Where I stand on religion currently

[PoetPhilosopher]

In regards to my pursuit of better understanding the Hindu faith, I feel it really opens my mind and heart. The biggest negative is that sometimes this opening of the mind can take me down a deep, philosophical rabbit-hole that can be scary.

In regards to where I stand with Jesus and the Abrahamic God, I think there is some comfort in the Christian stories as well as praying to Jesus and the Abrahamic God, but am not certain on many specifics.

In regards to where I stand with New Age, I see it's an even larger rabbit-hole than what I had mentioned about Hinduism, but those who come out on the other side of it seem to do well. Doesn't mean I consider myself New Age or will necessarily do so.

In regards to subjects like spirits and ghosts, psychics and the like, you reach dead ends quickly in your studies even if you get certain leads or small pieces of evidence along the way.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

In regards to the Baha'i faith, I'm well open to the potential of their leader being inspired, but am a little skeptical that some of the messages delivered aren't a bit dated in today's times and modern society.

 

[Aupmanyav]

The biggest negative is that sometimes this opening of the mind can take me down a deep, philosophical rabbit-hole that can be scary.

Keep away from rabbit-holes. Be on your own, don't do guru / sect thing. A newbie could be mislead.

 

[Nakosis]

Keep away from rabbit-holes. Be on your own, don't do guru / sect thing. A newbie could be mislead.

Hey, wait a minute... muh Guru said, umm
Ok, maybe that's a part of why I'm screwed up.

 

[George-ananda]

In regards to my pursuit of better understanding the Hindu faith, I feel it really opens my mind and heart. The biggest negative is that sometimes this opening of the mind can take me down a deep, philosophical rabbit-hole that can be scary.

In regards to where I stand with Jesus and the Abrahamic God, I think there is some comfort in the Christian stories as well as praying to Jesus and the Abrahamic God, but am not certain on many specifics.

In regards to where I stand with New Age, I see it's an even larger rabbit-hole than what I had mentioned about Hinduism, but those who come out on the other side of it seem to do well. Doesn't mean I consider myself New Age or will necessarily do so.

In regards to subjects like spirits and ghosts, psychics and the like, you reach dead ends quickly in your studies even if you get certain leads or small pieces of evidence along the way.

I was raised Catholic and am now a Hindu/Advaita/Theosophy/New Age type much interested in the paranormal.

What is your one or two biggest rabbit holes/dead-ends with this stuff?

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

What is your one or two biggest rabbit holes/dead-ends with this stuff

Since we know what happens in this life from what we can see, and just that.... my what-ifs focus on the origins of life, what the gods want currently, and the afterlife.

 

[Vinayaka]

Since we know what happens in this life from what we can see, and just that.... my what-ifs focus on the origins of life, what the gods want currently, and the afterlife.

I think those are rabbit holes for just about everyone. Of course some folks have convinced themselves they aren't, that they 'know'.

 

[George-ananda]

Since we know what happens in this life from what we can see, and just that.... my what-ifs focus on the origins of life, what the gods want currently, and the afterlife.

I'll give you my thoughts for what they are worth.

Advaita/Theosophy/New Age are generally called nondualist on theology meaning God/Brahman and creation are not-two. Abrahamic Religions are dualistic meaning God and creation are two.

In typical non-dual thought God/Brahman is all that is. As a play/drama God/Brahman separates sparks of itself from itself in Act I (producing a universe of seemingly separate things). In Act II God/Brahman returns itself to itself (finding Oneness, Liberation, Nirvana).

Why does God/Brahman do this? For the beauty and joy felt in spiritual growth. This beauty and joy can not be experienced without temporarily imposing finiteness on itself.

Life is a learning process of returning to God/Brahman. After we die we process the lessons of the last life on the higher astral plane eventually seeing the need to experience more (reincarnation). In the end, Liberation/Oneness for all is found.

 

[ClimbingTheLadder]

Abrahamic Religions are dualistic meaning God and creation are two.

Obviously not, Creation isn't a second God.

 

[George-ananda]

Obviously not, Creation isn't a second God.

The meaning is God is separate from his creation in dualism. We are not God.

In nondualism..We are God but experiencing temporary separateness

 

[ClimbingTheLadder]

The meaning is God is separate from his creation in dualism. We are not God.

In nondualism..We are God but experiencing temporary separateness

I don't know about the term "nondualism" but I believe Monotheism by it's very definition has to be Monism or else it isn't Monotheism.

In the Judeo-Christian Bible there are a lot of hints (Genesis 1:26, Genesis 2:7,Genesis 9:6-7, Exodus 3, Exodus 20, many parts of Isaiah and many ongoing symbols in the New Testament, et al)
And in Islam, the central axiomatic formula which is the entire basis of everything in Islam is La ilaha illa'llah (There is no God but God) even the very first Surah revealed to Muhammad states "man has transgressed all bounds when he sees himself as self-sufficient". The profound doctrine of Tawhid is very deep.
Surah 6:103, Surah 24:35, Surah 57:3, Surah 112 et al.

In "nondualism" or Monism, straight away is the Shema, as we also see rectified with the concept of Tashbih in Islam (God being all-pervading).

 

[Aupmanyav]

Since we know what happens in this life from what we can see, and just that.... my what-ifs focus on the origins of life, what the gods want currently, and the afterlife.

Origins of life: Abiogenesis - Wikipedia
What God wants?: Is there a God?
After-life: Chemical recycling.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

God who?

I said gods. But I may be better off wording it as "the powers that be".

 

[Vinayaka]

I said gods. But I may be better off wording it as "the powers that be".

Hehe ... don't listen to Aup ... he's older than me ... and an atheist to boot. Guy like that shouldn't even be on a religious forum, let alone dishing out advice to innocents like yourself.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I said gods. But I may be better off wording it as "the powers that be".

Kit-Kat, I use a dark background. On RF, I get the reply portion in white and the text also in white. So I type something (more than 5 letters and save it). While editing, everything is in dark color and I have no problem with that.

So here, "God who" was not a post, not a statement, it was just a filler to be changed immediately after being posted, which I did (but not before you replied to it).

Yeah, I am old in years, but still young at heart, just out of teens.