Full Version: Does Religion have any use today?
Realizing the distinction between 'religious feeling' (which has much in common with mystical experience) and 'religious doctrines' (dogma established by religious institutions), I'm curious to hear whether other people think 'religious doctrines' and dogma have any usefulness in today's world? I acknowledge the importance of 'religious feeling' and mystical experience, but as for the usefulness and validity of 'religious doctrines' and dogma in today's world, I think the negatives outweigh the positives. Wouldn't it be better to just consign all religious dogma to the realm of fantasy and fiction, and to embrace religious feeling and mystical experience as the kernel and sole truth of any and all 'religions'?
My own feeling is that some people still have a need for religious dogma in order to live their lives as happily as is possible.
My concern is that some of these Fundamentalist groups are misusing people for their own ends.
The Big question is how to cater for people with a need without subjecting them to brainwashers who wish [and will] to take advantage of them for their own ends!
Best regards, Bill.
My concern is that some of these Fundamentalist groups are misusing people for their own ends.
The Big question is how to cater for people with a need without subjecting them to brainwashers who wish [and will] to take advantage of them for their own ends!
Best regards, Bill.
This may well be controversial but i think the need for religion is linked to education, the less educated, the greater the need.
If you have a good education, and a sound view of cause and effect in this world then you do not need the terse rules of religion, they will only constrain/frustrate you.
Spirituality however is something I think everyone has a need for and is something people need to come to terms with on their own. For some; Christian/Muslim/Hindu/Buddhist religions may be it, for others atheism, paganism, gnosticism, for the rest of us i think we are still searching.
One big disctinction for me when deciding if some religion/belief system/cult is right for me, is this; is somebody making money out of this and living off its profits? If they are, then the intent behind the belief is wrong and cannot possibly be for me.
If you have a good education, and a sound view of cause and effect in this world then you do not need the terse rules of religion, they will only constrain/frustrate you.
Spirituality however is something I think everyone has a need for and is something people need to come to terms with on their own. For some; Christian/Muslim/Hindu/Buddhist religions may be it, for others atheism, paganism, gnosticism, for the rest of us i think we are still searching.
One big disctinction for me when deciding if some religion/belief system/cult is right for me, is this; is somebody making money out of this and living off its profits? If they are, then the intent behind the belief is wrong and cannot possibly be for me.
| QUOTE |
| is somebody making money out of this and living off its profits? If they are, then the intent behind the belief is wrong and cannot possibly be for me. |
Just because it seems like you're buying the religious experience doesn't mean it is any less real. But that's just me. I see conformity as a priveledge (not so much believing, but doing things alike.) Following the rules is fun. [img]http://brainmeta.com/YaBBImages/smilies/cwm26.gif[/img]
Rhymer, I don't have a religious dogma. The only reason I'd want one is because I had one for so long. Even though I am Atheist I have morals and certain things I live by. There are definately some dogmas in my life. They are not religious. Unless this is a dogma... because this is one religious related item (perhaps dogma) that I believe.
Nothing in another scheme of space exists. There are no angels, there is no hell, there is not a heaven or a devil or eternal life. I reason this whole matter by saying that science cannot prove that any of these things exist in any way. If you can't prove it with science then it becomes a myth. Hercules was a myth, so was turning water into wine.
Honestly, I don't know weather a god exists or not. What I do know is that without scientifically proving something it turns into "he said she said". And that is not something I'm going to readily believe. Especially when what I believe is a sensitive matter striking at the core of my humanity.
Hi guys - I'm back! Sorry I haven't posted for so long - other things going on, no time, etc.
Snowflake - I would state that science cannot actually prove anything. Therefore, by your own reasoning, all life is a myth. Quite poetic, really.
Snowflake - I would state that science cannot actually prove anything. Therefore, by your own reasoning, all life is a myth. Quite poetic, really.
"...Especially when what I believe is a sensitive matter striking at the core of my humanity. "
-powerful!
but im wonderig can we look at religion in another way? i dont mean to go off on a wild tagent but it seems like most people agree that spiritual belief and mystical experiences are very personal; then religion is social. if we dont focus too much on the doctrines or dogmas of any partcular one, it seems pretty clear that religion is about our relationship to eachother and the rest of the universe. religion is about food and eating. religion is about morality. religion is about sex, marrige and raising children. its about our families and villages and towns, its about our houses and the weather and hunting and the crops in the field (oh i already covered food and eating). it's about birth and death.
im just saying look at religion on this level: everybodies kids playing together in the nursery, people sharing cassaroles and three bean salad, circles of old ladies gossiping and knitting hats and scarves and gloves for the needy, and raising money for charity. - and about that charity, its those religious people that will feed you if youre hungry and clothe you if youre naked. it was religious folks that ran the old underground railroad, and religious people that are running today's version.
how about all the women together pounding manioc and girls makin piles of flower necklaces and all the men and boys together makin decorations and sprucing up and everybody gettin their hair done and lookin their best for someone's baptism, or wedding, or a scar-up-your-face-coming-of-age ceremony? thats religion. the mothers want their children to be baptized or their faces scarred exactly because they love their children, and the whole community turns out for this because this event is important to the whole community, not just the individual, and everybody is involved in some way. thats religion.
the mululuki tribal elders, after a lot of discussion, decided that it was community's responsibility to keep their unasked-for, unwanted and totally unprepared pair of anthropologists alive, the main reason that it would be bad luck for everybody if they had a couple of troublesome white peoples ghosts hanging around. thats not really truly noble, but its religion.
i kno i kno, not everybodys like that tho. greenbean cassarole and charity are great but i could just as easily be talking about the ties that bind in a bad way: women treated like property or second class citizens, that kind of thing. people are killing eachother ! for cryin out loud i cannot understand what has gotten into them. thats also my beef with organized religion. it seems to be made up of mostly people who really dont get it at all.
but its also true that anywhere in the world you go, you can find people that want to help you, not kill you or rip you off or anything. people, like complete strangers who will say things like "youd better come in the house and get those wet clothes off, ive got some stuff you can wear" and they are not even thinking about raping you and eating you.
people that will take you in and let you live in their house and they will love you like you are one of the family, thats religion.
i think there is still plenty of room in the world for that kind of religion even if it has different names in different places.
-powerful!
but im wonderig can we look at religion in another way? i dont mean to go off on a wild tagent but it seems like most people agree that spiritual belief and mystical experiences are very personal; then religion is social. if we dont focus too much on the doctrines or dogmas of any partcular one, it seems pretty clear that religion is about our relationship to eachother and the rest of the universe. religion is about food and eating. religion is about morality. religion is about sex, marrige and raising children. its about our families and villages and towns, its about our houses and the weather and hunting and the crops in the field (oh i already covered food and eating). it's about birth and death.
im just saying look at religion on this level: everybodies kids playing together in the nursery, people sharing cassaroles and three bean salad, circles of old ladies gossiping and knitting hats and scarves and gloves for the needy, and raising money for charity. - and about that charity, its those religious people that will feed you if youre hungry and clothe you if youre naked. it was religious folks that ran the old underground railroad, and religious people that are running today's version.
how about all the women together pounding manioc and girls makin piles of flower necklaces and all the men and boys together makin decorations and sprucing up and everybody gettin their hair done and lookin their best for someone's baptism, or wedding, or a scar-up-your-face-coming-of-age ceremony? thats religion. the mothers want their children to be baptized or their faces scarred exactly because they love their children, and the whole community turns out for this because this event is important to the whole community, not just the individual, and everybody is involved in some way. thats religion.
the mululuki tribal elders, after a lot of discussion, decided that it was community's responsibility to keep their unasked-for, unwanted and totally unprepared pair of anthropologists alive, the main reason that it would be bad luck for everybody if they had a couple of troublesome white peoples ghosts hanging around. thats not really truly noble, but its religion.
i kno i kno, not everybodys like that tho. greenbean cassarole and charity are great but i could just as easily be talking about the ties that bind in a bad way: women treated like property or second class citizens, that kind of thing. people are killing eachother ! for cryin out loud i cannot understand what has gotten into them. thats also my beef with organized religion. it seems to be made up of mostly people who really dont get it at all.
but its also true that anywhere in the world you go, you can find people that want to help you, not kill you or rip you off or anything. people, like complete strangers who will say things like "youd better come in the house and get those wet clothes off, ive got some stuff you can wear" and they are not even thinking about raping you and eating you.
people that will take you in and let you live in their house and they will love you like you are one of the family, thats religion.
i think there is still plenty of room in the world for that kind of religion even if it has different names in different places.
Hey veda, that was some sales pitch.
I'm sorry that I have always taken a suspisious view of the things you have posted, it's just that i am suspisious of you, of your motives, and of your sincerity.
Just out of interest, does your religion have a name?
I'm sorry that I have always taken a suspisious view of the things you have posted, it's just that i am suspisious of you, of your motives, and of your sincerity.
Just out of interest, does your religion have a name?
I think the religion boils down to femininianity in the spirit of neoafrohippaganism
btw, I think religion is important because it 'bootstraps' people's minds into forms that can support social complexity. social complexity is good!
btw, I think religion is important because it 'bootstraps' people's minds into forms that can support social complexity. social complexity is good!
"neoafrohippaganism"
-good one! it just rolls off the tongue doesnt it?
my mr smarty pants leaning over my shoulder read that and he looks at me and says "Laz is very wise. if only i'd had his keeness of perception." can you imagine? he thinks hes funny.
but gosh, Laz! what do you suspect? thats what id like to kno. i dont kno what to say to that except to quote your own shakespear at you: "Suspicion always haunts the guilty mind"
and i suspect youre not really very sorry at all
i dont have any one religion with a name i can point to and say this is the way! this is the true path to enlightenment and attainment of the godhead!
but there is something, its all around the edges of my consciousness, its the inside me that stretches way beyond the boundries of me-ness. i dont kno how to say it, so if this makes no sense then its not you misunderstanding, its me miscommunicating.
maybe its naivete making me want to share this with anybody, or even to think that i can.
but the topic here is 'religious doctrines'. i looked up 'dogma' and found this passage on the dfference between tenet and dogma: "...A tenet rests on its own intrinsic merits or demerits; a dogma rests on authority regarded as competent to decide and determine..."
so with this clarification i can tell ya i have never been able to trust anybody that said "this is the way it is because i say so," or "because the bible says so, and all the cardinals and bishops say so"
but a tenet... i didnt kno this word. one definition given is "a religious doctrine that is proclaimed as true without proof" so im thinking that if we're gonna make judgments about tenets we're gonna find good ones and bad ones.
but if we do like shawn says, and "embrace religious feeling and mystical experience as the kernel and sole truth of any and all 'religions' " then how should we think about the tenets and principles that spring out of these religious feelings and mystical experiences?
its my mystical experience and religious feeling that makes me think, hey! we really are all God's children! and that leads me to more ideas about my relationship to everybody else and the universe, ideas about morality, and when i see somebody in trouble it makes me wanna help em out instead of laugh and kick em while theyre down.
ok im rambling... my main objection to throwing out all religious teaching is that youd have to throw out all of it, but i think theres some worth keeping.
-good one! it just rolls off the tongue doesnt it?
| QUOTE |
| Hey veda, that was some sales pitch. I'm sorry that I have always taken a suspisious view of the things you have posted, it's just that i am suspisious of you, of your motives, and of your sincerity. Just out of interest, does your religion have a name? |
my mr smarty pants leaning over my shoulder read that and he looks at me and says "Laz is very wise. if only i'd had his keeness of perception." can you imagine? he thinks hes funny.
but gosh, Laz! what do you suspect? thats what id like to kno. i dont kno what to say to that except to quote your own shakespear at you: "Suspicion always haunts the guilty mind"
and i suspect youre not really very sorry at all
i dont have any one religion with a name i can point to and say this is the way! this is the true path to enlightenment and attainment of the godhead!
but there is something, its all around the edges of my consciousness, its the inside me that stretches way beyond the boundries of me-ness. i dont kno how to say it, so if this makes no sense then its not you misunderstanding, its me miscommunicating.
maybe its naivete making me want to share this with anybody, or even to think that i can.
but the topic here is 'religious doctrines'. i looked up 'dogma' and found this passage on the dfference between tenet and dogma: "...A tenet rests on its own intrinsic merits or demerits; a dogma rests on authority regarded as competent to decide and determine..."
so with this clarification i can tell ya i have never been able to trust anybody that said "this is the way it is because i say so," or "because the bible says so, and all the cardinals and bishops say so"
but a tenet... i didnt kno this word. one definition given is "a religious doctrine that is proclaimed as true without proof" so im thinking that if we're gonna make judgments about tenets we're gonna find good ones and bad ones.
but if we do like shawn says, and "embrace religious feeling and mystical experience as the kernel and sole truth of any and all 'religions' " then how should we think about the tenets and principles that spring out of these religious feelings and mystical experiences?
its my mystical experience and religious feeling that makes me think, hey! we really are all God's children! and that leads me to more ideas about my relationship to everybody else and the universe, ideas about morality, and when i see somebody in trouble it makes me wanna help em out instead of laugh and kick em while theyre down.
ok im rambling... my main objection to throwing out all religious teaching is that youd have to throw out all of it, but i think theres some worth keeping.
I think I knew your "my mr smarty pants" in a previous incarnation :0)
I suspect only that you enjoy playing games with people, that you like to hold the winning ticket; without showing it to anyone! Thus your posts tend to take on a kind of righteousness that serves to help no one but yourself.
I am hear to help, it's what I do. I'm coming to realise this, verbal delusion, and wrong thinking are my enemies.
Sorry if this sounds trite, you porbably have a picture of me in your head standing on a cliff top posing, the full moon in the background, and my cape flapping in the wind! That's not what i mean, i'm no super hero.
I find that I cannot relate to your Shakespear quote, but to continue the theme; you missed the second part
"The thief doth fear each bush an officer". Can you relate to that?
I really am sorry, I hate myself for seeing bad in others, but when I do, I just do. It comes from somewhere within.
I can cetainly relate to this, and can see the truth in it.
Regarding your other remarks, I have no comment to make on dogma and tenets.
The problem I have with religion, is the stereotypes, that it conjours up. The underlying principles are good, but all the crap that goes with it!
I'd rather have a religion for one, and go it alone.
| QUOTE |
| but gosh, Laz! what do you suspect? thats what id like to kno. i dont kno what to say to that except to quote your own shakespear at you: "Suspicion always haunts the guilty mind" |
I suspect only that you enjoy playing games with people, that you like to hold the winning ticket; without showing it to anyone! Thus your posts tend to take on a kind of righteousness that serves to help no one but yourself.
I am hear to help, it's what I do. I'm coming to realise this, verbal delusion, and wrong thinking are my enemies.
Sorry if this sounds trite, you porbably have a picture of me in your head standing on a cliff top posing, the full moon in the background, and my cape flapping in the wind! That's not what i mean, i'm no super hero.
I find that I cannot relate to your Shakespear quote, but to continue the theme; you missed the second part
"The thief doth fear each bush an officer". Can you relate to that?
| QUOTE |
| and i suspect youre not really very sorry at all |
I really am sorry, I hate myself for seeing bad in others, but when I do, I just do. It comes from somewhere within.
| QUOTE |
| but there is something, its all around the edges of my consciousness, its the inside me that stretches way beyond the boundries of me-ness. i dont kno how to say it, |
I can cetainly relate to this, and can see the truth in it.
Regarding your other remarks, I have no comment to make on dogma and tenets.
The problem I have with religion, is the stereotypes, that it conjours up. The underlying principles are good, but all the crap that goes with it!
I'd rather have a religion for one, and go it alone.
| QUOTE |
| The problem I have with religion, is the stereotypes, that it conjours up. The underlying principles are good, but all the crap that goes with it! |
Problems are self created.
You hold the values to be true and self evident.
What you focus on grows.
Expanding consciousness requires the ability to unite all things into one.
As Veda said to unite the yin and the yang to see the whole picture.
When you take each piece of the puzzle and identify the worlds values according to its shape purpose and fit then you never see the bigger picture only the fragmented parts.
If you are a man and only look at the tits on a woman you never know the woman. If you judge one person you will never know humanity and if you judge humanity you cannot know the universe, and you will not know yourself.
IF you take any one aspect of humanity and project it as its foundation and judge it as having no value you take a finger from your hand and cut it off, thinking you have accomplished something.
Discussion boards can be mirrors of the minds ability to rip apart life and judge the crap out of it in the name of scientific superiority, only because the ego does not want to leave itself exposed by saying to itself this is me and the way I perceive myself and the world.
I think this! any one want to come join me in helping me to back me up in my self and my beliefs by arguing with me or agreeing with me? I don't really care what you think though because I am my own experience and I enjoy experiencing me as my experience, this makes me feel real.
The media uses the same approach by dramatizing what seems unavoidable so that we either live with the excitment of living on the edge of the unknown or to make ourselves feel better by dramatically sensationalizing someone elses suffering.
Anal-yzing the world is not the same as questioning where it comes from, and it has nothing to do with the approach to God.
There is a passage from the claimed to be original Lords prayer taken from the monastery in which Jesus and his desciples lived 50 years after the crucifixion, I'll print the whole thing.
Original of the Lords Prayer
(From the records of Jesus' life 50 years after the crucifixion, found in a monastery which they occupied- From the life and teachings of the Masters of the Far East)
God our Father
You stand revealed to us this day as
The ever-present Principle.
Hallowed be your name;
We know it as Elohim.
Give us to live and know this day as you, God, alone
See us living and knowing,
Ever pure and perfect,
As you have revealed your Perfection to man.
And that Perfection has come forth as your son,
your only creation,
The only one through which you manifest.
Give us to know your son. For to know you as you
know man is to know ourselves.
For in knowing this, we are not led into any way
save your way.
And thus we know that this is the God way for us.
God our Father, we see clearly each day that we
may and do forgive every trespass that man has
brought forth into this Kingdom.
Thus we are not tempted to set up man's creations for your creations.
God our Father,
Again we say, hallowed be the name of God.
God our Father.
The hilighted sentence leads to the ability of man to support his own egoic ideals as reality. These are always separate only because they are not in alignment with expansion but surrounded in boundaries.
Here I use Ego as an identity that is separate from the whole not the cosmic ego.
All one has to do is surrender their limited ideas of themeselves to accept themselves as God rather than as human. This has to be done consciously and by this I mean as conscious of themselves in what they are before taking on the constructual Ideas of themselves as they were taught by the environmnet that exists as flawed, incomplete, evolving, limited to boundaries and fear.
There was a funny challenge made in the Onion regarding a Yogi superiority contest.
"Show me the face you wore before you were born!"
If you can know the face you can know yourself.
| QUOTE |
| Thus your posts tend to take on a kind of righteousness that serves to help no one but yourself. |
well im sorry. this isnt what i mean to do at all.
| QUOTE |
| but there is something, its all around the edges of my consciousness, its the inside me that stretches way beyond the boundries of me-ness. i dont kno how to say it, |
does this make sense to you? this is what i have been thinking about and referring to all along. how it relates to religion. how it relates to Jesus and Buddha and yoga. has it all been just verbal delusion?
i said at one point that if i take off my meme suit then who i really am is atman, but i dont really kno if this is right or true.i dont think what happened/is happening to me is the same as any of those yoga things you guyz have been talking about, unless bhakti points at it.
has it all just been word games? i admit i cant resist word games. my ebonical embellishments were word games i played with myself for fun, and that shakespear quote,i really only said that becuz i was so pleased with using the phrase "your own shakespear". sometimes i write down things like "!evil dog o god live!" in the margins of my journal. this is veda keeping herself amused. sorry for doing it here.
| QUOTE |
| "The thief doth fear each bush an officer". Can you relate to that? |
yes ive had this experience. not only feared, ive also hoped a few bushes were my savior.
well i apologize for any/all badness
| QUOTE |
| As Veda said to unite the yin and the yang to see the whole picture. |
did i say that? thats what i have been trying to do.
i want to tell people what i see but i have to talk all around it and it sounds all preachy when im not busy at my silly stuff.
im gonna have to think about this.
Why worry about who hears what?
There is no try only do. -Yoda-
If you are fearing the bushes there is no peace to be, for they are all around you.
Those that have the eyes to see and ears to hear hear your heart. Choose not to see the officers but to see your heart.
Personally I find you a light amongst the many desiring to know.
There is no try only do. -Yoda-
If you are fearing the bushes there is no peace to be, for they are all around you.
Those that have the eyes to see and ears to hear hear your heart. Choose not to see the officers but to see your heart.
Personally I find you a light amongst the many desiring to know.
"Those that have the eyes to see and ears to hear hear your heart."
i understand this is true, but...
"Why worry about who hears what?"
well, im thinking about paul's letter to the corinthians, when they all got heavily into speaking in tongues:
1 Corinthians 14:6
But now, brethren, if I come to you speaking in tongues, what will I profit you unless I speak to you either by way of revelation or of knowledge or of prophecy or of teaching?
1 Corinthians 14:7
Yet even lifeless things, either flute or harp, in producing a sound, if they do not produce a distinction in the tones, how will it be known what is played on the flute or on the harp?
1 Corinthians 14:8
For if the bugle produces an indistinct sound, who will prepare himself for battle?
1 Corinthians 14:9
So also you, unless you utter by the tongue speech that is clear, how will it be known what is spoken? For you will be speaking into the air.
...1 Corinthians 14:19
however, in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue.
1 Corinthians 14:20
Brethren, do not be children in your thinking; yet in evil be infants, but in your thinking be mature.
so if i have been speaking in tongues this whole time, what good is it to anyone? i would do better to speak clearly, or keep quiet. "for God is not a God of confusion, but of peace," paul says.
and joe, i admit that i cant understand a lot of things you say, and i havent asked you to explain becuz i was afraid i would get an equally incomprehensible explaination. you kno im not saying this to be mean.
"Let all things be done for edification." paul says, and staying on topic, if what pauls sayin here can be considered a doctrine, then my judgement is that this is both valid and useful. becuz i want edification for myself and for everybody else. so when i talk to the two year old, i talk to her in a way that she can understand, for her benefit not for mine. and when i talk to other people i want them to understand what im sayin for their benefit, not for mine.
but if i get caught up in what a good orator i am, and how cleverly i can put lessons and parables together, or how much more righteous i am than everybody else, then im not speaking for other peoples benefit. and if people say to me "veda, you are making no sense, you are playing games and being silly for your own amusement, (which i have been a little bit) then its pretty clear that the person didnt benefit.
just like the speaking in tongues people, i can love God and praise God and work myself up into conniptions of mystical ecstasy, but like paul asks twice: "what will be the result?"
"Personally I find you a light amongst the many desiring to know."
if i dont understand a lot of things you say, how can i kno if you arent just as full of delusion as me or anybody?
i understand this is true, but...
"Why worry about who hears what?"
well, im thinking about paul's letter to the corinthians, when they all got heavily into speaking in tongues:
1 Corinthians 14:6
But now, brethren, if I come to you speaking in tongues, what will I profit you unless I speak to you either by way of revelation or of knowledge or of prophecy or of teaching?
1 Corinthians 14:7
Yet even lifeless things, either flute or harp, in producing a sound, if they do not produce a distinction in the tones, how will it be known what is played on the flute or on the harp?
1 Corinthians 14:8
For if the bugle produces an indistinct sound, who will prepare himself for battle?
1 Corinthians 14:9
So also you, unless you utter by the tongue speech that is clear, how will it be known what is spoken? For you will be speaking into the air.
...1 Corinthians 14:19
however, in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue.
1 Corinthians 14:20
Brethren, do not be children in your thinking; yet in evil be infants, but in your thinking be mature.
so if i have been speaking in tongues this whole time, what good is it to anyone? i would do better to speak clearly, or keep quiet. "for God is not a God of confusion, but of peace," paul says.
and joe, i admit that i cant understand a lot of things you say, and i havent asked you to explain becuz i was afraid i would get an equally incomprehensible explaination. you kno im not saying this to be mean.
"Let all things be done for edification." paul says, and staying on topic, if what pauls sayin here can be considered a doctrine, then my judgement is that this is both valid and useful. becuz i want edification for myself and for everybody else. so when i talk to the two year old, i talk to her in a way that she can understand, for her benefit not for mine. and when i talk to other people i want them to understand what im sayin for their benefit, not for mine.
but if i get caught up in what a good orator i am, and how cleverly i can put lessons and parables together, or how much more righteous i am than everybody else, then im not speaking for other peoples benefit. and if people say to me "veda, you are making no sense, you are playing games and being silly for your own amusement, (which i have been a little bit) then its pretty clear that the person didnt benefit.
just like the speaking in tongues people, i can love God and praise God and work myself up into conniptions of mystical ecstasy, but like paul asks twice: "what will be the result?"
"Personally I find you a light amongst the many desiring to know."
if i dont understand a lot of things you say, how can i kno if you arent just as full of delusion as me or anybody?
This is a common concern. IT is the concern that is made real by the experience of taking the world and making it what it is by explaination.
When you speak to a two year old do you speak in the way the two year old understands or what you assume to be what a two year old understands?
There is a difference.
If you know the heart you can speak to the heart quite clearly and the intellect may not understand.
What the intellect cannot understand is not relevant.
In the egoic society it is not the heart that leads but the explaination that the intellect has for everything.
In the simplistic union of God and Man there is an intuitive sense that leads and the intellect may interpret afterwards. This is natural. When the intellect has taken the reigns and denies intuition for pretext then there is nothing to understand but what has seemingly been cast in stone by reason and consensus.
The heart knows no reason. IF it is drawn to do something nothing will stand in its way. No reason, no explaination.
What God speaks plainly to all is not always heard because reason has cast away the inner senses for the outer senses.
Interpretation of scripture by reason based on limited experience is what has handicapped many religious beliefs.
Jesus spoke in parables because it was for the ones that were present and ready to hear, this does not mean it wasn't for all, only that it is a waste of time to pick a fruit before it is ripe.
The order of the universe in the idea of evolution is that there are different levels of conscious awareness and the wisdom to know where one is at and what one is ready for and capable of hearing is in Gods hands, Not mans or the mans presupposition as to what or when something is needed.
Lets take for example the children of the world.
There is a story of a 3 year old walking up to the crib of his new born baby brother and he says, "Tell me of God, I am begginning to forget."
Many children have the experience of witnessing, experiencing angelic beings and the celestial realms. Most adults tell the children they will grow out of it and talk to them as if they are ignorant of reality. Eventually the child gives up its innocense and subtle perception for the reality imposed upon them by the adult and his/her reality which was imposed upon them by their parents.
If you can speak to the childs heart nothing can get in the way, if you can speak from your heart. This does not mean from intense sincerity or even best intentions, for even the most ignorant can be totally sincere and not know anything.
For one who wants to know and takes every opportunity to look further into what is around them they will not see anything but the opportunity to see more. They will ask questions and take each and everything that is given to them as opportunity.
Ego judges and takes what it sees fit and rejects the rest.
Duality is this reality.
There is good and there is bad. New age enlightenment and enlightened ego try and take good and bad and make them the same.
Together they complete a circle, they complete and complement themselves.
Taking one and forcing the other out denies what is whole for separation and duality.
If you don't understand what God has given you do not blame God for being unclear and don't expect God to satisfy your intellect when it is not what is needed. but ask to understand what is in your heart. That is all that is necessary.
The intellect is not your friend, it is a tool and if you depend on the tool and it is not available when your heart needs to listen you will be lost, because you have given the power of your intuitive sense and your heart to a tool.
Learn to listen with your heart and nothing will ever be beyond your ability to see or hear.
Paul took what Christ had in experience and deciphered through his intellect what his teaching was all about.
This was the beginning of the downfall of Religion and its true intent.
The churches of christ reside in the heart of man and Paul built them of stone.
The Bible stands as a cornerstone in the basic truth that lives in the heart of every living being, it is powerful in its existence and stands today still breathing its inner strength. However not all that is in it is the original intent of the prophets and masters who spoke the words. Mistranslations and manipulation by people like King James had a profound effect in misdirecting the beliefs in truth to live outside of humanity rather than within.
You should never be afraid to speak what is your concern nor expect to get anything less than what is needed to reflect what you hold to be true within.
Then take your experience and surrender it back to what you know is greater than your intellectual interpretation to recieve something greater.
The Ego will make a stand and fight for what it knows and has understood up to now.
God is always giving you more and most will say "no God I haven't fully accepted what I have been given up to now"
Let Go and let God.
I exist for one purpose, to serve God, not the intellect or anyones ego. I am always where I need to be and always say exactly what needs to be said, for I say and do not of myself but of God.
There is a small transition period that takes place when one decides to surrender what they think they know to receive what God knows but it is a battle of egoic proportions in reason and intellectual truths over the universal truth that lives in all.
Ask and you shall recieve, but then you must be humble enough to accept what has been given and also be able to trust rather than fear and doubt that God is with you and giving you what you need most.
The Ego can not ask for help and it does not trust.
One more point of intellectual reference.
When Christ healed someone he did not discuss the illness with them to help them understand the illness. He saw them in their pure perfection, whole and complete unto themselves.
To the cripple he would say "stand up and walk" casting aside all reason and idea of anything less. This energy was the light that penetrated the darkness of the thought of less within the cripple and would erase any lesser thought so that he would experience his divine wholeness, his perfection in body, mind and soul. This power is the power of God for God does not create imperfection, or anyone in Sin. That is an Egoic concept.
The cripple didn't need to understand that there was a healing he didn't need to understand change, he just healed.
Afterwards if his intellect deciphered the experience and gave it reason then that was probably out of habit and the need for reasons to call it a miracle by some power outside of himself.
Eventually in order to weild the miracle power one must step into the ability. Until that day the ego needs to have a reason to just be.
Enlightenment is not the continuing process of reasoning but the stepping into of the divine self. First you seek the essence of it and then you give all your attention to it when you have found it. The rest takes care of itself.
It is the simplest thing in the world and takes no time at all.
It takes less energy to be enlightened than it does to hold all the beliefs in limitation in place.
The Ego is stubborn and it won't give up its limitations without a fight. A little bit here and a little bit there, until it exhausts itself, either over a period of many lifetimes or if one is one pointedly focussed a single lifetime, or right now!
When you speak to a two year old do you speak in the way the two year old understands or what you assume to be what a two year old understands?
There is a difference.
If you know the heart you can speak to the heart quite clearly and the intellect may not understand.
What the intellect cannot understand is not relevant.
In the egoic society it is not the heart that leads but the explaination that the intellect has for everything.
In the simplistic union of God and Man there is an intuitive sense that leads and the intellect may interpret afterwards. This is natural. When the intellect has taken the reigns and denies intuition for pretext then there is nothing to understand but what has seemingly been cast in stone by reason and consensus.
The heart knows no reason. IF it is drawn to do something nothing will stand in its way. No reason, no explaination.
What God speaks plainly to all is not always heard because reason has cast away the inner senses for the outer senses.
Interpretation of scripture by reason based on limited experience is what has handicapped many religious beliefs.
Jesus spoke in parables because it was for the ones that were present and ready to hear, this does not mean it wasn't for all, only that it is a waste of time to pick a fruit before it is ripe.
The order of the universe in the idea of evolution is that there are different levels of conscious awareness and the wisdom to know where one is at and what one is ready for and capable of hearing is in Gods hands, Not mans or the mans presupposition as to what or when something is needed.
Lets take for example the children of the world.
There is a story of a 3 year old walking up to the crib of his new born baby brother and he says, "Tell me of God, I am begginning to forget."
Many children have the experience of witnessing, experiencing angelic beings and the celestial realms. Most adults tell the children they will grow out of it and talk to them as if they are ignorant of reality. Eventually the child gives up its innocense and subtle perception for the reality imposed upon them by the adult and his/her reality which was imposed upon them by their parents.
If you can speak to the childs heart nothing can get in the way, if you can speak from your heart. This does not mean from intense sincerity or even best intentions, for even the most ignorant can be totally sincere and not know anything.
For one who wants to know and takes every opportunity to look further into what is around them they will not see anything but the opportunity to see more. They will ask questions and take each and everything that is given to them as opportunity.
Ego judges and takes what it sees fit and rejects the rest.
Duality is this reality.
There is good and there is bad. New age enlightenment and enlightened ego try and take good and bad and make them the same.
Together they complete a circle, they complete and complement themselves.
Taking one and forcing the other out denies what is whole for separation and duality.
If you don't understand what God has given you do not blame God for being unclear and don't expect God to satisfy your intellect when it is not what is needed. but ask to understand what is in your heart. That is all that is necessary.
The intellect is not your friend, it is a tool and if you depend on the tool and it is not available when your heart needs to listen you will be lost, because you have given the power of your intuitive sense and your heart to a tool.
Learn to listen with your heart and nothing will ever be beyond your ability to see or hear.
Paul took what Christ had in experience and deciphered through his intellect what his teaching was all about.
This was the beginning of the downfall of Religion and its true intent.
The churches of christ reside in the heart of man and Paul built them of stone.
The Bible stands as a cornerstone in the basic truth that lives in the heart of every living being, it is powerful in its existence and stands today still breathing its inner strength. However not all that is in it is the original intent of the prophets and masters who spoke the words. Mistranslations and manipulation by people like King James had a profound effect in misdirecting the beliefs in truth to live outside of humanity rather than within.
You should never be afraid to speak what is your concern nor expect to get anything less than what is needed to reflect what you hold to be true within.
Then take your experience and surrender it back to what you know is greater than your intellectual interpretation to recieve something greater.
The Ego will make a stand and fight for what it knows and has understood up to now.
God is always giving you more and most will say "no God I haven't fully accepted what I have been given up to now"
Let Go and let God.
I exist for one purpose, to serve God, not the intellect or anyones ego. I am always where I need to be and always say exactly what needs to be said, for I say and do not of myself but of God.
There is a small transition period that takes place when one decides to surrender what they think they know to receive what God knows but it is a battle of egoic proportions in reason and intellectual truths over the universal truth that lives in all.
Ask and you shall recieve, but then you must be humble enough to accept what has been given and also be able to trust rather than fear and doubt that God is with you and giving you what you need most.
The Ego can not ask for help and it does not trust.
One more point of intellectual reference.
When Christ healed someone he did not discuss the illness with them to help them understand the illness. He saw them in their pure perfection, whole and complete unto themselves.
To the cripple he would say "stand up and walk" casting aside all reason and idea of anything less. This energy was the light that penetrated the darkness of the thought of less within the cripple and would erase any lesser thought so that he would experience his divine wholeness, his perfection in body, mind and soul. This power is the power of God for God does not create imperfection, or anyone in Sin. That is an Egoic concept.
The cripple didn't need to understand that there was a healing he didn't need to understand change, he just healed.
Afterwards if his intellect deciphered the experience and gave it reason then that was probably out of habit and the need for reasons to call it a miracle by some power outside of himself.
Eventually in order to weild the miracle power one must step into the ability. Until that day the ego needs to have a reason to just be.
Enlightenment is not the continuing process of reasoning but the stepping into of the divine self. First you seek the essence of it and then you give all your attention to it when you have found it. The rest takes care of itself.
It is the simplest thing in the world and takes no time at all.
It takes less energy to be enlightened than it does to hold all the beliefs in limitation in place.
The Ego is stubborn and it won't give up its limitations without a fight. A little bit here and a little bit there, until it exhausts itself, either over a period of many lifetimes or if one is one pointedly focussed a single lifetime, or right now!
hi Joe,
I'm curious: is one of your objectives to help awaken others, and if so, then what is the best way to do this in your opinion?
namaste
I'm curious: is one of your objectives to help awaken others, and if so, then what is the best way to do this in your opinion?
namaste
[quote]Topic Summary
Posted by: Shawn Posted on: Today at 06:15:06pm
hi Joe,
I'm curious: is one of your objectives to help awaken others, and if so, then what is the best way to do this in your opinion? [/quote]
That is the hearts objective or the highest desire in the game of evolution.
It's the only game in town.....
Anyway to answer you question:
The best way to help a person is to be yourself.?!
At different stages of conscious awareness there are different subjective and objective experiences of That.
I mentioned before that Patanjali wrote in the Yoga Sutras of the awareness of the absolute, perpetual awareness of the absolute, exhalted and unified perpetual awareness of the absolute.
You mentioned that you did not get that out of Patanjali, but that is only a difference in translations or interpretation.
In order for a state of consciousness to exist it has its different aspects both subjective and objective.
Sleeping: The body and the mind are not active or at least in respect to the other states of awareness and we shall exclude death from the comparitive. They are in a state of rest
Dreaming: The body is still mostly inactive (resting) and the mind becomes more active than deep sleep but not alert and not at rest.
Waking: The mind is more active and alert and now the body is active.
Awareness of the absolute: The body is at a state of deep rest and the mind is less active than dreaming and waking, but alert. This is the state achieved in meditation.
Perpetual awareness of the absolute: The awareness of the absolute now becomes a permanent part of the other states of consciousness,(sleeping , dreaming, waking).
Exalted: The intellect having achieved a high state of satisfaction from the experience of the absolute leaves the heart yearning for more. For fulfillment.
The celestial expressions of the universe open to the subtler senses. The senses expand, the eyes and ears that had not been previously opened open to reveal a multidimensional aspect to the reality of the self and all of life.
Unified perpetual awareness of the absolute: Where with perpetual and exalted the aspects of God or the unbounded properties and their relationship to the self were witnessed as an outer aspect in relation to the self and the senses, the experience moves into the self and the aspects are recognised as coming from the self as each object is perceived.
Brahman: where in Unified the awareness of each object is witnessed as coming from the self as it is recognized now all objects are unified at the same time. Rather than the awareness being just in one place at a time it is now in a thousand places at the same time.
This is a simplified explaination of the different subjective/objective experiences of the self/Self in the different states of consciousness.
So to answer your question, "how would you approach the helping of someone to awaken?" would have to be applied and experienced differently to each level of awareness.
To the waking state which has no direct experience of the absolute to help someone would be an intellectual approach to an idea.
To the person with the awareness of the absolute one may give their description of it to another in hopes that they might grasp it. If they can convey a meaningful description it can be recognized in another because the awareness of it is not only experienced but the resonance of it rings within like a tuning fork that is vibrating, and when it comes within the proximity of a similarly tuned fork it causes it to vibrate without physically touching it.
A simple analogy based on the universal principal that all matter vibrates at a certain frequency. The absolute vibrates within all things and has been called the AUM/OM.
At any rate at this level of awareness the intellect still has a tight grasp on its ideas about how and why, and may clumsily direct one to their goal based on their experiences which may or may not help the other who may need a different approach based on their subjective/objective experiences in life.
When one has sufficiently risen above their own levels of subject/object references or personal realities then a more universal approach to the manifest is realized at a co-created level more in line with the universal laws that support such a reality. One stands aside of themselves and a different voice speaks through the container that once was the home of the ego or personal.
This voice has been called the voice of the Holy Spirit.
So you see one can only help another to achieve the level of understanding which is at the level that they are at.
Once unified with the absolute and the manifest one becomes a servant by initiation into the reality that all things are one. Here to give is to allow the energy to move freely through the body rather than try to hold it where it stagnates and loses its potential. Here the more that is given and moved through the vessel the greater the capacity of the vessel as it continues to expand into omnipresence and omniscience.
Another thing is that you cannot "from the ego" help another when you see something wrong for you will attempt to correct a problem when there is no problem.
Where a child is just learning to walk you don't hand it the keys to the car, or reprimand it for its limited ability but meet it where it is at.
Again this is tricky from the intellects point of view because what may seem harsh or inappropriate is only judgment of what they can understand from the level of awareness.
Compassion is married to wisdom and can be utterly ruthless.
There are many passages that relate to christ and his appearance here on earth not to mollycoddle the ego but to wield the black sword of ruthless compassion. To meet illusion head on and destroy ignorance.
Another name for Christ is Mahesvara or Maheswara meaning the ultimate destroyer.
So in the words of Yoda," There is no try only do" which leaves one with a thought that if I do the very best that I can do that is all I can do.
It is by divine guidance that all the parts of the puzzle are always where they need to be in order to paint the picture that is relative and relevant to human evolution.
Even the dark side of the force has its place and it is a reminder to the split awareness that something is incomplete and cannot exist solely without the other.
If you are asking for yourself I would say follow your heart and it will lead you where you are ready to go next.
When the student is ready the Teacher will appear and that is at all levels of surrender and the ability to understand. The true teacher is the voice of God and the outward appearance of it is just appearance only for the same voice speaks always from the source regardless of the vessel and that is the lineage of the Holy Tradition. From one enlivened heart to another.
Posted by: Shawn Posted on: Today at 06:15:06pm
hi Joe,
I'm curious: is one of your objectives to help awaken others, and if so, then what is the best way to do this in your opinion? [/quote]
That is the hearts objective or the highest desire in the game of evolution.
It's the only game in town.....
Anyway to answer you question:
The best way to help a person is to be yourself.?!
At different stages of conscious awareness there are different subjective and objective experiences of That.
I mentioned before that Patanjali wrote in the Yoga Sutras of the awareness of the absolute, perpetual awareness of the absolute, exhalted and unified perpetual awareness of the absolute.
You mentioned that you did not get that out of Patanjali, but that is only a difference in translations or interpretation.
In order for a state of consciousness to exist it has its different aspects both subjective and objective.
Sleeping: The body and the mind are not active or at least in respect to the other states of awareness and we shall exclude death from the comparitive. They are in a state of rest
Dreaming: The body is still mostly inactive (resting) and the mind becomes more active than deep sleep but not alert and not at rest.
Waking: The mind is more active and alert and now the body is active.
Awareness of the absolute: The body is at a state of deep rest and the mind is less active than dreaming and waking, but alert. This is the state achieved in meditation.
Perpetual awareness of the absolute: The awareness of the absolute now becomes a permanent part of the other states of consciousness,(sleeping , dreaming, waking).
Exalted: The intellect having achieved a high state of satisfaction from the experience of the absolute leaves the heart yearning for more. For fulfillment.
The celestial expressions of the universe open to the subtler senses. The senses expand, the eyes and ears that had not been previously opened open to reveal a multidimensional aspect to the reality of the self and all of life.
Unified perpetual awareness of the absolute: Where with perpetual and exalted the aspects of God or the unbounded properties and their relationship to the self were witnessed as an outer aspect in relation to the self and the senses, the experience moves into the self and the aspects are recognised as coming from the self as each object is perceived.
Brahman: where in Unified the awareness of each object is witnessed as coming from the self as it is recognized now all objects are unified at the same time. Rather than the awareness being just in one place at a time it is now in a thousand places at the same time.
This is a simplified explaination of the different subjective/objective experiences of the self/Self in the different states of consciousness.
So to answer your question, "how would you approach the helping of someone to awaken?" would have to be applied and experienced differently to each level of awareness.
To the waking state which has no direct experience of the absolute to help someone would be an intellectual approach to an idea.
To the person with the awareness of the absolute one may give their description of it to another in hopes that they might grasp it. If they can convey a meaningful description it can be recognized in another because the awareness of it is not only experienced but the resonance of it rings within like a tuning fork that is vibrating, and when it comes within the proximity of a similarly tuned fork it causes it to vibrate without physically touching it.
A simple analogy based on the universal principal that all matter vibrates at a certain frequency. The absolute vibrates within all things and has been called the AUM/OM.
At any rate at this level of awareness the intellect still has a tight grasp on its ideas about how and why, and may clumsily direct one to their goal based on their experiences which may or may not help the other who may need a different approach based on their subjective/objective experiences in life.
When one has sufficiently risen above their own levels of subject/object references or personal realities then a more universal approach to the manifest is realized at a co-created level more in line with the universal laws that support such a reality. One stands aside of themselves and a different voice speaks through the container that once was the home of the ego or personal.
This voice has been called the voice of the Holy Spirit.
So you see one can only help another to achieve the level of understanding which is at the level that they are at.
Once unified with the absolute and the manifest one becomes a servant by initiation into the reality that all things are one. Here to give is to allow the energy to move freely through the body rather than try to hold it where it stagnates and loses its potential. Here the more that is given and moved through the vessel the greater the capacity of the vessel as it continues to expand into omnipresence and omniscience.
Another thing is that you cannot "from the ego" help another when you see something wrong for you will attempt to correct a problem when there is no problem.
Where a child is just learning to walk you don't hand it the keys to the car, or reprimand it for its limited ability but meet it where it is at.
Again this is tricky from the intellects point of view because what may seem harsh or inappropriate is only judgment of what they can understand from the level of awareness.
Compassion is married to wisdom and can be utterly ruthless.
There are many passages that relate to christ and his appearance here on earth not to mollycoddle the ego but to wield the black sword of ruthless compassion. To meet illusion head on and destroy ignorance.
Another name for Christ is Mahesvara or Maheswara meaning the ultimate destroyer.
So in the words of Yoda," There is no try only do" which leaves one with a thought that if I do the very best that I can do that is all I can do.
It is by divine guidance that all the parts of the puzzle are always where they need to be in order to paint the picture that is relative and relevant to human evolution.
Even the dark side of the force has its place and it is a reminder to the split awareness that something is incomplete and cannot exist solely without the other.
If you are asking for yourself I would say follow your heart and it will lead you where you are ready to go next.
When the student is ready the Teacher will appear and that is at all levels of surrender and the ability to understand. The true teacher is the voice of God and the outward appearance of it is just appearance only for the same voice speaks always from the source regardless of the vessel and that is the lineage of the Holy Tradition. From one enlivened heart to another.
Thanks Joe, Do you know that I saw fireworks?
Ok I'll bite, was that on Guy Fox day or were you referring to something else?
Would you like to elaborate?
Would you like to elaborate?
I meditated on you and saw many fireworks. I somehow thought you would know?
Fawkes, not Fox.
Guy Fawkes Day.
The fifth day of November.
Beware casual imperfection in your discourse; it speaks of laziness: whether intellectual or spiritual, discursive laziness (when discovered!) is destructive of trust.
I see this as a problem for you, here and everywhere.
Never publish a statement until you have checked the facts; Guy Fawkes Day is an observable and measurable phenomenon, easily quantified, easily spelled.
What I mean to say is:
Think before you speak.
Namaste
Guy Fawkes Day.
The fifth day of November.
Beware casual imperfection in your discourse; it speaks of laziness: whether intellectual or spiritual, discursive laziness (when discovered!) is destructive of trust.
I see this as a problem for you, here and everywhere.
Never publish a statement until you have checked the facts; Guy Fawkes Day is an observable and measurable phenomenon, easily quantified, easily spelled.
What I mean to say is:
Think before you speak.
Namaste
Pardon me Steve,
Not being a Brit I have heard of it and experienced some of its festivities while living in the British West Indies, but it is not as familiar as say the fourth of July celebration in the U.S. where we celebrate with fireworks.
As for your noticing a problem...
I don't see one so who has the problem?
But thank you anyway for you input. I can see if I want to know more about Guy Fawkes I can go deeper into the subject.
Anyway to get back on topic.
Laz,
Now that you have clarified your statement, your meditative experience is an experience. It can mean any number of things, it could be stress releasing, it is the mind translating something and the thoughts asociated with it an attempt to bring subjective understanding to it.
It doesn't matter.
Meditation is a tool to bring the awareness inward. As it travels towards what the mind is naturally drawn to it passes through many layers of mind in its ideas and habits. Like going through the layers of an Onion it dives through them until it reaches the infinite silence of the One. Once this happens the mind more easily reaches this point, the stress and associated limitations of ego and habit dissolve in the light of greater Self. Like opening a doorway into the light it dispells the darkness in the room. With repeated attempts the experiences change, so it is not the goal to meditate but the change that occurs in Life as a result of the repetative diving into the absolute.
What you focus on Grows.
There are 4 prime words in the sanskrit language that cannot be broken down into lesser meanings. One of them is God. The litereal meaning of the Sanskrit word encompasses everything. What the mind does with it is relative to its depth of immersion into the absolute.
So, why did you chose to meditate on me?
Not being a Brit I have heard of it and experienced some of its festivities while living in the British West Indies, but it is not as familiar as say the fourth of July celebration in the U.S. where we celebrate with fireworks.
As for your noticing a problem...
I don't see one so who has the problem?
But thank you anyway for you input. I can see if I want to know more about Guy Fawkes I can go deeper into the subject.
Anyway to get back on topic.
Laz,
Now that you have clarified your statement, your meditative experience is an experience. It can mean any number of things, it could be stress releasing, it is the mind translating something and the thoughts asociated with it an attempt to bring subjective understanding to it.
It doesn't matter.
Meditation is a tool to bring the awareness inward. As it travels towards what the mind is naturally drawn to it passes through many layers of mind in its ideas and habits. Like going through the layers of an Onion it dives through them until it reaches the infinite silence of the One. Once this happens the mind more easily reaches this point, the stress and associated limitations of ego and habit dissolve in the light of greater Self. Like opening a doorway into the light it dispells the darkness in the room. With repeated attempts the experiences change, so it is not the goal to meditate but the change that occurs in Life as a result of the repetative diving into the absolute.
What you focus on Grows.
There are 4 prime words in the sanskrit language that cannot be broken down into lesser meanings. One of them is God. The litereal meaning of the Sanskrit word encompasses everything. What the mind does with it is relative to its depth of immersion into the absolute.
So, why did you chose to meditate on me?
Well, I didn't read the whole thread so since I'm probably echoing what others have said I'll keep it simple. I'm pretty much an atheist. I don't believe in any kind of deity let alone a personal intervening God. I don't really believe that our lives or the universe has purpose. The one thing that I do believe in, however, is community, as an end in itself. I believe religion can still provide true community based upon a fundamental respect and appreciation for human dignity. I don't believe religion is unique in this capacity, but I am not convinced that our society has the social structures capable of this degree of community building. As such, I believe religion still fills an essential role in society. The key is to deconstruct the organisms of religion in such a way that their beneficial capacities are preserved while their dogmatic and intolerant aspects are eradicated. A daunting task to be sure.
So for me, being religious involves not just a respect for the mystical, or an appreciation and appetite for wonder, but also a deep sense of community.
So for me, being religious involves not just a respect for the mystical, or an appreciation and appetite for wonder, but also a deep sense of community.
an atheist with respect for the mystical, an appetite for wonder, and also a deep sense of community.....hmmmm.....what are your reasons for atheism? Or rather, what is it that you're trying to convey by associating that word with yourself? Wouldn't your mystical experience be 'proof' of the divine?
interesting, the role of the community. Reminds me a bit of Martin Buber's "I and Thou".
interesting, the role of the community. Reminds me a bit of Martin Buber's "I and Thou".
Perhaps I use the term mystical too lightly, but maybe that's because I use the term divine too strongly. For me the divine has always implied the supernatural....or the unnatural. So when I reject the idea of the divine I am merely rejecting the distinction between the natural and the supernatural. This includes the idea that nature is sustained by some transcendent and executive will. But what room does that leave for the mystical? I dunno. Sometimes I look at the clouds, at the stars, at the horizan, and I just think....how amazing. I don't know if I could differentiate a mystical experience with a unexplainable sense of wonderment. If mystical means more to you than that I can't really comment because I can't relate.
What is meant by the term atheist depends on what is meant by the term God. For me, God conveys the idea of a transcendent, personal and intervening creator. I think that such a God is improbably and so consider myself atheistic--agnostic if you want to be picky, because I abhor certainties.
What does God mean to you?
What is meant by the term atheist depends on what is meant by the term God. For me, God conveys the idea of a transcendent, personal and intervening creator. I think that such a God is improbably and so consider myself atheistic--agnostic if you want to be picky, because I abhor certainties.
What does God mean to you?
hi Timothy,
I don't know why God should convey the idea of a personal and intervening creator. It's sounds like you have an anthropomorphic conception of God, and that when you say you're atheist, you're saying that you don't believe in anthropomorphic conceptions of God. But what about non-anthropomorphic conceptions of God?
About how I define God, or how other members define God, those are great questions, and so I started a thread at http://brainmeta.com/yabbse/index.php?boa...;threadid=2694; for people to post their conception or definition of God. I will post mine there, too.
I don't know why God should convey the idea of a personal and intervening creator. It's sounds like you have an anthropomorphic conception of God, and that when you say you're atheist, you're saying that you don't believe in anthropomorphic conceptions of God. But what about non-anthropomorphic conceptions of God?
About how I define God, or how other members define God, those are great questions, and so I started a thread at http://brainmeta.com/yabbse/index.php?boa...;threadid=2694; for people to post their conception or definition of God. I will post mine there, too.
I actually just posted there before reading this. We are on the same page I think. I reject the idea of an anthropomorphic being. I have never really been able to form a non-anthropomorphic conception of God so in either sense the term is rather empty for me. Perhaps it's my upbringing but causal, intelligent agency seems to be an essential attribute for any meaningful definition of God. It is the subtle difference between will and force.
I guess I just don't understand the distinction between God and Nature if God is not something supernatural. Why make a distinction at all?
I'll post this to the other forum and we can continue the discussion from there.
I guess I just don't understand the distinction between God and Nature if God is not something supernatural. Why make a distinction at all?
I'll post this to the other forum and we can continue the discussion from there.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.