Date: January 11, 2021 09:26PM
> Because now, who is God?
This is the all-time, Numero Uno, question of the ages--going back all the way to when we (the debut of our homo sapiens sapiens species) were trying to understand "why" things happened: Why did people die? Why did newborn babies die? What caused good conditions one year (food gathering was good, or the planted crops became a pleasing harvest), and bad conditions another year (a drought killed the crops, or strangers came through and destroyed everything)?
> I mean is he a man that walked the earth in the form
> of Jesus, and do I believe that and want to be
I am a Jew, so my own, personal answer to this question is: Jesus is/was not God. In my personal belief, he was one of many wandering [Jewish] "rabbis"/teachers who were going from place to place in that part of the globe in that time. The difference between him and the others is that he inadvertently acquired the benefit of what turned out to be phenomenal p.r., through Paul.
> What if the bible was made up just like
> the BOM by a group of people?
I don't think the Bible was made up (in the sense that a fiction story is "made up")--I think it was meant as serious reportage and teaching at that time. In Israel, right now as I write this, there are countless archaeological digs going on (a major archaeological dig frequently begins with someone digging in their backyard to build a new house foundation, or a new highway is being dug, etc.), and one of the most frustrating things archeologists in Israel have had to contend with is that the "right" thing (an ancient town, for example) can be found this way, but it frequently is either in the "wrong" place, or it exists in a strata of the earth which proves that it existed at the "wrong" time. It is really not that common to find that a biblically-indicated "place" (etc.) is newly discovered where the Bible SAYS it should be found, AND it exists in the "right" time frame within the earth to conform to the dates in the Bible. This is a constant, and extremely frustrating, part of Israeli (and neighboring areas) archaeology, because many of the archaeologists are sincerely religious.
> The fear I have of not knowing the ultimate truth is so scary!
No one knows "ultimate truth." I, personally, do not believe that "ultimate truth" is even knowable with present-day human brains. You are yearning for something that I believe cannot exist (at least until our brains develop further).
> I mean, don't you wish you could leave Mormonism
> but then find the actual only true church?
I am a nevermo, so I never had to leave Mormonism. In the sense that you are using the words "the actual only true church" I do not believe this exists. I think "parts" of the truth can be understood as humans continue to evolve, and I think some religions are closer to what is PROBABLY "the truth" than are others, but all any of us can do is the best we can do, because if we have done our personal best, there is [usually] no way to go further (in this life--I do believe in reincarnation).
I think a number of religions have "part" of the truth, I think some have more than others (but, even if a given religion has MORE of "the truth," from the perspective of a given individual, that truth may not be accessible to them personally if their brains just can't "stretch" to understand the content; this is why, in Judaism, this kind of advanced study was traditionally restricted to those who were not likely to go insane in the search for it).
> Not having that safety net, the structure has allowed
> my mind to completely take over. The OCD is more
> threatening than ever because as a Mormon, if it
> said anything that wasn't church taught, I just
> assumed it was OCD or Satan. Now, I have to ask
> myself, where is this thought coming from? I hope
> that makes sense.
I do understand. You are saying that you are asking for deep insight which, if you receive it (or a even a preliminary glimpse of it), you will then [second step] question your sanity because the "answer" must be erroneous if it came from YOUR brain, or from YOUR cognitive work.
This can be a lose-lose conclusion.
My suggestion: When this happens, take it as a potential hypothesis....and then work to acquire the supporting "evidence" you need to either validate your hypothesis, or to realize that it is false (or partially false).
One thing you should be aware of: disparate religions can, independently of each other, "come to an agreement" on particular areas of philosophical/religious thought--although the cognitive and practical "vocabularies" to express these areas of agreement may be completely different from each other.
One of the things I have discovered in my life is that some elements of Hinduism (I was raised Hindu/Vedanta), and some elements of Judaism (I am now a Jew), and some elements of metaphysics (for me: somewhat related, personal to me, and also religious roots), some elements of certain Native American religions, plus physics (the science of physics), can all be "saying" the same things, though in different words, analogies, and thought "expressions."
When I find these "areas of improbable agreement," I pay attention to them.
If you strip away the "clothes" they are dressed in, if they're all saying the "same thing," I figure that the chances that some kind of real truth is being expressed can be fairly high.
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 01/14/2021 02:41AM by Tevai.