|
Replies: 28
| visibility 451
|
All-In [30000]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8884
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
10
10
Sep 12, 2023, 2:59 PM
|
|
Cheaters might never win, but they can go to heaven. At least, in ancient Egypt.
The Egyptian Field of Reeds (aka, Heaven.) Where a man can work his plow in peace, under the glowing rays of God, for eternity.
In fact, cheating to get to heaven was encouraged in ancient Egypt, because tests can be really hard.
If you’ll remember, to get to heaven after you died, you had to run the gauntlet of the Underworld, Duat, just like the sun god Ra did every night. (He’s the big red guy.) Then, every morning, Ra rose up out of Duat to bring you warming rays of light.
But while dodging all the monsters and baboon guarded lakes of fire in Duat might have been easy for a god like Ra, a mortal stood no chance – unless he cheated!
Those Egyptians were pretty good artists. Compare.
And these cheats were called Funerary Texts. Now, if you were pharaoh, you got your money, and your cheats, for free. Those were the perks for being semi-divine.
Later on the restrictions were relaxed so that all rich people could buy their own Funerary Texts. Sort of like buying your way into heaven. And still later than that, anyone could get in. Not unlike the indulgences that got Martin Luther so pixxed off.
The earliest Funerary Texts, in the Old Kingdsom, were personalized; practically custom fitted to each pharaoh. And they were carved into the walls of his pyramid so he wouldn’t lose them. They were a list of prayers and spells, and some light reading, to help him on his afterlife journey.
By the Middle Kingdom, these spells were simplified and written on your sarcophagus instead. So, they were called Coffin Texts, but served the same purpose. An aid in your next adventure, whatever that was.
Some people still use Coffin Texts to this day…
But the New Kingdom, technology had advanced enough that you could make a book of protective spells and prayers to help you on your journey. And that book was called The Book of the Dead. Sort of a Fodor’s Travel Guide to the afterlife.
Or maybe, “Rick Steve’s Best Sights to see in Hell”
Although the first Books of the Dead were personalized, in time you could simply buy one off the shelf and just write your name in it. But make no mistake, they were still pretty expensive. Maybe a year’s wages for a laborer. Heaven might come at a discount, but it wasn’t free.
.jpg)
But what did you get for your money? Well, sort of a mixed bag of goodies. Since, as a part of getting to the Field of Reeds, you had to name the gods who would judge you (all 42 of them), no Book of the Dead worth its salt would exclude their names. That was sort of a given.
Your 42 Judges. Here’s a few of them, sitting on the left, with their names, so you don’t get embarrassed by forgetting one.
Another part of your test was Negative Declarations. That’s interesting, because it didn’t force you to say what you DID to be a good person, but rather what you DIDN’T DO to be a bad person.
You couldn’t just say “Well, I prayed a lot, and helped a lot of old ladies cross the street, and gave a lot of money to the priests.” It didn’t work that way. You had to show that you DIDN’T do bad things. How many good things you did didn’t count.
And there were spells to help you do that.
Your Negative Declarations were (one for each of your god judges)
1- I have not committed sin
2,3,5,7,9,17,38- I have not stolen (various things…food, land, etc.)
4- I have not slain men and women
6- I have not swindled offerings
8- I have not told lies
10- I have not cursed
11- I have not closed my ears to truth
12- I have not committed adultery
13- I have not made anyone cry
14- I have not felt sorrow without reason
16- I am not deceitful
18- I have not been an eavesdropper
19- I have not falsely accused anyone
20,25,27,15- I have not been angry or violent
21- I have not seduced anyone’s wife
22- I have not polluted myself
23- I have not terrorized anyone
24- I have not disobeyed the law
26- I have not cursed God
28- I have not caused disruption of peace
29- I have not acted hastily or without thought
30- I have not overstepped my boundaries of concern
31- I have not exaggerated my words when speaking
32- I have not worked evil
33- I have not used evil thoughts, words or deeds
34- I have not polluted the water
35- I have not spoken angrily or arrogantly
36- I have not cursed anyone in thought, word or deed
37- I have not placed myself on a pedestal
39- I have not stolen from or disrespected the deceased
40- I have not taken food from a child
41- I have not acted with insolence
42- I have not destroyed property belonging to God
That was HARD.
That’s a pretty tough test for anyone to pass. But, with a good Book of the Dead (like with a good lawyer), you could probably lie your way through a dozen of more of those declarations to the gods…
And in addition to all that, you also got general ritual type spells and protective spells against all sorts of dangers in the underworld. There’s about 200 spells in all, though no Book of the Dead contained all of them. Dangers like…
5. A spell for not having to do work in the realm of the dead. Whoa, work? That’s scary.
7. Protection from animals digging up your corpse. Can’t argue against that one.
Down, boy, down. Good doggie.
14. Spell for removing anger from the heart of the gods. Angry gods are bad.
25. Caused the deceased to remember his name after death. Helpful for those of us up in age.
28. Guarding against the loss of the heart, including theft by robbers or other gods.
Some gods will do anything for a laugh
32. The deceased takes on the identity of Ra to drive back crocodiles with a spear.
33. Protection against snakes, snakebites, or being eaten by a snake.
40. Protection against snakes big enough “to swallow a donkey.”
It could happen
41. Prevents the deceased from being slaughtered by demonic servants.
43. Prevents decapitation in the afterlife.
44. For 'Not dying a second time in the realm of the dead'.
45. Prevents the body from rotting.
51. To not go upside down in the underworld. Apparently walking upside-down was a real problem in the afterlife.
I did see it in the Exorcist, now that I think about it…
52. To not eat excrement in the underworld.
53. To not drink urine in the underworld. 52 and 53 would be WAY up on my list. In fact, I’d list them as #1 and #2.
60. Gives the deceased the power to breathe air. Something we take often take for granted.
63. Prevents the owner from being scalded.
Steam is no joke. Water can burn one badly.
77. Spell for being transformed into a phoenix.
83. Spell for being transformed into a heron.
84. Spell for being transformed into a falcon of gold. They even made a movie about this one.
90. Spell for removing foolish speech from the mouth. A spell not used NEARY enough.
104. Spell for allowing one to sit among the gods.
Just sharing a brew with the almighties
189. Spell for not eating feces or drinking urine. Just can’t have enough back-up spells to protect against this one.
So there you have it. A quick look at The Book of the Dead. Everything you need to make it through the underworld on your way to heaven, in one easy-to-read volume. Also in Books-on-Tape by now I’m sure.
So, if you’re concerned you might need one for just that extra little edge before Death arrives, place your orders now before it’s too late!
Death will still get you, but he can’t block your path to heaven!
|
|
|
|
 |
Oculus Spirit [94309]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95555
Joined: 12/25/09
|
As long as the gods can't judge the heart I'm good.
2
Sep 13, 2023, 7:19 AM
|
|
That gets me every time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24531]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14001
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
2
Sep 14, 2023, 10:54 AM
|
|
I cannot think of a matching response to this fun tongue-in-cheek - I'll leave that to RH Tig - so I'll instead say that it seems to illustrate a basic human desire: Just tell me what the rules are. For worth, happiness, satisfaction, love; just tell me the rules.
There is an adage that says a rules based environment results in two kinds of people: pharisees and rebels. This could explain what we see in our polarized attitudes about religion and politics, and maybe that's what those two things are, answers to 'what are the rules'.
I will propose that attempting to answer that question, from cheat sheets in coffins to the next "From Good To Great" book, simply asks the question more loudly. If we have been asking it for 5000 years, the issue can't be what the answer is, but that we find ourselves having to ask it. How did we come to lack those attributes we're seeking? ClemsonTiger1988® posted a passage several threads below where God is asking us that same question. "Why do you keep asking for rules?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30000]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8884
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
2
Sep 14, 2023, 12:59 PM
|
|
As an extension of the "looking for the rules" aspect, and how we ask for them, I find it interesting that there's an expectation of judgement here as well. And one that goes very far back.
That is, that the things you in this life matter, and you will be held accountable one way or another in the end...either by eternal life, or by eradication (in the Egyptian religion.)
That's not always the same in the East, where religion is often simply advice on how to deal with reality (Toaism), or climbing a spiritual ladder to get closer and closer to God through reincarnation (Hinduism), or tools to understand God (Buddhism).
Even in Mesopotamia your belief, or faith, or acts, didn't really matter. All Mesopotamians went to "hell", regardless of earthly actions. You were a servant, and then you died.
But in the Egyptian and Jewish understandings of God, life is clearly viewed as a test. It's really analogous to a hurdle if you think about it. In Hinduism, say, you move up and down the latter. Have a bad life, move down. Have a good life, move up. It's a continuum, and you get multiple chances to get it right through reincarnation.
But in Egypt, there was only one "weighing of the heart." One hurdle. You got one chance, and one chance only. And in Judaism/Christianity, there's presumably only one chance as well. That is, if you get "sent to hell", there's no way, ever, to get back out. At least not one that anyone knows about.
No amount of remorse, faith, or action will make a difference at that point. You can't hand out glasses of lemonade in hell and pray for the anguished and expect to be called back up to heaven, even if you do truly believe at that point. You failed the test, on earth, and there's no make-up test in all of eternity.
There are some other interesting implications to rules and judgement, too. For the Egyptians, and to an extent, Jews and Christians, you are being judged on how you treat other people.
Those are part of the rules, and part of the judgement. "Love others...etc.)
So others, or your relationship with others, matters in that judgement. I suppose a completely strict interpretation of "faith alone" could be that ONLY the belief in God, and not your relationship with others, is considered to get into the Christian concept of Heaven. I suppose that falls into the faith vs. works debate.
But another interesting thought is that maybe there is a back door between heaven and hell. We only have the perspective of the living. And so from our view, one only goes to heaven, or to hell. You can't do both, and there's no connection between the two.
But you CAN get kicked out of heaven (ask Lucifer), so perhaps there is a way to get kicked out of hell as well. One that is unknown to mortals who only see darkly. Or even, a way to be drawn to heaven directly from he77, if an omnipotent God so desires.
I've never heard of any writing that says that, but again, going directly from heaven to hell or vice versa wouldn't necessarily pass through the world of the living, and so that experience wouldn't be recorded by anyone.
Lots and lots of interesting questions. In an alternative existence, there could be no rules, and no judgement. There doesn't seem to be either in the animal world. But in Western religion there are both, and both seem to have as much to do with how you treat others as your belief in God.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24531]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14001
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
2
Sep 14, 2023, 2:11 PM
|
|
Interesting, a good summary of the various religions views. Is it possible that the reason there are such varied views is the same reason we are still asking 'what are the rules', that the common factor is human thought? You have shown how one culture and history produced a certain way of envisioning it, another produced another. Is it possible that this is not a matter of human development, but the different values of different cultures? We are no more sophisticated in intellect or morality today than 5000 years ago, so a modern religion may make more sense to us than Ra - because we know the earth goes around one of innumerable suns - but our modern philosophies/religions are providing no better answers than Ra did to Egypt.
So, is it possible that mankind's issue is not that the answers remain out of reach, but that the question exists? For example, Jesus's fate was in the balance until Pilate asked, "What is truth?" With that, he gave himself permission to say to a mob, "He hasn't done anything wrong by my book, but I leave it up to you." He didn't know what truth is, and maybe no one does, so it was determined by the immediate needs of a group of people.
What is truth? We don't even know how to decide what it is, let alone know what it is. Isn't that why we keep asking, "What are the rules", and why the rules keep changing, both religiously and secularly? Does truth not actually exist, or is it beyond our understanding? If God exists, why would our most foundational question be unanswerable?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30000]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8884
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
1
Sep 14, 2023, 5:26 PM
|
|
>that the common factor is human thought?
I'd say so. There certainly seems to be a continuous curiosity that man has about such things. Other animals are curious in different ways of course, but there's no way of knowing if they sense an "other" in the universe, or the possibility of an afterlife.
>Is it possible that this is not a matter of human development, but the different values of different cultures?
It could be both I think. Developmental maybe in that it takes a certain mind development to live in larger and larger groups. But that's all over the place, and would make an interesting study all its own. Think about social creatures like bees, or ants, who live in much larger communities than say apes or wolves. And lots of animals are almost solitary. But few would say a bee has a more developed mind than a wolf, even though bees live in larger groups. That's a real mystery.
On the values, there are variations in the specifics, but it seems that a lot of the values are community-oriented. How to get along with your fellow man type stuff. That's not always the case, but it seems that the Egyptian Negative Declarations would work pretty well today if most people followed them.
>We are no more sophisticated in intellect or morality today than 5000 years ago, so a modern religion may make more sense to us than Ra - because we know the earth goes around one of innumerable suns - but our modern philosophies/religions are providing no better answers than Ra did to Egypt.
I think that's a real astute observation. The singular lesson I have learned from all history is that man is man, and has been at least as long as he's been writing. Again, there are variations along the way, but Egyptian mothers loved their children 5000 years ago just as mothers do today. And people still killed each other for greed, or jealousy, or material wealth, or whatever, both then and now.
Very little change in the morality. For the intellect, we do have much better tools today, and we understand the HOW of things, like how lightning works or planets revolve, but it hasn't gotten us one step closer to the WHY of it all. So what we perceive as advanced intellect doesn't get us any closer to some answers. And of course, we are the judge of what "intelligence" is, and the value of it, so you can't get any more biased than that.
I can imagine the first scuba divers thinking "How clever are we? We can breathe underwater now" And a dolphin swims up and thinks "What a bunch of idiots." A dolphin has no need of scuba gear, or credit cards, or ball point pens, or cell phones. He lives his entire life, and perhaps propagates another generation, without them. They're all impressive technology to us, but only to us.
>but our modern philosophies/religions are providing no better answers than Ra did to Egypt.
I think that's true in one sense, but only after the fact perhaps. That is, when the Egyptians were worshipping Ra, they truly believed the sun was their god, and was responsible for various aspects of the world around them. There's no way to know exactly when or why that changed, but I suspect it had to be about the time those aspects could be described or attributed to other things. Fo instance, Thor is no longer necessary when one understands lightning is an electrostatic discharge.
Thor, and Ra, were just descriptions of natural phenomenon. But the phenomenon existed regardless of how they were described or explained. WHY? The HOW is electrostatic, but the WHY is still a mystery, whether one calls it electricity or Thor.
>So, is it possible that mankind's issue is not that the answers remain out of reach, but that the question exists?
I would say absolutely to that. People do, and have, for all of history (in the technical, written definition) expressed the feeling that they sense "an other", or something behind the curtain, or a mystery beyond them. And all indications are, far before the written word as well. And in my mind, every religion is, and has been, and attempt to explain that feeling. So yes, the fact that there is a question at all is the key, in my mind. That by itself seems to presuppose that there is an answer.
But the challenge then becomes "How does one correctly describe that answer? Or is there even only one answer, or might there be multiple answers?"
>He didn't know what truth is, and maybe no one does, so it was determined by the immediate needs of a group of people.
That's a great way of looking at it. In my mind, in that moment (and others) the Jews brought one viewpoint to the table in that situation. It's the old adage of "You find what you are looking for." And the Jews were looking for A) there to be a God, and B) God to be explained in only one way...their way. Lol.
The reality might have been very different. Perhaps the rules did change and they refused to accept it. Perhaps Jesus is/was God and they didn't recognize it. But by their thinking, they, and only they, knew what truth was. And that was a really big assumption on their part I think. And certainly an arrogant one. God may very well have come to them through rules in a book. I'm certain they believed that with all their heart. But that also doesn't mean that he didn't come to the disciples and others through Jesus. Both can be true. Neither side necessarily has a lock on truth.
>Does truth not actually exist, or is it beyond our understanding? If God exists, why would our most foundational question be unanswerable?
The ultimate question, I think. At this point in my life I'm pretty well convinced that it's simply beyond my understanding, which is why I enjoy seeing how so many others, through history, have tried to explain it. But I surely can't speak for everyone, only my personal experiences. Just because I'm in limbo doesn't mean others have not seen truth, if it does in fact exist.
>If God exists, why would our most foundational question be unanswerable?
I think about that all the time, lol. But a lack of understanding doesn't mean a lack of existence. God may or may not be, and may or may not be as we think we understand him. And that opens up a WHOLE different can of mysteries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2186]
TigerPulse: 70%
Posts: 2602
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
1
Sep 15, 2023, 7:40 AM
|
|
“Thor is no longer necessary when one understands lightning is an electrostatic discharge.”
Meme worthy quote right there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24531]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14001
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
1
Sep 15, 2023, 1:05 PM
[ in reply to Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead ] |
|
> "The ultimate question, I think. At this point in my life I'm pretty well convinced that it's simply beyond my understanding, which is why I enjoy seeing how so many others, through history, have tried to explain it. But I surely can't speak for everyone, only my personal experiences. Just because I'm in limbo doesn't mean others have not seen truth, if it does in fact exist."
>If God exists, why would our most foundational question be unanswerable?
> "I think about that all the time, lol. But a lack of understanding doesn't mean a lack of existence. God may or may not be, and may or may not be as we think we understand him. And that opens up a WHOLE different can of mysteries."
Interesting observations. Thanks. I have one reaction, will keep this short as possible. First, let's assume here that God exists. If he doesn't, what follows is moot.
We seem to agree that truth and love are beyond our understanding. We do, however, know what they are, and we desire and experience those things. We have the knowledge of them, without the ability to understand or create them. Conversely, our shortcomings seem to directly result from this inability. I forget who said it, but "every 'sin' is an illegitimate attempt to satisfy a legitimate desire." That's a longer conversation, but after all is said and done, it seems to be true.
This leaves us concluding that God created us destined to dissatisfaction due to a missing universal compass. He then labeled the resulting behaviors "bad", then left it up to us to devise systems to either overcome or atone for that behavior, and then at the end He sits in judgement over which of us, if any, got it right. And as we said earlier in this thread, none have seemed to have gotten it right yet, which is probably why there is such conflict over it. One would agree with any skeptic: that don't sound right.
Before actually concluding that, what if we begin with the assumption God does actually love us? We do a horrible job of displaying love, but as you said, we know it when we see it, so we can sort of describe it. One thing we know is that it is relational. Another is that it cannot be forced. Love is a relationship created by a continuing renewal of the commitment to it (I just made that up, but it seems right). Love has the possibility of aloneness, or it doesn't exist. Love is necessarily a risk.
Those beginning assumptions seem reasonable. So, we have three givens, but a conflicting reality:
1. God created us.
2. He created us for love, which is relational, with Him and with each other.
3. Because He is God, it was done right the first time ...
... but we see a reality where 2 and 3 no longer seem true. The question is "what happened?" If we keep a constant definition of what love is - knowing we can't do that perfectly - one of us had to have changed our minds. If that is what has happened, and if we do not want to make the admission that it was us, would not our inability to understand and satisfy our basic human desires create the sociological and religious differences we have been discussing?
Does it not seem true that what changed had to have been us? And if that is true, isn't the real question in front of us, "What would God do in response?" I'm sure I left holes in that. Feel free to point them out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30000]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8884
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
1
Sep 15, 2023, 2:47 PM
|
|
>Love is a relationship created by a continuing renewal of the commitment to it (I just made that up, but it seems right).
I like this. On a side, one of my very best friends in my youth used to say "Love is like a bucket with a hole in it. You must constantly fill it to keep it, and if you sit back do nothing, it eventually goes away."
I think these are your framing assumptions, if I read everything correctly:
>A. God created us destined to dissatisfaction due to a missing universal compass
>B. God does actually love us
>1. God created us.
>2. He created us for love, which is relational, with Him and with each other.
>3. Because He is God, it was done right the first time ...
And these are the questions...
>Does it not seem true that what changed had to have been us?
With those assumptions I can see that, although one might say the change, or at least the potential for change, was "baked in" at the beginning, if we were created with a missing compass. But, if assumption 3 is also correct, that's the way God wanted it, for reasons only known to God I suppose.
>And if that is true, isn't the real question in front of us, "What would God do in response?"
Whoo. This one is tougher. Predicting God's actions. Well, I'd assume that if B and 2 are true assumptions as well, he would still love us no matter what our choices, related to the missing compass.
But I'm not sure if our (Western) descriptions of God reflect all those assumptions. But it does lead to a great follow up question I think. Let's continue with all that being true. And a person makes choices that move him away from God, and God's love...
If that person, in Western thought, goes to Hell, does God still love him, since the love is relational. I guess I would have to say yes, as odd as it seems. On the one hand it's no worse than saying a Dad still loves you even if he punishes you. But on the other hand, a Dad's punishment isn't eternal. And usually a Dad's punishment is educational, instructive, and finite. But hell seems punitive, on the other hand.
"What would God do in response" is a really, really, tough question.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30000]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8884
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
1
Sep 15, 2023, 2:54 PM
|
|
As a follow up thought to that, maybe our view of hell, if it exists, is off, and not our view of God. It's a varied as a holding cell away from God to a raging inferno, depending on the text you read.
I think it would be more in line with a loving God if it were viewed as temporary and instructive, not permanent and eternal. Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24531]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14001
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
1
Sep 15, 2023, 3:24 PM
|
|
The raging inferno as punishment is off, I agree. Those terms are used in the bible, but I am convinced that they, while true, describe a horror of our own making. "I would rather be punished by a God who loves me than be handed over to the humanity I have come to know." I forget who said that, but it reflects CS Lewis's description of the hell he perceived the bible to describe. If our relationship with God is about estrangement and reconciliation, not crime and punishment, that is what would fit.
However, the answers to the questions raised in this thread - the nature of love and peace and why it has been beyond our understanding - is not, imo, found in understanding all the surrounding macro questions, such as what heaven/hell is, what about people who haven't heard about Jesus, etc and etc. We've already said we can't. Those obviously have answers, but to require answers to those in order to understand one's own life/God is looking through the wrong end of the telescope, I think. If everyone who ever lived was perfect, except you or me, God's response for either of us would have been exactly the same as it has been for all humanity.
That being the case, isn't the first question anyone should ask, "What happened to me?" To turn the viewer around to look at all the macro questions is an attempt, I think, to avoid answering that one. If one wants to understand why the Tibetans look at God differently from the Europeans, I think God might say, "We'll talk about them in a minute. I love you, as you sit right here, so let's talk about you." Isn't that the starting point?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30000]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8884
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
1
Sep 15, 2023, 7:01 PM
|
|
>so let's talk about you." Isn't that the starting point?
I agree that would be the logical starting point. But, if one doesn't find answers there, then the circle should probably be widened to look for answers elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24531]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14001
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
1
Sep 15, 2023, 7:47 PM
|
|
This isnt a point to debate, just something I will propose:
If God created you because he loves you - in the way you knew you would love your future children - I think he would say to any of us, "It is all about you ... you and me. I dont care about anything else. All the rest seems big and important to you, but I can make it come and go with a blink. To me there is only you. There was never anything else."
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30000]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8884
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
1
Sep 15, 2023, 9:01 PM
|
|
I can agree with that. That would certainly be the most intimate interpretation of a "personal relationship with God," I think, and who most people would hope God is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24531]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14001
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
1
Sep 16, 2023, 11:01 AM
|
|
I think you could find him to be that. Perhaps the most common thing he says to me is what he said to Peter, as Jesus was telling Peter that the end of Peter's days would not be pleasant. Peter looked over at John and said, "What about him?" Jesus said, "If I want him to live to be a thousand and fat, dumb and happy, what is that to you? You just follow me." Well, that's me all the way, always wondering why this and why that, and I hear that in return. Sometimes that is admonishing, if I'm wondering why something seems inequitable, but usually it is encouraging if I'm feeling overwhelmed and I'm wondering if I'm lacking something. But after years of it, it goes like, "If I ...". "Okay, okay, I got it." The common theme of most of my interactions with Him is, "You walk with me, and you'll see what this circumstance means."
It started with me first admitting it was about me and him. When I first admitted that anything that was wrong in life was about me - that anything societal was just about me times 7 billion of us - is when he responded and I got to know him. That had always seemed to be admitting to ineptness, a hard thing to do. But heck, everybody is inept. Not inept per se, just alone. Like the prodigal son, fully independent by my own demand, and finding myself getting deeper and deeper.
Sorry, didn't mean to go that long. But that is how I first experienced the fact that God is "All I care about is you and me."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2186]
TigerPulse: 70%
Posts: 2602
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
1
Sep 18, 2023, 12:21 PM
|
|
Reminds me of a youth conference I attended once upon a time as a chaperone.
One of the speakers, a well known pastor, told a story of a man who came to him with questions about faith. His question was a common one: What about people who have never heard the gospel? What happens to them?
As this well known pastor got ready to say what his response was I sat up in my chair in anticipation of his answer, hoping it would clear up this issue that I had long had with what christianity teaches.
He said I looked at the man right in his eyes and asked why are you worried about everybody else, you should be worried about yourself.
I thought really? That's it? We shouldn't worry about the billions of people that have lived and never heard about the way to avoid eternal damnation and only care about ourselves?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24531]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14001
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
1
Sep 20, 2023, 9:16 AM
|
|
It should remind you of that incident, because you are still confusing which of the two questions holds the answer to which; actually demanding more than confusing. That you dont know either answer brings you here.
To demand an answer to the "everybody" question before looking in the mirror keeps you where you want to be, the arbiter of you and your sphere. It keeps you ignorant of what you really want to know, but it allows you to blame God and others for that; almost everything you say here is some version of doing so. Deal with the only thing God wants to talk about, which is you, and you will understand more of what He knows, and be comfortable with what only He can know and you cant. The choice will always be yours, however, and will at some point become permanent, a fate frightening except to those who refuse the message of the mirror.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2186]
TigerPulse: 70%
Posts: 2602
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
Sep 20, 2023, 3:51 PM
|
|
Christianity says that belief in Jesus is the only way to eternal life.
This cannot possibly be true, because A. Billions of people lived before he was born, and B. Billions of people have lived and died since without hearing the gospel.
If you start with the premise that christianity is true, then yes your question would be the only one that really mattered. Again though, it can not possibly be true for the simple reasons stated above. At least not in the literal sense.
I've read from several apologists like William Lane Craig who claim that with people who have not heard the gospel it's determined by their reaction to nature, and basically whether they believe god exists or not. This would contradict the belief that "Jesus is the only way".
Apologists such as yourself work backwards. You have a belief, and things that challenge that belief you seek to defend anyway possible. Is this seeking truth? I would say not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24531]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14001
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
Sep 20, 2023, 8:14 PM
|
|
Truth is in the mirror. Start there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24531]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14001
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
1
Sep 15, 2023, 3:33 PM
[ in reply to Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead ] |
|
Very cool. Will think about this and respond. But I'll throw this in for now: It is easy to forget that Christianity is an Eastern religion. There is certainly an American take on it, unfortunately, and much of that is now simply religion, no different from any other. Granted. Wish there was a way get that genie back into the bottle. The part of Christianity that seems Western is the sense of objective ethic, a truth independent of us. But we got it from that, not the other way around. I know you know that. Just making the observation.
Message was edited by: CUintulsa®
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30000]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8884
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
1
Sep 15, 2023, 6:50 PM
|
|
I probably toss those terms around too loosely, but when I speak of Western I'm usually thinking of stuff in the Jewish, Christian and Muslim traditions, and by extension European and American variants. All of which seem to focus on obedience and/or faith.
Eastern religions (Hindu, Tao, Buddhism, etc.) seem to focus on investigation and the search for greater understanding of God. But there is overlap and blending of course.
As always, gotta be careful with the terms to make sure we are talking apples-to-apples. Sometimes I get loosy-goosy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24531]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14001
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
1
Sep 15, 2023, 7:40 PM
|
|
It is true that the terms Eastern and Western are now as much about perspective as geography. No, I didn't think you were being too loose. If anything, I was, because I did not intend to say you were mistaken - I knew you knew what was where - but was saying it was interesting that the two broad perspectives came from cultures more similar that east and west is today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30000]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8884
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
1
Sep 15, 2023, 9:10 PM
|
|
Yes, that actually makes me wonder about a possible "root theology", say before writing, that branched into the multiple philosophies we have today. I would say one possibility is a common philosophy, or understanding, that began to vary as people spread out.
One can see that very clearly in Christianity itself, where the apostles had one view, and as the religion spread, alternative views developed. Not necessarily on core issues, but on unaddressed issues.
For instance, the church in Alexandria might have said "Well, Jesus never talked about X. How do we address X?" While at the same time, the church in Antioch is saying the exact same thing: "Jesus never talked about X. How do we address X?"
Multiply that by enough issues and enough different people and places, and soon enough you may go from minor differences to major differences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [94309]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95555
Joined: 12/25/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30000]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8884
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: Love, that's a subject worth exploring.***
1
Sep 15, 2023, 10:41 AM
|
|
I agree, it's a mystery.
The logical assessment of man, or any animal, is that they should naturally do what is best for them, or improves their chances of survival, or furthers their goals. But that is not always the case.
Man surely is selfish, but love seems to be a counter to that. People will often do things for the ones they love before they will do things for themselves.
It's one of those "I know it when I see it, but I can't really explain it" type of things."
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30000]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8884
Joined: 10/31/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24531]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14001
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Love, that's a subject worth exploring.***
1
Sep 15, 2023, 3:04 PM
|
|
'The fascinating Eurasian.' That's love if I've ever seen it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24451]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12459
Joined: 9/1/14
|
Re: Religious Pron - The Book of the Dead
1
Sep 20, 2023, 8:14 PM
|
|
What do you think it was that was pulling the first Egyptian?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30000]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8884
Joined: 10/31/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 28
| visibility 451
|
|
|
50
