I think my response to what you say James is that I'd like to see material change that gave us more time and security in just that.
On Oct 6, 10:36 pm, James Lynch <[email protected]> wrote: > For me it took some time to recognize my own lack of faith, and just > as long to begin recognizing that I have and will feel a stronger > kinship to spiritual faith being outside finding my own way. My > younger years were spent learning from and observing the lives our > society would not like to advertise. The american dream was as alien > to many I've known as my own detachment from faith. It was during > adolescence that I looked across my life and the things I've > experienced and seen that I experienced an existential and spiritual > collapse. It took a long painful time but I burnt the remnants I held > onto out, and recognized the best the world could provide fell far > short for me. A skeptic personality from early on, my actual losses > were little but the recognition was traumatic as it removed a small > area of hope in reserve, even if I hadn't counted on but a few times. > Later I came to a similar recognition about the world and that helped > lead me to delve into mysticism, occult, pagan, shamanic, eastern, > gnosticism, metaphysics and many others. Of course avoiding the > megalomaniac desires of the ego has been an occasional cat and mouse, > depending on your take of transhumanism I guess. > > It has taken a long time seeking answers to get a general picture of > what I am as an intellectual and emotional being and this place I've > resided in, and with some creativity I even appreciate some of the > 'spiritual' things. There is a huge amount of context for me to figure > out, sometimes it would help to have a bit more trust, as everything > seems to lead back to that. > > I suppose one could call me an spiritual iconoclast or nonconformant, > taking what I will, as such a personal dialogue is saturated with the > eddys of experience, knowledge, understanding, inspiration over time- > how could I demand someone else agree on my symbology, such a thing > sounds negligent even vulgar in the face of how I've gleaned my own > insights. Take what you will. :) > > Very subjectively yours, > Me > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 11:58 AM, pol.science kid <[email protected]> wrote: > > These days in india the Durga puja and Dusshera is on full blow... and > > will be followed by diwali... now i was persuaded by my Ma for going > > to the temple after i dont know.. a very very long time... it was > > fully decorated and all... with full festive swing.... lots of > > people.... i just realised how indifferent i have been to the 'faith' > > i was born in... my religion.... i am not an aethieist... but i have > > faith ... though it is not the faith that i saw so many people seeming > > to have ... i was thinking while there... so many people paying > > obeisance to the the deity... the Goddess... its hard for me to > > understand... the feeling towards that Idol.... my moms totally > > religious... and i DONT get her... what little i can make myself > > understand is that suppose the Goddess ..the idol is supposed to > > represent something.. certain values.. is it really the idea behind > > the deity..why do we needs these anthromorphised Gods... for most > > though i feel that it is based on fear... but not all of course.... > > though i am learning to check myself the disdain i used to have for > > someone totally religious ... devoutly doing all the rituals and > > fasts.. cause i guess tolerance should be both ways... its a strange > > feeling standing in a temple... not knowing what to feel and think.... > > I agree with Molly.. though .. i want to ask... do we scientifically > > outgrow Faith.. to use scientific here... is it circumstances... i > > presume we all are born into a faith... i would love to talk to a > > child of an atheist though... a child who is kept away from faith... > > some who leave faith after certain tragedies... did they ever have > > faith.... lots of confused thoughts... > > > On Oct 5, 3:53 pm, Allan H <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I refer to christian mysticism because like you Molly it is the one I am > >> most familiar with ,, and everything hinges on trying to understand what > >> is > >> said and meant not necessarily what the "churches" want you to accept as > >> the > >> truth.. not necessarily leading one to the truth, I believe the word > >> christ comes from the greek word meaning "anointed one." that is a long > >> way > >> from arriving that Jesus is God.. unfortunately that is where today's > >> christianity wants everyone to jump to.. that takes a few more hoops though > >> I am not willing to arrive at the conclusion he is the son of God. > >> I do not think you can out grow spirituality as it is a basic part of each > >> person's being. As for being anointed I think every generation has its > >> "anointed" people. The problem comes from the older generation (church) > >> does not want them interfering with their cash cow they keep passing on.. > >> Allan > > >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > I think that being faith based may be something we outgrow, like being > >> > ego based. Both have a function that we tap from time to time even > >> > when outgrown because they become the repository of information and > >> > attribute. That said, I do consider Christian mysticism, simply > >> > because I have a more thorough understanding of it than any other form > >> > of mysticism and live in a society that is more Christian based, > >> > giving me a way to communicate. The idea that Christ is the > >> > culmination of all men as the son of God does, I think, have a related > >> > concept in every form of mysticism. Our individual view gives us each > >> > our own way into the paradox of One. Life may be as simple as a > >> > "force" that differentiates and unites through order and chaos and > >> > other such ranges, as RP suggests. Faith, I think, in whatever form, > >> > is a system of thought that can lead to a path to understanding. > > >> > On Oct 4, 2:49 pm, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > I'm very much in agreement with you, Neil. But, like you, I am also > >> > > suspicious of arguments which claim to base themselves on pure > >> > > "reasonableness." We are much more than just rational intelligence - > >> > > you mention "emotional understanding"; we are complex, forever > >> > > interacting unities - personalities formed out of all sorts of aspects > >> > > apart from "pure Reason," whatever that may be. > > >> > > One of these aspects is our need for meaning-giving narratives, > >> > > stories, myths to help us structure and find sense and fulfillment in > >> > > our lives, both individually and communally. But such narratives and > >> > > identity myths are immediately subject to distortion and manipulation. > >> > > For them to be any way useful they need a constant open dialogue with > >> > > sceptics, critics and heretics. Even classical traditional Christian > >> > > theology recognised this with the concept of "ecclesia semper > >> > > reformanda" - more theoretically than practically. And Dostoevsky's > >> > > Grand Inquisitor is always present to manipulate and take control. > > >> > > Personally, I "lost" the faith many years ago - and do not miss it. > >> > > Yet I still know many great people who are motivated by faith - and > >> > > I'm not talking about fundamentalist fruit and nut-cases either. > > >> > > On 4 Okt., 17:34, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > > oops - drat this laptop! ... was caused over a sandwich. This turned > >> > > > out to be the Balkan assassination story. My view these days is that > >> > > > this war started with the British invasion of Iraq in 1913 and might > >> > > > be better explained from the point where various imperialist navies > >> > > > (British, US, French, German and Japanese) were queuing up in 1906 > >> > > > off > >> > > > the Chinese coast (Boxer rebellion etc.) - such analysis is way > >> > > > beyond > >> > > > school examination 'sound bites'. > > >> > > > What I'd like to see is a much more open society that was no longer > >> > > > printing myths. I want my beliefs and fellowship based in an > >> > > > accurate > >> > > > version of what human life is about and the dangers involved in > >> > > > denying this. I want control to be based in Reason that leaves > >> > > > emotional understanding in. What I find personally is that I repeat > >> > > > the mistakes of any elite thinking or practice in being so frustrated > >> > > > about general ignorance. It's not intellectually honest to believe > >> > > > in > >> > > > the will of the majority, though one can make a lesser claim for a > >> > > > society in which votes matter than perfection. > > >> > > > In the past, religion often had emancipatory aims - much of its > >> > > > language is about freedom from debt - and I find myself wishing one > >> > > > could take part in the fellowship of such religion without corrupting > >> > > > into all the sacred text belief in god nonsense - just as I don't > >> > > > mind > >> > > > feeling proud of my country and its people as long as it's not on the > >> > > > basis of jingoism and false history. Much western history is little > >> > > > more than dross versions of stuff peddled by the Vatican. > > >> > > > Today's religion is economics based in imperialist myth - we hide a > >> > > > holocaust, indeed deny one - as in the book 'Killing Hope' - though > >> > > > one need not focus on the Americans. I feel the truth of this may be > >> > > > so bad that figures like Churchill, Bush, Blair and others may well > >> > > > have been bag men for international finance and the preservation of > >> > > > an > >> > > > ancien regime. I wish in many ways for a religion that stood up to > >> > > > this. > > >> > > > On Oct 4, 4:07 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > > > The ultimate answer for me is that belief in god lacks intellectual > >> > > > > honesty. I wouldn't seek any argument on the existence of god - > >> > > > > for > >> > > > > me an answer either way is a rationalist fantasy - i.e. there is no > >> > > > > answer. I reject most of the ideology I was brought up in as based > >> > in > >> > > > > fables. The idea of scripture as revelation from god doesn't > >> > > > > appeal > >> > > > > in the slightest. Most of it > > ... > > read more »
