Sign in to follow this  
Ex Nihilo

An Ineresting Take On Karma (And Whole Lot Of Stuff)

Recommended Posts

ok.i read the whole article,found it interesting,but i already agree with it anyway.

was more curious about your thoughts on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the transcript, and I was pleased to learn that some of my most basic religious assumptions are shared.

Edited by Songster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a bit off-topic, Rev Rattler, but inasmuch as every post that you make (these days) ...

including this topic (that you introduced) all contain the following subscript, I feel that this is

"as good a place as any" to address the statement that you keep repeating.

Here is the subscript that I am referring to:

The 5 points of Christian Universalism:

  1. The Universal Fatherhood of God
  2. The spiritual authority and leadership of His Son Jesus Christ
  3. The trustworthiness of the Bible as containing a revelation from God
  4. The certaintity of just retribution for sin
  5. The final harmony of all souls with God.

The reason that I am raising this subject is a simple one. As a Christian and a Universalist,

I am exceedingly uncomfortable with dogma of any kind, and with four of your dogmatic points in particular.

Of the five "points" ("articles of faith") that you repeatedly list,

I reject the first four out-of-hand as being incompatible with my Christian Universalist faith.

Only point number five do I not immediately reject... and that is most likely because I have no idea what it really means.

Edited by Bro. Hex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bro. Hex, I cannot (and would not assume to) answer for the Rattler, but would rather question your aversion to a statement of HIS personal religious beliefs. How many different sects/denominations posses and share simular basic tenets yet conflict over (seemingly) trivialities? Does Baptism require full submersion to wash away one's sins, or will sprinkling (dry-cleaning) suffice? Why require his Universalist views to conform to your views of Universalism?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoyed reading a take on metaphysics from normally very earthbound economists and political theorists. I was also very surprised how much I agreed with these guys...not a phenomenon I get with most of the conversations these two guys usually engage in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agreed with most of it except for the part about wishing for money. A million dollars in hundreds will fit in a briefcase, so there's a higher probability that the mailman will arrive with a smaller box. It's all a matter of economics.

"It is futile to do with more things that which can be done with fewer." ~ William of Ockham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a bit off-topic, Rev Rattler, but inasmuch as every post that you make (these days) ...

including this topic (that you introduced) all contain the following subscript, I feel that this is

"as good a place as any" to address the statement that you keep repeating.

Here is the subscript that I am referring to:

The 5 points of Christian Universalism:

  1. The Universal Fatherhood of God
  2. The spiritual authority and leadership of His Son Jesus Christ
  3. The trustworthiness of the Bible as containing a revelation from God
  4. The certaintity of just retribution for sin
  5. The final harmony of all souls with God.

The reason that I am raising this subject is a simple one. As a Christian and a Universalist,

I am exceedingly uncomfortable with dogma of any kind, and with four of your dogmatic points in particular.

Of the five "points" ("articles of faith") that you repeatedly list,

I reject the first four out-of-hand as being incompatible with my Christian Universalist faith.

Only point number five do I not immediately reject... and that is most likely because I have no idea what it really means.

Thanks for your interest in my signature Bro. Hex. I am glad to know that others also find comfort from the truth of christian universalism. The 5 points come from the historic 1899 Westminster Declaration, as a way of crystallizing the witness of Universalist churches and societies in America at that time. I don't consider it dogma, nor did those who declared it. As they put it, the points were "commended not as tests but as testimonies in the free quest for truth that accords with the genius of the Universalist Church." The historic Universalist Church was nondgmatic, considered the bible it's only creed, and even that was subjected to individual conscience. I fell in love with it the first time I read it as it communicated more than I have ever been able to in so short a space.

As to your issues with it, I'm sorry they do not ring true to you the way they do to me. Here is how I see them. Point 1 says that God is the spiritual and physical source and sustainer of all creation in all it's wonder. No one is left out of God's family nor ever will be. Point 2 says that christians find their unity and truth not in books or dogmas or clergy or institutions, but in the person of Jesus Christ and the truth he revealed to us: A god who is love, a god who is our father, a god that would stop at nothing to save those of his children who are lost and will never give up doing so until each one is safely back in his loving arms. Point 3 says that the gospel can be trusted, not because of it's human origin but because it is a witness of the Holy Spirit to those in need of good news, I also see that it clearly recognizes that while the bible is indeed a revelation from God, it is by no means the only one. God has spoken, and still speaks, in a variety of ways to a variety of people and no book could ever hope to contain his fullness, since the universe itself cannot do so. Point 4 says that while theosis is constructive, it is also purgative. Sins, the evil that we do out of malice and ignorance, leave marks or stains on the world, on those harmed, and on the sinner. Purification is needed to wash away those stains. Perhaps another way to characterize it is that sin creates a (karmic) debt, which will either be paid for or forgiven. I turn to Jesus for forgiveness but see that wrong's must be righted and that which I haven't been forgiven for, I will pay for, either in this life or the next (or maybe even the next). Point 5 says that all will be restored, that the wrongs will indeed be righted and all that was once broken will be made whole. I look forward to that day and hope for God's words to be fulfilled: All shall be made alive in Christ!

Perhaps you see it a different way. I'd love to here your testimony as to why you are a Christian Universalist. Maybe we can learn something new together.

Edited by Rev'd Rattlesnake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agreed with most of it except for the part about wishing for money. A million dollars in hundreds will fit in a briefcase, so there's a higher probability that the mailman will arrive with a smaller box. It's all a matter of economics.

"It is futile to do with more things that which can be done with fewer." ~ William of Ockham

It isn't wishing for money. It is asking for it knowing that the check is in the mail. Of course, that is not literal, though, I imagine it could come by mail. The point is, that as Gods, we create our own reality and it might as well be one of wealth as of poverty. Must also keep in mind that, for instance, if you asked to become a rock guitarist and never bothered to practice and practice and practice playing the guitar or pursue what is needed to become one, you will never succeed no matter how much or how often you ask.

Every time I need money, it is there. That does not mean that I can be foolish with my money and not manage it properly but it does mean that I don't have to worry about it like many do. I consider myself to be quite wealthy because of it. All I did was ask for it and I never looked back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't wishing for money. It is asking for it knowing that the check is in the mail. Of course, that is not literal, though, I imagine it could come by mail. The point is, that as Gods, we create our own reality and it might as well be one of wealth as of poverty. Must also keep in mind that, for instance, if you asked to become a rock guitarist and never bothered to practice and practice and practice playing the guitar or pursue what is needed to become one, you will never succeed no matter how much or how often you ask.

Every time I need money, it is there. That does not mean that I can be foolish with my money and not manage it properly but it does mean that I don't have to worry about it like many do. I consider myself to be quite wealthy because of it. All I did was ask for it and I never looked back.

I wasn't objecting to the "wish" for money in itself, I was contemplating this very point in relation to parsimonious nature of the universe. St. Thomas Aquinas held a very similar philosophy... that in order to actualize prayer we must conform to what is (he used the term "God's will") rather than only seeking what we would wish things to be. Mr. James just seemed to have a sort of "Rube Goldberg" approach. Pressing in the same direction, it is even more likely that the mailman would arrive with a check, and even more so if you buy a lottery ticket, and so forth. My position is that, in order to be more efficient, creating our expectations requires just as much effort as creating our doings, and "keep it simple" seems to be advice that is just as wise in the spiritual realm as it is in the physical. These aspects of life are not independent from one another. :)

"Mind is the Master power that moulds and makes,

And Man is Mind, and evermore he takes

The tool of Thought, and, shaping what he wills,

Brings forth a thousand joys, a thousand ills:

He thinks in secret, and it comes to pass:

Environment is but his looking-glass." ~ James Allen, As a Man Thinketh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this