Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 186 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
welcome to the newly developing glaciation period.
by paul
10/24/19 03:23 PM
Potatoes on Mars
by paul
10/24/19 02:55 PM
Fishing , baiting the hook.
by paul
10/24/19 02:43 PM
F=mv ... mv=F
by paul
10/24/19 02:37 PM
Do we have a moderator?
by paul
10/23/19 12:30 AM
Is there anybody out there?
by paul
10/23/19 12:22 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
paul 13
Page 7 of 13 < 1 2 ... 5 6 7 8 9 ... 12 13 >
Topic Options
#27821 - 09/22/08 02:23 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Ellis]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Ellis


TT As you know, my problem is that I personally lack any religious belief (in Hell too!) and I am conscious of the distress I can cause by stating that.

I don't see that as a problem. But I do sense the problem you have regarding your belief in religious belief.
I would say any distress you create is a reflection of your own confusion over any validity or reason for religion and its trickling effect on personal social values and ideals.
Originally Posted By: Ellis



I have no issue with the god concept for others who believe, but I myself do not believe it is the truth.

Why should you if you have no experience of it?
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
.
#27822 - 09/22/08 03:17 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
MY RELIGION--The bottom line, at this point--subject to change
==============================================================
By now, I hope that most readers know that when it comes to a my philosophy of religion I am a strong advocate of the freedom of and from religion--in all its forms--including the freedom to be an atheist, agnostic and/or secular humanist.

For me, one's religion is matter of deep personal choice. My religion, or lack of it, is my personal choice. I refuse to impose it on others and I will not allow others to impose their religion, or lack of it, on me.

Therefore, while I am happy to dialogue with anyone about the nature and function of what I believe, I refuse to debate, or argue, with the idea of proving that I am right and others are wrong. Systems, like theocracy, may be wrong. But, IMO, having a system is not the same as having a religion.

In my opinion justice, peace and good order are only possible when we all agree to live by the generally-accepted laws of the land, which are established with the participation and cooperation of all the members of the community--religious and non-religious. In the spirit of Adam Smith, the one who wrote The Wealth of Nations, I am a pluralist. I am also an advocate of the separation of church and state. [BTW, I would also like to see separation of the economy and the state. But that is another dialogue as to how this can be done.]

It ought to obvious then that, when I think of good government, theocracy--a government in which God, or a god, is recognized as the supreme civil ruler and divine or religious laws are taken as the laws of the state--is definitely not an option. By the way, most of the early empires, including the Roman Empire, were theocracies. So were the early nation states, including England.

My personal religion is definitely non dogmatic and I abhor taking a fixed-positioned approach to any teaching, including my own. It also frees me to be agnostic about that which I do not know enough, or do not fully understand, yet.

A good religion for me is one which helps me grow and develop, physically, mentally and spiritually and be of real service to my family and my fellow human beings, including those who do not happen to share my beliefs.


Edited by Revlgking (09/22/08 03:20 AM)

Top
#27823 - 09/22/08 04:14 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Revlgking]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
MY RELIGION--The bottom line, at this point--subject to change
==============================================================
By now, I hope that most readers know that when it comes to a my philosophy of religion I am a strong advocate of the freedom of and from religion--in all its forms--including the freedom to be an atheist, agnostic and/or secular humanist.

For me, one's religion is matter of deep personal choice. My religion, or lack of it, is my personal choice. I refuse to impose it on others and I will not allow others to impose their religion, or lack of it, on me.

Therefore, while I am happy to dialogue with anyone about the nature and function of what I believe, I refuse to debate, or argue, with the idea of proving that I am right and others are wrong. Systems, like theocracy, may be wrong. But, IMO, having a system is not the same as having a religion.

In my opinion justice, peace and good order are only possible when we all agree to live by the generally-accepted laws of the land, which are established with the participation and cooperation of all the members of the community--religious and non-religious. In the spirit of Adam Smith, the one who wrote The Wealth of Nations, I am a pluralist. I am also an advocate of the separation of church and state. [BTW, I would also like to see separation of the economy and the state. But that is another dialogue as to how this can be done.]

It ought to obvious then that, when I think of good government, theocracy--a government in which God, or a god, is recognized as the supreme civil ruler and divine or religious laws are taken as the laws of the state--is definitely not an option. By the way, most of the early empires, including the Roman Empire, were theocracies. So were the early nation states, including England.

My personal religion is definitely non dogmatic and I abhor taking a fixed-positioned approach to any teaching, including my own. It also frees me to be agnostic about that which I do not know enough, or do not fully understand, yet.

A good religion for me is one which helps me grow and develop, physically, mentally and spiritually and be of real service to my family and my fellow human beings, including those who do not happen to share my beliefs.

I'm responding to this particular post before it might be edited due to some second thought or preconceived idea generated from this response, so the dialogue is not misconstrued or taken out of its original context.

Originally Posted By: Revlgking
MY RELIGION--The bottom line, at this point--subject to change

You're beginning sentence is an oxymoron...
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
By now, I hope that most readers know that when it comes to a my philosophy of religion I am a strong advocate of the freedom of and from religion--in all its forms--including the freedom to be an atheist, agnostic and/or secular humanist.

That would be freedom of choice which is not necessarily a religion. At least not that I'm aware of.
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
For me, one's religion is matter of deep personal choice. My religion, or lack of it, is my personal choice. I refuse to impose it on others and I will not allow others to impose their religion, or lack of it, on me.

I gotta say I find it a bit of a stretch trying to believe in an innocuous changing bottom line that could come from any real deep thought.
But I also think if you really believed in freedom of choice then I would find it hard to believe that you would entertain the idea that anyone could or would impose anything on another.
That would be an illusion, something that is not real even if someone thought it was.
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
Therefore, while I am happy to dialogue with anyone about the nature and function of what I believe, I refuse to debate, or argue, with the idea of proving that I am right and others are wrong.

I'm personally not aware of this proving one is right or proving one is wrong thing actually taking place here on this forum.
We are discussing the nature of reality, and the outcome of certain choices.
That would include the value of making statements regarding philosophy and belief from lack of experience and knowledge of the subject believed in or philosophized.
I would imagine that if words are spoken without knowledge one might feel they are wrong or that another who recognizes such action as trying to be right.

I like Odin1's signature: People will forgive you for anything -but being right ! This is especially true if one feels they are being persecuted by the reflection of their own inadequacies.
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

In my opinion justice, peace and good order are only possible when we all agree to live by the generally-accepted laws of the land, which are established with the participation and cooperation of all the members of the community--religious and non-religious.

Not being Canadian does the law of your land advocate freedom of speech? It does in the law of our land, here in the United States as written in the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
I find that law much misunderstood by most.
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

It ought to obvious then that, when I think of good government, theocracy--a government in which God, or a god, is recognized as the supreme civil ruler and divine or religious laws are taken as the laws of the state--is definitely not an option.

God does not take from the son of Man Free will. However it is God's universe and since everything has some form of structure that holds it all together the universe may not bend toward the will of man made governments just because Man will not accept God as part of reality.
So in reality there could never be a theocracy of God because God does not rule and never has and never will. Jesus tried to tell the world that but everyone then was hoping....

Originally Posted By: Revlgking

My personal religion is definitely non dogmatic and I abhor taking a fixed-positioned approach to any teaching, including my own. It also frees me to be agnostic about that which I do not know enough, or do not fully understand, yet.

Hard to have a personal religion or to be dogmatic if you don't understand what religion you have. Also not having a personal point of view that is anchored in anything understandable or experienced, would leave one somewhat pensive about saying anything that might have something of any permanence attached to it.
You might want to give up any attachment to the fixed positions taken by those who actually have a deep understanding and experience of a teaching tho. I find that taking a position against a position when you don't know what you know is kind of futile, and only creates a huge amount of stress.


Originally Posted By: Revlgking

A good religion for me is one which helps me grow and develop, physically, mentally and spiritually and be of real service to my family and my fellow human beings, including those who do not happen to share my beliefs.

One would have to know all religions to have made a choice for a good one.
I'm sure Charles Manson felt what he believed in was a good choice and of real service to his family and fellow human beings and even those who didn't happen to share in his beliefs. I think I remember him saying something to that effect.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#27824 - 09/22/08 04:29 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Ellis Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/08/07
Posts: 1490
Loc: Australia
TT. I think you are perhaps right, I do find the reasons for belief baffling and I am totally unable to understand the fanatical beliefs that let people kill each other in the name of their god, who is the one true god. Surely truth was never meant to be that destructive.

So why believe in god? There's a good question for discussion.

Top
#27826 - 09/22/08 06:28 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Ellis]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Truth is in itself not destructive. People in their beliefs that are conjured from the limited imagination of ego which is driven from fear rather than love become destructive to themselves and their environment.
This destructive energy is drawn from Truth and twisted into darkness rather than light. We are allowed to make the choice to do so in order to discover the nature and potential of ourselves.
The surface appearances are easily misconstrued from belief in it being more real than the truth. When we turn back to the truth and align with it we become part and parcel to that which expands and fills everything with Truth. The nature of such absorption is called Nirvana or Bliss.
The nature of absorption into the relative limits of ego is called suffering and Hell.
These are terms which have no real meaning to one who has no awareness of these realities and no personal experience with them. But they inspire fantasy and belief.
We like to believe we can know or do know because we fear the darkness of not knowing.
Some are easily threatened by the awareness of how little they know. That pushes the ego into feeling attacked and by habit of what the ego identifies with in self preservation has a tendency to defend or fight back.
This is the hell Jesus spoke about some 2000 years ago.

The greatness of our fear or inability to condense the infinite universe into some sense of control causes us to create beliefs and habits to try and define reality so that we can prevent or circumvent bad experiences which we store in neural patterns of memory in the brain.
Being in what Tolle calls the now as the Reverend has become so interested in, or what others call the absolute or transcendental experience, or rising above duality and beyond ego brings us beyond fear.

Ultimately we all would like to find relief from the ideas that threaten our peace of mind and our senses. The belief that there is some thing, or some way to achieve this is easily adopted in favor of the everlasting condition of the threat to personal freedom and physical suffering that is the unknown.

Because the separation from isness in knowledge and experience is so prevalent we believe it is controlled by some higher authority because we cannot conceptualize the reality that it is by our own choices that we create the conditions to our personal experience of suffering.
We have experiences that do not bother us and others which do. We watch others have experiences of something we do not like and not be bothered and we experience what bothers someone else. This is our clue to the fact that we decide how we experience rather than an object controlling us.
This can lead us to the awareness of freedom from outside authority that is created from fear and habit, if we would really take a close look.
For those who would rather focus on instant gratification and to avoid the process of self exploration, it is easier to put salvation in the hands of some divine power that has the power to bathe us in our greater good and glory even when we are too lazy and stupid to see it and take it for ourselves.
For some it is a desperate measure to try and force happiness into their lives even if it is at the cost of others happiness.

We either live by trial and error or we live and learn through the guidance of those that have actually found the way.

Pride tho often circumvents the heart and its ability to ask for help for fear of looking and feeling inadequate.
The Ego NEVER asks for help. It will make up a belief before it does.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#27832 - 09/22/08 07:28 PM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Ellis, you ask
Quote:
So why believe in god?
If you have told us before now, remind us: What comes to your mind when you think of the god-concept.

Top
#27833 - 09/22/08 11:10 PM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Revlgking]
Ellis Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/08/07
Posts: 1490
Loc: Australia
Rev: The answer is nothing.

TT. I suppose what I said did seem to indicate that I think truth is destructive. It can be sometimes but that is usually because of the deceit that the truth reveals-- But I think what I meant to indicate was that whilst the search for truth can be destructive it is a necessary journey to make in every aspect of our lives. Perhaps the most dangerous attribute is certainty, because it means the end of searching, and thus a hardening of our attitude to things that are different and that ties in with your view on ego (perhaps another word for the same thing). And I think truth is the ultimate achievement.


Top
#27834 - 09/23/08 12:31 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Ellis]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Ellis


TT. I suppose what I said did seem to indicate that I think truth is destructive. It can be sometimes but that is usually because of the deceit that the truth reveals-- But I think what I meant to indicate was that whilst the search for truth can be destructive it is a necessary journey to make in every aspect of our lives. Perhaps the most dangerous attribute is certainty, because it means the end of searching, and thus a hardening of our attitude to things that are different and that ties in with your view on ego (perhaps another word for the same thing). And I think truth is the ultimate achievement.


It sounds like you're making an assumption that truth leads to finality, but I think you'd be surprised.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#27837 - 09/23/08 04:58 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Quote:
Rev: The answer is nothing.
Oddly enough, I agree with you. IMO, GOD is no-thing. So does Eckhart Tolle. This why Orthodox Jews write 'G-d', to avoid thinking of god as a thing, an object, mental image, or an idol, in the mind (psyche). Non-theistic religions, like Buddhism, feel the same way.


Edited by Revlgking (09/23/08 04:59 AM)
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#27838 - 09/23/08 09:43 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Revlgking]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
Quote:
Rev: The answer is nothing.
Oddly enough, I agree with you. IMO, GOD is no-thing. So does Eckhart Tolle. This why Orthodox Jews write 'G-d', to avoid thinking of god as a thing, an object, mental image, or an idol, in the mind (psyche). Non-theistic religions, like Buddhism, feel the same way.
Your twisting her answer to make something (no-thing) out of nothing.

It might be a good time to explain what no-thing is and how it relates to your credo.
Quote:
I use the symbol, GØD, to refer to the entire physical COSMOS and beyond. GØD encompasses and interpenetrates all "things"--physical, mental and spiritual.
So that No-Thing can be something like the entire physical cosmos and how it can also interpenetrate all things physical as no-thing.
By the way Tolle borrowed the word "No-thing" from the teachings of Advaita Vedanta, which was like putting a retread on an old but good tire.

Also Buddhists do speak of God, actually in the same way Jesus and Buddha spoke of God. Neither of them really advocated the use of symbols to ward off bad or twisted thoughts.
What they did teach is the direct experience of God so that one might keep their focus on what was real rather than to create superstitious icons to prevent the evil thoughts from entering the mind.
The direct experience of No-thing was a reflection of something so impossible to contain that is does not come packaged in form but it does resonate with the awareness in the human nervous system which is sufficiently flexible to penetrate the veil between the physical and spiritual worlds.

So in fact no-thing is not a nothing, and the experience of nothing is not the experience of no-thing as Tolle speaks of it.
I wouldn't be doing any celebration dances yet Rev. There is still much to learn in the actual experience of No-Thing.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#27840 - 09/23/08 06:15 PM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
redewenur Offline
Megastar

Registered: 02/14/07
Posts: 1840
I suppose you good and honorable people know what you're talking about; but I ask you, when your life is done, and you look back on it all, among all your deeds and experiences, what value will you place upon all these words? That is a rhetorical question. It doesn't require an answer. It's food for thought, no more, no less.

Top
#27841 - 09/23/08 07:06 PM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: redewenur]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: redewenur
I suppose you good and honorable people know what you're talking about; but I ask you, when your life is done, and you look back on it all, among all your deeds and experiences, what value will you place upon all these words? That is a rhetorical question. It doesn't require an answer. It's food for thought, no more, no less.
If its food for thought and it has value, it is not rhetorical.

What value do you suppose Jesus placed on his words when engaging the people of the Earth knowing he was going to be crucified, and do you think he knew what he was talking about? I suppose I should ask also if you believe the man actually existed since some don't.

That by the way is not rhetorical.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#27842 - 09/23/08 07:16 PM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Quote:
I wouldn't be doing any celebration dances yet Rev.
It is nice to hear how you feel about celebrating. TT, until you mentioned the subject, it never occurred to me to celebrate anything,

Whenever I now feel like celebrating, or denigrating anything, including persons, I now have the presence of spirit (pneuma) to check my ego and its servant, the mind (psyche). Invariably, I find that my ego--sneak that "she" smile is --is up to no good.

BTW, long before I was introduced to the writings of ET and others, by my daughter--last October--life taught me that celebrating and denigrating is a waste of the Now--in which things come and go and pass away. Only that which is truly valuable--faith, hope, love, joy, truth, peace and justice--remain constant.

For me, GOD is that which helps us live in the Now, the Presence. GOD includes all, even that which some call evil.

I, for one, now experience that NOW as the infinite and eternal moment where true creative love and its by products--faith, hope joy, peace of mind--not just the fleeting by products we call happiness and sadness--all dwell.


Edited by Revlgking (09/23/08 11:00 PM)
Edit Reason: GOD
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#27845 - 09/23/08 11:40 PM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Revlgking]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Revlgking


Whenever I now feel like celebrating, or denigrating anything, including persons, I now have the presence of spirit (pneuma) to check my ego and its servant, the mind (psyche). Invariably, I find that my ego--sneak that "she" smile is --is up to no good.

I hope that includes any false ideas you might have had in leading yourself and or anyone else into believing the idea or experience of nothing was the same as No-thing or God.
Also it might free you from the idea of fostering truth in and amongst illusion and ignorance, as being denigrating toward anyone that is deluded. That would be an ego thing as well if one is not immersed in the now or at-one-ment with God or universal mind.
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

For me, GOD is that which helps us live in the Now, the Presence. GOD includes all, even that which some call evil.

Actually the presence of evil is not a god created thing, it is an ego created thing of which ego being created by God is allowed to swill in its own concoction of illusion, as well as stand in Truth and clarity. That would be the image of God, to make choice through free will to manifest whatever one desires regardless of how expansive or contracting to the human nervous system.
In reality everything is just energy. Quality of energy is pasted on top, like celebrating or denigrating. Its all in the way you see things. Either you see through the eye as single or you see with the two eyes of duality.
God doesn't really help anyone in the way you might think. God is ever-present and when one turns toward God rather than ego one is automatically charged/helped with divine energy. It is when one turns toward the illusions of ego that one ignores Gods Love/Help. Words are so easy to get lost in dontcha think. Trying to stay ahead of the game by learning definitions and playing games with definitions is what is known as an enlightened Ego.
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

I, for one, now experience that NOW as the infinite and eternal moment where true creative love and its by products--faith, hope joy, peace of mind--not just the fleeting by products we call happiness and sadness--all dwell.

That's amazing. You went from nothing to no-thing as soon as you got your definitions straight!
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#27851 - 09/24/08 05:52 PM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Now I would like to ask Ellis, or anyone: When so-called Bible-believing Christians, whatever, try to convert you, to save your soul, talk to you, or write to you about God, what image of God do you think they are trying to get across to you?

Top
#27852 - 09/24/08 07:19 PM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Revlgking]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
Now I would like to ask Ellis, or anyone: When so-called Bible-believing Christians, whatever, try to convert you, to save your soul, talk to you, or write to you about God, what image of God do you think they are trying to get across to you?

I'll answer as an anyone:
It would vary from person to person.
The ego imagines based on collected information relative to the personal belief and the catalogue of memory and association.

You are a good example Rev.
As long as I have known you, you have changed your description about as often as you post to keep the conversation going as long as you can.

So would one who will want to save the soul of another but maybe for their own personal reasons that are not the exact same as yours. No two personalities will think and experience exactly alike all of the time.

Really what we are speaking of is a personality which believes in an obligation to ones self and humanity.
Obviously if one believes in some God in heaven as a personality it wouldn't really be that God that has demanded them to live in fear and try and save the world of lost humans if that type of God isn't real.
It would be man himself who has imagined such an idea because of what he believes, what he has been told, and what he has read based on what others believe and have read and have been told ad infinitum...

Unless one has the direct experience of God, humans imagine and engage others in conversation to try and find enough people who might imagine the same thing so they won't be afraid their imagination is false.
Unfortunately God is not democratic and no matter how many believe in the same thing majority does not make something real. It only feeds the ego and a level of comfort.

So conversations that dwell in the imagination only prolong the illusion and distract the mind from the real.
Beliefs that aren't anchored in anything substantial and are constantly changing are beliefs that are derived from imagination. Spirituality lived from imagination has no ability to move another or will it resonate with all of humanity.
It might find commonality in a like minded thought which is why there are so many groups that congregate with their own ideas about religion and God.

I was living in North Carolina for a while and wondered about the Baptist Churches that were spaced about every two blocks within the small town I was visiting.
As it turned out when someone decided they didn't like what was going on within the church, they started another one down the block until the town had one for every ideal and every imagination.
Everyone was happy as long as they were within the walls of their own church, but as soon as they stepped outside they were under the threat of their own imaginative fears of personality that their religion and church might be missing something. Maybe just maybe one of those other churches might have something going on that theirs didn't, and those guys might know something they didn't, and maybe God might find more favor in the beliefs and practices of one of those other churches.

So we are talking about superstition and ego, it is what seeks to find commonality in conversation and belief so that it might not fear being alone.


_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#27853 - 09/25/08 01:27 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Quote:
You are a good example Rev.
As long as I have known you, you have changed your description about as often as you post to keep the conversation going as long as you can.
I have changed my description?

Of what? From what? And to what?


Edited by Revlgking (09/25/08 01:31 AM)

Top
#27854 - 09/25/08 02:16 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Revlgking]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
Quote:
You are a good example Rev.
As long as I have known you, you have changed your description about as often as you post to keep the conversation going as long as you can.
I have changed my description?

Of what? From what? And to what?

Of yourself.
From Minister, to writer, to Artist, to pneumatologist, empath,
intuitive economist, and most recently equal in knowledge and experience with Eckhart Tolle since you read his book.

I'll quote you"
Quote:

I love going into the root meanings of words. For new ideas, I also love to coin new words.
when it comes to a my philosophy of religion I am a strong advocate of the freedom of and from religion--in all its forms--including the freedom to be an atheist, agnostic and/or secular humanist.
MY RELIGION--The bottom line, at this point--subject to change.
I'm easy.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#27855 - 09/25/08 05:51 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Ellis Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/08/07
Posts: 1490
Loc: Australia
There are as many versions of 'god' as there are people, as each person who believes wants to create god in their own image! The established churches recognise this and a lot of doctrine, discussion and dogma is spent on ensuring the the god recognised by their group is distinct (and more powerfully holy) than their neighbours down the road.

I am of course talking about gods in a very universal way, and not confining myself to the christian variety. We humans will, with little encouragement, worship virtually anything. With encouragement we will kill to preserve that which we feel is holy. Often, we assure ourselves, with the blessing of our god.


Edited by Ellis (09/25/08 07:08 AM)

Top
#27858 - 09/25/08 07:43 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Ellis]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
There is a saying. "The universe does not support vacillation."
Beliefs that are not founded on anything real fade into memory and oblivion. Change seems to be a constant in the relative world but changes stands as testimony to that which cannot remain, no matter how strongly one believes, if it isn't real.
Whatever is a constant, stands free of mans bottom line in lack of commitment, and or any commitment to illusion.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
Page 7 of 13 < 1 2 ... 5 6 7 8 9 ... 12 13 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.