--- In [email protected], grate.swan <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> > wrote: > > > > Invoking Narayana is not secular. And although it is not "required that > > you believe" in the religious concepts that are taught, they are still not > > appropriate for school outside of world religion class. TM could be taught > > there alongside creationism. > > > > Just as an exploratory counter point - > > If a "religion" doesn't reveal God in its Fullness and Completeness to me -- > within a year, month is better -- then its just so many words. A fraud. Not a > religion.
Most religions don't share this criteria. For a guy like me, even the "experience" of some version of god doesn't make it less of a fraud. It is the "certainty" of religious knowledge claimed that I object to. So who cares if some drunk like characters proclaim themselves a religion. It doesn't make what they do, believe or teach a religion. Its just perpetuation of a scam, calling itself a religion when it can't produce the goods. You are presupposing an experience of God in a yogic way. Most religions are a collections of beliefs that are not necessarily "experienced" in that way. But if that same group has something else to offer of value -- ok -- I'm game -- and I have no qualms or concern that the thing of value that they offer is religious. Its not. How can a non-religion offer something religious? It is the source of their claims that defines a religion, not whether the claims are true. Religions use an authority based epistemology. Modern society has given this up in every single area of life except for religion because it has been found to be wrong to many times whenever evidence is available. (Men don't have one less rib than women cuz God made women out of one of them.) > > A separate point. If I eat at a HK temple, is it a religious meal? I don't think those words naturally go together. But in the Krishna view it is because they have offered the food as prasad to a statue before you eat it. So in the context of their beliefs it is. But food is different from beliefs which is what TM sells along with its meditation. < Is it counter to my religion? Are Christians at risk for eternal damnation by eating at a HK temple?> Some Christians believe yes. Some fundamentalist groups would believe that the food conveyed the demonic quality of the Krishna's beliefs and influence. But I think we have mixed up logical levels by trying to include a physical object like food in a discussion of beliefs taught in schools. In other words, it isn't the flower used in the puja that the initiate keeps that is the religious problem with teaching TM in schools. >
