Confidence in your beliefs.

Actual medicine or real therapy.

Quote:

I'm curious about your statement, "I feel his presence". If it is not too personal to talk about, may I ask how you feel his presence? Is it a fullness in your heart, someone that you have an internal dialog with, or is it faith in his presence? Or something else?

for me personally its like a wholeness or completeness, if that makes sense. and sometimes its internal dialogue.

Diest TKO wrote:

Actual medicine or real therapy.

If spiritual practice is a substitute for "actual medicine or real therapy", that would mean that the person is sick. Most people who engage in prayer, meditation, etc., don't consider themselves sick and wouldn't be diagnosed as such by a doctor. So, how can you make that claim?

IFeelFree wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

Actual medicine or real therapy.

If spiritual practice is a substitute for "actual medicine or real therapy", that would mean that the person is sick. Most people who engage in prayer, meditation, etc., don't consider themselves sick and wouldn't be diagnosed as such by a doctor. So, how can you make that claim?

This is frustrating to me. I don't think you are keeping pace with this conversation. I am refering to people who use prayer as faith based healing. This is EXACTLY the senario I am refering.

I'm not sure what person's personal opinion about ther heath has to do with the truth about their heath.

If spiritual practice is a substitute for "actual medicine or real therapy", that would mean that the person is sick. Most people who engage in prayer, meditation, etc., don't consider themselves sick and wouldn't be diagnosed as such by a doctor. So, how can you make that claim?

If you're in pain and go to a doctor, and he tells you you're OK, would you just take his word for it? You're opinion would override his.

IFeelFree wrote:

If spiritual practice is a substitute for "actual medicine or real therapy", that would mean that the person is sick. Most people who engage in prayer, meditation, etc., don't consider themselves sick and wouldn't be diagnosed as such by a doctor. So, how can you make that claim?

then...

IFeelFree wrote:

If you're in pain and go to a doctor, and he tells you you're OK, would you just take his word for it? You're opinion would override his.

These exactly opposite examples.

What would you say to the doctor if you insisted you were fine, but he told you that you were not. Assume in this example, that the Doctor is not lying.

The cognitive dissonance only arises when what the doctor says is in contradiction to your own experience. In your example, I would ask about the specific test results, and how sure the doctor was about the diagnosis. I would ask what symptoms I could expect. If it was serious, I would go see another doctor, and perhaps even a third. However, if I was in pain and a doctor told me I was fine, I would just go see another doctor. Physical pain is not normal. Something is wrong.

but not "internal dialogue". I tend to have a more impersonal view of God

May I ask, are you familiar with "A Course in Miracles" (ACIM)? If so, what is your opinion of it? I'm curious how most Christians view this text.

...this is where we differ. Christianity is all about having a relationship with God and Christ. When JEsus died for us, he made it possible for us to know God personally.

I've always wondered what Christians mean by this. In what way do you have a personal relationship with God and/or Christ? To many of us, it seems like having an imaginary friend. Do you actually see or hear Jesus speaking to you (as some imply)? Or is it a sense that he is somehow with you, guiding you, helping you, etc

ifeel...i went to acim's website. as a christian i am wary of any type of religious teaching that doesn't come straight from the bible. the lady who started the book said she heard a voice she later believed was Jesus, yet i couldn't find anything on the website listing her views other than that of an agnostic that now believes in Jesus. (but what does that mean?) i personally don't see the need for a book that teaches love and forgiveness etc bc the bible already covers that quite clearly. but this is just my view.

Quote:

I've always wondered what Christians mean by this. In what way do you have a personal relationship with God and/or Christ? To many of us, it seems like having an imaginary friend. Do you actually see or hear Jesus speaking to you (as some imply)? Or is it a sense that he is somehow with you, guiding you, helping you, etc

For me, Christ doesn't speak audibly but its an internal voice, a guide. I can feel him with me also. He doesn't just watch from above and allow us to go through life on our own. When Jesus went to heaven, he sent the Holy SPirit to live within christians to be our comforter and our guide. One particular instance in my life, i was really low and felt so alone and miserable, i just started praying and then reading my bible and i felt better, i felt him. In so many religions, the gods are impersonal but in christianity, GOd is personal, he is real and he loves us.

I believe that the Holy Spirit speaks to all those who are open to it, not just to Christians

please note that im not trying to be rude, but i can't fathom how anyone can take different teachings from different religions. I don't understand how a person can believe some of Christ's teachings yet ignore the rest. Yes Christ taught a lot on love and forgiveness (both are key) but he also taught on hell and punishment and repentance of sins. He claimed to be GOd's only begotten son, he claimed to be equal in all ways to God, he claimed that he is the only way to heaven. He told people they had to follow him wholeheartedly in all ways. He said You have to be born again of God to be saved. He claimed he would die on the cross and be raised again after three days and only through him could one know God. As C.S Lewis wrote in Mere Christianity, Christ was either a liar a lunatic or he is truly all he said he was. If you deny most of Christ's teachings, how can you take him seriously?

Quote:

I believe that the Holy Spirit speaks to all those who are open to it, not just to Christians

that isn't what Christ taught. SOrry we will have to disagree on this.

but you must respect the spiritual paths of others.

When Christ said that he was the only way to the Father, he wasn't speaking about himself as a separate ego, he was speaking about himself as the inner Christ-consciousness, with which he was completely identified. This is the same Christ-consciousness that is in each of us. The kingdom of heaven is within because Christ-consciousness is within, and that is the way to the Father.

It is fine to choose a particular spiritual path and stay faithful to that, but you must respect the spiritual paths of others. Religious intolerance is a major problem in the world today.

IFeelFree wrote:

but you must respect the spiritual paths of others.

Why? Someone has to be right, and someone wrong don't they?

maporsche wrote:

IFeelFree wrote:

but you must respect the spiritual paths of others.

Why? Someone has to be right, and someone wrong don't they?

Actually, no. When you understand that two people can say exactly the opposite things, and both be right, then you've got it.

Understanding depends on the state of consciousness of the knower. From my perspective, a certain thing might be true, from your perspective it might not be. Both us are faithful to our own understanding, but we disagree. The confusion arises because in science there is understood to be an objective criterion for right and wrong -- the consensus of scientific opinion, supported by the history of scientific investigation and analysis. In spiritual matters, understanding is more fluid. The transformation of consciousness changes the knower and therefore what is known. When I emerge from a deep meditation, saturated with bliss, the world appears lovely and dreamlike. When I emerge from an intense departmental meeting at work in which I've had to defend the work of my section, the world appears quite differently.