Quote:
Originally posted by Chewbacca:
Your the one sowing confusion here Yorick, with your belittlement, guilt trips, insuations and accusations.
Do you really know what Christ means when I use the word? What it feels on the inside of ME to have a relationship with Christ? Do you know what it means to know and nuture your own Christ-consciousness? Because thats what I am all about when I talk about inner-christ. I speak of a personal spiritual transformation.
Do you mean to belittle my beliefs I have shared! Well fine, feel real good about yourself okay, enjoy yourself. I challenged your use of a limited definition of a concept, of a word and in return you have personally attacked my spiritual beliefs, opinions and ideas because they do not do not fit your own, and I wont take it.
To think how hurt you acted because someone made a half-true generalization and then to turn around and belittle my personally knowledge and understanding of Christ.
That's TRULY ridiculous and quite revealing.
Are you so closed minded you cannot believe that Karma has more than one defintion? Are you so hell-bent to demonize every religion but your own you won't open your eyes to ideas that may not have cross your path before?
I did not pull this concept and defintion of Karma out of my ass, it is as old as hermetic philosophy and thats pretty damn ancient.
You know what, it is irrelevant. I have declared my beleifs and refuted your narrowing of the concept of Karma and how it fits with Christianity. What ever you say from this point on is irrelevant because it will obviously come from your desire to push your beliefs and belittle those that are different.
Somebody stick a fork in this thread, its done!
|
????????
1. I never belittled your beliefs.
I challenged your understanding of the English language. Big difference.
2. "Karma" was and is a Hindu worldview. Buddhism adopted it because it is a reaction against Hindu values, but is still within the Hindu worldview of cyclic rebirth and pantheism.
As such it does not fit within Christianity at all because of it's specific reincarnational effects, however, a "softer" definition - which I actually allowed for in my original use of the word - limits it to a universal "cause and effect" barometer. (Please note this Kathen)
3.
You have not offered an alternate definition of the word "Karma" merely challenged my ability to use it in a sentence along with Law, in terms of ascribing guilt. Whether the soft definition or the accurate definition is used, the fact remains, if something keeps a record of right and wrong actions, it ascribes guilt. This is not something you've addressed.
4.In keeping with my challenging your use of ENGLISH, not your beliefs, I brought up your use of the word "Christ". Again, you speak of "Annointed One consciousness". I am not sure if you intend to mean what you say when you use the word. If I am not mistaked you mean "Divine" do you not? One's inner divinity? One's divine consciouness? What's wrong with using a correct word? Why use "annointed one" instead of "divine"?
If this is not what you mean, then feel free to elaborate. I am all about clarity and understanding. It simply frustrates me when people apply their own definition to a word instead of taking the time to understand what the word means. (As I said Christ and Messiah mean exactly the same thing. Messiah is Hebrew, Christ is Greek. "Jesus" is an anglocisation of his Greek name Iesus, hence the Greek honorific. Y'shua Messiah, would be the Hebrew.)
In any case I INTRODUCED THE TERM INTO THIS DISCUSSION. You are the one that semanticly challenged my use of the word. I stand by what I said.
[ 10-16-2003, 01:16 PM: Message edited by: Yorick ]