by pr_capone 90 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Gumby:
I find it awful that the WTBTS has ingrained in your head non essential biblical dogma.
As usual, cutting through the crap - glad to have ya back, bro
Defd:
Following on from Didier's question (Narkissos) which has a scriptural answer in its own right; Which is the "name above every other name?" (There's a scriptural answer for that one, too ).
Following on from Didier's question (Narkissos) which has a scriptural answer in its own right; Which is the "name above every other name?" (There's a scriptural answer for that one, too ).
Dont forget WHO GAVE Jesus that name. Philippians 2:9 "For this very reason also God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every [other] name,..........
I'm not talking about the authority of the one confering a name, I'm talking about the name itself. Which name is it again?
Cummon, it's not that hard. Say it. Ya know you want to. It'd make ya ever so happy
Jesus. Which is really Jehushua. Which means "Yhwh is salvation".
Isn't it ironic that in using a name for "god", or anything else for that matter, automatically creates distance, creates separation from that which is being named and that which is naming? And isn't it ironic how disputes concerning "god's" name in particular creates further distancing and separation, how it creates tension and argument. Do you think "god" finds this pleasing?
Wouldn't it make more sense to drop all names for "god" and seek instead that to which the word god points to? Look for the presence of what the word points to, look in the only place that presence could possibly be: in what is arising in the here and now. Notice what is doing the looking, and in the finding of that separation dissolves.
Poppers:Do you really think that the "God" of which you speak is truly that displeased with idle discussion?
We all need a hobby or two
LittleToe said,
"Do you really think that the "God" of which you speak is truly that displeased with idle discussion?"
I don't even like to use the word "god" because it has too much baggage attached to it. People automatically revert to acquired beliefs rather than experiencing the actuality to which the word points.
As for idle discussion, in and of itself there is no harm; it is another arising within what is. The usual result, however, can further solidify one's core beliefs about who one is in contrast to those who hold contrary beliefs, and it is this which keeps separation from others as well as separation from "god" in place. It is this separation which becomes the fuel for conflict of every sort. And the irony is that the one who would hold any belief has no basis in reality, for when searched for, no such entity can be found. When searched for, the "me" that would cling to any belief and reject an "other's" belief doesn't even exist except as an idea.
"ME" is only an idea - look for it and find this out directly. What is real, however, is what every belief arises within - that is what you are. "That" holds no judgment.
Who am I?
I am that I am.
LittleToe,
Congratulations! Now, drop the words and rest in/as the realization of the words.
Poppers:
I already do
Theology is a hobby
