Post Reply
Page 1 of 3  •  1 2 3 Next
6 years ago  ::  Jan 06, 2008 - 7:48PM #1
EagleKnight
Posts: 11
In the posted discription of "New Thought" it states that we of New Thought Christianity don't believe in original sin. I believe that is a mistake.

The story as related in Gen. is designed as a teaching story. When we ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge, we swallowed the poison which is our inner voice of knowledge. This inner voice is a parasite which we all must overcome. Thus the journey of self discovery.

Before we ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge, we lived in Eden. Not a physical place, but a state of being. Without knowledge we were living in bliss. No self doubt, self criticism, judgement, victimization, etc. When we swallowed the poisen fruit (it tasted sweet to us) we removed ourselves from that state of ignorant bliss. Thus the God within threw us out of Eden.

Now, as we toil with our life struggles, we must first discredit the liar (demon, evil, devil, etc) that is the inner voice as we find our Christ (which is not a surname: it comes from the Greek word for Messiah) within. The parasite fears its own extinction and begins to become an ally. This is what is meant by the major Jihaad of Islam. Fight off the infidels and take no prisoners here.

I am very interested to hear what your thoughts are in this area.

Thank you taking time to read my thoughts.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jan 07, 2008 - 12:12AM #2
Flowupstream
Posts: 244
Actually, we don't take ANY "sacred text" literally. No literal "fall of mankind" or "satan". No literal Old man in the sky God. Using The Bible, or any sacred text, as an allegory is what New Thought is about and has been for thousands of years.

Your interpretation can be viewed as quite valid, but I see no need to "discredit the liar" as knowing Truth makes all lies transparent.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jan 07, 2008 - 12:12AM #3
Flowupstream
Posts: 244
Actually, we don't take ANY "sacred text" literally. No literal "fall of mankind" or "satan". No literal Old man in the sky God. Using The Bible, or any sacred text, as an allegory is what New Thought is about and has been for thousands of years.

Your interpretation can be viewed as quite valid, but I see no need to "discredit the liar" as knowing Truth makes all lies transparent.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jan 07, 2008 - 4:54AM #4
TigersEyeDowsing
Posts: 6,833
I see your point.  This story is often used in New Thought and is considered a very intelligent allegory.  We in New Thought attempt to being as "Adam" and end as "Jesus".  I see "Adam", our original self, as being born as perfection, created in the image and likeness of God.  Perfect in Eden.  As we get older, our negative thoughts creep into our consciousness, and we are lied to and fall into the Race Consciousness.  We are cast out of "perfection" by our wrong thinking.

But thankfully this is corrected, as flowupstream mentioned, by Truth.  I am not a big Charles Fillmore fan, but he has a chapter on this in "Dynamics for Living". http://www.tigerseyedowsing.com/ds/char … ng_19.html
Churchianity, by substituting creed for Christ and dogma instead of the divine facts of being, has stripped Love of her royal robes and has left her standing an unheeded beggar in the universe of God. - Rev. W. John Murray
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jan 07, 2008 - 4:15PM #5
EagleKnight
Posts: 11
The liar in my story that voice of self doubt, judgement and victimization. The knowledge itself is fruit, but with it comes arrogance that we "know" more than God. I think arrogance is the original sin.

When I say to discredit the liar what I am saying is to not believe what it says. Don't believe everything you think, if you will.

I love the exchange of knowledge we have going here and I hope I'm not being too arrogant.  I sure don't want come off as having all the answers, just as looking for some.

Thank you all for taking time to share your thoughts and ideas.

Peace
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jan 08, 2008 - 3:34PM #6
annihilator
Posts: 17
Darn,  I just spent time posting to this and when I hit the "Submit Reply" button, I got a network connections message.  I hit the Back button and my whole post was gone.

Guess I should copy before I hit the "Submit Reply" Button.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jan 08, 2008 - 10:13PM #7
EdGreene
Posts: 7
Greetings!
I see the primary conflict of original sin in new thought is that non of us believe that the true nature of humanity is anything less than "perfect, whole, and complete".  We just don't believe that we are born in sin and have to do something to get right with God in order to enter a state of salvation.  Since in New Thought we don't believe in an evil power there is nothing to be saved from and no need for some kind of transformation of our spirit.

We are born "one with Spirit" and our only job - if you insist that we have one - is to recognize the fact of our oneness.

Peace to All,  Ed
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jan 09, 2008 - 8:22AM #8
The_Eye_Am
Posts: 100
The dialogue here is fabulous, exchanging and sharing of ideas in a manner that honors all.  I like what Ed posted, as that is my belief as well.  When we read the bible, we can take it on three basic levels:  literal, historical/literary work, and allegorical/metaphysical.  I guess that's actually more than three levels, with the sub-levels, but three presiding levels.  Much of the 'stories' in the Old Testament I see as allegorical, with the first chapters in Genesis telling us how to create something (a good read on that is Eric Butterworth's, The Creative Process in the Bible), and the root of how we perceive ourselves as being separate from God in the story of the Garden of Eden.  Joseph, thank you for the link to the Fillmore book.  I have that book at home but it was much easier to just click the link.  Thank you!  Fillmore can be a bit overwhelming, but he does know his stuff.  He was a brilliant man who fully practiced what he preached.

~Lori
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jan 10, 2008 - 11:44AM #9
annihilator
Posts: 17
[QUOTE=EdGreene;199395]Greetings!
I see the primary conflict of original sin in new thought is that non of us believe that the true nature of humanity is anything less than "perfect, whole, and complete".  We just don't believe that we are born in sin and have to do something to get right with God in order to enter a state of salvation.  Since in New Thought we don't believe in an evil power there is nothing to be saved from and no need for some kind of transformation of our spirit.

We are born "one with Spirit" and our only job - if you insist that we have one - is to recognize the fact of our oneness.

Peace to All,  Ed[/QUOTE]

I've been spending a lot of time talking to Christains from my old religion.  It is interesting that the focus is often on seperation rather then oneness.

There does seem to be something that we do have to do to "get to God".  We need to "renew our mind".  God is already with us, we are experiencing separation because we think we are.  As we take a good look at our 'self talk' and the underlying beliefs that are enforcing them, we are able to use affirmations, to bring ourselves back into harmony with the reality of the ever present God.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jan 12, 2008 - 12:15AM #10
bb-15
Posts: 242
This is an interesting thread. I find Charles Fillmore's writing easier to understand when it is further explained. To get better clarity for myself on the topic I read the two Genesis chapters in the book; "Let There Be Light" by Elizabeth Sand Turner.

As Turner has written;

"However, like his Creator, man has free will and, therefore, must decide for himself alone whether he will hearken to the inner voice of Spirit or yield to the outer voice of the serpent. Charles Fillmore states that the serpent represents sense consciousness."


What is described here in my opinion is a core concept of at least the Unity version of New Thought. We all have the free will to choose what we think and what we react to. These choices of free will happen every moment of every day. Divine Mind is available to everyone in every moment.

As stated by Charles Fillmore in the article, "ADAM AND EVE", previously mentioned;

"When man is expressing in harmony with Divine Mind, bringing forth the qualities of Being in divine order, he dwells in Eden, or in a state of bliss in a harmonious body."

But we have a choice at every moment to not be in harmony with Divine Mind. Fillmore also describes the results of this.

"When man fails to master his sensations and gives himself up to the uncontrolled enjoyment of life, he is losing his dominion and must suffer the consequences of transgressing the law. Man should therefore be ever on the alert to maintain his dominion and mastery over all the ideas of the mind and sensations of the body."

So, in the way that I look at New Thought, Adam and Eve is not about sin and salvation but is about daily choices involving Thought and sensation.

Peace, BB ;-)
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 3  •  1 2 3 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook