Who is right when it comes to religions about spirituality and the spirit world? [Spirituality & Religion]

I only believe in Christianity because I had a vision of the cross when I was redeemed and it has explained ALL of my spiritual experiences almost to a T.......BUT I had a talk with a Native who goes to sweat lodges and he said that he can feel the hand of a spirit on his shoulder too just like me, to him its a spirit to me its the hand of the Lord.....I am not all too familiar with what it says about the spirit world in the Islamic religion, or even Buddists....Except that they too also see a great light which Christians believe is Jesus in spirit form......Are all of these religions trying to do their best to explaine the spirit world? Which one is closest to the truth?

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

SW-User

I think the act of seeking the spiritual is what engenders the experience, which is why many paths can lead to God. In terms of the religions themselves I think the more they try to lay out 'rules' the more they reflect the fucked up nature of human society - sometimes focused on cult like group adherence and sometimes leading to very nasty violence. The higher level theory of Buddhism to me represents the purest expression of seeking a higher spirituality

Lincoln98 · 22-25, M

@SW-User
*If God constructs many ways to Him, then is that not a God of confusion? Seeing as this many ways has brought about great havoc in the religion sector of mankind, along the centuries.

*It is indeed imperative we seek the spiritual. If when hungry, we search out food; thirsty, we look for water; then ought we not to even the more craze for the knowledge of our creator, the one who sustains us?

*Although I do not stand in support of every religion, I have to state that the notion that religion is the [b]#1[/b] cause of violence/"the fucked up society of humanity", is absolute and total fallacy. Hitler and Stalin alone have caused more deaths than all of religion combined, and they were non-theists.

*Quite ironical is it not that Buddhism, which you glorify as pacifist, was full of and spread by violence in its early days, only dissolving away from that later on? Tell me, if a religion - obviously all claims to be divine-inspired - is subject to change, how is that god/emissary/fore-runner/leader to be trusted in anyway? A g/e/f/l whose precepts are subject to change is not constant; being not constant, it is unworthy of attention or trust; and being one who changes with the wind - that is, the state of humanity's attention/acceptance - then it is not the supreme being here, but humans/the followers themselves are.

*Christianity, on the other hand, is [b]relationship[/b]and not religion. It is not primarily a set of rules, but a heart which, upon genuine repentance and surrender, was set free and made new; a trait being that it gushes with love for its Lord & saviour, and now only desires to live for Him and die to itself.

🙂