You Are A Slave!

reply to post by logical7


Are you judging me or speaking in generalities? I hope it's the latter, because for sure you don't have the foggiest clue who I am. Who are you to sit in judgement of anyone?

reply to post by logical7

Originally posted by logical7
The reality of "Creator" can be reached by reasoning, yes its "Unseen" but its simple enough to reason.
If you find a beautiful woven sweater in a pile of loose woolen threads, you will ask "who MADE it?"
not assume that the threads got tangled and created a sweater.
The one who made the sweater should "know" weaving.
Similarly the One who made the Universe should know All Knowlege in the Universe.

The only problem with that "reasoning" is that we know sweaters are made because we can see them making them, but we have never seen a universe be created.

You are humanizing the universe and assuming that it must be something "created" just because humans make things.

Originally posted by logical7
A creation is an expression of the knowledge/talent of the creator/artist. Thats how you get the "All knowing" Creator.

Even *IF* this universe was created, that doesn't mean that the creator is all-knowing. There could still be more information out there unbeknownst the mind of this creator of the universe.

Originally posted by logical7
As by observing beings with a free will(humans), we do know that multiple free wills only lead to disharmony.
So we have an All knowing One Creator(Will).

What do you mean by "disharmony"? Do you mean "wars"? Because if so, that has nothing to do with different wills that just has to do with CONTROL. It's because people DON'T like free-will that they start the wars to control everyone else. If they would mind their business and live their lives, respecting free-will then everything would be ok.

reply to post by arpgme

we say that everything comes by itself because we are not a scientist. No scientist would ever say that. All scientists and all scholars believe in the existence of a creator, but, they may call Him by different names. Even those, who do not believe in God, believe in a Creative Force.

this is because of small creatures and their wonderful work that we are kept alive. They are so small that we cannot see them. Since we are a slave of our senses, we do not know about their existence usually. If we increase our knowledge and decrease our ignorance, we will come to know that these small beings in our body are as large in number as the particles of sand in the desert. These small creatures are born in our body, multiply in our body, work in our body and die in our body. But we never see them, touch them, taste them or hear them in our life time.
It is true that one who knows himself knows his God. If we had known ourself and had the knowledge of what is going on inside our body, we would not have said that we do not believe in God, without seeing Him.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by logical7

 

If we are supposed to be slaves of something then why not be slaves of our Creator?

Who?
What?
Nope. Not a slave. You can choose to be, if you want to. I won't.

I've never met 'our Creator.' EDIT: ...IN THIS LIFETIME.
I refuse to trust someone I've never met.
You've never met 'our Creator', either. Not in this lifetime. Or, you'd get it better (the idea, that is).....
WE ARE ALL ONE.

edit on 6-7-2013 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

He can not be seen by the eyes of head, neither in this world, nor in that world !
you are right, we should never worship an unseen. He can only be seen by the eyes of the faithful hearts.

Originally posted by maes2
we say that everything comes by itself because we are not a scientist. No scientist would ever say that. All scientists and all scholars believe in the existence of a creator, but, they may call Him by different names. Even those, who do not believe in God, believe in a Creative Force.

How do YOU know what "ALL" scientists think? Where is your evidence to back up your claim because The Laws of Thermal Dynamics says there IS no CREATOR since energy is NOT created.

reply to post by arpgme

I meant that scientists always ask themselves why !?. they are after reasons.
conservation laws of energy, mass ans mass_energy show that every event needs a reason. for example car will not move unless a force is exerted to it. or water is not boiled unless it is imposed to a warmer source of energy.
nevertheless, when we see Buddhist or Indian ascetics they can concentrate and detach from earth and move up a little. do they violate the universal conservation laws or there is a energy that we do not know or a reason at all !?
we do not know very much from universe unless what we can see or feel or think about !
second law of thermodynamics states that order can not be created by disorder unless a work is done. so someone should cause a disorder to order. from this point of view even the evolution hypothesis can not say that there is no reason or disorders have changed to these orders only by themselves. it can not say that there is no first creator.
suppose that all of the members of universe are dependent on themselves. for example A needs B to be created and B needs C .... and so on to infinity. then how can universe be created, it is impossible ! all of them should wait for each other. it is like that we say I do not enter the room unless you enter the room before me and you do not enter the room unless I enter the room before you. so will we enter the room at all !?
logic can not accept that universe is self dependent. at least we should say that there should be a first creator which is self dependent. that self dependent entity is called God. some people may call it mother nature. but the point is that nature is a chain of reasons. it is the universe which can not be self dependent. it is needy. God and the first creator should not be needy. not at all.

reply to post by logical7


Your total concept of enslavement when it comes to Christianity is totally carnal. That is why you do not understand what a slave is in Christian terms. At the time of the NT writing they had slaves and most generally it was because of a debt, once you paid off your debt you became a freeman. Some who were slaves and were set free became what is known as a love slave, meaning that they chose to stay a slave to their master because of the kind treatment they received while indebted to their master. So in Christianity when it says that we are a slave to Christ it is out of our love for what He has done and we serve Him freely.

Before you start a thread out of ignorance maybe you should investigate what you are railing against first.

Originally posted by guitarplayer
reply to post by logical7

 

Your total concept of enslavement when it comes to Christianity is totally carnal. That is why you do not understand what a slave is in Christian terms. At the time of the NT writing they had slaves and most generally it was because of a debt, once you paid off your debt you became a freeman. Some who were slaves and were set free became what is known as a love slave, meaning that they chose to stay a slave to their master because of the kind treatment they received while indebted to their master. So in Christianity when it says that we are a slave to Christ it is out of our love for what He has done and we serve Him freely.

Before you start a thread out of ignorance maybe you should investigate what you are railing against first.

The term used in the NT is "bondservant". The specific Greek word is a servant who chooses to stay with the master's family after released from debt out of love.

reply to post by guitarplayer

it is out of our love for what He has done and we serve Him freely.

yes of course love is sort of freely slavery. the lover is in need but God is not needy. I think this is the base of improved belief in monotheistic religions. those who are enlightened in the course of monotheistic religions they are lovers, but neither love nor other words can not describe the relation between the almighty creator and the needy creatures.