Is God an autocrat ?

1. 62

   ram_mposted 11 years ago

   In many religions God is depicted as a stern and aloof autocrat who tolerates no dissent. There is also the need for an intermediary.If that is the natural order, is not the democratic spirit and institutions  that we have built up in our modern society contrary to the divine order?

   replyreport
2. 69

   Cagsilposted 11 years ago

   What divine order?

   replyreport
3. 61

   knolyourselfposted 11 years ago

   Yes - that is why they have the separation of church and state.

   replyreport
4. 0

   Emile Rposted 11 years ago

   If God exists, he is definitely not autocratic. Has he stepped in, at all, to manage anything? His style is better describes as laissez-faire.
   
   I think it's obvious, if he exists, that he has full faith and confidence in humanity to figure things out for themselves.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      kessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Yep hep...He has given  his best...the light and his position is who have eyes to see let them see..

      replyreport
   2. 62

      ram_mposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      May be yes,  but I think he might be quiet disapponted. I mean with so many billions always seeking his intervention every time a person is in trouble, he might be wondering why humanity is lacking in confidence.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Baby steps. We are still very immature as a species. Until we find answers to questions on the spiritual, the lion's share of the weakest within humanity will gravitate to the lowest common denominator. Asking for intercession for selfish gain, at the expense of others, is that point. 
         
         Religion is, by design, a childish endeavor. We are slowly coming to that conclusion. I see that as progress.

         replyreport
         1. 62

            ram_mposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            True, we may have to wait until the 'baby' matures. But the problem is with so many  religious zealots around lets hope we do not self-destruct ourselves.

            replyreport
      2. 61

         kessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Think about is as the blink eye...
         You blink to right your sight.
         To God is the same, death comes so that man can see clearer. So even death to hom is good.
         
         When that man understand this he had develop his sight to the extent  that he also realise that he need not die.

         replyreport
   3. 74

      jacharlessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      True, because humans were created to do just that: management.
      Managing the balance between Creator-creation.
      
      The "cycle" has come full circle and humanities autonomy, although governed by autocratic method, is not irresolute, nor ignorant of its purpose. With such "awaking" comes many changes and the evidence of that change is mounting up.
      
      The greatest "feeling" I get from most is more so a genuine concern over the transition itself, as it requires dissolution of present mediocrity, versus the end result.
      
      "Death must end, as all things that have a beginning have an end, yes? So then, death is no different than other circumstance. As life was ended by death, now death must end by life. It is inevitable. But, the challenge is the bridge between them. I suppose this is the realm of faith and thought" ~ jacharless

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         
         
         You've lost me on that one. Death must end? How is that going to happen?

         replyreport
         1. 74

            jacharlessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Emile,
            Simply said, death is merely an effect or circumstance of living.
            So, like any other circumstance it is subject to limitation.
            As such, it can be avoided, altered, removed -even exceeded- either by another circumstance or its own implosion.
            
            Putting a spin on this: there is no evidence throughout history proving humans must die, yet mounds of evidence proving humans have. It is an interesting situation.
            
            James.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Disappearingheadposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               I believe that in theory we can live forever, like some jellyfish. The reason we die is our environment. Free radicals, ultraviolet radiation, chemicals, all interfere with cell division, such that each time a cell divides, the DNA is incrementaly corrupted.
               
               Can we live forever? I used to think it required a resurection, but now I'm not so sure. If Revelation is the Revelation given to Jesus, then the first resurection was the one that occured when he died, and the second when He rose from the grave.
               
               So when our mortal frames die, do we immediately obtain the incorruptible life?

               replyreport
               1. 74

                  jacharlessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  I am not convinced we must put off this body to obtain an incorruptible one.
                  
                  I think humans can.
                  Looking at the average tree, it lives 1,000 years, easy; Sea turtle living easy 600 years. As you said, jellyfish living indefinitely. all of these items were not given the human attribute of reason, speech nor dominion/intellect over all the other items within the ecosystem. This was the first thing that grabbed me years & jeers ago. After learning the text, it seriously reinforced it.
                  and right, about the DNA, I read this too. It basically says the cell xeroxes the genetic patterns. So, if the body -on the genetic level, copied perfectly or did not deteriorate, then agelessness is absolutely possible. But still, with agelessness comes other things that would be required to maintain and deal with.
                  
                  On my end, it takes a lot of spiritual connection to Creator to even consider such a possibility, let alone attempt to accept it. I suppose that is what the whole faith conundrum is all about. Pressing the limits of spirit.
                  
                  James.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     Brenda Durhamposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     You sound like Bill Clinton.  I heard him talk about some sort of "fountain of youth" a few years ago.  Ahhh.  You might wanna contact him and put your heads together.  Since you don't wanna believe the Bible when it outright says this corruptible body must put on incorruption.  Note that it also makes the distinction between mortal and immortality.  It says "then" shall the saying be brought to pass which is written "Death is swallowed up in victory".  That'll be after our bodies are dead, James.

                     replyreport
5. 60

   Tim Higginsposted 11 years ago

   Well, they are called the Ten Commandments, not the Ten Suggestions for Acceptable Behavior.
   
   For what it's worth, my take on it is that religions are created by people and take on the attitudes of the people who create them. Fundamentally, religions are human organizations. That means some sort of hierarchy develops with a small number of people telling all the rest what to do and think, and thereby profiting in some manner. Sometimes this hierarchy is embraced by the religion's adherents, sometimes acceptance of the hierarchy is enforced.
   
   Cagsil said it very succinctly when he replied, "What divine order?"
   
   Belief in God and belief in religion are different things.

   replyreport
6. 62

   ram_mposted 11 years ago

   Friends, I think I need to clarify the word 'divine order'which I had used earlier. I did not mean by that any divine commandment or injunctions. I just meant the schema or the natural order that we find. If we look around we find a system (or you may call it universe) which is violent.Violence is found in abundance wherever we look, whether it be inanimate things like  galaxies or heavenly objects or living forms like animals and plants. Even man is basically violent. But then my contention was whoever (God, if you prefer)created seems to be very detached and harsh as an autocrat.In such system or  environment does 'democratic' values we cherish have relavance? Our perception of a benevolent and caring God is not reflected in the world created by him/her

   replyreport