Where love rules, there is no will to power, and where power predominates, love is lacking. The one is the shadow of the other.
Is that true? If so, how does God manage to combine both? Is it a case of defining the word "power" differently? Or of divorcing "power" from the "will" perhaps?
Then we have from the NT:- "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.”
All things to muse upon and think about.
Jung again:-
All the greatest and most important problems are fundamentally unsolvable. They can never be solved, but only outgrown.
Definitely a case of defining the word power - God is all powerful means he is greater and capable _ there is nothing he is not able to achieve.
God does not have control over people, nor does he want to - or have an influence in the means of their beliefs and possible way of living a righteous life over an estimated 1/4 of the population. God is not forcing anyone to do anything - he lets every individual decide their own path, to make their own choices on a minute by minutes, second by second basis...... If he was using power to control people the whole Earth would be at peace, living with love and harmony and everyone would believe in him, no different religions, no atheism, no agnostics.
And actually he's not threatening anyone to do anything _ he's warning one of the consequences of one's actions. Yet to unbelievers is taken as a threat....... A stop sign or a red light is a warning if you cross without stopping and obeying the rules that are applied, the outcome has a 99% chance of being devastating.
Seems like to me you would like a lawless society where everyone can do exactly what they please regardless to the consequences towards others. Chaos and havoc is what you will have.
No you only think that because you seem to think the concept of divine law and "sins" exist outside of religious doctrine and belief... it doesn't. Laws are not put into place on basis of divine laws in functioning countries. It rather seems to me like you support countries like Afghanistan under the Taliban that enforce religious laws.
Moral systems exist without the concept of some divine law.
Where you live - your social life - your family life - how you were raised, what you eat, etc etc etc has nothing to do with whether you choose to do right or wrong.
If you think a person born into wealth and a stable environment is in the same position to make choices as a person born into poverty and an abusive situation then you'd be wrong. Moral absolutism doesn’t exist and christianity isn't the metric by which we measure what is right and what is wrong.
@Gloomy oh please - where do you people come up with these concepts that only makes sense to you.
And the fact that you would even say moral absolutism doesn't exist supports people are sinful by nature _ wow!
You wrote I seem to think that the concept (meaning idea) of Divine law and "sins" exist outside of religious doctrine and belief ......... The Ten Commandments is considered Divine law ___ don't kill (crime) --- don't steal (crime) --- respect your neighbor's property ( can be criminal) ---- honor your parents (can be criminal) ----- don't commit adultery ( can this country **it "was" a crime and still is a crime in 16 States - and still can be criminal and positively accepted for means of divorce) and the other parts of the Ten Commandments are strictly moral. Think again about your statement considering the concept of laws in functioning countries.
I seem to support countries like Afghanistan and the Taliban the statement I made was based on the statement you made referring to your ideas.
And I never said a person born in a wealthy situation compared to a person born in a situational poorness were the same or would make the same decisions. I don't even know how you come up with that analogy................... A person's culture, nationality, skin tone, wealth, or poorness has nothing to do with making a choice between right and wrong/good and evil - if either of them steal, murder, rape, they are still wrong regardless of where they are in society and facing the penalties thereof if caught.......... Now a person of less or no fortune may make the wrong CHOICES because of their lack of necessities _ guess what, it was still their choice to make.
Goodbye ----- your reasoning is lacking reason - nothing else to say to you - write all you want.
Think again about your statement considering the concept of laws in functioning countries.
Most things in the 10 commandments are not unique to christianity and predate christianity and can be found in different moral systems. Only from your perspective it is divine law.
I seem to support countries like Afghanistan and the Taliban the statement I made was based on the statement you made referring to your ideas.
You want to apply divine law and bible based moral in a society. The Taliban are doing it from an Islam perspective the biblical enforcment would look similar.
good and evil
Typical black and white thinking. That's a bit infantile and has no application to reality. A person about to die from starvation stealing bread may be legally wrong but would it be morally wrong?
Your so called reasoning is immoral and based on the baseless assumption there is a god and to be specific the christian God
SW-User
I tend to see virtually all concepts and descriptions of God as virtually a "Power" that looks down upon humanity as some sort of experiment, testing us, seeing which way we are going to go. I don't share them.
Free Will I see as a red herring. We are only free (if at all) within certain restraints not of our own choosing. True freedom, radical freedom, can possibly exist in union with a Source/Reality beyond our conceptual comprehension. It is something to be realised not something given at birth.
Basically I use a negative method of just seeing what "God" cannot be. When such is stripped away, maybe some sort of actual Reality will become clearer.
It has been said here:- "he lets every individual decide their own path, to make their own choices on a minute by minutes, second by second basis".
Well, maybe, yet statistics show that since the beginning of human time about 50% of those ever born died before they reached an age capable of any "choice" worth the name. And if there are consequences of our acts, "rewards" and "punishments" would seem to be postponed until some form of afterlife.
@SDavis Hi, I'm a non-theist. If a label is required, a Pure Land Buddhist - the so called "Buddhism of Faith". Faith not as a means to salvation/enlightenment, but as salvation itself. Simple trust/faith (Japanese "shinjin")
I'm interested in what dividing line there is, if any, between the actual experience of Faith of theists and non-theists, but so far no one seems to see or recognise the implications of the question.
As I said, free will is for me a red herring. We are "chosen", we do not choose. It is recognition of being chosen (pure Grace) that can flower through us into acts of mercy, love and compassion. Such are by-products of a living faith. Seeing a God as some sort of Power that keeps tabs on our choices and has set up a system that rewards or punishes accordingly is to me repugnant.
And we are ALL chosen. It is only a matter of time.
I'm quite OK with some of the Christian mystics, such as Meister Eckhart. And certainly with Mother Julian of Norwich, with her Revelations of Divine Love.
I was answered in spiritual understanding, and it was said: What, do you wish to know your Lord’s meaning in this thing? Know it well, love was his meaning. Who reveals it to you? Love. What did he reveal you? Love. Why does he reveal it to you? For Love…. So I was taught that love is our Lord’s meaning.
Those last words have taken on deep significance for me just this morning.
@SW-User I am trying to give my understanding of Christian faith and of what faith is to you.
Is there an actual dividing line in anyone's experiences of Faith regardless to their beliefs - I personally don't think so.
Some may look at the Christian faith as "a way to salvation" but *from my viewpoint faith is salvation.* Just like Buddhism of Faith means to you.
The *main* difference is Buddhism is more of a philosophy without a supreme deity "like that of Christianity" (though Buddhism do have many deities) and Christianity is a form of philosophy *from* a supreme deity.
From my belief faith and love go hand - the two work together - one without the other is somewhat half stepping.
I agree we are all chosen. But where we differ in opinions is probably why we are all chosen. I believe and it is not a Christian teaching - as scripture indicates we will all in heaven before we were placed on Earth in these flesh bodies. Chosen because of something we did while in heaven that requires a trial - judgment -sentencing!
SW-User
@SDavis Hello again! Way back I read a Christian theologian, John Hick, who distinguished between "faith" and "belief". That was the start. Now, gradually over time, I know Faith as the complete opposite of "belief". Faith lets go, does not demand "answers", reaches no conclusions. Belief clings, holds onto "answers" and explanations, often has come to a conclusion - and looks out at the world from a position of such certainties, imprinting itself upon it. Faith allows the world, Reality, to unfold as it is, full of grace, full of surprises. Even mercy.
A Pure Land myokonin (loosely translated, a "saint") has written:-
"Not knowing why! Not knowing why! That is my support, not knowing why! That is the Namu-amida- butsu!" (Loosely translated = the source of my gratitude)
The Christian mystic, Meister Eckhart says:- "Love has no why".
It is sad to me when people demand "evidence" for anything to do with the mind/heart.
