What is Your Worldview?

Hangdawg,I read that and then went now whaaaat? As in...
What do you define life to be? I mean the term is generally used to refer to organisms, cells, tissues, organs i.e. flesh.
And what is the corruption of the flesh? Disease,cancer, pus, urine, saliva, or are you refering to the drives that people have for sex and aggression?If you have time I'd like your clarifications of life, corruption, and flesh.Thanks!lfen

MrHambre,Given the grim state of affairs discribe by Dawkins it's clear to me that religion is much more than a "superficial parlor game". It seems rather to be for many people a necessary illusion to maintain their motivation to cope with such a difficult life. and so it seems someone did.lfen

Why not until 9/11/01? Surely throughout history even in recent times there have been greater horrors and acts of irrational outrage. You never dealt with the gulags, the concentration camps, what China has done to the gentle people of Tibet?And touchy feely is only one kind of nonsense. There is also the bitter vengeful nonsense of terrorist which brings them to commit acts like 9/11. I prefer people believing touchy-feely nonsense to believing that God wishes them to enact revenge on unbelievers, or at least postpone the satisfaction of their desire for vengence until a last judgement at some end time.lfen

Hangdawg,Or if there is a God perhaps that is the only reality and life and belief are as illusory as can be?!Thanks for your replies. You've started back to school?lfen

MrHambre,I had misunderstood. Sometimes I have an "irritated tolerance" also. And true believers whether of an islamic, communist, racist, or whatever can do or sanction terrible things BUT that remains an extremist minority. Well, fighter aircraft could have been used to shoot down the airlines. I'm not sure what his avatar means to him. It doesn't upset me. And I've never felt personally condemned by Hangdawg and I personally like him. The christian religion as well as some others does impose a belief on many of its adherents that non believers will go to hell. My sister who goes to the Luthern church believes that.I don't find his philosophical thinking to be bizarre or rantings (unless it's catagorically stipulated that all theology is bizarre rantings say along the lines of Wittgenstein}even though I may disagree. Having a christian background when I was young I have some understanding of what issues he has to consider as he thinks about the world.lfen

Hangdawg,Just as a point of reference the following does not accurately protray my views: While disagreeing with it I understand the judeo christian belief of the individuality of souls. And I know that the nondual is a very slippery concept. There is no "merge back" because there was never a separation. And we can't remain what we never were.One approach is to examine in depth the nature of our experience of being a self. That experience is an illusion. Shankara used the analogy of someone being frightened of a snake only to realize that it was a piece of rope. Where did the snake go? It never went anywhere as there was never a snake, just the mind for a moment holding an illusion of a snake. The snake doesn't merge into the rope. The rope is simply seen as it is without the illusion.The only boundary is the idea that there is a boundary. What boundary could there be?lfen

Hi Phat! I certainly think that is one way to interpret the eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. What is knowledge? is then the question.In another thread Jar recommended the Gospel of St. Thomas to me. I found it online and it does seem to show a more eastern teaching attributed to Jesus. I know very little about Thomas so I don't know to what extent that gospel reflects the early church and the early teachings.It's my impression that some (many? most?) fundamentalist have major issues with the Catholic church, but I still recommend to almost everyone who shows an interest in this topic Bernadette Roberts' book THE EXPERIENCE OF NO-SELF. It is not a philosophical or theological work. She writes in the tradition of St. John the Divine as a map of inner experiences for contemplatives who might have a use for it. In that book she writes of her personal experience with losing her self. I'll go get the book and type in a quote. Okay the final sentences of her book:"But isn't this what Christ would have us do--to lose our very life (our souls)that we might have eternal life? In new translation this saying turns into: 'He who seeks only himself brings himself to ruin, whereas he who brings himself to naught for me discovers who he is' Mt. 10,39. To this I would add that in coming to nought, he will not only discover who he is, but "what" he is, for in God these can not be separated. THAT he is, WHAT he is, WHO he is, WHERE he is, in God these are all One, and outside this One, nothing is." New Age was a catch all for the explosion of beliefs in the sixties and partly reflects the first contact of westerners with eastern religions, and was an eclectic blend of whatever ingredients someone wanted to include from a loooong shopping list.The nondual teachings are at least as ancient as the Buddha and the roots of that are even older. The other new age stuff I'm interested in is physics, biology, and brain function particularly as they shed light on what and how we experience what we know as reality.I'm not very interested in New Age stuff per se.
Have you read the Gospel of St. Thomas? That might make an interesting thread.lfen

Hangdawg,Would you be precise about what you believe Jesus did?
What did he give? And why was it a gift?
I think I know what you believe but I'm not sure so before I bring up a counterpoint I want to hear what is being asserted. Thanks. Ummm? I'm puzzled. How does that bombing in Iraq result in him being free to sit there and criticize them? I'm thinking you were very tired when you wrote this post. I've been there and done that but this is a slogan useful for motivating patriotic activities but beyond that does it make sense?lfen

Wow, you do? What does this mean a "monopoly in the sense of God's Spirit?". You don't think Rumi, or Ramana Maharshi felt and understood God's spirit, to name only two of a very large number of nonchristian spiritual people?lfen

Phat,I am answering your question with my historical understanding. At the end of WWII some of the old imperial powers were gone, well, they weren't called necessarily called imperial they were called colonial. Great Britian and Germany were weakened by the costs of the war. The US and Soviet Russia emerged as the 2 powers. And eventually the Soviet's system collapsed. Now the US remains the imperial power in the world. There is a possibility that in the future China will emerge as a world power.The thing I understand from my world view of history is that at some point empires spend more than they take in. It's very expensive to be the world power and none have been able to sustain that expense. Already the US carries a great debt to maintain our position.Now I'm not offering this as a criticism. Things can't be different than they are and throughout history there are the cycles of power. At the end of WWII the US was at the pinnacle. We are still in the high plateau and may be for many years. But the costs are adding up and having passed the peak we are in the decline whether it's yet perceptible. This is neither a good thing nor bad. Italy remains long after the Roman Empire, and the Holy Roman Empire. England remains long after the sun set on it's empire.lfen

Phat,That was interesting. Though I'm not sure how valid the test is. There is a lot of analysis that goes into creating good tests,and most of the net tests out there don't come close to qualifying.But I'm was pleased to find myself in the same quadrant as the Dalai Lama.. though beyond that sense of pleasure I doubt it means very much.Economic Left/Right: -5.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.97lfen

I am remembering the title of the book as: 1066 the Story of a Year, but not finding it so I'm misrembering it. Anyway, check out that year and the battles in England, especially the battle of Hastings. That was a time when the Kings stood with their armies and fought and died on the field of battle. Herald or Norway and Herald of England both perished on the battlefield.But those were different times.But then do a search on Ashoka who after a battle that resulted in horrendous casualities converted to Buddhism and a reign dedicated to peace and compassion. They have begun to translate the inscriptions that he left over the land.But warfare has been a feature of most societies to varying degrees. On the other hand I'm all for postive alternatives and think we should keep trying.What I don't understand really is that Paul and many early christians were certain Christ would return within the lifetime of those still living, but the failure of the second coming did not falsify the prophecy. Starting from the conviction that bibical prophesies are all accurate than any perceived failure is simply a failure not of the prophecy, which can't be falsified by prior assumption, and is therefore a failure in interpretation. Thus it seems to mean Christianity is resigned to war as that is how the world is assumed to end. I say in another millenium who knows what we will come up with, if the pollution doesn't get us first.lfenACK! Edited because I am very confused this morning. I had thought I was replying to something Phatboy said, not Sidelined's post and now I can't even find what post of Phatboy's I thought I was replying to. I stand by the statements here, but I can't find the post I'm referring to. My apologies to all. lfenThis message has been edited by lfen, 09-04-2004 01:38 PM

Hangdawg, thanks for replying even when tired. But note get your rest. Posting here can always wait, your body and brain both need a good nights sleep, so please don't ever push yourself on my account.Scourging and crucifiction are tortuous death. And Christians believe God sacrificed his son just as fathers around the world to this day sacrifice their sons in the wars that they send them to, so it makes sense to me that psychologically this sacrifice makes sense to humans as they've been doing the same thing for a long time.Jesus suffered on the cross horribly but other humans have and continue to suffer as horrible or more. In countries around the world torture has continued, and there are some diseases that produced terrible suffering not only physically but also psychosis. So God was willing to an extreme but not the most extreme degree partake in what humans do. I find this logic so disheartening. Supposedly God and Jesus knew about the plan. I am personally appalled that so many people suffer on earth, children of malnutrition, disease and war and I just don't think what God and Jesus went through can redeem what humans go through even if it could compare to human suffering which to my mind it doesn't.Christianity like Judaism before as a religion uses the "guilt trip" to manipulate people. Christianity wants us to feel guilty and believe what we are told because Christ died for us. But how many humans have died as horrible or a more horrible death than Jesus. What doesn't God feel guilty? Why are we guilty and God isn't? And the answer is because the priest class then couldn't manipulate us. They couldn't say well a bad thing happened because you were not good enough or didn't believe enough,nope, keep sacrificing the cows, or paying the tithe cause you are guilty and we have the power and you have to do what we say and support us. This is the cost of religion. Yes, mental health, anxiety reduction, etc. but the priests get to guilt trip you for deviating, like studying science and finding their age of the earth doesn't add up. And if you question their story? If you ask well, is it that big a sacrifice if you get it all back 3 days later? And who asked for that sacrifice anyway? It wasn't me! well, I get to go to hell questioning the priest story, no disagreements allowed, either follow the party line or it's straight to hell with you, daring to think instead of parroting what we tell you.Why wouldn't God send a teacher like the Buddha to live and teach among the people for decades instead of a incident lost to history buried in myth and conflicting scriptures? The core of the christian assertion is mired in self contradiction hallowed by centuries of authority.That is my rant, and it's not about you, but it is about what I find so tragically false and twisted about Christian doctrine.[Aside to Jar, I've probably overgeneralized this and I apologize if I have. And I will deserve correction as you provided before if I have lumped unfairly christian beliefs in here. I have at time a passionate nature and I'm not writing my most rational here. This is just my statement of my deepest reaction to what I percieve as the most irrational demands that the christian religion puts on people. This is my statement of why I'm not a christian. Now I know there are many christians for whom this is not a central concern and their religion supports them in living a loving life everyday, and I know some of these people and love them.]So I'm not attacking the people but I have to say I find the central tenants of the religon appalling in attributing barbarous religious practises i.e. human sacrifice to the source of the universe and barbarous miracles like a virgin birth. And I am disappointed that so many people find that explanation compelling. As metaphor I understand they have a function, but as actualities, how could I possibly believe this stuff? Why would anyone want to?lfen