Christ not the only way to God

[B. W.]

...If we are to have any discussion in philosophy I must first state that referencing the bible as fact because the bible says so is a basic logical fallacy, begging the question. And if are to use philosophy or Logic to deduce God, then the Bible has to be thrown out on fallacious grounds. But that does not mean the bible isn't a good and useful book, and has provided soul food for so many over vast time. But as a vehicle for producing Proof of an "EXCLUSIVE" God, it is awful.

I would also keep this discussion confined to a just one topic, whether or not Christians have the EXCLUSIVE way to God....

...If we are to have any discussion in philosophy I must first state that referencing the ancient Hindu tradition called Bakti Yoga as fact because Bakti yoga/ Devotional Yoga says so is a basic logical fallacy, begging the question. And if are to use philosophy or Logic to deduce God, then Bakti yoga/ Devotional Yoga has to be thrown out on fallacious grounds. But that does not mean the Bakti yoga/ Devotional Yoga isn't a good and useful book, and has provided soul food for so many over vast time. But as a vehicle for producing Proof of an "EXCLUSIVE" God, it is awful. I would also keep this discussion confined to a just one topic, whether or not Christians have the EXCLUSIVE way to God...

...Jesus taught in an ancient Hindu tradition called Bakti Yoga. Look it up on google. There’s much written about it. But briefly, Bakti yoga is roughly translated as Devotional Yoga. Where the Guru assumes the role of God. An incarnation, an avatar, a Bhagavan, a Bodhisattva. And allows followers to worship them as such. They talk as if they are God. It’s a two way street. I know it’s hard for a Christian to belief that there are any other living saints today who perform just as many if not more miracles than Jesus. But these saints not only exist, there are a plethora of them. Of course meeting one in your life time is difficult, but possible. I happen to have the great luck of having met a few. And because I did, I’m more than convinced that Jesus is just one of the many messiahs that have lived and taught.

Exodus 20:3-7 "You shall have no other gods before Me. 4 "You shall not make for yourself a carved image—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; 5 you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, 6 but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments. 7 "You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain." NKJV

And you expect to be allowed into heaven justifying breaking the commands of God himself? This is clear evidence of how people exploit, mock, and attempt to manipulate the love God has for ones selfish gain. You are presuming a lot on God's innocence, nature and personal character to trust in man. No wonder you don’t desire the bible’s use.

Think on this: God, due to his just nature, left us a road map back to himself. This justice will permit you to decide if you’ll use it or reject it. All roads do not lead to the same location. To illustrate this, you have one month to the day to meet me at my family’s privet cemetery, at my father’s grave site. No directions provided – take any road you like.

All roads do not lead to the same end even in this mortal life so the all roads lead to the same end philosophy is logical fallacy as well.

Jesus did say in Matthew 7:13, 14, 15 - "Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. 14 Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it. 15 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.” NKJV

And you trust…

... Devotional Yoga. Where the Guru assumes the role of God. An incarnation, an avatar, a Bhagavan, a Bodhisattva. And allows followers to worship them as such. They talk as if they are God….

?

[Danieltwotwenty]

Thanks Dan. That's brilliant. Because that's how I feel too, I feel god every second of everyday, and I don't need the bible to tell me so.

I may feel God working in my life, but to know God and what he wants for me is through his revelation in the Bible.

I know a lot of people who have god in their lives without the bible or Jesus. and I don't think there is a hell for people who do not claim Jesus as their savior.

The Bible is pretty specific about false God's and false teaching's and how they can lead to spiritual death.

I'm not saying don't quote the bible. But it's just easier for me to relate to when you don't.

Well some of the claims you are making are completely false, how can we refute them without using the Bible, we might as well quit now.

And plus if you start quoting the bible, then I'll have to counter your quotes with more quotes and point out all the inconsistencies and how Christians pick and choose the versus that support their case. And this discussion will be side tracked by bible one-upmanship rather than sticking to the point.

This is not about one-upmanship, we as Christians read the Bible as a whole and not just cherry pick verses and warped them to our own world view as you seem to have done.

So the question remains. Why do Christians think they are right and others not?

Because that is what God said through revelation in the Bible and through coming to earth in the form of Jesus. pretty simple really.


Dan

[B. W.]

While I don't necessarily agree with the specifics of Buddhawarrior, I kind of get his idea (I think). I think the real issue here is, can you be moral and spiritual and find God and go to heaven without accepting Jesus as God? I think the ultimate question here is whether the Jews and the Muslims and the Hindus and the Taoists and the ancestor-worshipers in Japan etc.etc. can possibly go to heaven. I think that is where lots of non-Christians take offense to other people who claim that they are inevitably screwed unless they drop their beliefs and dedicate their lives to Jesus.

Personally, I think God would accept anyone into heaven so long as they lived a good life, but I understand that my perspective isn't really accepted here haha...

Question:

Ivellious, are you a good person?
-
-
-

[Ivellious]

Depends on your definition of a "good person." But if you are insinuating that you can only be a good person by being Christian, I respectfully disagree wholeheartedly.

[MarcusOfLycia]

Depends on your definition of a "good person." But if you are insinuating that you can only be a good person by being Christian, I respectfully disagree wholeheartedly.

I don't think he was insinuating anything. However, you were the one to say 'good life'.

[Ivellious]

True. I guess my response was just to say that I don't think there is one definition of a good life or a good person. And I certainly can't possibly know what God might define them as.

[Echoside]

I think the real issue here is, can you be moral and spiritual and find God and go to heaven without accepting Jesus as God? I think the ultimate question here is whether the Jews and the Muslims and the Hindus and the Taoists and the ancestor-worshipers in Japan etc.etc. can possibly go to heaven.

Sure, it is not unfathomable that a person who is not a Christian goes to heaven, but if said person knows of Jesus, studies him, etc, and denies him while having said knowledge then no.

Depends on your definition of a "good person." But if you are insinuating that you can only be a good person by being Christian, I respectfully disagree wholeheartedly.

You will not hear anyone ever say non-christians are incapable of doing good things. However, Romans 3:23 is clear. No one is a good person, not when judged next to goodness itself. Surely you realise that is the whole point of Christ?

[buddhawarrior]

Hi Paul/domokunrox,

Thank you for your incredibly thoughtful reply. I will attempt to address each point and try to not drift off into tangets and stick to the questions of whether Christianity should claim exclusivity.

Since you are setting ground rules for logic and philosophy, I'll just clarify some of your initial rules.

2+2=4
The answer is EXCLUSIVELY 4. It cannot be 4 and 5 or any other number. Just 4. That's it, and anyone else who thinks otherwise is wrong.

2 + 2 = 4 is only true in the reduced symbology of mathmatics and logic.

the number 2 is a symbol denoting two objects. And when you have 2 apples and give me two apples, we can use the agreed upon linguistic symbol of 4 to denote the number of object/apple I now have. This seem elementary, but here is why I bring this up.

if I have 2 small apples, and want to trade me for my 2 very large apples, I would not take the trade because 2 does not equal 2 in this case. If your apples are the same size, yet they are sour and meely, I still would not consider them equal. If you had great big sweet apples but was bruised and filled with holes, I would still not consider them equal.

So, there is not just one right answer. There is only 1 right answer in a very small and controlled circumstance.

This being said, not everything we discuss here in our debate will be applicable to the assumption of "1 right answer" sometimes there can be 2 or more, or even everyone is right.

The dog outside is either barking at the cat in the tree or he is not barking at the cat in the tree.
The dog cannot be in the state of barking and not barking at the cat at the same time and in the same sense. Reality reflects that only 1 proposition is exclusively true about the dog.

Here we have again the use of symbols. If we agree on the symbols, Dog, Cat, Tree, Bark, then yes, this statement is easy to agree on and nothing more needs to be said. But when encountering, let's say, different cultures, where the definitions of Dog, Cat, Tree, are different, then there is not 1 exclusive truth. (it's hard to think of a culture where those definitions are different, but there are many cultures where the definition of GOD and HEAVEN, and FATHER, etc are different.) This little discrepancy may account for all, if not a large quantity of disagreement between myself and fundamentalists. Quoting from the bible also leads to the same discrepancies. And someone in a Christian culture speaking to someone not Christian often run into the same discrepancies.

Many of our arguments are about word definition, rather than the ultimate truth. Because if it is Ultimate truth, it would be true in all language and culture and have no discrepancies at all.

Let's go into religion shall we?
Judaism believes that Jesus Christ was not God, he died, and did not go to heaven.
Christianity believes that Jesus Christ was God, he died, rose from the dead, and go to heaven
Islam believes that Jesus Christ was the spirit of God, he didn't die, and went to heaven.

Only 1 can be right.

You can see from my above argument that this statement "only 1 can be right" is false.

Your view is a view of Monism. An all is one view.

Our view is a view of dualism. A distinction between Creation and the Creator.

Yes, My view is Monism, which includes dualism, and from which dualism arises. Thou Monism is better described as All arises from One. Which also had a distinction of creation and creator, but since the creator created the creation, it's still part of the creator, which is why it's still considered one. And The interrelatedness, interdependence of all matter is the connection that binds all as one. Like your body has parts that perform certain functions, but missing any part and it disrupts and may even terminate the function of the whole. In this sense, it is one, but it is made up or parts, which all arises from the One.

[buddhawarrior]

...If we are to have any discussion in philosophy I must first state that referencing the bible as fact because the bible says so is a basic logical fallacy, begging the question. And if are to use philosophy or Logic to deduce God, then the Bible has to be thrown out on fallacious grounds. But that does not mean the bible isn't a good and useful book, and has provided soul food for so many over vast time. But as a vehicle for producing Proof of an "EXCLUSIVE" God, it is awful.

I would also keep this discussion confined to a just one topic, whether or not Christians have the EXCLUSIVE way to God....

...If we are to have any discussion in philosophy I must first state that referencing the ancient Hindu tradition called Bakti Yoga as fact because Bakti yoga/ Devotional Yoga says so is a basic logical fallacy, begging the question. And if are to use philosophy or Logic to deduce God, then Bakti yoga/ Devotional Yoga has to be thrown out on fallacious grounds. But that does not mean the Bakti yoga/ Devotional Yoga isn't a good and useful book, and has provided soul food for so many over vast time. But as a vehicle for producing Proof of an "EXCLUSIVE" God, it is awful. I would also keep this discussion confined to a just one topic, whether or not Christians have the EXCLUSIVE way to God...

wow, that's funny, looks like you didn't even try here. Are you playing games or having a serious disgussion? I think I played this game with my 4 year old cousin once. Real logical on your part. From your original post, i thought you would be the one who could reason this out with me, but it seems you rather like to take it personally and make it into a childish game.

well played, sir.


Bakti yoga is not a book and not a truth, or claim anything at all. I'm not using it to prove anything other than that the way Jesus taught is the same way that many Gurus/spiritual teachers of the past have taught. It doesn't mean I'm absolutely, by divine right, correct. It just means I've made an observation.

However, claiming that the Bible was divinely created as a road map to God, you'll have to come up with better reasons for me to believe that than "The bible says so."

If you follow the bible and Christian Dogma, fine. I have no judgment against that. And I hope you live a wonderful and eternal life. But I would also like to live my life in similar peace without the Christian side of my family disowning me and telling me that I have disgraced them.

I do not wave my theology/philosophy as a way to deny theirs.

If you want to continue this discussion, please keep it civil.

[Ivellious]

You will not hear anyone ever say non-christians are incapable of doing good things. However, Romans 3:23 is clear. No one is a good person, not when judged next to goodness itself. Surely you realise that is the whole point of Christ?

Of course no one could be as good as the incarnation of goodness. But I don't think BW was asking me if I considered myself godly or not. As far as whether non-christians have a shot at getting into heaven...Well, I guess I kinda disagree. I think God is probably far less concerned with the details of one's belief system and much more concerned with simply how you live your life. For instance, is a Muslim volunteering his or her time for charity not as valuable or good in god's eyes when compared to a Christian doing the same thing but adding "in the name of Jesus Christ?" I would think not. Just a difference of philosophy I guess.

[buddhawarrior]

Exodus 20:3-7 "You shall have no other gods before Me. 4 "You shall not make for yourself a carved image—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; 5 you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, 6 but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments. 7 "You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain." NKJV

I feel like you are the one putting graven images and other Gods before him. Does Jesus have a likeness to things in this world (heaven above, earth beneath, and water)? Yes, HUMAN. And yet you worship him before your creator. As if he is a way to the Creator?

By the way, nothing wrong with having a guide and a road map. But mine happens to be the hindu cosmology and bakti yoga. rather than Christian mythology and Jesus worship. Same thing, different names.

[dayage]

buddhawarrior,

By the way, nothing wrong with having a guide and a road map. But mine happens to be the hindu cosmology and bakti yoga. rather than Christian mythology and Jesus worship.

There is a problem here. Hindu cosmology says that the universe lasts for 4.32 billion years and is then destroyed. Then the universe is created again. But, science tells us that our universe is 13.7 billion years old. Hinduism is thus wrong.

The Bible does not give an age for the universe, but does tell us that time, space and matter were created. These are supported by the singularity theorems. The Bible also tells us, in eleven different places, that the universe is expanding. It also gets the order of the creation events correct.

The Bible does not teach mythology. It speaks of events happening in real places and times. For example Genesis two describes the location and environment of Eden. Recent research suggests that the timing was during the last ice age, around 70,000 years ago. Radar has located the two missing rivers (Gihon and Pishon) in Arabia.

The Bible also contains thousands of prophecies which have come to pass.

The bible was written some 300 years after the fact. Even with out modern day technologies and record keeping, can we trust the facts, verbatim, of any piece of history written today about something that happened 300 years ago? The discussion here is on such a minute level of scriptural detail, but the whole discussion can be moot if the bible is not a reliable source of written history. The Bible was also strung together by the council of Nicaea under the order of King Constantine for his political purpose. Of course details of Nicaea and what was included and not, and how much influence Constantine had and all that is up for debate, but just the very fact that the bible was put together by a group of people with some agenda needs to be considered.

The Bible was not written 300 years after the events. I personally have a photocopy of papyrus 4, containing Luke chapters 3 and 4. It dates to 150 A.D. or earlier. Luke was written in about 60 A.D. There are parts of a John papyrus dating to about 120 A.D. John was originally written in about 95 A.D.

What evidences are you giving us for your beliefs?

[wrain62]

So my question is this. I would like to know why you think the Christian God is the only way to God. Please speak from personal experience, and quote from the bible as little as possible. I'm not a biblical scholar and do not want to spend my time researching the pre-translated Aramaic and Latin versions to check translational errors.

I am sorry I can't bring personal experience into this as I do not think I have come to grips with any true experience worth telling at least in my head.

I feel one part of the elephant along with others who feel other parts while you have the spiritual(maybe) knowledge that they are touching the same elephant. But there is one thing here we cannot ignore. We both recognize that there is an elephant. And I think the correct analogy is you spiritually(maybe) know that you are also be on the same boat as the others groping for the truth of the elephant except that you may have touched upon his DNA and thus while not being able to comprehend it you at the same time know that there is something about it that connects all the other parts of the elephant.

the Creative force is beyond language, beyond time, beyond dimensionality, beyond human ego and sensory perceptions. Any attempt at making it into a thing, a dogma, a set of rules to govern, is an attempt at population control and not at all a way to God.

And the elephant that we both recognize I think is absolute truth, something that one cannot simply dismiss. We are arguring over a better perception of it but still nontheless we both recognize that it is something worth percieving. Even saying that it is something that cannot be perceived in one way is itself a perceivement of the truth. We both recognize that it is something that is worth striving for. And if I may we both think that there is a good moral affinity surrounding it otherwise we would not be talking about it now. And I do agree that other religions do point to truth for the mere fact that people would not be captivated(in my view there can only be so many conterfiets if there is truly one valuable thing to try to resemble and all the best lies are the ones filled with a half truth).

What I simply cannot agree with you on is how you allude to telling us that any attempt to believe a dogma is evil, not a way to God when your post is filled with dogma about God. We cannot even say the word God in a sentence or by itself without asserting some kind of dogma about it. Dogma is the only way to god because if you say it is not then you are in contradiction with your words and your thoughts.

I say that there is one true way through Jesus because I have grown very attached to the idea that the moral law is best explained through his words, I have reason to believe that he is Lord through process of elimination: Lair? No Legend? No Lunatic? No Lord? Yes

Also by his command to spread throughout the world Mark 16:15 which tells us that we should not be ashamed to think that Jesus is the only way to God otherwise this would not be neccessary.

[buddhawarrior]

They do not in any way, shape, or aspect conform in some way or find any ground in which they both claim. Simply saying that Jesus was a Guru because you think he is based on your grade school understanding of the bible does not work. Your unwillingness to even want to hear quote from the bible because you believe some really bad game of telephone took place or some kind of translation issue really drives home my point I am about to make.

How is it even possible you even claim to know the REAL meaning behind the words of Jesus and at the same time state apathy and ignorance in regards to how the propositional content is there and derive your interpretation off that?

Is there a full manuscript of the bible in the Tibet mountains that we don't have, but you do? I would sure like to see it. I would love to hear a Guru give an exegesis from that manuscript.

I know you don't want to hear quotes from the bible, but you're unfortunately going to need to hear the critism of your claims on what the bible says. I am sure there is someone is would be willing to hold your hand with how it was translated into english.

I have to reiterate that I am not opposed to reading the bible or you quoting the bible. But simply that it would be easier and more productive if we spoke from personal experience rather than quoting something that we do not have a common background in.

Let me explain. You will quote something in English, however your understanding of the words used will be different than mine, since I am not in your ontological circle of influence. I do not attend your church or hang out with your Christian friends. I will read it like I read any english quote, with my own set of circumstances and judgment.

I'd say that I understand God and Jesus just fine without claiming exclusivity. Jesus taught me to Love and to have compassion and to give of myself to service of God. I do not need to claim exclusivity. I do not claim to have the only interpretation of his teaching. Sometimes being right is not important. And asserting that you have exclusive knowledge of God's way is just bad-taste. I don't need to be right, but I do like to feel love and be loved and to act out of compassion and have compassion acted towards me. I don't need to read more into it than that.

Since the bible has been translated into so many languages, I'm sure there is a Tibetan version. I will see if I can't find a guru to talk to you about it. But if you'd like, I have another book you might find interesting. Since you are the eastern philosophy apologetic. But if you have questions about the names and word and meaning of the text, I would be happy to answer questions. Although I do not have a fundamentalist perspective on that text either. The book is the bardo thodol. Roughly translated as The Tibetan Book of the Dead. It chronicles what the afterlife path is like out of rebirth.

I should disclaim that, seeing you have a fundamentalist slant, to try and not read the Bardo Thodol with too closely. Gather, instead it's greater meaning.

The part I found most useful about the Bardo Thodol, is that it discribes perfectly (not literally, but metaphorically) the path after life towards the light. I know from experience because I have died and now am alive. I drowned in a river in my twenties.

[B. W.]

Depends on your definition of a "good person." But if you are insinuating that you can only be a good person by being Christian, I respectfully disagree wholeheartedly.

According to your own definition - are you a good person Ivellious?
-
-
-