Conversation Board - Confused by Traditional Religious Content Here

NMM

New Member

Offline

ALK Member

Posts: 17
Gender: male

Re: Confused by Traditional Religious Content Here
Reply #60 - Jan 7^th, 2013 at 1:04am

Petrus,

I appreciate your input, but we seem to have fundamentally different views on the tenets of organized religion.

You wrote:

Petrus wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 10:22pm:

Hey NMM,
So if you see people mentioning Christianity a lot here, I think a big part of the point, is that people are comparing what they have been taught as Christians, with what their actual experiences in the Afterlife are. By doing that, they can figure out what parts are true, what aren't, what maybe is true but is just distorted a little bit, and in that way, they can receive resolution and closure.

.

I feel that you actually make my point for me.

One can't really believe in Christianity and still accept the possibility of the departed not going to heaven or hell.

Yes, I understand that someone raised with a specific belief system may encounter unassailable facts that contradict their upbringing-that is exactly what happened to me.

But one can't have both views. You either believe in a religion that says you go to heaven or hell or you don't. There really isn't any middle ground with organized religions.

There may be some leeway in modern discussions of which gospels were chosen or how individual or group agendas affected the resolutions of the Council of Nicea, but those are not fundamental issues.

The issue of absolute punishment or reward in many organized relgions-but Christianity foremost-is not debatable. It is a tenet.

So I must repectfully disagree with you.

Back to top

IP Logged

NMM

New Member

Offline

ALK Member

Posts: 17
Gender: male

Re: Confused by Traditional Religious Content Here
Reply #61 - Jan 7^th, 2013 at 1:53am

It would really be helpful if people in general, and, specfically in these threads, would make a distinction as to exactly what god or gods they are referring to.

In Western monotheistic religions, "God" is context sensitive. "God" typically means either Allah (the Muslim deity) or Yahweh/Jehovah (the Jewish/Christian deity).

It is interesting in that Christianity is, in my experience the most "blurry" of the religions. Muslims often use the name Allah and Hindus might mention any of a number of gods or goddesses such as Shiva.

Christians, especially American Christians, somehow seem to think that everyone else shares their views and rarely address their deity by name.

There are occasions when Christians use a specific name: Emmanuel for Jesus and Jehovah for God.

It is interesting that Christianity, which is actually a "branch" of Judaism, rarely uses the name "Yahweh," a traditional Jewish name.

Here is something to think about...

...the Gnostics state that the physical world was created by a deity who thought he was the only god but wasn't.

This deity created a fundamentally flawed world (predation, death, suffering, etc.). His creation has been attributed to two main possibilites:

1. He meant well, but he wasn't really competent. He was a "partial god" and has thus been called the "demiurge."

2. He really wasn't all that cool. This viewpoint is often held by those who often refer to the "blind god" as "Samael."

The most basic concept in Gnosticism is this:

The physical world, the world of corruption, suffering and death could not possibly have been created solely by an omnipotent, all knowing, all caring, all powerful deity.

Many Christians state that there was no suffering, death or predation until "the fall." That is interesting. It would mean that no living being ever harmed another living being in the original existence.

So this view states that not only was animal predation nonexistent, that not one animal ever tore a leaf from a tree or a blade of grass from the ground.

That must have been quite a world-a world where all animals ate only dropping fruit or ripened grains-a world where nothing was ever harmed.

Here is something to think about...

...perhaps Jesus was really referring to the ultimate creator of the universe-the entire universe, physical and nonphisical.

If this was so, it was his presence in the Jewish community which caused people to believe he was addressing Jehovah when he was not.

Just a possiblity.

If any forum participants want to embrace Judeo-Christian views while investigating other possibilities, reading up on Gnosticism may be helpful.

There are excellent online resources about Gnosticism which one can find with a simple online search.

Two very interesting books on Gnosticism in general and "the lost gospels" in specific are:

"Beyond Belief The Secret Gospel of Thomas" by Elain Pagels

"The Gospel of Thomas The Gnostic Wisdom of Jesus" by Jean-Yves Leloup

The TV networks "A&E" and "History Channel" have had several excellent programs on Gnosticism and other topics such as the specific Christian evolution of the view of Satan.

Netflix has many good programs. Just search for "lost gospels" or go to the "Faith & Spirituality" genre.

Be prepared, however. These programs may cause you some real problems if you are a Christian but have an open mind.

One program describes how parts of the Judeo-Christian canon was partially assembled from other religions. For example, the bibical story of the flood was taken directly from earlier religious text(s), most likely "The Epic of Gilgamesh."

I wish everyone success in whatever peaceful path they may have embarked upon.

Back to top

IP Logged

BobMoenroe

Ex Member

Re: Confused by Traditional Religious Content Here
Reply #62 - Jan 7^th, 2013 at 12:28pm

Quote:

Griffin,
I was just making the point that Robert Monroe had appreciation for christian practice and thought, as evidenced by his endorsement of "the Course in Miracles". [...] The fellow who gave the presentation was Jose Gastanega. It was in '77 or '78, in Richmond VA. It was at a 10 day Gateway workshop that I attended. [...]"

Did your endorsements change during the period from 1977 to 1995? I gave breast milk two thumbs up in '77. The following year, cow milk in a bottle got two thumbs and one toe up.

Back to top

IP Logged

recoverer Super Member Offline Afterlife Knowledge Member Posts: 5027 Gender:	Re: Confused by Traditional Religious Content Here Reply #63 - Jan 7^th, 2013 at 1:43pm Right. We also need to use our discrimination when dealing with people. Griffin wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 11:00pm: That makes sense to me. Just as it is, out and about in the physical world. Good night & good dreams....
Back to top	IP Logged

Berserk2

Super Member

Offline

Posts: 844
Gender: male

Re: Confused by Traditional Religious Content Here
Reply #64 - Jan 7^th, 2013 at 11:43pm

The mark of a genuine spiritual quest is a longing for awareness of all the relevant facts, barriers, and dangers of self-deception, so that the quest's legitimacy can be validated. Some posters here are not up to this challenge and content themselves with cartoony caricatures of Christianity to abort their sensed obligation to experience the faith at its best. So they ignore easily established facts that refute their superficial analysis.

Thus, they overlook the fact that the New Testament and early church provide the earliest literary evidence for a belief in soul retrievals from lower planes. They overlook the biblical teaching that God's love never permanently abandons anyone after death. In C. S. Lewis's words, "the gates of Hell are locked from the inside!" As in the Monroe-Moen model, so in Jesus' teaching the principle of like attracts like governs postmortem assignments, so that the possibility of universal salvation always looms large, even for those consigned to a so-called "eternal " Hell. Actually, neither the Hebrew (olam) nor the Greek (aionios) terms translated Hell actually means "eternal." But obviously the poster bigotry of this site further vouches for the principle that like attracts like on the internet. Fortunately, this site also attracts a few open-minded souls who are willing to take new pictures with no predetermined assumptive lens and to take people one at a time. That's why I still lurk here and occasionally post.

Don

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jan 8^th, 2013 at 1:28am by Berserk2 »

IP Logged

a channel

Ex Member

Re: Confused by Traditional Religious Content Here
Reply #65 - Jan 7^th, 2013 at 11:45pm

I wasn't aware that there were so many traditional Christians and viewpoints here..???

There are some of us here who are not interested in religion, but through "non physical" oriented experiences have a lot of respect for Yeshua (Jesus) and his example and basic teachings.

Re: Monroe and Christianity, his wife Nancy was bit of a Christian Mystic, but it seems to have taken Bob a good long time to be open minded to what Jesus was all about. A number of his explorers talked about Jesus at some point in their sessions, and at some point Bob asked his then friend, remote viewer Joseph McMoneagle to remote view a target--which he later revealed was Jesus. So whether or not the ACIM connection is true, it's seems true enough that he had some eventual interest in what and who this character was about.

Re: Monroe and ACIM, while i have A LOT of respect for R.A.M. and think he was generally a very perceptive person, i'm aware that even Bob could be "fooled", mislead, or just have mistaken perceptions or interpretations. He was after all not a "He/She" type yet. That doesn't take away from his accomplishments or general awareness, service, and perceptiveness.

Back to top

IP Logged

carl

Full Member

Offline

Posts: 122

Re: Confused by Traditional Religious Content Here
Reply #66 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 3:21am

Berserk2 wrote on Jan 7^th, 2013 at 11:43pm:

The mark of a genuine spiritual quest is a longing for awareness of all the relevant facts, barriers, and dangers of self-deception, so that the quest's legitimacy can be validated. Some posters here are not up to this challenge and content themselves with cartoony caricatures of Christianity to abort their sensed obligation to experience the faith at its best. So they ignore easily established facts that refute their superficial analysis.

Thus, they overlook the fact that the New Testament and early church provide the earliest literary evidence for a belief in soul retrievals from lower planes. They overlook the biblical teaching that God's love never permanently abandons anyone after death. In C. S. Lewis's words, "the gates of Hell are locked from the inside!" As in the Monroe-Moen model, so in Jesus' teaching the principle of like attracts like governs postmortem assignments, so that the possibility of universal salvation always looms large, even for those consigned to a so-called "eternal " Hell. Actually, neither the Hebrew (olam) nor the Greek (aionios) terms translated Hell actually means "eternal." But obviously the poster bigotry of this site further vouches for the principle that like attracts like on the internet. Fortunately, this site also attracts a few open-minded souls who are willing to take new pictures with no predetermined assumptive lens and to take people one at a time. That's why I still lurk here and occasionally post.

Don

Thanks Don. Now that all those former posters are now filtering back after the 'Mayan Calender' end of the world scenario, and the 'New Age Ascension' to the 4th or 5th dimension for those 'White Robed Posters' on this forum didn't happen! Now they are voicing their frustrated opinions on this forum! Why me!? They might say?...Ego and bullshit people. Happy 2013 to 2020! Life on Earth goes on! Best Regards. Carl.

Back to top

IP Logged

Griffin

Junior Member

Offline

Posts: 62

Re: Confused by Traditional Religious Content Here
Reply #67 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 9:56pm

Bless you Carl, I couldn't have dished out such a steaming heap of self-rightous disdain any better! Yum! Now that all the posters I can't stand are whimpering back with all their questions and posts about their experiences..... because 2012 came and went you babies! And guess what? The rapture didn't happen! Jesus didn't come down in a flying saucer and hand out food-stamps! The Buddha didn't drive up in his Rolls-Royce and tell you how special you are! You're all losers, goldern New-Agers, every last one a you! Go back to what-ever rock you crawled outta, goldern heathens! This is a god-fearing forum and it ain't no place for ya! And you kids! Get off my lawn! And stop tracking mud across my clean kitchen floor! Yer all going to hell! ......... are you gone yet? Awful quiet here. Gee.... I'm kinda lonely....Wait! Come back! I wanna yell at ya some more! STUPID NEW-AGERS! #*&%#!!!!!!!

Back to top

IP Logged

pratekya

Full Member

Offline

Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 150
Los Angeles, CA
Gender: male

Re: Confused by Traditional Religious Content Here
Reply #68 - Jan 9^th, 2013 at 1:00am

I'd like to respond to the original post, and just make a couple points.

Quote:

I have just discovered this site and will read more posts and obtain Mr. Moen's published works. Regardless of his input or views, I am still befuddled by so many posters espousing traditional religious views.
I am viewing this site because I have firmly rejected the theological ideas of established religions.

To be redundant, and I don't mean to offend, but why are so many here rehashing the same old bits?

First off your premise that everyone has rejected all traditional concepts of Christianity or other religions is not necessarily the same premise that everyone else approaches this site with. Some people (like myself) are both open minded to new ideas and also embrace many traditional spiritual truths, about the identity of Jesus for instance.

Quote:

Monroe and the Toltec literature I am familiar with clearly state that there is no "God" in the form of a singular, judgemental deity.

Which apparently you find to be more compelling than traditional texts. Just because Monroe and the Toltec literature you're familiar with contradict the beliefs of some here doesn't make their beliefs automatically false and not worth airing. It seems like you are arguing that because you have rejected traditional religious views, and moved on, and others have as well, you expect everyone else to do the same. Remember I am not claiming your view is automatically wrong because it contradicts what I know about God and Jesus; if I was then you would have a right to think I was 'claiming intellectual territory and trying to exclude others' so to speak.

Quote:

So why such consistent and pervasive focus on these established religions and their entrenched laws and tenets?

Because things can be true regardless of the age in which they are written down.

Quote:

My point, my complaint, my disappointment is that so many here want to compare baby photos rather than try to move as efficiently as possible to adulthood (ultimate human evolution).

I'd say three things:
1/ your point is insulting. Those of us who hold on to some traditional beliefs are babies, and the adults (including yourself) have moved on apparently.
2/ you make the mistake of assuming that later relevation is more correct or true or consise, and therefore worth hearing. Muslims will say the Quran is automatically more valid because it is a later testament (and because its the literal word of God, and the Christian scriptures were corrupted).
Some people make the opposite mistake, and argue that even more ancient texts than the New Testament are automatically more valid.
The philosophical reality is that these revelations, or truths, or world views, or whatever you want to call them are independently true or false; they are not necessarily dependent on how old they are.
3/ my next criticism is a common one I find among new age thinkers, and that is they are very tolerant people of just about any concepts except for the Jesus found in the bible. Jesus as an ascended master is fine; Jesus as a Buddha or a Bodhisattva is fine, Jesus as a failed revolutionary leader or a literary figment is fine; however Jesus as he is generally presented in the Christian New Testament is simply unacceptable. A lot of people who preach tolerance and detest the moral judgments of Christians absolutely abhor Christianity with their own moral judgments.

Quote:

I find many of these personal suppositions and simple restating of the Bible, Koran, or other old texts (forum postings) to be of little or no value to my quest.

So don't read them then. Secondly, are you the only person who reads this website? Does everyone else have exactly the same belief system as yourself? Third, is it possible, just maybe, that there are other genuine spiritual seekers out there who hold on to traditional beliefs about Jesus, and should be treated as valid spiritual seekers?

Lastly, I'm curious about this judgmental view of traditional Christianity that you have - meaning it seems like you are beating a straw man here. Have you read the gospels and thought deeply about them? Have you ever noticed that Jesus has a huge emphasis on love and commands us to love others? Or read in the gospel of Luke about his concern for the poor and social justice? Or consider that the anger of God can come from witnessing the abuse of others and out of a love for others? I think you may be fighting a version of Jesus that isn't accurate.

Back to top

IP Logged

Lights of Love Super Member Offline Afterlife Knowledge Member Posts: 881	Re: Confused by Traditional Religious Content Here Reply #69 - Jan 9^th, 2013 at 1:27am Well stated Pratekya! If the path you follow leads you to spiritual growth as in becoming a more loving person, then you are on the right path. Love defined includes respect and tolerance for the beliefs of others among many other attributes such as patience and caring.
Back to top	Tread softly through life with a tender heart and a gentle, understanding spirit. IP Logged

Griffin

Junior Member

Offline

Posts: 62

Re: Confused by Traditional Religious Content Here
Reply #70 - Jan 9^th, 2013 at 2:09am

I know your thoughts are directed towards the original poster and I hope she'll respond. I hope my thoughts don't intrude too much.... For me, it isn't the Being that went by the name of Jesus that is a problem. It's just how traditional Christianity has played out in contemporary society as the dominant western religion. On a smaller scale, Buddhist schools, non-dual schools, mystic schools of all stripes in the West have also not lived up to the healer's credo of "Do no harm" .... and there ARE individuals and schools within Christianity and other forms of spirituality that are doing great work, that are living up to "Do no harm". Where I live ( the US ) Christianity as the dominant religion is something that is..... not my cup of tea. I have a friend who is a christian minister. We play music together. ( believe it or not I've been playing and singing gospel music for 40 years ) But I have no affection for organized religion in contemporary society. I personally think that ANY religion is something to eventually move through and out of. (I come out of Zen Buddhism ) That's just my personal opinion. To me, religion or any organized system is a vehicle that you eventually leave. Carrying the boat with you after you've used it to cross the water becomes a needless burden and limitation.... these are my opinions, I speak for no one but myself and advocate no particular belief-system. I am selling nothing.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jan 9^th, 2013 at 10:17am by Griffin »

IP Logged

BobMoenroe

Ex Member

Re: Confused by Traditional Religious Content Here
Reply #71 - Jan 9^th, 2013 at 1:40pm

"If they had DNA testing and lie detectors back then, christianity wouldn't even exist" - Bus passenger

Back then, 'christian open mindedness - open for faith' and 'fear and biased' were the standards for journalistic integrity, which means fox news is somewhat older than they've let on, but none the wiser.

For those christians who still doesn't get it: why can't you pull the net over some new agers - the very same reason some christians shy away from O.T. - too dark.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jan 9^th, 2013 at 2:57pm by N/A »

IP Logged

Mystic Tuba

New Member

Offline

ALK Member

Posts: 30

Re: Confused by Traditional Religious Content Here
Reply #72 - Jan 9^th, 2013 at 3:56pm

To the original poster:
This site attracts beginners and those who like to argue intellectually about their beliefs. Some, after they progress in their spirituality, stay to try to help newbies. Others, finding that they no longer fit the resonance of this site, move on. It also attracts trolls because it is not moderated to any large extent, and some people really have fun being trolls.

Back to top

IP Logged

recoverer

Super Member

Offline

Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 5027
Gender: male

Re: Confused by Traditional Religious Content Here
Reply #73 - Jan 9^th, 2013 at 4:36pm

Regarding what has "recently" been discussed, for the most part I believe it is important to listen to our heart and common sense. If a belief system interferes with this, it probably isn't the best path a person can take. Listening to our hearts doesn't include being ruled by fear.

I spoke to a lady at work recently. She is Catholic. She said her parents attended a Catholic conference and at the end of the conference they witnessed an exorcism. It really scarred them (seems like an odd conference event).

If the time comes when their souls need an approach that doesn't include the non-preferable dogma that Catholicism includes (I'm not saying it's all bad), the fear that was created when they watched the exoricsm might get in the way of their finding a perhaps more expansive approach.

Related to this, the lady I spoke to expressed the belief that only a Catholic priest can perform an exorcism. Of course this isn't true.

When it comes to Catholic dogma, whatever an exorcised spirit is, I figure it is inately divine. For whatever reasons it ended up developing in a negative way. It is best to try to inspire such a spirit to let go of its negative way and move towards a more positive approach. How can this be done if it is treated as evil demon that can never be redeemed?

Bruce wrote of Curiosity sending out probes that got lost. If this interpretation is true, then perhaps some of these lost probes are beings that are known as demons. If so, perhaps they should be treated in such a way rather than as beings that don't deserve to be helped so they can progress to a positive way of being.

Back to top

IP Logged

Rondele

Ex Member

Re: Confused by Traditional Religious Content Here
Reply #74 - Jan 9^th, 2013 at 5:46pm

Yes Pratekya, excellent post!

Just to add my 2 cents, there's no question that Christianity is about the only organized religion these days that has the dubious distinction of being politically correct to attack.

Islam, on the other hand, gets a pass no matter what kind of atrocities are committed in its name.

To repeat Pratekya: "what some I find among new age thinkers, and that is they are very tolerant people of just about any concepts except for the Jesus found in the bible. A lot of people who preach tolerance and detest the moral judgments of Christians absolutely abhor Christianity with their own moral judgments."

One point here- it's not so much that the new agers dislike Jesus, it's more that they criticize organized Christian churches and esp certain preachers. I have to wonder how many of them have actually read any of the Gospels before they spout off their politically correct criticisms.

And yes, just because something is 2,000 years old doesn't mean it's no longer true. To me, nothing is more inspiring than the Gospels and Jesus' teachings. To diminish or dismiss them because they are not "new age" shows a tremendous lack of historical knowledge and intellectual thought.

R

Back to top

IP Logged