>Could it be that there is really > no human interaction whatsoever and that we have simply been left to > our own devices, left to decipher the mysteries of life which in turn > gave way to conceptual myths, the advent of religion.
I don't think so because being is so radical. I don't think its right to call it being "left to our own devices". I think "our own" devices are extremely paultry when compared to creation ex nihlo. Religion to me > is archaic mentality which has literally gone nowhere for thousands of > years, it remains as it was in the very beginning, an archaic > mentality. There is nothing to go on except books that were written > by the ancients who really hadn't a clue in the world and nothing to > substantiate their ideas. But isn't there a lot of wisdom in what they have written? Nevertheless they were revered by the > populous because they could read and write, they were the scholars of > their time. They spewed out explanations and dictum which the sheep > followed or otherwise be stoned to death. They learned how powerful > religion can be and soon wrote in "tithing" as a way to accumulate > wealth which ultimately became more "power" and then of course came > "persecution" of those whose disbelief or alternate belief presented a > threat to the stability of their religious empire. Well, there are the scholars, but also there are those that sell soap, and the politicians. I try not to get religion confused with the organizations that sell it. Happy hunting, Cheers > > On Apr 21, 3:48 am, Justintruth <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Here is my opinion: > > > The religions can be looked at two ways. In the first way you take > > them literaly. You believe that a god "exists" in the same way any > > other entity exists. Just like you exist and I exist. "It is possible > > that god did not exist but in fact he does" - that kind of thinking. > > > I label this "fundamentalism". It interprets being in a certain way. > > All being is contingent meaning it could have been otherwise but in > > fact is not. For example my computer is black but it could have been > > blue. God exists but he could have not existed. > > > Now that form of religion ultimately is a kind of science because it > > postulates the existence of an entity and it requires evidence to > > either confirm or deny the fact of the existence of that entity. That > > is why science seems to contradict religion. Because scientifically, > > if you are careful, no such entity is required to explain the data. > > Many of the atheists here believe that what God means is this > > contingent fundamentalist god and rail against those that believe it > > exists on basically, and correctly, scientific grounds. > > > However, it turns out that is not what the religions are about. If you > > look deeply into them you see that they are conceived of in a kind of > > alternate metaphysics or ontology. They are not sciences. For a long > > time they were confused with them but not now. God, when directly > > experienced, is not a contingent being that happens to exist but a > > necessary one breathing the life of meaning into experience. There are > > "messages" that some claim to get. "Answers" and the experience is > > never academic but goes to the heart of who we are. Strictly speaking > > it IS heart. Denying this god is in fact - exactly - a black mark on > > the heart for what we mean by "heart" is the ability to experience > > life and its meaning as it actually is - sacred - full of mystery and > > - perhaps at least - loving. That form of religion is not > > fundamentalist but is routed in the meaning of being itself. Access to > > it is more like access to mathematics than it is like access to > > science - although in reality it is neither. > > > So it is possible to scientifically not believe in the fundamentalist > > god while still realizing and experiencing what I will call the real > > god" on whom tthe scientific world depends. All of this is rationally > > explainable - at least to a point - in the study of ontology and > > metaphysics in philosophy. I think though that the reality exceeds > > these descriptions and requires a response that is beyond a kind of > > limited intellectual knowing. > > > I wish you well and hope that the "black spot" which is really the > > presence of evil does not overcome you. Doubt is not a problem but > > unfortunately it is also not the answer. I think that if you doubt > > sincerely it is the first step. But it is necessary to go beyond that > > and find the answer as well...find the real answer.... or to have the > > answer find you! > > > One thing for sure just abandoning the questioning and "choosing to > > just believe" is the wrong answer. It is a kind of lying to oneself > > and it is rampant in the more fundamentalist religious views. It is > > saying you don't doubt when you do or failing to realize that you > > can't just choose what to believe. You just can't stop questioning > > because you want to! That is a fundamentaly dishonest process because > > your will doesn't just make the truth. That is the real evil. Belief > > that you can just choose to make the truth into what you choose to. > > That is why I agree with the materialists more that disagree with them > > because they are trying, in their own fundamentalist way perhaps, to > > defeat that kind of intellectual dishonesty and blindness at the root > > of religious fundamentalism. > > > At any rate I hope that the peace you experienced is not completely > > gone and my opinion is that that peace is based in truth and all that > > is required is to experience it more fully. Questioning is one path. > > There are others. I think that you can directly experience all of this > > for yourself and I recommend the Sufi tradition if you are Islamic. > > Read Rumi for sure. Or it might be interesting to try a course in > > comparative religious studies that compares the religions of the book > > with, for example, the Zen traditions. I also recommend exploring the > > artistic traditions as they are inherently linked to the religious > > ones... and then there is my favorite.... philosophy... the love of > > truth. > > > Salam Alekum. > > > Ma salam ya sayidati > > > J > > > On Apr 19, 9:42 am, Rosey <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I decided to start a new post as I originally intended it to be a > > > response to the Purpose of Life post but felt it took another > > > direction. > > > > First off, tip of the hat to everyone in here. I discovered this > > > group by chance. Second, purpose to life? Ah, the frailties of the > > > mind, I have been walking backwards as I've grown weak in faith. I am > > > muslim, I don't think anyone here is immature enough to negatively > > > comment on such a label, but I do have one thing to say: When I was > > > more faithful to my religion and consistent with prayers I felt a > > > sense of completion and calmness. I could even say that I at one > > > point I felt that I reached a temporary self actualization. It's not > > > the religion, but more or less the idea of maintaining spirituality > > > that keeps one fulfilled. Through my recent skepticisms and > > > analyzations of religion as a whole I have been more distraught than > > > I've ever been. Is it an oddysey? Why does one who has steered far > > > from ideological beliefs that a supreme entity exists feel lost and > > > agonizingly stressed? Wouldn't one be better off just accepting and > > > following religion knowing that they are abiding by its rules > > > accordingly? Isn't that comfort? > > > > Sincerely, > > > Lost --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
