Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Mar 19, 2021 11:36 am
The more I think about the idea that the universe is nothing more than a random, accidental, mindless one off never to be repeated event, that just happened to pop aware by sheer luck or chance.. doesn't really sit well with me. That does not make sense actually.
Yes. And it doesn't solve anything, does it? If we don't like the way the world is, then saying, "Well, it's the way it is because of forces prior to me that I can do nothing about," doesn't really help with that, does it? It just replaces confusion with despair.
Nihilism's a lousy consolation. But some people choose it, because they prefer any answer at all to no answer at all. But I have sometimes noticed that others choose it, as well, because in it they hope to find a challenge they can throw in the face of God...a challenge they despair of Him answering, and yet at the same time hold out a vague and distant wish that he would...as if, if they raise an insulting enough claim against God, He's going to have to be provoked and answer them.
It's like when we say, "How could God allow..." we both declare a refusal to believe in Him, and at the same time want to provoke the God in whom we profess we don't believe... It's rather paradoxical.
if I exist now then I must have always existed.
Well, that would depend: is your life best mathematically represented as a
segment (as Materialism would have to hold) or an
infinite line both ways (as you are suggesting) or a
ray (as the Bible says).
A "ray" is, of course, a line that does have a definite beginning point, but no end.
Something is living as and through me.
Well, that doesn't quite add up, does it? I mean, you've got two different things there: your "something" and your "me." If the two were identical, why would you even have that supposition? Why not just say, "I am living through me"?
But you sense that's not how it's happening, exactly, don't you? There is a larger drama going on, in which your "me" is a singular character. The "Something" of which you speak, and which is responsible for life, is beyond being the "me," though it makes the "me" possible and gives the "me" life. But the "me" isn't self-sustaining, and it isn't fully aware of what's going on. The "me" has questions, we might say: the "Something" plausibly does not. The "Something" must know what's going on, already...at least, if it's true that the "Something" is behind the curtain that the "me" is not able to pull.
This makes so much sense to me
John 8:48-59
''Before Abraham Was, I Am'' ...
In the context, this is Christ speaking of Himself, not of us. It's one of His many claims to Godhood. And you can see that's true, because He uses the Hebrew sacred name of God to describe Himself, and his hearers become so upset they accuse Him of blasphemy and pick up stones to kill Him with. If you read the passage, you'll see I'm telling you the truth about that.
That passage isn't about you, or about me. It's about who the Son of God says He is.
I understand what you are saying.. The wheel of suffering has to exist because of the duality of choice, to choose good over evil.
Well, that's not quite what Hinduism thinks. In Hinduism, there isn't really any Western conception of "good" and "evil," actually. Instead, there are said to be multiple aspects to the god, including what the West would call both "good" and "evil." But for them, "evil" is not really "evil"; rather, it's just the opposite of something else. Shiva, the destroyer-god, is not "evil" per se, for Hindus: he just represents the force of unmaking, of destruction, for example.
You really see this if you read the Gita: Krishna and the Destroyer of Worlds are the same entity, in that book.
So no, Hinduism does not teach the choosing of "good" over "evil" at all. Rather, the reason for the wheel of suffering is that material existence is "cast out of" the god, and thus is psychologically orphaned to a land of deception or "maya." But nothing is really "evil."
I can see that each and every one of us have a share in the suffering of Jesus as a way to knowing goodness and peace.
The sharing in the suffering of Jesus is the Christian lot, but it's chosen, not automatic.
"Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery ordeal among you, which comes upon you for your testing, as though something strange were happening to you; but to the degree that you share the sufferings of Christ, keep on rejoicing, so that at the revelation of His glory you may also rejoice and be overjoyed. If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory, and of God, rests upon you." (I Peter 4:12-14)
On the contrary, Peter adds,
"Make sure that none of you suffers as a murderer, or thief, or evildoer, or a troublesome meddler; but if anyone suffers as a Christian, he is not to be ashamed, but is to glorify God in this name." (1 Peter 4: 15)
The "beloved" Peter speaks of there are Christians. And he says, "to the degree," meaning that there is also a "degree" to which sufferings can be brought on by other things. It's only when one suffers "for the name of Christ" that a person is "blessed" in suffering. Suffering for one's own misdeeds is not "the suffering of Christ," even if it ever happens to somebody who professes to be a Christian...far less for anybody who doesn't. Those who have no association with Christ do not ever "share the sufferings of Christ." They just suffer because of their own sins, or the sins of others, or because they partake in a fallen, sinful world. But there's no automatic nobility in human suffering: it's only dignified if it's voluntary, undeserved, and on account of Christ Himself.
If you are offended by the pain and suffering you see in the world, you have every right to be. This is not a place of sunshine and roses every day. There is genuine evil, misery, injustice, pain and death here, and it ought not to go on...so your intuition is quite fair and right. I would never argue you should suppress it, or avoid the question of it. It is a constant reminder that this place, the world, is messed up, out of joint, and not what it ought to be. That's a realization we all need to have.
However, suffering is not what God wanted for this world. It's what happened because men and women had free will, and decided to sever themselves from the "Something," the Source of Life, God Himself. And suffering is not actually the worst feature of this world: the worst feature is that it leads to eternal death. And about that, something must be done.
