Hi LumbyLad,

Why is it important to you that we pretend we are the final arbiters of who is in and who is out?

You say you are a Christian.  If you are we should be able to see that in how you live your life.

You'll make mistakes just like the rest of us.

I disagree with you about quite a bit of your intro to the actual question.  So what?

It might mean that you and I wouldn't be able to be community together as there is so much that we couldn't relate on.  I don't think that makes either one of us "lesser" of "non" so much as it makes us "different."

Can we still be civil towards one another?

To me that is more important that whether or not you "qualify" under any theological lable. 

Grace and peace to you.

John

Love God - Love each other.  That's about it!  I don't think you are violating that basic principle.

Your searching would suggest that you are Christian. Not that only Christians search of course, but your grappling with the "elements of faith" sounds pretty Christian to me.

That sums it up for me and for anyone who makes such a claim and even with some who don't....

LB

Well, there are some things a man just can't run away from.    

John Wayne, Stagecoach

Somebody tells you that Caesar salad is really good, and you decide to make it for your next party.  So you open up the recipe book and look at all the ingredients and the first thing you see is anchovies.  You hate anchovies – in fact there are a lot of ingredients there that you find repulsive.  So you make it your own way.

The guests show up and you introduce your Caesar salad.  Those who have tasted Caesar salad think – Wow this is nothing but lettuce, but much worse, those who have never tasted Caesar salad are being lied to, and because of that, they may never taste the real thing.

Hello lumbylad........God bless you.......

When Jesus cried from the Cross .....Lord why have you forsaken me.....this to me means..that He chose to come back here on His own....as a separte part of the Trinity as the Son of God...when He died on the cross and spoke these words it meant that He was indeed alone as the decision He made before He came here....this is what I believe...He does say I lay down my life ...my choice.....and that is what He did....it makes Him separte ...His own person and part of the Trinity.....

What ever path you take lumbylad....it seems you are still working towards a God of Love a God of peace and power....the teaching of christianity.....are the Father , the Son , the Holy Spirit....these are what Jesus taught when He lived His life here on earth....He was God as one of the important aspects of the Trinity.....

Are you a christian ....that is for God and you to decide....I believe we cannot do God half way...the bible has over 300 prophecies of the coming of Jesus in the old testament and of course Jesus journey here as the Son of God, healer, teacher .........

I agree that Jesus would of travelled the world and encounter many different religions...and these would of been part of His teaches as God uses every part of our journey...it is what builds our character...in His likeness........

But you choose the path of your journey and I ask God to bless it as you learn and grow the way your heart feels.....what works for you may not work for others or visa versa.....

Be blessed....Praise the Lord God....

IJL:bg

Greetings!

Just as each of us have a unique and individual relationship with one and another, and all those in our lives, I believe we each have an individual and personal relationship with Jesus.  We might have different understandings of our friend Jesus, and each of us may determine we know or believe something different about him than others do.

I think if a person believes they are a Christian it is not up to me to decide or determine or tell them whether they are or they aren't.

Saul_now_Paul - are you using your caesar salad story as an analogy for how others will know about who and what Jesus is, depending on what people tell them?  Is there not some trust for you that the spirit will bring about the truth for them in their lives?

In time, I believe the spirit will guide us into all understanding - maybe sooner . . . maybe later

Hope, peace, joy, love . . .

To take your analogy further, Saul_now_Paul:

I am presuming that your analogy equates Jesus with the man who came up with the original Caesar salad recipe (purported to be Caesar Cardini). 

How do you know that the caesar salad recipe you are starting with is the original recipe aka the"real thing"?  Who determines that?  Mr. Cardini is not alive anymore to verify your recipe's authenticity.  I would think that he is the only one who could unequivocally say if your recipe is his exact recipe that he invented.

In this same way, Jesus is not alive anymore to unequivocally state what did and did not happen in his life and what he did and did not say and in what context, etc.  We rely on the Bible to gain insight into this.  Yet, even the Bible cannot agree - we have four different gospels.  So then, who exactly determines what is the "real thing" when it comes to Jesus, his life events, his teachings, his intentions?

LumbyLad: With respect, I would like to point out some of the inconsistencies in what you have posited here.

You wrote: "I do not read the Bible literally, but I do read it and glean some good from it. Unfortunately most of Christianity, from Paul's first church congregations through Constantine to all of the revisions of the Bible, is full of fiction or at least metaphoric language. Initially it was not meant to deceive, but as time passed it is likely the legend grew and even deception was introduced..."

So essentially what you are saying is that we cannot trust the biblical texts to be authoritative on the historical life and teaching of Christ (among all other things). Further, you wrote:

"I choose not to believe in the supernatural aspects of our "faith" - that Jesus was the "son of God" who, after his crucifixion, rose from the dead, appeared to the faithful and ascended into heaven..etc... but realistically it is more likely that he was just a man who was such a great Leader that he succumbed to believing, along with his followers, that he was the Messiah, the Great One who the Jews had been waiting for for so long."

You may have chosen to reject certain aspects of the Christian faith, but on which evidence do you claim "realistically it is more likely" that Christ was merely a 'great human teacher', as opposed to who he claimed to be? Was it the 20th century Spong's (non-scholarly) opinion that was imposed onto Christian history?

You yourself asserted that we must have an accurate knowledge of history: "We cannot be harnessed with "non-negotiables" in our beliefs, but we must value our history and know it."

The claim is also problematic. How could Jesus be considered a great human teacher if he claimed to be God's Son, claimed to be able to forgive sin, claimed to the be the only way to salvation, etc. if he was not? This would render him to a liar or lunatic or worse. It is not logically viable to hold this view of Jesus. But hold on, you also said:

"He did a marvellous thing. He taught of a forgiving and compassionate God, in contrast to the God of the Old Testament, the war God of judgment. He taught about passive resistance to the governance of the day and how many of the rules and practices of the Jewish people were not necessary."

But how do you know this? Earlier you told us that we can't trust many of the traditionally accepted aspects of Christian teaching. Before it was Jesus didn't/wasn't, but now it is Jesus did/is. How are these 'facts' about Christ any more credible of the historical Jesus than the others? By whose authority are picking and choosing what to accept and what to reject?

You wrote: "I am a follower of the teachings of Jesus Christ, the great teacher and the carpenter's son.

But you have already cast a shadow of doubt on the knowability of the life and teachings of Jesus. So how can you coherently make this claim?

Say that in reality Jesus's claims that you reject are true after all. Your believing that they aren't does not change reality. If I believe the moon is made of cheese, it doesn't become cheese in reality "for me" just because I choose to believe that about it...no, I am in error in my belief. I do not have that kind of power over objective reality - rather I am subject to it.

 Finally, you wrote: "What do you all think? Am I a Christian in your eyes?"

It doesn't matter whether or not you are a Christian in our 'eyes' because we are not God. God alone is the sovereign judge who knows the thoughts and hearts of every human. After all, it is not the name 'Christian' that saves a person. Many self-professed 'Christians' will be unpleasantly surprised in the end:

"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!"

LumbyLad

Well, all I can say is, right on!!

I think that I have spent most of my church going life heading to this exact same position.  I think that I always had the idea of  "fear of God" as a reason to not try and challenge my beliefs.  After all, if you didn't believe, you would spend the rest of your days toasting weenies over a fire. Then two years ago,we had our Minister of 19 years leave, an interim come in and turn us upside down with a good shake, and now the new Minister is very 21st century.  A few sessions of Living the Questions, really analyzing the Bible, and "fear" becomes "awe".

Suddenly I am no less a believer in Jesus, but a believer in the man, not the three headed apparition.

I think that God as evolution, God as nature, God as the universe, is no less awesome than the God in the Bible. just a different way of looking at IT.  Not something to avert your eyes from, or grovel down to, or kill thine enemies for, but a God that is just that one word  AWE

Look at the night sky.  Doesn't that evoke AWE.  A still lake on a fall morning.  A chickadee eating from your hand.  That is AWE.  Not accident, not fear, but WOW.

IT

Russ

Lumbylad,

you are unique.

Never before has there been you and your experiences are like no other.

The way you walk, the way you smile, the way you read a book, the way your fingers make that sound as they pick up your glasses...all unique.

And you are giving us the gift of sharing that.

I'd say that is much more important than what fan club one belongs to (though, make fun of Battlestar Galactica, and we're on fighting terms :3)

Be a candle, and by your own light inspire others,
Inannawhimsey

I read 3/4 of Butler Bass's book on the Emerging Church.  I read Harpur's Pagan Christ.  I have read about 6 books by Spong and about 10 books by Borg.  I read half of Harpur's Water into Wine book.  I am tired of them all.  So I guess I am not emerging.  I found them interesting but I have always believed that if someone can talk you out of faith you never had it in the first place.

I don't really want to change anyway.  The old way works good for me.

Hi Folks:

This has been a wonderful read. It is truly wonderful to hear the diversity of opinions and ponder what is said. I guess it is time to look at the gleanings:

1. Of course, I related most to RussP, for my "God" is not in human form, although I believe that we were indeed created inwardly in the essence of this great Creative Force. When I talk to God I go inward, to what some may call the "Soul" and LISTEN. Then I take from the golden silence and look around me at the wonder of this world. The resultant feeling and experience is what God is. I find wisdom in some of what the Bible says that is curious, and therefore likely accurate. Jesus is said to reflect God as "I AM". Likewise, when I look for God, I don't look first to the Heavens, but look inward. I, too, "AM" and as many of you said, it is more than just BEING. It is found in working inside-out, not outside-in. The wisdom of our Creator is found deep within us.

2. Thank you Geo, for your points to ponder. Jesus was not a liar. He spoke his truth through the symbols and metaphors of his day, filtered through the values he saw that were hypocritical and the governance of the times. He chose to believe that he was the Messiah and likely had a very passionate relationship with the Spirit within. Like me, he was inconsistent at times, for TRUTH is slippery. He thought that his return to earth was imminent, but this was just a mistake in judgment. He did not understand the idea of evolution or the concept of co-creation. These were not ideas that were talked about at the time. But he was wise enough to know that women were deserving of more equality (a bit) although slaves were Ok to own. His truth came through his experience - the ONLY place where we can find (and chose) our own truth.

3. As for Saul_now_Paul's Caesar Salad, I took this as a rebuke. That my own sifting out of the things "I don't like" made me a liar when I try to pass it off as the original salad. I DON'T try to pass my mix off as the real Biblical teaching. I call it "my truth" and I use the miracles I see around me as more evidence for the existance of a Spiritual Creator and even another spritual plane, than what is in the Bible. We know very little about the historical Jesus, but the little that I choose to believe makes me admire the man, inspite of his divergent beliefs. He got some of it right and what he got right was admirable. Read the Book of Judas for a more cosmological view of Jesus' beliefs. Judas may not have been chosen for one of the sacred books, but he was there too, and wrote about it.

InannaWhimsey: I love your message, although I don't much like Battlestar Galactica. I am 63 and much prefer the wisdom buried in "Alll in the Family". Archie Bunker teaches us a lot, behaving very badly, but possessing the same loving soul that we all have. Edith stays in an abusive relationship but shines like a Saint. Paradox rules. Who said that truth was consistant? What I see with my eyes, feel with my feeling, and choose to believe never makes sense. It is the Journey,not the Destination that is important, and carrying a candle or a light is the ONLY way to make the journey.

BygraceIam: I have never heard this view on Jesus last words. I am going to give this a lot more thought. You have opened a window to another way of choosing to believe. You talk of Jesus' CHOICE. This is what frees us to make our own journey unique, just as Jesus did. I am not sure I would have the courage of my beliefs that he had. For this I admire him.

So thanks all, for the time and thoughts. It is a good thing we do.

PS. Is that Comment * a "non-negotiable"? I realize I have broken the rules by not having a heading that makes sense, but I have yet to figure out how to put something in this space! Make my heading say: To Choose is Divine.

LumbyLad wrote:"Like me, he was inconsistent at times, for TRUTH is slippery. He thought that his return to earth was imminent, but this was just a mistake in judgment."

So you do not believe that Jesus was a liar, but that he was mistaken. This is as large of a problem as it would be were he a liar.

Jesus claimed to be God. In reality, he either was or he wasn't. Not only this, but Jesus told others that their eternal destiny depended on believing in him. He would be a liar if he knew he wasn't God yet claimed it anyways. He would be mistaken if he sincerely believed he was God, but was not. He would be Lord to which we would all be accountable were he correct.

The measure of one's insanity is the distance between who they think they are and who they really are. The magnanimous claims of Christ would render him fully insane were he wrong...but this wouldn't make sense in comparison with the character which he displayed and the profound ethic that he taught which is influential even to this day. Indeed if Jesus was mistaken about himself, why regard any of what he said? Or is it simply because we do not want to face the conviction of his claims which call us to put ourselves aside for his sake, admitting his Lordship in our lives?

LumbyLad wrote: "His truth came through his experience - the ONLY place where we can find (and chose) our own truth."

There is a flaw in the logic of this statement. First you are relegating 'truth' as being purely subjective to the individual. Then, in bold letter you make the claim that this is an absolute truth about the nature of truth. It's called the relativist fallacy and thus cannot be taken to be a true statement about reality.

What did the gospel writers record Jesus saying about the notion of 'truth'?

"To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, "If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."

"When the Counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father, he will testify about me."
 

"I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

Many people recognize these claims to be exclusivistic and thus, offensive. Interestingly however, they are no more exclusivistic than the claims of those who say that there is only one way of thinking about truth (namely that all truth is relative).

Hi Geo:

I may be a "relativist" but then this would make you an "'absolutist". It is obvious to me that somewhere there is an absolute TRUTH. I just don't claim to know it or own it like you. I also don't believe that Jesus knew it. I don't have a problem with what I call his "mistakes", for he was a product of his times. How he experienced his own personal truth is OK with me. He decided from his experience in his communion with God that he WAS God. I can fully understand this, as I believe that God dwells within every molecule in my body. I am his creation and therefore I am created in his "image" and he/she/it is the "image" of me. We can argue all day on what this means. I chose to believe that the first place to look for God is within us. The Soul was likely implanted in my very molecules of being.

Yet I do not believe I am God. I look outside of my Self and see Nature also has a logical pattern to it. So God is evident outside of my Self as well. The WHOLE is greater than the sum of its parts, it is said. I chose to use this as logically so. It conforms with my experience of my self in relationship to life itself. Jesus had the wisdom to find the Creator in himself. That was a good start.

I am sorry if you interpreted me as saying that my experience of my truth was related to any absolute truth. I don't. I use the word "God" to define the Whole, the absolute Truth. I simply don't believe that on the basis of what is written in the Bible, with its inconsistencies and "opinions", that very much of this absolute truth is revealed. Jesus did, however, open up new and transforming ways of looking at a personal God.

I am sure that you, like me selectively take what is in the Bible and chose what to believe. Do you believe in the Rapture? Do you accept the visionary poetry of John the Seer in his Revelation as being the Truth? When the Gospel writers have a different perspective on how things happened, which truth do you accept? I KNOW what Jesus SAID. I don't need you to present what he said as examples of the TRUTH. It was his truth, and that is fine with me. Get 5 people to experience an event and you will get 5 different perspectives. Is one telling the truth and the others lying? Or are they all telling a part of the whole truth. Might a later investigator find other clues that were missed to add to this truth? At what point do we determine the whole TRUTH has been revealed?

"Love is Simple," sings KD Lang. But the essence of God is not. God is Love. Paradox jumps out at every corner when we claim to "know it all". The truth I know does set me free. Jesus was a very wise man for his times. His challenge to the Jewish view of God as "only their God" was a serious challenge. I believe that he was right on this one. His death on the cross was not a waste of time. He died for what he believed. I admire this in him - but only because he caused no harm. Terrorists die for what they believe as well, but they do harm. As a "follower of Christ" (a Christian) I do not claim to only follow him. I admire him and chose him as one of my idols, ONE of the people who I admire, not because he was always right, but because his actions created a church of loving people. These are people like myself who, in my United Church, do not accept everything in the Bible as true, but struggle to explore, to tranform and emerge from the Christian experience, then continue on to struggle some more.

The Bible is full of contradictions and curious "facts". We hardly know the historical Jesus at all. Very little is revealed about his personal relationship with God, his relationships with his parents, his height, weight, personality or likes and dislikes. We know only the bare bones of his teachings, and we cannot be sure these have not been altered over time. Yet there is enough there to light a spark that can grow into something greater. I am glad you have found your absolute Truth. I am glad you are happy with it. I feel just a content with what I have found and the Journey I have chosen to take. I don't need "saving", but thanks for trying....

Can you think of any other categories asides from Liar, Lunatic, or Lord?

Hey JC JC wont you ride with me,

Inannawhimsey

LumbyLad wrote: "I don't need "saving", but thanks for trying...."

LumbyLad: "I may be a "relativist" but then this would make you an "'absolutist". It is obvious to me that somewhere there is an absolute TRUTH. I just don't claim to know it or own it like you. I also don't believe that Jesus knew it."

Most 'relativists' don't realize that they are in fact 'absolute' relativists. Ironically, they seek to relativize all claims from the pinnacle of absolutism. But relativism relativizes itself, rendering one's statements false/incoherent/self-refuting, etc. Hence, we cannot have relativism all the way down. Especially since you touted 'logic' at least twice in your last post, you should be conscious of the 'illogical' nature of this kind of claim. Omitting them will greatly bolster your argument.

So when you assert (as above) that truth is found 'only' from within one's experience, then why should we consider your claim as superior to any other person's? Indeed it is an 'absolute' claim about the nature of truth. So you, like me, are both absolutists, but in different ways.

 LumbyLad: "I KNOW what Jesus SAID. I don't need you to present what he said as examples of the TRUTH. It was his truth, and that is fine with me. Get 5 people to experience an event and you will get 5 different perspectives."

How do you 'know' what Jesus said? Perhaps you are really wrestling with this issue right now (which is fine), because the way in which you oscillate back and forth between saying with certainty of 'what Jesus said' or 'who he was' and claiming that "we cannot trust the Bible" as a means of casting doubt on the historical Jesus, is glaring. (Upon request, allow me to provide examples from your posts.)

Now if you really 'knew' what Jesus allegedly said, as the writers record in the biblical texts (our only true means of having any idea), you would have recognized that Jesus does not claim about himself: "I am a way, and a truth, and a life...there are many ways to the Father other than through me". Similarly, look to Acts 4:12. (But you must have already known that =) Whether or not one accepts the claims is different business - but one cannot go on claiming that Jesus believed 'his' truth was different from everyone esle's taking the NT texts into account. There is no proof for such assumptions that have often been read into them 2000 years later.

LumbyLad: "Jesus had the wisdom to find the Creator in himself".

You claim, that 'as Jesus did', humans should strive to recognize that the divine resides within us. But then you said: "Yet I do not believe I am God". This would be where you and Jesus are different. Jesus, unlike you, believed that he was in equal standing with God; thus, he believed he was God. Necessarily, he either was or he wasn't. You have simply chosen that he was mistaken.

LumbyLad: "The Bible is full of contradictions and curious "facts"...

A profound statement indeed. So profound in fact, that it needs qualifying. Explain.

InannaWhimsey wrote: "Can you think of any other categories asides from Liar, Lunatic, or Lord?"

In fact, I believe that the categorization can be simpler than three. Simply, it is two: He either was or he wasn't. The 'Liar/Lunatic' categories are merely sub-categories of the option of him in reality 'not' being Lord, explaining that either he was willfully or unwillfully wrong about himself.

Can you think of any other categories?

This is really hard core myth structure.  So hard core that I need to know the name of the bloke who wrote it down and what language he spoke and whether or not he had a clear idea of written language when he recorded it.  There is a lot about this passage that needs to be realized. 

This might be a bit of a ramble, so hold on :3

I'll call it 'Shaman'. Someone who is a Limnal Being of sorts, which is a mythic archetype. Someone who lives in the "mundane world" and yet who is able to travel to some sort of Otherworld (the Spirit Realm, the Divine Realm, etc) who then picks up gnosis or can bring bits of that Otherworld back with him.

Another one is 'Poet'. Jesus then is someone who knows that words are real (but in a different way than a stone) and that they can affect others. And that the Divine is where poetry comes from.

Another one is 'Reality Terrorist', who saw the old ways, the slavery to God (and other Gods) and who tried to break them free, using, of course, God-language. "Follow the Way and you will be saved (free from slavery)."

Also, the whole 'Lord, Liar, Lunatic' thing I think is predicated on a non-relation notion, that all the information aboot Jesus, God, etc comes totally from outside the reader. Of the notion that Jesus was all aboot 'Ok. I am the offspring of God and am God Himself and you have to follow Me and then you will be following Him and then you will end up in this place called Heaven which is completely seperate from you and this world.'

When, if one were to take the notions of 'The Son of God', 'I am the Way', 'Heaven', etc as more of Jesus saying 'Ok folks. I am of the Divine so my words are True. Love one another, help those less fortunate than you, and never ever judge each other, follow my philosophy and you will eventually be saved, in the sense of justification by grace through faith.'

So, depending on the reader, Jesus is both a Liar in some sense and a Lunatic in some sense, he is both telling the Truth and not telling the Truth and the whole Liar and a Lunatic is meaningless in some sense as well (if one isn't aware of the culture, history, language, etc of the time, then that reader is free to put in all sorts of semantic pollutions very akin to the search for phlogistion).

Or something along those lines,

Inannawhimsey

ps. I see what you're doing, Geo. You're like a Logic Inspector :3

Haha okay, thanks for that =)

InannaWhimsey wrote: "So, depending on the reader, Jesus is both a Liar in some sense and a Lunatic in some sense, he is both telling the Truth and not telling the Truth..."

Fair enough. But just because the reader interprets these things this way, that doesn't mean that is the way it is in reality, right?

The whole 'Lunatic, Liar, or Lord' approach addresses specifically Christ's claims to deity. If he was telling the truth, then he was the Lord, which people can choose to accept or reject. If he wasn't telling the truth, then he either knew it (Liar), or didn't know it (Lunatic). Other categories may be applied elsewhere, but regarding the validity of this particular claim they are irrelevant. (Which wouldn't disagree with the question you asked because your question was more directed towards other categories of Jesus in general, no? =)

Lumbylad

• I hope you're still with us or if not perhaps Neo can lend me a hand if he's around.
•  
• Thanks so much for sharing with us and in a straight forward manner that I can understand. I am interested in your beliefs.  Could you please explain the following  quote a bit more clearly. I guess I'm thinking evolution continues  automatically so I'm not sure  what it is that we co-create with God ?  Do we as spirits ( after death)  influence  or participate  with mankind in any way?  You say its possible we ourselves may be able to create as God creates in the far future. I've heard this said before but once again, the meaning eludes me.
•  
• Do you mean we would have this power as humans if its possible we can evolve high enough in spirit? Its quite an extraordinary thought !! We consider Jesus and others of this high holy ilk, the Ascended Masters for example as in New Age, to be the highest we know as earthly and divine, reincarnated possibly and able to don a body at will, project their thoughts from the spirit world etc. etc. but not one has been able to actually create a tree from scratch if you get my drift. Or do you mean creating galaxies, stars etc. ? Wow....talk about reaching for the stars.....its possible we've come from the stars!  Very interesting. I read a lot of these theories; totally fascinating.
•  
• Quote:

We participate in co-creating with God, just as evolution has been a result of this process of constant change.

Hi stardust:

I just stated, on a different thread, that we co-create the future. And we co-create it in the here and now--right now! If we don't, then others will, and they may do it more destructively than we, and at our peril.

Our ability to create is the same (opposite) as the ability to destroy. Which way our creative/destructive talent goes depends entirely on our awareness, consciousness, and conscience. If we are aware of our Unity with God and the world, then we think and act from the Unitive viewpoint, and our actions will be largely creative. Then our consciousness and conscience is world-centric rather than ego-centric.

If we are not ware of our Unity with God, and regard ourselves as separate individuals only, who start at birth and expire in death, then our thoughts and actions tend to be ego-centric and potentially destructive.

God is not running the world for us--we are running the world for God!

Who, if not we?

Where, if not here?

When, if not now?

Thanks muchly Arminius. I meant my question in regards to life after death where we will exist as spirits in space. Sorry  if I didn't clarify.

Hi stardust: I just answered this on paradox3's chapter 7 thread.

Hi Stardust:

Sorry, it's hard to keep up with all of these threads and I had forgotten all about this.

My main focus on the co-creating role (as part of the Whole) is in the here and now. As for Life after Death, I tend not to go there. I do believe that as we evolve as humans, we may enter a stage where we can more easily tuck our Shadows behind us and enter the "spiritual" realm with more facility. Then, while on earth, we may be able (say 2000 years from now) dip in and out of the spiritual realm without actually "dying".

Belief is an act of faith. Even beliefs about science end up being acts of faith. We have seen in the discussions about how we can twist words and put spins on anything to appear to know what we are talking about. In the end, none of it is anything by OUR truth. We KNOW very little but we are sustained by hope and by faith. I approach death this way. I have faith in the scientific belief that "energy is not destroyed in a chemical change". I therefore CHOOSE (notice I always use this personal word) to believe that there is a PART of me that is immortal. This part, I choose to call my Spirit, my Soul or the part of God that resides within (sometimes referred to as the Holy Spirit). In this sense, when I die perhaps I emerge with the WHOLE and become "God" (whatever form IT is) or perhaps I remain an individual soul. For no reason at all, I choose to believe the latter. I am drawn to believe that this new existance will remain spiritual but it may attach itself to another body (the math doesn't work out so well here). I belief that God, although I characterize my Creator as an IT, does no harm. We call this compassionate, but it is not the same. Do we participate with God in co-creating after we die? I haven't even thought of that, to tell you the truth. Off the top of my head I would think not. I do not think that the Creator did anything but start the cycle that has one law: that things evolve always to a greater complexity. The "created" are the tools of subsequent creation. We evolve as we deal with our world in a way that works for us or not. Some become extinct and some become dominant. It all depends on how harmonious they learn to live with their environment, which means both other creatures and nature. God is the "spark" that lit the fire. We are the fire that can either consume all, provide light, give off heat, or burn flesh into carbon. Each of the created has a role in this world. It is not just what I do, but what some other form may do in relationship to me. Who knows that some day the stinkbug might take over the world because it has become more adaptive (a Stephen King novel, but always possible)? This is why ECO- Spirituality is so important. We must pay attention to all of God's creation, for it is not only our playground but we are the stewards of it. 

Sorry Stardust. I wish I could be more sure about the afterlife. I leave this to those who know all of the answer - the absolutivists, although now I am apparently an 'absolute relativist'! It is amazing how we have the need always to make others feel something they do not feel or experience. Geo is an expert at using the quote function, taking a sentence and twisting and spinning it around until it appears to say something quite different, or at least very WRONG. Oh well, at least he called me "Sir". Now that was a real complement. Thanks Geo. I see that what you say "about you" is "I believe that God has made a way to humankind through Jesus Christ." Then you go on to talk about being a student and loving Southern Alberta,etc. Well, when I was your age I spent my summers while at the University of BC, working at the Prince of Wales Hotel at Waterton and loved hiking in Montana. I also love music of all kinds. You are obviously more than your beliefs about God. We may have some things in common, although I am old enough to be your father. So thanks for the 'Sir'. You know you are getting old when someone calls you "Sir" (or maybe it is I am wise?).  Struggling to find holes in the words of others is one way of testing the ego and striving to learn more. I fully support it as long as it is kind, and Geo, you have been kind. Later in life we begin to realize that there are certain things that matter a lot and others that don't. I care less about theories now and more about actions that come out of theories. But I respect those younger than I who need to be right and sure of themselves. It is an important talent to be able to take a stand on an issue and debate.

The intrusion of Paradox into life has shown me that what is "logical" may often be illogical and that sometimes when we think we are standing right-side up, we are really upside down, thanks to gravity. I choose my truths carefully from my experience and try to remain flexible as far as other beliefs that seem to be universal in science, politics, religion, etc. Anyway, I have side-tracked Stardust. I hope my answer does not disappoint!

LumbyLad

I do believe that you have just about nailed it perfectly.

It truly is faith, and like the horse and water, my faith is my faith, and I will not, and should not, try and force it on anyone else.

Theories of Life, the Universe, and everything.  Perhaps like the white mice in Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy, what we perceive as our world is just the "now" perception.  We will travel through this life, leave these four dimensions, and find ourselves elsewhere.  Travelling through space/ time from the singularity to the big crunch, or perhaps from before the singualrity to after the big crunch.  Basically, forever.  In that case, we never die, as we were never born, we just evolve from simpler to more complex.

God is the underlying desire to order and become more complex.  That is why, as Bruce Sanguin pointed out, matter wants, no needs, must, become more complex.  Whether than more complex form is benevolent and wise, or not, is free will.  There is no clockwork mechanism toward the future.  This is our world to steward, for good or bad.

ECO-Spirituality...... Whether mankind wants to believe it or not, we are but one experiment in a long line of experiments that have existed on the planet.  We are really nothing special and can go just as extinct as the dinosaur!  "Our" life started out on a planet with a poisonous atmosphere, at least to us, bacteria evolved that produced oxygen which killed the early life forms off, and allowed us to evolve.  We poison our planet and guess what, that early life will happily take over the planet and it can start all over again, only we won't be here.

A good read on THIS topic is "The World Without Us" by Alan Weisman, an exploration of how our planet would respond without the relentless pressure of the human presence.

Anyway, just my thoughts, worth the electrons I used.

IT

Russ

LumbyLad

Thanks for taking the time to post such a long informative reply and thanks Arminius also.

Hey Russ:

So nice to have someone agree in essence, yet when it comes out of your mind to paper (electrons and all), I want to say, "Yes, but...there's more." I tend to agree that the God that we have turned into a compassionate human is superstition, but I am curiously fixed on the "do no harm" principle. I guess that is because creation cannot move to more complexity if the surge is destructive. WE provide the compassion and forgiveness in this world as the creative spirit within REQUIRES of us if we are to survive. So developing a 'partnership" with this "God" is so very vital, however we wish to visualize it or even believe it.

I guess I look at your avatar and see your Self covered in metal against the pollutants that man has made, both in substance and beleif, Russ. Or is that small pin-point lazer beam actually being proactive in doing something to express its power? Since allowing myself to personalize God within and not using words like "...if it is the will of God" and waiting for God to take the ball, I have found my "religion" more affirming and certainly stronger. I try not to get irritated at those who must believe that God is "running" this world, when it is so apparent that he/she/IT is not. "Free will" is indeed "turning you free" and we are so hestant to take the full resonsibility for this. We would rather just curse Eve and batter women. Yet through all of this, which may seem cynical to some, I feel a great Joy in my religion and even my church. I feel excited about where this "emerging" may take us, and hope it will free us from the hang-up we have about Father-dependency.

another way to look at the cesaer salad anology might be that even though you made it very different for you party and many people prefer the more common ways of making it someone who thought they did not like cesaer salad might say "Huh all this time I thought there was only one way to make a cesear salad and I didn't like it turns out there are differnt ways and I like this one.

Peace

Joel

 To me when Jesus called out "My God, My God why have you forsaken me" he was quoting Psalm 22

The bible is very clear on the person of Jesus Christ. Historically we know He was killed for giving Himself Gods name...He was given worship by his disciples ...something the bible forbids outside of God alone...He performed miracles noone else ever has or ever will complete...yes , Jesus Christ was God. To accept Jesus into your heart and become born again is the true definition of a christian , therefore , since you deny that claim , and merely consider yourself good for attending a church with relative high moral standards , you are nothing more than a churchgoer. The only way to become a christian is to accept Christ into your heart and become born again. But to do this you must have faith in who Christ really is and consider yourself a sinner , not a good person. Are you closer ..perhaps .... but one cannot be truly a christian outside of this.

S-P, I feel you are too harsh. It all depends in how the host introduced his Caesar  salad.

My opinion!

Eagle, I am not an expert, but I have been involved in Christianity and its Biblical message all my life. I don't agree with your position and take this opportunity to give you my point of view.

Personally I believe that Jesus was an actual human being who walked the earth and did amazing things. Having said that, I understand things differently.

As far as I know, Jesus never wrote anything down personally. This means that what we read in the Bible is written by others, which makes it suspect. Not only that, but the concensus of the scholars is that Paul was the first author who wrote about Jesus and his actions. Again here we have to remember that Paul himself had never met Jesus in person. This means that he spoke/wrote from a source other than personal.

Several years later Matthew, Mark, Luke and John produced their Gospels. Couple of facts here: The scholarly consensus is that the Gospel writers were NOT disciples of Jesus. In addition they wrote from an era many years AFTER the fact. So, what is the story, Paul was the first Biblical author and he wrote without the benefit of having the Gospel material in front of him and Not having met Jesus in person and this long after the facts/events.

Several years later Mark became the first Gospel author, followed by Matthew, Luke and John. Again, time had gone by and the different Gospels demonstrate that point as the stories themselves are much different.

This is what I know, and this is the information that has shaped my Christianity. It should be clear that you and I work from a different interpretation of the material. I interpret as I discern. You (my opinion) read and interpreted on a literal basis. Be sure to understand that this is NOT a flame. This is an interpretation of your words as  I understand them. It seems to me that we therefore arrive at different understandings which lead us in different directions.

Finally, we arrive at the end point, death! As I read your position, in order to be saved, one has to meet ceertain standards which one has to profess. My opinion, after a long involved life, has become that Life itself is a seemless (don't have a good word) entity that stretches beyond either side of Life. Being 80 at this time I am very aware about the fact that my time is short. How does that strike me? For the information of anybody interested, before birth, during life and after death I am in the hand of God (as the saying goes) and therefore "saved". Listening to the Bible though, God, at all times,invites us to respond possitively to the option of LIFE. (Deuteronomy). All ANYBODY has to do at any time, is to open the door to that persistent knock/invitation to LIFE.

Blessings.