@@CopyPaste88found it! It was at the end of the short but the video is titled “music and pattern (royal northern college of music Q&A)” it’s about 2 hours long! 👍
Christ didn’t bind himself to religion either. He met everyone where they were. That had nothing to do with categorizing people as sinners or otherwise. He saw the inherent goodness of all and called each to awaken to who they truly are.
@@Aaron-xb4rq Didn't bind Himself to religion? You mean quoting Scripture, teaching in synagogues, called rabbi, praying Jewish prayers, accepting baptism in the Jordan, celebrating the Passover meal... The Romans even labeled Him "king of the Jews"... He no doubt reached out past the perceived boundaries of Judaism, but I can't see how anyone would say He wasn't religiously Jewish.
@@FrJohnBrownSJ Yes, he was a religious Jew, but he didn’t teach religion as that which binds people together. He spoke very strongly against the religion of his time. He wasn’t calling people to convert to a religion, but taught the higher truth of who they really are. Oneness is not dependent on religion.
@@Aaron-xb4rq "He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” - and "And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." - seems like a religion to me.
I'd say neither spiritual nor religious. There's spiritual but not religious, but conversely, there are also people who are religious but not spiritual. Both sides are equally broken, in my view. And, I'd say there tends to be more intrinsic religiosity to the "spiritual but not religious" than there is spirituality to people who are "religious but not spiritual." The "religious but not spiritual" types tend to be the genocidal maniacs and people who seek theocracy to force people into their limited, narrow dogma, into a mode of being that prevents progress of any sort whatsoever.
To be fair, it's not always driven by selfishness; rather, it may reflect a desire to avoid being tied to individuals who don't truly share the same understanding. Even when two people profess faith in Jesus, their intentions can differ significantly.
That's how it was for me. It ended up being one of the necessary stepping stones in my search for truth before arriving towards Christianity. Breaking out of the materialist frame then breaking out of a gnostic one was a long and subtle process that took a good bit of time for me to go through.
We are in the world but not of it. We can't skip the former, because its wanting the ressurection without the cross. Jesus did ask to take up our cross and follow Him.
Yes but that's just the nature of the beast. When you go to Church you're often sitting and praying with people you wouldn't normally choose to be around. It's going to be a mess until we get to heaven.
Yeah I never understood the "organized" religion contention. Like if you really believed that you have the truth, wouldn't you want to share it with as many people as possible? Organizing is inevitable if you want to share it with the world. Are we supposed to keep Christianity a secret? No. Atheists just don't want to hear about it. That's the real complaint.
@@shmeebs387 We need to get farther than this if we want to see real progress. Christs words are not honored by the "religious" in general. The 10 commandments are elevated above the greatest commandments by American conservatives, who also worship their orange calf, Donald Trump over Jesus Christ. That's why people who are both religious and spiritual tend to avoid organized religion, because organized religion is so often devoid of spirit.
Sounds almost like the original sin of Adam and Eve. I want to become like God but without God, on “my” own terms. I want to be spiritual on my own terms without the religion of binding me to God and to His church.
Similar to the Tower of Babel, our goal was to create a system that rendered the transcendental obsolete. Considering Dogma, it works in both directions. If you view God as the Dogma, you're essentially using Dogma as your Tower of Babel. However, assuming that someone's pursuit of spirituality on their own stems from selfishness due to a temporary lack of understanding seems like a stretch.
@@jonathansolero7 seeking spirituality, and claiming, “I’m spiritual but not religious” are two different things. It’s good to seek to be spiritual, but the movement itself tends to come from a rejection of God and of the community that serves God. That is selfish, because they want to define spirituality on their own terms, not as a humbling to the knowledge of God (unless they’re seeking another community if they identify something heretical in the community they were originally in).
Nah. It's more like I want to connect with God without submitting myself to a structure that believes things like there being humans on Pangea. It's because religious institutions, for all the good that is in them, are also filled with a lot of ridiculousness, and avoiding the ridiculousness is a herculean task. The real sin is the divorce of religious institutions from science. Science is nested within religion, as Pageau himself put it. But, too many religious institutions are anti-scientific. Organized religion needs to reintegrate the Truth that has been laid bare before our eyes. Burying one's head in the sand and pretending the scientific revolution didn't happen won't create any progress. What will create progress is to bring enchantment to science, to bring beauty to science, to bring meaning to science, the Goodness and Beauty that science's truth lacks. I also hate the split that people who don't want to quite join onto an organized religion just "want to do things on their own terms," as if everyone who disagrees with you is just X. I consider myself Christian, but it is Christian in a way that many would find hard to reconcile. But that isn't because "I simply want X to be a certain way." It's because by my own conscience and rationality I cannot follow certain aspects of certain interpretations of certain religious ideas.
Even they participated in the Church just in a different way, appearing and helping people for example, recieving communion at least once, etc. Otherwise we probably wouldn't even know about them!
Even Saints who were alone almost their whole life, went to church, and ate with the brethren at those days by breaking their fast.. Church, Holy Communion, Liturgy is something that connects us with God and Heaven, we need it.. when even the Saints left their solitary for it once a week or once in a time..we absolutely need it
Universally Preferable Behavior is an outline of secular ethics that's based on logic, reason, and empiricism. It's not my ethics, or your ethics, or John Doe's personal version of ethics--but objective morality. I do believe in God, but I think UPB is worth looking into.
I partly disagree, because I don't think that the "spiritual but not religious" thing is in all cases about me wanting to do things my way all the time. It could also be about not agreeing fully with any one tradition, but seeing some value in several ones. It could be a matter of conviction rather than a mere preference.
Well, my views and ways of life could become a tradition if they got popular. But I find that thought a bit creepy, to be honest. I mean, who the heck wants to be my follower? I'm just a guy 😅
@@jukkaahonen6557 Yet you are still relying on various traditions of spirituality, picking and choosing what you accept and reject. It’s just borrowing from various spiritual traditions in at attempt to crate your own.
You spoke I spaced out. Not in a negative way. Regurgitating the same old written words gets OLD real quick. It's not a knock on any religion. In fact, it should inspire people to find out what is real and what isn't. If we all make mistakes that means god and his chosen ones also made mistakes. So what do we do? That's the billion dollar question. I respect all religions. Some rules are too rigid. Why? Who? Started that? They injected their own view to religion. Why can't I and other people do the same thing? 🎉
But truly spiritual person realizes that he doesn’t need religion with all its dogmas and rituals to experientially know the oneness that he is with everyone and everything. Unfortunately, if religion isn’t properly understood as a means to an end and is instead made to be an end in and of itself, the religious person can mistakenly think that it’s the dogmas and rituals which bind him to those of his religion, never transcending the dualistic limits of religion and knowing himself truly.
I agree with you. Do you practice Dzogchen or a form of non-dual mindfulness? I’ve been using Sam Harris’ app for a few years on and off and his presentation makes a lot of sense to me.
@@ymwo97679 There is great wisdom in the dzogchen tradition. It’s essentially enlightenment teaching without the religiosity of Buddhism. If you find it helpful, I recommend listening to talks from James Low.
Bible says there are only 2 spirits...God/Holy Spirit and the other is Satan/ demonic/...so it's not good to just be spiritual because Satan is a spirit...we have to choose who we will align with( choose ye this day whom ye will serve)
Followers of Jesus were first called “ Christians “ in Antioch. ( Acts 11:26 ) … for a whole year Barnabas and Saul met with the church and taught great number of people. The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch. They were called “ Christians “ because their speech and behaviour were like Christ. The truth of Christianity leads us not to a position of pride over other people or other religions. Rather we are called into a humble way of life that seeks to embody the love of Jesus through the Spirit so that the whole world might come to know God, the creator of heaven and earth, in and through Jesus Christ. For the truth of Christianity is not that we somehow found our way to God, but that God, in Jesus Christ, came and found us. The greatest truth is not something you can hold onto, but that which holds onto us.✝️❤️❤️✝️
Yeah, it’s not much of an answer. That’s a big reason why I’m looking for the video. I hope that’s not everything he said. Hope there’s something more.
Belief and religion are not one in the same. Belief and practice is how one lives to better their own and those around them. Religion is the tool used to claim "yeah, but our sect of said religion is the only true one" religion is used to indoctrinate people particularly if taught by the wrong person (Osteen's of the world) and it's also used to shame you into giving your tides away, which let's be honest, is just a guilt trip to never say it out loud, buy your way into heaven. There is a difference some just like to shame others for not doing exactly as they do so they make videos on youtube to feel better about themselves
Hold on , SBNR or SBNA is a good stance because it takes the boundaries between the religions ,it means you can use the mechanism and material from everything Do you do yoga ? Meditate? That's a proof that the whole world today is going in the direction of SBNR or SBNA. Religion is truly a bad product , spirituality on the other hand is freeing. I don't want the shackles,if you want them ,so be it
Spirituality, there are many spiritual beliengs, like demons. The true religion guides you to the proper Spirit, which is God. Paul calls these idols and false gods of false religions demons.
there's a problem with groups when they ask you to sacrifice your personal ability to think to a mediocre collective ideology. there are also things binding the "spiritual" person to other spiritual people... a preference for liberty and individual thought are pretty decent values that can pull people together regardless of creed. the problem is when people have different epistemologies, then you get into the whole "my truth" thing and you can't communicate across boundaries.
Agreed. Many interpretations of Christianity start by asking you to affirm that you are nothing or are disconnected from the divine. I don't want to be in that room anymore. If Jonathan's Christoanity doesn't start there, then maybe i could join. And just by the by, i suggest that instead of saying "epistemologies" you say "ways of knowing what is true." It's only one syllable more. Every time i read epistemology or ontology, i have to stop and go uhhhhhhhh for a while. I know I'm not the only one.
@@jamesdewane1642 well, if i didn't use that word then nobody would learn it. both of those words are important to know. i don't know if johnathan thinks we are disconnected to the divine, or what the nature of that connection is. my issue with most christianity is that there's always this uncrossable chasm between fallen man and perfect man-god that you're supposed to try to cross. i don't like spending my time striving for impossible contradictory things. i like to have an end goal that i can actually attain, not in some alternate dimension somewhere after i'm dead.
my categories aren't arbitrary. maybe try asking a question or two instead of immediately strawmanning a person who doesn't think 100% like you. Thought, if we're feigning suprise... let's just say i've heard this tired line of reasoning from christian apologists before.@@stevendouglas3781
Religio that which binds there is good religion and bad religion good religion is being bound by the God of Life the God of the most High. Bad religion is being bound to lower dead gods.
All religions require belief, regardless of evidence… Christ demands belief because of the evidence Without Christ there would not be Christianity! Κύριε ίσους Χριστός ελέησον ήμας! ✝️❤️❤️✝️
Exactly. And belief springs out ignorance. Christianity is no different. Only one who doesn’t know, believes, and ultimately, all beliefs are false. One must be relentless and brutally honest in their search for truth. What do you really know to be true?
@@joshvarges9230 What is your path? What I’m describing is an experiential knowing of who you are as opposed to thinking and believing things about who you are. The fact is, you are not your thoughts. You are not your beliefs. And one who believes something does so because he doesn’t know it to be true. If one knows, there is no need for belief. If a Christian is brutally honest, he ought to ask himself: What if the Christian narrative isn’t true? What if the beliefs of the church are false? Where does that leave you? Then what does it mean to be a human being? Who am I? What’s the purpose of my life? What if there is no Heaven or Hell? Etc. Do you really, honestly know any of your Christian beliefs to be true? After all, the creed starts by saying, “I believe…”
@@Aaron-xb4rq the authority of christianity comes from the testimony of the apostles and they went to lengths to prove that what they taught came from the risen Christ. i ask those questions with the knowledge of what is in scripture
@@joshvarges9230 If one’s “proof” of Christianity is the scriptural accounts, then one’s burden of proof is quite low because you either accept or ignore the numerous contradictions contained therein. A more honest approach is to acknowledge that you simply believe in those accounts despite their contradictions because the fact remains, one can’t prove that Christianity is true. The only thing you can truly know is, “I am.”
Yeah but the difference is that saints are self-sacrificial. They are "dogmatic", but at the end of the day they selflessly lay down their lives for God and for others. -L
@@JonathanPageauClips that's very naive. I'm not saying there aren't moral people from all religions and secular spaces, but oftentimes they are also constrained by the dogmas which originate from their respective religions and ideologies. Furthermore who defines what a saint is? Would Muslims accept a Christian or Hindu saint or vice versa? Even within the same religion, a man can be viewed as a saint or a sinner. Prime example is Muhammad in Abdul Wahab who started the wahhabi movement, the brand of Islam prevalent in Saudi today. His followers love him. The sufis and other Muslims think he's a great evil. The point is you can't get around dogma. At the same time I recognize the "I'm just spiritual" types want to play the game without any skin in it and pick and choose. The whole thing is a mess.
Fair criticism. But this does not apply to people who come together in a spiritual but not religious setting to connect to each other and to God. Or as they would say 'the universe'😂. I know you can criticize that as well, so please do.
@@jalbers3150 concretely I envision a group of people doing some new age ceremony that aims to detach all words and rituals from existing religions, but I think you're right in saying that this 'spritual not religious' hypothetical situation is oxymoronic.
@@Lucasvozit’s absolutely an oxymoron, especially considering religion is about the rekindling of the human spirit with divinity. The idea of being “spiritual without religion” is completely ignorant of what religion really is. But I can understand the sentiment because religion has become bastardized in secular culture
Full talk: ruclips.net/video/OutbtwqxZn0/видео.html
link does not work. Can you tell the name of the talk?
@@CopyPaste88 I’m looking for the video myself if I find it I’ll let you know 👍
@@CopyPaste88found it! It was at the end of the short but the video is titled “music and pattern (royal northern college of music Q&A)” it’s about 2 hours long! 👍
I don't think it's dogma that really bothers us. The real repulsive thing about religion is that it binds us to sinners. And Christ did just that.
Woah..
Christ didn’t bind himself to religion either. He met everyone where they were. That had nothing to do with categorizing people as sinners or otherwise. He saw the inherent goodness of all and called each to awaken to who they truly are.
@@Aaron-xb4rq Didn't bind Himself to religion? You mean quoting Scripture, teaching in synagogues, called rabbi, praying Jewish prayers, accepting baptism in the Jordan, celebrating the Passover meal... The Romans even labeled Him "king of the Jews"... He no doubt reached out past the perceived boundaries of Judaism, but I can't see how anyone would say He wasn't religiously Jewish.
@@FrJohnBrownSJ Yes, he was a religious Jew, but he didn’t teach religion as that which binds people together. He spoke very strongly against the religion of his time. He wasn’t calling people to convert to a religion, but taught the higher truth of who they really are. Oneness is not dependent on religion.
@@Aaron-xb4rq "He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” - and "And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." - seems like a religion to me.
The devil is spiritual but not religious
Says who
I'd say neither spiritual nor religious.
There's spiritual but not religious, but conversely, there are also people who are religious but not spiritual.
Both sides are equally broken, in my view. And, I'd say there tends to be more intrinsic religiosity to the "spiritual but not religious" than there is spirituality to people who are "religious but not spiritual."
The "religious but not spiritual" types tend to be the genocidal maniacs and people who seek theocracy to force people into their limited, narrow dogma, into a mode of being that prevents progress of any sort whatsoever.
To be fair, it's not always driven by selfishness; rather, it may reflect a desire to avoid being tied to individuals who don't truly share the same understanding. Even when two people profess faith in Jesus, their intentions can differ significantly.
That's how it was for me. It ended up being one of the necessary stepping stones in my search for truth before arriving towards Christianity. Breaking out of the materialist frame then breaking out of a gnostic one was a long and subtle process that took a good bit of time for me to go through.
We are in the world but not of it. We can't skip the former, because its wanting the ressurection without the cross. Jesus did ask to take up our cross and follow Him.
Yes but that's just the nature of the beast. When you go to Church you're often sitting and praying with people you wouldn't normally choose to be around. It's going to be a mess until we get to heaven.
The pic that appears when Johnathan says"and so if we stand together"...been there...and it is such a beautiful place ❤😊
If you reject "organized religion" you just get disorganized religion.
Yeah I never understood the "organized" religion contention. Like if you really believed that you have the truth, wouldn't you want to share it with as many people as possible? Organizing is inevitable if you want to share it with the world. Are we supposed to keep Christianity a secret? No. Atheists just don't want to hear about it. That's the real complaint.
@@shmeebs387 We need to get farther than this if we want to see real progress.
Christs words are not honored by the "religious" in general. The 10 commandments are elevated above the greatest commandments by American conservatives, who also worship their orange calf, Donald Trump over Jesus Christ.
That's why people who are both religious and spiritual tend to avoid organized religion, because organized religion is so often devoid of spirit.
Sounds almost like the original sin of Adam and Eve. I want to become like God but without God, on “my” own terms. I want to be spiritual on my own terms without the religion of binding me to God and to His church.
Similar to the Tower of Babel, our goal was to create a system that rendered the transcendental obsolete. Considering Dogma, it works in both directions. If you view God as the Dogma, you're essentially using Dogma as your Tower of Babel. However, assuming that someone's pursuit of spirituality on their own stems from selfishness due to a temporary lack of understanding seems like a stretch.
@@jonathansolero7 seeking spirituality, and claiming, “I’m spiritual but not religious” are two different things. It’s good to seek to be spiritual, but the movement itself tends to come from a rejection of God and of the community that serves God. That is selfish, because they want to define spirituality on their own terms, not as a humbling to the knowledge of God (unless they’re seeking another community if they identify something heretical in the community they were originally in).
Nah.
It's more like I want to connect with God without submitting myself to a structure that believes things like there being humans on Pangea.
It's because religious institutions, for all the good that is in them, are also filled with a lot of ridiculousness, and avoiding the ridiculousness is a herculean task.
The real sin is the divorce of religious institutions from science. Science is nested within religion, as Pageau himself put it.
But, too many religious institutions are anti-scientific. Organized religion needs to reintegrate the Truth that has been laid bare before our eyes. Burying one's head in the sand and pretending the scientific revolution didn't happen won't create any progress.
What will create progress is to bring enchantment to science, to bring beauty to science, to bring meaning to science, the Goodness and Beauty that science's truth lacks.
I also hate the split that people who don't want to quite join onto an organized religion just "want to do things on their own terms," as if everyone who disagrees with you is just X.
I consider myself Christian, but it is Christian in a way that many would find hard to reconcile. But that isn't because "I simply want X to be a certain way." It's because by my own conscience and rationality I cannot follow certain aspects of certain interpretations of certain religious ideas.
What about hermits that became saints?
Even they participated in the Church just in a different way, appearing and helping people for example, recieving communion at least once, etc. Otherwise we probably wouldn't even know about them!
Mount Athos is also interesting. No women for example.
Even Saints who were alone almost their whole life, went to church, and ate with the brethren at those days by breaking their fast.. Church, Holy Communion, Liturgy is something that connects us with God and Heaven, we need it.. when even the Saints left their solitary for it once a week or once in a time..we absolutely need it
I’d ask that man to expand on the dark side of dogma. Then give examples of that dark side, THEN that can be properly addressed
This is very deep. I have called it "collective therapy"
Worshipping God and his moral laws are intrinsically connected to him.. to base your morality on your own morals you become a god
Universally Preferable Behavior is an outline of secular ethics that's based on logic, reason, and empiricism. It's not my ethics, or your ethics, or John Doe's personal version of ethics--but objective morality. I do believe in God, but I think UPB is worth looking into.
I partly disagree, because I don't think that the "spiritual but not religious" thing is in all cases about me wanting to do things my way all the time. It could also be about not agreeing fully with any one tradition, but seeing some value in several ones. It could be a matter of conviction rather than a mere preference.
Thereby creating your own tradition. Which is still holding to a tradition. Just your own.
Well, my views and ways of life could become a tradition if they got popular. But I find that thought a bit creepy, to be honest. I mean, who the heck wants to be my follower? I'm just a guy 😅
Because tradition is something you inherit, and you can't inherit yourself.
@@jukkaahonen6557 Yet you are still relying on various traditions of spirituality, picking and choosing what you accept and reject. It’s just borrowing from various spiritual traditions in at attempt to crate your own.
You spoke I spaced out. Not in a negative way. Regurgitating the same old written words gets OLD real quick. It's not a knock on any religion. In fact, it should inspire people to find out what is real and what isn't. If we all make mistakes that means god and his chosen ones also made mistakes. So what do we do? That's the billion dollar question. I respect all religions. Some rules are too rigid. Why? Who? Started that? They injected their own view to religion. Why can't I and other people do the same thing? 🎉
But truly spiritual person realizes that he doesn’t need religion with all its dogmas and rituals to experientially know the oneness that he is with everyone and everything. Unfortunately, if religion isn’t properly understood as a means to an end and is instead made to be an end in and of itself, the religious person can mistakenly think that it’s the dogmas and rituals which bind him to those of his religion, never transcending the dualistic limits of religion and knowing himself truly.
I agree with you. Do you practice Dzogchen or a form of non-dual mindfulness? I’ve been using Sam Harris’ app for a few years on and off and his presentation makes a lot of sense to me.
@@ymwo97679 There is great wisdom in the dzogchen tradition. It’s essentially enlightenment teaching without the religiosity of Buddhism. If you find it helpful, I recommend listening to talks from James Low.
Bible says there are only 2 spirits...God/Holy Spirit and the other is Satan/ demonic/...so it's not good to just be spiritual because Satan is a spirit...we have to choose who we will align with( choose ye this day whom ye will serve)
Followers of Jesus were first called “ Christians “ in Antioch. ( Acts 11:26 ) … for a whole year Barnabas and Saul met with the church and taught great number of people. The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch. They were called “ Christians “ because their speech and behaviour were like Christ.
The truth of Christianity leads us not to a position of pride over other people or other religions. Rather we are called into a humble way of life that seeks to embody the love of Jesus through the Spirit so that the whole world might come to know God, the creator of heaven and earth, in and through Jesus Christ. For the truth of Christianity is not that we somehow found our way to God, but that God, in Jesus Christ, came and found us.
The greatest truth is not something you can hold onto, but that which holds onto us.✝️❤️❤️✝️
And it is the function of the Transcendent to bring all things together, especially as revealed in Christ
get's ask a vaild question about institutionalized religion - a concern that most relate to:
"I don't know what to tell you" *giggles*
Yeah, it’s not much of an answer. That’s a big reason why I’m looking for the video. I hope that’s not everything he said. Hope there’s something more.
Belief and religion are not one in the same. Belief and practice is how one lives to better their own and those around them. Religion is the tool used to claim "yeah, but our sect of said religion is the only true one" religion is used to indoctrinate people particularly if taught by the wrong person (Osteen's of the world) and it's also used to shame you into giving your tides away, which let's be honest, is just a guilt trip to never say it out loud, buy your way into heaven. There is a difference some just like to shame others for not doing exactly as they do so they make videos on youtube to feel better about themselves
coughJOHNVERVAEKEcaugh
😂😂😂
Hold on , SBNR or SBNA is a good stance because it takes the boundaries between the religions ,it means you can use the mechanism and material from everything
Do you do yoga ? Meditate?
That's a proof that the whole world today is going in the direction of SBNR or SBNA.
Religion is truly a bad product , spirituality on the other hand is freeing.
I don't want the shackles,if you want them ,so be it
Spirituality, there are many spiritual beliengs, like demons. The true religion guides you to the proper Spirit, which is God. Paul calls these idols and false gods of false religions demons.
there's a problem with groups when they ask you to sacrifice your personal ability to think to a mediocre collective ideology.
there are also things binding the "spiritual" person to other spiritual people... a preference for liberty and individual thought are pretty decent values that can pull people together regardless of creed.
the problem is when people have different epistemologies, then you get into the whole "my truth" thing and you can't communicate across boundaries.
Agreed. Many interpretations of Christianity start by asking you to affirm that you are nothing or are disconnected from the divine. I don't want to be in that room anymore.
If Jonathan's Christoanity doesn't start there, then maybe i could join.
And just by the by, i suggest that instead of saying "epistemologies" you say "ways of knowing what is true." It's only one syllable more.
Every time i read epistemology or ontology, i have to stop and go uhhhhhhhh for a while. I know I'm not the only one.
@@jamesdewane1642 well, if i didn't use that word then nobody would learn it. both of those words are important to know.
i don't know if johnathan thinks we are disconnected to the divine, or what the nature of that connection is. my issue with most christianity is that there's always this uncrossable chasm between fallen man and perfect man-god that you're supposed to try to cross. i don't like spending my time striving for impossible contradictory things. i like to have an end goal that i can actually attain, not in some alternate dimension somewhere after i'm dead.
my categories aren't arbitrary. maybe try asking a question or two instead of immediately strawmanning a person who doesn't think 100% like you. Thought, if we're feigning suprise... let's just say i've heard this tired line of reasoning from christian apologists before.@@stevendouglas3781
Background music is annoying 😅
Gracias
Religio that which binds there is good religion and bad religion good religion is being bound by the God of Life the God of the most High. Bad religion is being bound to lower dead gods.
All religions require belief, regardless of evidence…
Christ demands belief because of the evidence
Without Christ there would not be Christianity!
Κύριε ίσους Χριστός ελέησον ήμας! ✝️❤️❤️✝️
Exactly. And belief springs out ignorance. Christianity is no different. Only one who doesn’t know, believes, and ultimately, all beliefs are false. One must be relentless and brutally honest in their search for truth. What do you really know to be true?
Prove why your path to searching for truth is superior to our way
@@joshvarges9230 What is your path? What I’m describing is an experiential knowing of who you are as opposed to thinking and believing things about who you are. The fact is, you are not your thoughts. You are not your beliefs. And one who believes something does so because he doesn’t know it to be true. If one knows, there is no need for belief.
If a Christian is brutally honest, he ought to ask himself: What if the Christian narrative isn’t true? What if the beliefs of the church are false? Where does that leave you? Then what does it mean to be a human being? Who am I? What’s the purpose of my life? What if there is no Heaven or Hell? Etc. Do you really, honestly know any of your Christian beliefs to be true? After all, the creed starts by saying, “I believe…”
@@Aaron-xb4rq the authority of christianity comes from the testimony of the apostles and they went to lengths to prove that what they taught came from the risen Christ. i ask those questions with the knowledge of what is in scripture
@@joshvarges9230 If one’s “proof” of Christianity is the scriptural accounts, then one’s burden of proof is quite low because you either accept or ignore the numerous contradictions contained therein. A more honest approach is to acknowledge that you simply believe in those accounts despite their contradictions because the fact remains, one can’t prove that Christianity is true. The only thing you can truly know is, “I am.”
Well saints isnt much of answer. Saints are humans who can be dogmatic too
Yeah but the difference is that saints are self-sacrificial. They are "dogmatic", but at the end of the day they selflessly lay down their lives for God and for others.
-L
@@JonathanPageauClips that's very naive. I'm not saying there aren't moral people from all religions and secular spaces, but oftentimes they are also constrained by the dogmas which originate from their respective religions and ideologies. Furthermore who defines what a saint is? Would Muslims accept a Christian or Hindu saint or vice versa? Even within the same religion, a man can be viewed as a saint or a sinner. Prime example is Muhammad in Abdul Wahab who started the wahhabi movement, the brand of Islam prevalent in Saudi today. His followers love him. The sufis and other Muslims think he's a great evil. The point is you can't get around dogma. At the same time I recognize the "I'm just spiritual" types want to play the game without any skin in it and pick and choose. The whole thing is a mess.
Fair criticism. But this does not apply to people who come together in a spiritual but not religious setting to connect to each other and to God. Or as they would say 'the universe'😂. I know you can criticize that as well, so please do.
Then that is religious already
@@youssefsammouh501 perfect response, thank you!
”people who come together in a spiritual but not religious way” What does this even mean?
@@jalbers3150 concretely I envision a group of people doing some new age ceremony that aims to detach all words and rituals from existing religions, but I think you're right in saying that this 'spritual not religious' hypothetical situation is oxymoronic.
@@Lucasvozit’s absolutely an oxymoron, especially considering religion is about the rekindling of the human spirit with divinity. The idea of being “spiritual without religion” is completely ignorant of what religion really is. But I can understand the sentiment because religion has become bastardized in secular culture