I think that happens only as people get more spiritual (NOT religious).
Hey there, good to see you... if enough of us show back up we can have a reunion. lol.
I'm sure each little sect of people thinks they are the ones that are spiritual (not religious) and are just waiting for everyone else to align with their revelation of truth.
Not necessarily. They may actually appear to have less in common with each other for a long time. If given enough time then they would eventually start to have more and more things in common. I think the time required for that is longer than any individual human lifetime.
EDIT: I think the biggest difference is this: We can conceptualize a "truthline" that is kind of like a number line where the things further left aren't as true as the things further right. It seems reasonable to assume that if two people are getting closer to the truth then eventually their views will start to converge. It is even true that they will EVENTUALLY converge. However, before their views begin to converge they can actually diverge and jump all over the place and yet still both be seen as getting closer to the truth. I want to make it clear that they are not getting physically closer to the truth in this instance, but if by going through these diverging steps the two people eventually get to a place where their views start converging then it can be said that by physically diverging from each other was all part of the process that eventually led to those two peoples beliefs converging. So, even by physically diverging they can be said to be converging
Ahhh, like a sine wave, except in this case, ever increasing in frequency while lowering in amplitude until it is eventually just a straight line.
Hey there, good to see you... if enough of us show back up we can have a reunion. lol.
I'm sure each little sect of people thinks they are the ones that are spiritual (not religious) and are just waiting for everyone else to align with their revelation of truth.
Yep. And one of them got it right! (I guess. )
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
Hey there, good to see you... if enough of us show back up we can have a reunion. lol.
I'm sure each little sect of people thinks they are the ones that are spiritual (not religious) and are just waiting for everyone else to align with their revelation of truth.
Yes, hello! I kind of hang around on the fringes around here. LOL!
I don't know. Maybe there are some truly spiritual people out there who are not judgmental. As a matter of fact, I am quite sure there are, but they may not be organized. Organization kind of blows it for that, IMO.
__________________
Those who say it cannot be done should not interrupt the people doing it. ~Chinese Proverb
When I was young and clever, I wanted to change the world. Now that I am older and wiser, I strive to change myself. ~
I guess my thought is... if God leads each of us towards truth, then wouldn't it follow that as people get more religious (ie- closer to God), they would be LESS divisive and have more in common with each other?
My sense is that we have betrayed ourselves a bit here. And I mean "we" as in the human race.
When you look at the ancient religions of the world you see them all (virtually "all") developing toward a monotheistic faith. The various "gods" and "goddesses" end up being seen as personifications of natural forces; forces that are being increasingly understood, so the "divine" aspect fades and a more materialistic understanding of nature and natural processes develops.
In other cases, the "gods" are cast as different aspects of the single God. An argument can be made that in the ancient milieu the methodology of philosophy and theology was tending toward a monotheism. This is one reason why the Christian faith was so readily accepted, especially in the Eastern Mediterranean world: It seemed to embody many of the things that the other religions were grasping for and growing toward.
If this development of monotheism in antiquity - and the apparent building of a consensus for monotheism was part in parcel with the way the ancients did their theology, then we might well ask ourselves, "What have we lost and what are we doing wrong when we work out our theology and philosophy today?"
My sense is that we have betrayed ourselves a bit here. And I mean "we" as in the human race.
When you look at the ancient religions of the world you see them all (virtually "all") developing toward a monotheistic faith. The various "gods" and "goddesses" end up being seen as personifications of natural forces; forces that are being increasingly understood, so the "divine" aspect fades and a more materialistic understanding of nature and natural processes develops.
In other cases, the "gods" are cast as different aspects of the single God. An argument can be made that in the ancient milieu the methodology of philosophy and theology was tending toward a monotheism. This is one reason why the Christian faith was so readily accepted, especially in the Eastern Mediterranean world: It seemed to embody many of the things that the other religions were grasping for and growing toward.
If this development of monotheism in antiquity - and the apparent building of a consensus for monotheism was part in parcel with the way the ancients did their theology, then we might well ask ourselves, "What have we lost and what are we doing wrong when we work out our theology and philosophy today?"
Do you believe what makes sense to you? Do you believe what certain people you trust tell you to believe? Do you believe what makes you feel good? Do you believe what you see?
The Bible is infallible, I received the Holy Ghost just like the Apostles, His Spirit leads me and guides me into all truth, it's a progressive process. I read His Word, I talk to God and He talks to me. It's pretty basic and simple.
Linear Mode
