The world and its creatures are totally dependent upon an external Creator-God, rendering all "created things" mere artifacts. In other words, these artifacts have no life of their own other than that given them by their Creator. Adam and Eve were created from the dust of the Earth, and only became animated when the Creator-God breathed his life into them. The analogy is that of a potter who "creates" a pot. The pot is an artifact, made of clay. It is subject to birth and death; creation and destruction. When man realizes this is false, that his divine nature is beyond birth and death; creation and destruction, he becomes liberated. The mystic Christian, on the other hand, can indeed realize his own divinity, because he finds the divine essence lying within his own being. This is the "gnosis within" of the Gnostic Christian. The divine essence does not come to him from the outside; it is already within. It has always been within, but man has simply failed to realize that fact. God has never left. The illusory division between "mortal man" and God is only a falsehood within the mind. Yeshua confirmed the idea that the divine nature lay within: Thomas 3: “If those who lead you say to you, '’See, the kingdom is in the sky,’ then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, ‘It is in the sea,’ then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is inside of you, and it is outside of you. When you come to know yourselves, then you will become known, and you will realize that it is you who are the sons of the living father. “ Thomas 113: His disciples said to him, “When will the kingdom come?” Jesus said, “It will not come by waiting for it. It will not be a matter of saying ‘here it is’ or ‘there it is’. Rather, the kingdom of the father is spread out upon the earth, and men do not see it.” Q 20: But on being asked when the kingdom of God is coming, he answered them and said: ‘The kingdom of God is not coming visibly‚ Nor will one say Look, here! or: There! For, look, the kingdom of God is within you!’ Last edited by godnotgod; 08-15-2009 at 10:53 PM.. |
|
#49
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
"When Nothing is Special, Everything can be." Stephen Bachelor, "Buddhism without Beliefs" "Remember, dahling, it is more important to look good than to feel good!" ![]() Billy Crystal |
|
#50
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
The only way you can know with absolute certainty is for you to undergo an actual spiritual transformation from within. Then you will know beyond the shadow of a doubt. The Bible is but a second-hand account of the first-hand living spiritual experience, but it is, alas, a terribly corrupted account at that. If you wish to get closer to the original documents that the Bible was based upon, before St. Paul got hold of the doctrine and launched his own religion, and before the Church further deformed it, take a look at the original Bible as written in Yeshua's tongue, Aramaic. It is called the Peshitta. Google it. There are several sources and translations direct from Aramaic into English, rather than from Aramaic into Greek and Hebrew and then into English. Originally, Yeshua and his Essene teachings never taught that there was a resurrection of the body. Yeshua was a vegetarian, and did not believe in animal sacrifice as orthodox Jews did, let alone human sacrifice. Though Yeshua was divine, he never demanded that others worhip him as God. These ideas only came later, when St. Paul single-handedly created what is now modern Christianity, by the brilliant synthesis of three powerful factors: Jewish history, which lent credibility and authority to the new religion; the idea of the descending Gnosis, in the form of Jesus, taken from the Gnostic teachings; and the idea of the dying and resurrected godhead, taken from the mystery religions, which St. Paul was completely immersed in as a child. Essentially, what modern Christians believe in is not Christianity at all, but Paulanity. St. Paul was a charlatan with an over-active imagination. The real secret to Yeshua's teachings lay in his life as an ordinary man who was in touch with his divine nature. These teachings come originally from Buddhism, believe it or not, and were not some new and exclusive Christian doctrine. I will provide an example of Buddhist influence. When Yeshua cried out: "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do", he was not asking his Father to forgive his murderers for their Sin, but for their Ignorance, and it is ignorance which is the focal point of Buddhist thought, not Sin. On top of that, Yeshua asked forgiveness of his transgressors without demanding any contrition or repentance whatsoever! This goes against Christian doctrine, which always demands repentance before forgiveness can be considered, and which always demands allegiance before one can go to the Father. In other words, contrary to what Christians say, the Christian God's "love" is anything BUT unconditional: it is completely conditional. Buddhist love and forgiveness, on the other hand, are totally Unconditional, as reflected in what Yeshua actually said from the cross. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |