Predestination

[Derideo_Te]

Thus, what value does an organized religious structure have? I would argue that for a person of advanced faith, it acts as a restraint upon the development of a personal relationship with God that is based upon one's inner truth. Therefore, they are unquestionably subject to scrutiny

Of course a cynic like me might argue that organized religion is just a "gateway drug" to your current lifestyle.

Organized religions are not geared for more than the mass handling of like minded theists IMO. They don't do a great job in advancing the actual in depth study of the subject matter. Instead they focus on the mundane routine of the day to day needs of the parish.

In that respect they are wide open to the legitimate criticism that they are more of a hindrance than a help towards developing a personal relationship with one's inner spirituality IMO.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Folks of advanced faith may well deal with some restraints openly in their practice of faith with a set organization. However, one can continue to develop hishers relationship with deity. I could worship with RCs without getting into a hassle about transubstantiation. I could worship with Mormons without getting into the fallacies of their supposed authority or what the Atonement means.

Agreed, there is a common basis there.

The question would be could you do the same thing in a Muslim Mosque or a Hindu Temple?

 

[BluePhantom]

Folks of advanced faith may well deal with some restraints openly in their practice of faith with a set organization. However, one can continue to develop hishers relationship with deity. I could worship with RCs without getting into a hassle about transubstantiation. I could worship with Mormons without getting into the fallacies of their supposed authority or what the Atonement means.

In a large sense I would agree. But when you get closer to brass tacks it gets a bit different. Avatar, for example, is a Mormon. He and I rarely butt heads on anything but that's because we are generally focused on large issues where it's easy to find common ground. Start talking about specifics within the larger framework and it will get sticky. I would say that in general, most organized religions are not terribly good about allowing the individual to embrace an alternate path within the larger framework. What I mean is that an organized religion is more likely to attempt to direct a person's spirituality toward a specific path instead of simply acting to inspire a person to advance along any path they choose.

 

[BluePhantom]

Thus, what value does an organized religious structure have? I would argue that for a person of advanced faith, it acts as a restraint upon the development of a personal relationship with God that is based upon one's inner truth. Therefore, they are unquestionably subject to scrutiny

Of course a cynic like me might argue that organized religion is just a "gateway drug" to your current lifestyle.

Organized religions are not geared for more than the mass handling of like minded theists IMO. They don't do a great job in advancing the actual in depth study of the subject matter. Instead they focus on the mundane routine of the day to day needs of the parish.

In that respect they are wide open to the legitimate criticism that they are more of a hindrance than a help towards developing a personal relationship with one's inner spirituality IMO.

Well...yeah....I think we are saying the exact same thing. Now...I don't necessarily think organized religions are "bad". For some people it is just what they need to give their lives meaning, structure, and a sense of fulfillment. I think if used carefully and correctly, a religious community can be beneficial in providing basic understanding. I do believe though that when one evolves into more advanced stages of faith they will often find, as a matter of natural development, that an organized religion may not be so fulfilling anymore. They may remain within the large scale framework as Jake points out, but they may find that they have.....oh......outgrown it perhaps? That may not be the right way to phrase it.

 

[TrinityPower]

Thus, what value does an organized religious structure have? I would argue that for a person of advanced faith, it acts as a restraint upon the development of a personal relationship with God that is based upon one's inner truth. Therefore, they are unquestionably subject to scrutiny

Of course a cynic like me might argue that organized religion is just a "gateway drug" to your current lifestyle.

Organized religions are not geared for more than the mass handling of like minded theists IMO. They don't do a great job in advancing the actual in depth study of the subject matter. Instead they focus on the mundane routine of the day to day needs of the parish.

In that respect they are wide open to the legitimate criticism that they are more of a hindrance than a help towards developing a personal relationship with one's inner spirituality IMO.

I think that is a generalization. The people I hold in high esteem DO encourage a personal relationship and a read it for yourself stance but if one reads it and has no inner understanding the message is of little to no effect. The mind set that I personally take is not to read it and find fault in accuracy but to focus on the meaning and how it applies to my life and experience. If I do not understand I pray and ask for wisdom and understanding. It is ok to ask questions why and how but for me to dismiss something because I do not understand it the first time around reading it doesn't mean it has no significance or value. I do not put all my eggs in one basket and dismiss something because I learn the person I believed wrote something and learn they didn't. For me it does not lose its value upon that criteria. You ask for proof that God exists but if I gave evidence of my own experience you would just dismiss it because it isn't YOUR experience. That is your choice. As in any relationship you have to choose to enter into it and engage in it. If you do not then it isn't a relationship.

 

[BluePhantom]

Folks of advanced faith may well deal with some restraints openly in their practice of faith with a set organization. However, one can continue to develop hishers relationship with deity. I could worship with RCs without getting into a hassle about transubstantiation. I could worship with Mormons without getting into the fallacies of their supposed authority or what the Atonement means.

Agreed, there is a common basis there.

The question would be could you do the same thing in a Muslim Mosque or a Hindu Temple?

I would say that depends on who you are dealing with. If we were dealing with a Muslim or a group of Muslims that had the same mindset as KG, that probably isn't going to work very well. I have never had the opportunity to do so, but, so long as the person was not an extremist, I don't see where there would be conflict in having a common worship in the manner you suggest.

 

[guno]

What are your thoughts on this?

Obviously, this would be primarily a question for Christians (though non-Christian's could weigh in)

The concept is that with God being Sovereign, it was decided from the beginning whether certain people were going to be "saved" or not.

there is more it than this, but, that the general idea.....

I think anyone who believes this see this as the freedom to do as they please, 'cause no matter what they do, it's not their fault. Much like all those born again people, no matter what they did, they will be forgiven.

Crimes on credit

 

[guno]

Since the atheist can't proved that God does not exist, s/he is operating on belief not empirical data, which puts them right there with believers.

It is what tis. Argue it all you want, but you are in a box with no escape.

one cannot prove a negative it is not the atheist making a positive claim for a god

 

[Derideo_Te]

Thus, what value does an organized religious structure have? I would argue that for a person of advanced faith, it acts as a restraint upon the development of a personal relationship with God that is based upon one's inner truth. Therefore, they are unquestionably subject to scrutiny

Of course a cynic like me might argue that organized religion is just a "gateway drug" to your current lifestyle.

Organized religions are not geared for more than the mass handling of like minded theists IMO. They don't do a great job in advancing the actual in depth study of the subject matter. Instead they focus on the mundane routine of the day to day needs of the parish.

In that respect they are wide open to the legitimate criticism that they are more of a hindrance than a help towards developing a personal relationship with one's inner spirituality IMO.

I think that is a generalization. The people I hold in high esteem DO encourage a personal relationship and a read it for yourself stance but if one reads it and has no inner understanding the message is of little to no effect. The mind set that I personally take is not to read it and find fault in accuracy but to focus on the meaning and how it applies to my life and experience. If I do not understand I pray and ask for wisdom and understanding. It is ok to ask questions why and how but for me to dismiss something because I do not understand it the first time around reading it doesn't mean it has no significance or value. I do not put all my eggs in one basket and dismiss something because I learn the person I believed wrote something and learn they didn't. For me it does not lose its value upon that criteria. You ask for proof that God exists but if I gave evidence of my own experience you would just dismiss it because it isn't YOUR experience. That is your choice. As in any relationship you have to choose to enter into it and engage in it. If you do not then it isn't a relationship.

Yes, it was a generalization because that was the point we were discussing as to how organized religion is open to criticism for failing to encourage individualism in the spiritual experience.

As far as taking what is written in holy texts goes there is more than one way to approach them.

There is the objective face value of the text itself within the context of what precedes and follows it.

Then there is the subjective "intent" of the author.

The former is straightforward and relatively benign. The latter is open to abuse and there as many "interpretations" of the intent as there are stars in the night sky IMO. Unfortunately some of those latter interpretations have been used as justification for many of the more horrendous crimes against humanity.

Yes, you are correct that ultimately it will be your own interpretation that will result in your personal relationship as you understand it to be.

Understanding interpersonal relationships between flesh and blood individuals is difficult at the best of times and requires compromise in order to make them work.

Establishing a relationship with a deity when all you have to go by is an outdated book of ambiguous instructions and no other feedback other than your own values, emotions and conscience is a daunting challenge.

I wish you the best in your endeavors.

Peace
DT

 

[Derideo_Te]

Folks of advanced faith may well deal with some restraints openly in their practice of faith with a set organization. However, one can continue to develop hishers relationship with deity. I could worship with RCs without getting into a hassle about transubstantiation. I could worship with Mormons without getting into the fallacies of their supposed authority or what the Atonement means.

Agreed, there is a common basis there.

The question would be could you do the same thing in a Muslim Mosque or a Hindu Temple?

I would say that depends on who you are dealing with. If we were dealing with a Muslim or a group of Muslims that had the same mindset as KG, that probably isn't going to work very well. I have never had the opportunity to do so, but, so long as the person was not an extremist, I don't see where there would be conflict in having a common worship in the manner you suggest.

Having spent time in the homes of those of different religions we have more in common than what separates us.

We would do well to remember that in our daily lives as the powers that be try to influence us to hate our fellow man. Their agenda is necessarily in our best interests.

 

[guno]

The principle of predestination is strong in various Christian and Islamic sects.

I do not know about Judaism.

The different social and political sects of ancient Judaism held varying beliefs on the idea of predestination versus free will. The aristocratic Sadducees believed in free will and rejected the notion of divine predestination. The ascetic Essenes ascribed wholly to the idea of predestination, whereas the Pharisee scribes and sages took the middle road and put forth the idea that both predestination and free will of man coexist in Jewish religion.

 

[Vandalshandle]

God is all knowing.

Therefore, he knows my ultimate destiny.

Therefore my ultimate destiny is sealed. If not, than I could surprise god, and change it
Since I can not surprise god, I have no free wil.

Therefore, if you believe in god, then you believe that he knows everything that is going to happen, and your puny efforts to change it are useless...including the prayer that you made this morning that it does not rain while you go shopping
.
Which means that you have no decisions to make, regarding religion.

Which means that you might as well be an agnostic, for all the good that your religion is going to do for you.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Since the atheist can't proved that God does not exist, s/he is operating on belief not empirical data, which puts them right there with believers. It is what tis. Argue it all you want, but you are in a box with no escape.

one cannot prove a negative it is not the atheist making a positive claim for a god

Nope, doesn't work that way. If you make a positive statement that X does not exist, yet you cannot prove it, then your statement is nothing more than a mere assertion. Nothing more. You are no different than evangelical who says God exists.