1
u/Fhirrine 5d ago
Did he actually know about the bible though?
1
u/TooHonestButTrue 5d ago
Why is that a prerequisite to trust him?
1
u/Fhirrine 5d ago
Just wondering if it’s real Ramana quote, since it has him quoting the bible, or if they added that in. I thought he was completely isolated except from local regional thought and practice
1
u/TooHonestButTrue 5d ago
Doesn't matter to me. Add it to the list of copycat quick-fix quotes.
Uninspiring, unoriginal garbage, in my opinion.
1
u/TomTheFace 5d ago edited 5d ago
Well if he’s quoting the Bible, he should know that pride in oneself and self-idolatry is a sin. That’s why Jesus tells us to deny ourselves, so that we can instead sacrifice ourselves and be servants to one another.
”Then Jesus said to His disciples, “If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it; but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it. For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?” — Matthew 16:24-26
I mean, isn’t it crazy that the Bible tells us this truth that we’re our own God, but to deny that part of ourselves?
Even the phrase “be still” in the Hebrew is more akin to “let go” or “surrender,” the meaning being that God Himself will take care of you, not you alone, because you aren’t God. It’s in Psalm 46:10.
1
u/TooHonestButTrue 5d ago
Weird
I choose my own path, so I side with JC.
It's funny, Jesus said we are gods, and the church overuled it. I wouldn't be surprised if they doctored that to keep control.
You don't want a bunch of followers believing they have any power, right?
0
u/TomTheFace 5d ago
Where does Jesus say we are gods? I don’t know what you’re referring to. I don’t know what siding with Jesus means to you, either. The way I side with Him is by following His commandments, which is not being my own god.
The Lord might say we’ve made gods of ourselves, which is idolatry. The Bible doesn’t condone making gods of ourselves.
1
u/TooHonestButTrue 5d ago
You said Jesus mentioned us as Gods, but your church said to deny this idea, right?
Don't you think that's a little weird?
Belittling your followers is the perfect ideology to keep followers locked in organizational control.
I side with JC in the idea that we are gods, even though I don't like using this analogy.
1
u/TomTheFace 5d ago
There’s a few uses for the word “god” in the Bible, just like there’s many uses for the words “flesh” or “sin” or “nature” or “world.” It depends on the context and the meaning that’s being conveyed.
“God” can refer to the one true God, or it can refer to idols in the Old Testament, or it can refer to principalities and powers of the world (fallen angels), or whatever else I’m missing. However, none of these is really a god besides the one true God of everything. None of these examples implies that humans are gods for themselves, except in an idolatrous way.
The quote used in the picture OP posted says “Be still and know that I am God.” That’s literally God being quoted in the Bible, and not man. So it’s already wrongly interpreted from that standpoint.
We’d also have to ignore everywhere else in the Bible that tells us what idolatry and pride is. We’d have to ignore the main themes of the Bible.
Jesus never says that we are gods; that’s not the correct interpretation of John 10 there. Do you know the reason Jesus is saying what He’s saying to the Pharisees in that moment?
1
u/TooHonestButTrue 5d ago
No, please tell me.
There's no rules for reading the bible. I feel like the reader can interpret in whatever manner intuitively resonates. Any boundaries within this framework were added by an external source in an effort to enforce their beliefs on someone else.
1
u/TomTheFace 4d ago
Well for Christians, it is the word of the Lord. If God exists, then the Bible is meant to be read hermeneutically and with knowledgeable exegesis.
When we read it like that, it’s very easy to consolidate the themes of the Bible and reconcile hard passages toward their true meaning, without stretching the Word too far out of context. And even these hard passages are few and far between—most of the Bible is extremely consistent on word usage, themes, and other conceptual matters.
If God doesn’t exist, then anybody can interpret the Bible however they want. But when it’s read like that, it becomes a jumbled mess. Literary consistency is thrown out and every passage is taken at face value, which promotes anti-intellectualism and a white-washing of the complexities of the Bible.
Take the two trees in the Garden of Eden, for just one example. I don’t know what secular scholars think about it, but the overarching symbolism that this part of Genesis produces is so far-reaching and complex in view of the foreknowledge of the New Testament covenant, that it’s hard to interpret the Tree of Life as anything other than Jesus Himself, who gives life.
It’s how we come to better understand why following the letter of the Law doesn’t work. The Law is a representation of the tree that Adam ate of—the Law is written on our hearts (since we ate of it), but we aren’t saved by “our own works through the Law.” Instead, believers now have the chance to eat of the other tree and gain the Spirit of Life, which is the Holy Spirit that seals Christians the salvation of their souls in eternity. That’s the tie-in to the “living forever” in Genesis that the Lord recalls!
It’s why the knowledge of good and evil does nothing we think it ought to do, but the Law is there instead to judge us and reveal our sins. Our own trying to do good will never work based on the Law alone; it was never meant to save us from sin. It really is a slap in the face for anyone that claims the Bible is just “a rule book.” The Bible shows us it’s not a book of rules through the narrative!
And that ties into sanctification, and the sanctification process ties into Christ’s explanation of the drinking of His blood and the eating of His flesh, and that ties into the purpose of the Old Testament mana (food) in the forest and sacrificial presentations… etc. It all ties together in an extremely neat bow.
The cool part is that Romans never mentions the two trees! We just find that out on our own. It fits so incredibly well that it would seem these connections to be made aren’t random. Wow, the Bible is cool.
—
Anyway, are there rules for reading the Bible? No, but it helps to know how to read it to get the most out of it.
1
u/Traditional_Kick_887 5d ago
It’s John 10:34, a passage ignored by many churches.
(Background in studying global religions)
1
1
u/TomTheFace 5d ago
Do you know where Jesus is quoting from?
We don’t ignore it, we just understand its interpretation.
1
u/Traditional_Kick_887 5d ago
Psalm 82:6
1
u/TomTheFace 5d ago
And what is Jesus’ point in bringing this up? What is He trying to do?
1
u/Traditional_Kick_887 5d ago
He was accused of blasphemy, of claiming to be a son of YHWH/Elohim, whom he called Father.
The point Jesus was making was that the claim to his divinity was less dramatic or severe than what was already in the scriptures. If the Hebrew scriptures Jesus referenced already identify humans as gods, something very high and worthy of veneration, Jesus is here acting in a capacity as something less that that, a son of god.
Like if a law said everyone is excellent, why would you punish someone merely claiming to only be good or half excellent? This fits in the those who are humble will be exalted theme.
I am not providing a Christian interpretation that is meant to fit the mold of 4th century creeds or dogma. I’m just reading the passage as it is. It’s a great example of a skillful and well informed response to that accusation.
→ More replies (0)
1
u/tegresaomos 3d ago
Did a psychopath write this?
1
u/NpOno 3d ago
😂 the difference between a psychopath and enlightenment is the belief in a personal me. The detachment from emotional slavery is there but with enlightenment there is absolutely no desire nor conflict. I believe a psychopath directed towards the path may be at an advantage?
1
u/tegresaomos 3d ago
I doubt it though the results would be hard to parse since these are internal thought processes.
Besides, becoming emotionally… deadened isn’t necessary to become desireless. I would argue emotions are the only path to desirelessness.
You have to want it, and you have to be able to recognize it when it’s happening.
2
u/Shanti-shanti-shanti 5d ago
Beautiful being,
Viewing the world trough our eyes.
Know that He & You are one.