| Is the inner Light relative? |
[25 Jan 2008|09:18pm] |
Hello, all. I'm a first-time poster; in the past 2-3 days I have read/skimmed over all 330+ posts in this community, and I feel like I have learned a lot. I've checked out the F+P for my nearest Yearly Meeting, I know where my closest Meeting house is (though have not yet had the opportunity to attend) and have been hunting for good literature on the subject of Quakerism... I feel very drawn to this belief system, especially the attitude that wisdom of God and God's nature can be found, even in unlikely places.
However, this last attitude is also the one that I seem to be struggling with the most. I am from a fairly conservative, Christian background. I am comfortable with Quakerism within a Christian framework, or even an Islamic, Jewish, or Taoist framework. However, I find that when I am faced with atheist, skeptical agnostic, or polytheistic attitudes about Quakerism, I become very uncomfortable, and want to say, "How can we worship the same thing?"
Because worship, one would assume, is a part of the Quaker way of life -- after all "meeting" IS short for "meeting for worship", right?
So many of us have different beliefs. I believe in one truine God. You may believe in no God. You may believe in several gods. If we are all being led by the same inner Light, that of God in each of us, wisdom from the same entity/Spirit, then how do we reach such radically different conclusions?
Or, if you believe that the inner Light is not from God, but rather a result of human love and compassion, doesn't that make you a humanist, not a Quaker?
I have always felt that the attitude of relative truth was just solipsism masquerading under a pretty name.
I acknowledge fully that my attitude is biased ... But if God's wisdom is absolute, then how can God's truth be relative?
(Yes, this IS my first post... Don't you love people who start with the easy questions?)
|
|
![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/community.gif){kind=small}
quakers