My answers to a faith/theology survey.

So I was given a survey on faith and theology to fill out for someone’s research. I think you’ll experience some of the answers I’ve given.

How would you describe your religion legend( or paucity thereof) to someone who had little or no understanding of it? If “youre ever” religious, what is the highest good as described by your sect community? What do you find most requesting about your heritage( or scarcity of it )?

Me: Biblical mysticism. Highest good: Mercy is the central statute of God. Recieve mercy for yourself and likewise spread it to others. What you disseminate, you reap. I like its Simplicity and it’s liberating.

How did you come to embrace your current impressions? Was there anything( or anyone) that especially influenced or reformed how you encounter the world countries? If you belong to a religious community, are you in line with official schoolings or do you hamper some personal ideas that differ from the group?

Me: A very long journey out of an abusive and controlling schism of Evangelical Christianity determined by the school of hard knocks and soul searching over countless decades, and an rouse to the human condition. I live outside of the clique in the proverbial wilderness.

Is there more to actuality than the physical world that we can see? If so, what is it? If you believe there is a God, how would you describe God?

Me: More than likely. I tend to ascribe to quantum theory, multiverse possibility and several dimensions. God is ever present in all things. God is that which enlivens all of life, as it were. God is Life itself. Without God there is no life. The obedience of humankind is to choose between life and death.

What do you think compiles us human? How do we are different from other living creatures? What is it that reaches some people seem so inhuman( ie all the persons who shortcoming basic empathy for others or who commit terrible crimes )?

Me: The divergence with humans is the high-brain, manufacturing composite logical and moral decisions that transcend basic instinct. Seeming inhuman is a product of being human. The ambiguity of the inherently shortcoming man hope purity. Flaw, of course, is what is percieved being the ideal rather than abiding reality as is. So if a human seems inhuman it could be in the eye of the spectator who has an unrealistic ideology of what IS human. Or it could be someone else trying so hard to measure up to that standard, and in doing so he sacrifices his own humanity. Some idealogues become mad in their infatuation with perfection and their actions are most cruel. The narration of Adam and Eve in the garden-variety represents this. The lust for the excellent knowledge of good and evil warps our sensing of world. We penalize ourselves and each other with the word “should” beating each other to a gory mushy, instead of accepting the reality of our own requirement; the perfection of shortcoming. The prime terminate of humanity, then is accepting that he is morally shortcoming in the eyes of God and being, and therefore must meekly countenance his own need for mercy. Once he accepts that reality he can easily extend mercy to others. This, I believe is true meeknes, and false respect and pride stem from rejecting that reality.

When making a moral or ethical decision, what sources do you look to as a guide and how do you go about defining the right thing to do? Do you believe that there is a conscience or moral compass common to all parties?

Me: One universal statute: Broadcasting and deriving. What you sow, you derive, be it desirable or unwanted. If I require apples, I won’t broadcast orange seeds. If I am on an Island with nothing but raw material, it’s outrageous for me to demand an apple from the dirt if I have at first not sown and done all things necessary to grow a tree. All of the ills of mankind grow from the accept of this basic law. Man wants to reap but doesn’t want to sow. Or adult broadcasts in please but refuses the hard labor of encouraging and thriving what he has broadcast. Or person sows but hates what he collects and foists it onto others to suffer with. One dominate: Mercy. Recieve mercy for yourself and give it to others. Consequentially, the reverse is a reality of blaze, a regime one hears themselves in if they deride and repudiate benevolence, for hell is that regime where no refuge of mercy exists. “Moral compass” is shaped by culture standards and social mores programmed into beings, they are only as good or bad as different cultures and communities of the person’s origin.

Recognizing that there is some uncertainty about the question, what do you think happens to a person after they die? If you believe in an afterlife, how do you understand the relationship between life on earth and life after death?

Me: We molted our figures as though they were worn uniforms. We move on to whatever is next, be it by choice or perceive naming. I tend to believe that this world, or plane of universe is a purgatory of kinds. Once we worked out our component of the sins of mankind, we move on to greater…or we may have to come back depending on our succeed. So then it is balanced by God’s mastery to mankind. Mercy.

7: What personal commitments do you regard as a result of your views? In other paroles, in what concrete ways are your personal picks influenced by the way you believe? Do you ever have doubts? Have you had any suffers whatever it is you felt absolutely certain of your faiths?

Me: I lived an part life struggling with the faith that was given, which I most certainly doubted. Once I assured all of the core statutes I described above, I simply accept them as world to work from paying no second thought to it. My personal decisions are based on the knowledge of consequences, broadcasting and deriving, act action, cause and effect, and which of the ends I find undesirable or desirable.

submitted by / u/ DavidransomBackus [ tie ] [ explains ]

Read more: reddit.com