Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Maynard on February 5, 2010 at 9:14pm

Anand Krishna said:

I was shocked to meet westerners converting to Hinduism becoming more extremist, fanatic, and even radical in their views than the most radical born Hindus i have so far met.

Westerners frequently have a deep need for validation, which I suspect is the driving force behind the behavior you describe.

Permalink Reply by Marilyn Louise Copeland on February 6, 2010 at 6:07am

In my understanding and personal experience of the Church there are two aspects. The institutional church with all the hierarchy, structure, organisation, doctrine & dogma etc.and the Church as a community of Love, where people gather to prayer, to worship, and to celebrate all the great events of Life: Births, Deaths, Marriages. Many find deep meaning in the rituals, sacraments and the great Archetypal example of Christ .
It seems a natural human longing to find places of belonging and soul refreshment, and with the many different Churches , where each has it's particular expression, there is something to suit most Christians. Some of us however struggle in mainstream Churches, and this is where Ecumenical gatherings and Interfaith groups can meet that need to connect with people of like mind and heart. I think there will always be a need for churches as long as there are people of faith. The expression of faith and worshipping together has been a part of the human spirit since the year dot it seems !!!
I still enjoy going to church myself from time to time, and I also enjoy the experience of Hindu chanting, Buddhist meditation , Celtic or Nature based rituals etc.
The better world is created I feel , by accepting all the diversity of religions, \by allowing free expression of faith, by taking opportunities to experience them for ourselves, where possible,. so that understanding can grow , and we finally see the Oneness of all religions, at their heart , in their essence. Love & Blessings, Marilyn

Permalink Reply by Graham George on February 6, 2010 at 8:14am

Dear Anand,

I have personally always believed that the 'Church' or 'Temple' is the Self. That part of us which resides with our God/belief, that is a strength that cannot be moved by any external influence. I am also aware that the 'spiritual energy' that comes from prayer, in many churches and religious institutions, is of vital importance to those who require confirmation of their belief, a place where this energy is tangible.
Finally I believe that were we able to readily access that which is our inheritance to our God/belief, simply Peace, Love and Joy in our moment to moment lives, then neither churches nor religious institutions would be necessary, as we would be 'living' our purpose here...to be Love!
II say this in Loving Respect to all religions, for if we didn't have them to bring us to this point, would we still 'know' of God?
Graham.
"I Will Shine Today!"

Permalink Reply by Anand Krishna on February 6, 2010 at 12:55pm

I thank all of you fr your comments, kind remarks, thoughts - I hv learnt a lot from each one of you. Reading the latest remarkds by Marilyn n George I am rather cnvnced that religions n religious teachings can be presented without institutionalizing them. This was my original thought to trigger this discussion, to free religions n religious teachings from institutions.

In the west this process of deinstitutionalization has alrdy begun - where a churchgoer. Can also attend a wiccan prayer meeting, n perhaps attend meditation classes under the guidance of a Buddhist master.

In my part of the world, such an act would b unacceptable to the church. Religious institutions wud rather have them cnfined within the four walls of their churches.

But things wl change, must change. The writtings on the wall r clear.

Thank u friends, sisters, and brothers - lv n blsgs

Permalink Reply by Maynard on February 6, 2010 at 4:47pm

My findings are in concert with yours, Anand.
Apostles as chosen preachers were directed to spread the gospel="good_news" of the kingdom of (heaven|God) which is largely described in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt.5-7) and enveloped by the Great Commandment to "love one another as I have loved you".
It seems that the building of institutions arose from somewhere else, and I suppose quite naturally so, as enthusiasm for this good news spiraled through the region and brotherhood coalesced into recognizable forms.

Permalink Reply by Anand Krishna on February 6, 2010 at 9:25pm

My dear Maynard, cud it be that the church was part of the Roman strategy to curb the teachings of Jesus, the Rebel, n cntrol the early followers of Jesus.

This in my opinion happened to Muhammad as well.

I am still working and researchng on this.

Lv n blsga

Permalink Reply by Hadrian Judge on February 7, 2010 at 11:28pm

Dear Anand

You are already blessed and may you continue to be so. it would be my privelidge to help.

All my love and blessings - Hadrian

Ps Please pass on to Doug that I regard truth to simply be Truth. it's just our understanding of it that's different because of those limitations we discussed and the different ways in which we use our brains. See http://www.society4good-feeling.com/index.php?option=com_content&am... its a bit old now, ideally I'd like time to update it. Fat chance of that!

Also, many people are familiar with the mechanism mathematicians use in algebra to represent the unknown. Traditionally X is used. The word God is exactly like that. Amongst the enlightened in religion this is understood. It’s very likely that maths, being an ancient science, provided the original model for the use of the God word. That and how easily it manifests in the throat. Because God can’t be known there are many references in religion to ‘the Power of God’ which can be felt. So how would it be if a mathematician were to declare he didn’t believe in assigning a designation to the unknown? How would this benefit his career as a Mathematician? Who amongst us would give him a good chance of a successful career in algebra?

Anand Krishna said:

Many Thanks Hadrian, for your very enlightening discourse. I agree with you, the bottom line is "let us work" - If this be our "mantra", no conflicts will be there. And, peace shall prevail... I, we will miss you. But, at the same time, i honor your decision too.
Yet, i shall consider it as a privilege if i can turn to you in the times of doubts, and despair. I seek your blessings, Sir....
Hadrian Judge said:

In regard to whether we need Churches and or Religious Institutions

Hi Anand This is a bit like asking ourselves how we might go about discerning the difference between a Path and a Movement. A path being analogous to a person and a movement to many. A recent post from Maynard Riley touched on this subject by raising the concept of Geometric Metaphors. A Geometric Metaphor is a great concept, thank you Maynard. See http://www.meru.org His reference neatly identified for me that all roads lead to Rome, yet leaves unstated how many lifetimes any particular path might take someone to arrive. Also, in the light of the theories that abound in relation to this, it begs the question here ‘How does human understanding inform us?’ The simple answer is easy; the big question is not so simple.
Simple understanding at a material level informs us through our environment and the choices we make in this world. It is apparent that we all share one nervous system and are all part of one humanity. There is only one humanity isn’t there? If so, our choices determine whether we will take the high road or the low road. This leaves me little doubt that acceptance of the other guy’s path and his business in it is only his business. Our duty toward him is to cherish his life and ensure he’s free to follow his path - provided he isn’t an axe murderer or something equally devastating to society. This is why there are so many communities that share good intent toward human beings. I find problems occur when my cage is rattled.

Now we’re on the subject of the big question. When another guy disturbs my cage, there is only my understanding to guide me. So how do I handle cage rattlers? I can choose a weapon and do him in or, I can seek to understand his motivation before decide how I’ll deal with him; or I can follow my intuition. How well I manage to do that is dependent on the values I’ve adopted during my time in this world. To me, this suggests only my understanding of human values guide my result; that human understanding is quite independent of my principles and the path(s) I’ve chosen. This really excludes understanding’s origin coming from a particular path because that’s where a lot of the world’s cage rattling emanates from - that and axe murderers etc. So, if I can understand and my connection to this quality is intact it doesn’t matter a fig which path I take, it only matters that my understanding is maintained. And what of Movements and how they influence how we proceed?

If human beings are one species, and it certainly looks as though we are, what is the source of human understanding? Could it be that this very real human value has only one source, and that it is the same quality that informs all paths? So what could it be that resides within human beings who find this possibility so unfathomable?

Many people have problems with other faiths. I take the view that the real issue is who interprets and records the theology and with what degree of understanding. A common edict amongst religious is ‘knock and the door will open, don’t knock and there is no door.’ It is apparent that much remains unsaid with proclamations like that. Such edicts can fly up the nose of almost anyone, religious included. Such sayings do have something fundamental to say that can’t be further expressed without error. That particular one is because of the premise that suggests that what’s right or wrong in the world is a black and white issue. This is truly fallacious.

Any study of human motivational factors will reveal how difficult it is to determine how and when positive thinking is more beneficial to a given situation than raw emotion and or animal aggression. Most of what’s expressed about reality is like that. I believe the whole truth is only accessible to those who’ve achieved a superior understanding of reality; then those people shut up because a lot of what they understand about reality will be misinterpreted by the rest of us. So, for me what distinguishes those holy ones from the rest of us is just their understanding of reality. That understanding is not something that’s dependent on theology.

Could it be that adopted principles are valued more by some than their own human understanding? Yes? No? How does a human being seek to discover what human understanding is? How do understanding and truth manifest? Can we effectively pursue any of these questions without we first apply ourselves to the task in harmony?

And are not Movements also a means of enabling disparate paths to work in Harmony or do Movements seek to serve only one particular path? Surely the answer to these questions lie in how each Movement manifests in society. Do they seek to control? What qualities do they demonstrate? How do they go about achieving their objectives? How does an individual exercise sufficient understanding to discern the difference between theory and reality in their attempt to decide these things?

For me theologies are coded messages delivered within a given specific cultural settings which are commonly meaningless to people outside a particular culture; and which change internally within people as time passes. I take the view that it’s best to leave other peoples’ cultures to them and concentrate on understanding your own. Without people put human understanding on their personal agenda as a goal they will, if they open they mouth - or write, end up doing something similar what I did recently - deliver something incomplete - because their understanding is incomplete.

This happened to me because of what was not included by me, could not and should not have been included by me in what I wrote. So, I offer my apologies here for the incompleteness of that expression of mine and the inevitability of my wrong action. The misunderstandings I caused were fundamentally because what I was trying to express can’t be publicly expressed. It can only be understood, which is why I was wrong to say what I did; I just didn’t foresee my error.

I’m aware there are people in this world that only ever use their intellect sparingly, who don’t have any defined path, whose capacity to fix their focus makes it difficult for them to relate to others. Unless I have the special skills that are needed to include people who have any particular deficit I can’t meet their needs. I maintain we are all in that boat; unless our perception has already become God-like. I am not like that. I just feel bad when I begin to realise that I got it wrong. Are we not all like me? Or do we all have the required powers of discernment already developed and ready to help such people? In which other way could any of us be entirely inclusive?

I do admire the inclusiveness of the various descriptions and tags I’ve seen used to address issues here but. I’m going to bow out of PeaceNext, not because it isn’t interesting - it is - it’s extremely interesting. My problem is it’s consuming time I don’t have to spare; and there’s the gob-stopping email load. My primary interest is in how to act responsibly and to achieve my objective and I need to devote a lot more of my time to activities that will achieve that end. I have benefited from my time here; I’ve learnt some lessons. Sorry about the hornets nest. My apologies to all.

Permalink Reply by Rev. Douglas Walker on February 8, 2010 at 9:21am

Dear Hadrian,

I like very much your explanation comparing God and X, "The mechanism mathematicians use in algebra". This same idea may very effectively be applied to Truth also. As Anand said, "if God is Truth". The problem with all this is that people don't kill each other in the name of a "mechanism mathematicians use in algebra", but do over their ideas of God and Truth. I also very much like the concept of the Tao, which could be used to represent God and Truth. The wisdom of the Tao says "those who know do not speak of it, those who speak of it don't know." Maybe living from our knowing is enough?

Thank you all for your patience as I work through this.
Blessings of great peace and joy to you today - Doug

Hadrian Judge said:

Dear Anand

You are already blessed and may you continue to be so. it would be my privelidge to help.

All my love and blessings - Hadrian

Ps Please pass on to Doug that I regard truth to simply be Truth. it's just our understanding of it that's different because of those limitations we discussed and the different ways in which we use our brains. See http://www.society4good-feeling.com/index.php?option=com_content&am... its a bit old now, ideally I'd like time to update it. Fat chance of that!

Also, many people are familiar with the mechanism mathematicians use in algebra to represent the unknown. Traditionally X is used. The word God is exactly like that. Amongst the enlightened in religion this is understood. It’s very likely that maths, being an ancient science, provided the original model for the use of the God word. That and how easily it manifests in the throat. Because God can’t be known there are many references in religion to ‘the Power of God’ which can be felt. So how would it be if a mathematician were to declare he didn’t believe in assigning a designation to the unknown? How would this benefit his career as a Mathematician? Who amongst us would give him a good chance of a successful career in algebra?

Anand Krishna said:

Many Thanks Hadrian, for your very enlightening discourse. I agree with you, the bottom line is "let us work" - If this be our "mantra", no conflicts will be there. And, peace shall prevail... I, we will miss you. But, at the same time, i honor your decision too.
Yet, i shall consider it as a privilege if i can turn to you in the times of doubts, and despair. I seek your blessings, Sir....
Hadrian Judge said:

In regard to whether we need Churches and or Religious Institutions

Hi Anand This is a bit like asking ourselves how we might go about discerning the difference between a Path and a Movement. A path being analogous to a person and a movement to many. A recent post from Maynard Riley touched on this subject by raising the concept of Geometric Metaphors. A Geometric Metaphor is a great concept, thank you Maynard. See http://www.meru.org His reference neatly identified for me that all roads lead to Rome, yet leaves unstated how many lifetimes any particular path might take someone to arrive. Also, in the light of the theories that abound in relation to this, it begs the question here ‘How does human understanding inform us?’ The simple answer is easy; the big question is not so simple.
Simple understanding at a material level informs us through our environment and the choices we make in this world. It is apparent that we all share one nervous system and are all part of one humanity. There is only one humanity isn’t there? If so, our choices determine whether we will take the high road or the low road. This leaves me little doubt that acceptance of the other guy’s path and his business in it is only his business. Our duty toward him is to cherish his life and ensure he’s free to follow his path - provided he isn’t an axe murderer or something equally devastating to society. This is why there are so many communities that share good intent toward human beings. I find problems occur when my cage is rattled.

Now we’re on the subject of the big question. When another guy disturbs my cage, there is only my understanding to guide me. So how do I handle cage rattlers? I can choose a weapon and do him in or, I can seek to understand his motivation before decide how I’ll deal with him; or I can follow my intuition. How well I manage to do that is dependent on the values I’ve adopted during my time in this world. To me, this suggests only my understanding of human values guide my result; that human understanding is quite independent of my principles and the path(s) I’ve chosen. This really excludes understanding’s origin coming from a particular path because that’s where a lot of the world’s cage rattling emanates from - that and axe murderers etc. So, if I can understand and my connection to this quality is intact it doesn’t matter a fig which path I take, it only matters that my understanding is maintained. And what of Movements and how they influence how we proceed?

If human beings are one species, and it certainly looks as though we are, what is the source of human understanding? Could it be that this very real human value has only one source, and that it is the same quality that informs all paths? So what could it be that resides within human beings who find this possibility so unfathomable?

Many people have problems with other faiths. I take the view that the real issue is who interprets and records the theology and with what degree of understanding. A common edict amongst religious is ‘knock and the door will open, don’t knock and there is no door.’ It is apparent that much remains unsaid with proclamations like that. Such edicts can fly up the nose of almost anyone, religious included. Such sayings do have something fundamental to say that can’t be further expressed without error. That particular one is because of the premise that suggests that what’s right or wrong in the world is a black and white issue. This is truly fallacious.

Any study of human motivational factors will reveal how difficult it is to determine how and when positive thinking is more beneficial to a given situation than raw emotion and or animal aggression. Most of what’s expressed about reality is like that. I believe the whole truth is only accessible to those who’ve achieved a superior understanding of reality; then those people shut up because a lot of what they understand about reality will be misinterpreted by the rest of us. So, for me what distinguishes those holy ones from the rest of us is just their understanding of reality. That understanding is not something that’s dependent on theology.

Could it be that adopted principles are valued more by some than their own human understanding? Yes? No? How does a human being seek to discover what human understanding is? How do understanding and truth manifest? Can we effectively pursue any of these questions without we first apply ourselves to the task in harmony?

And are not Movements also a means of enabling disparate paths to work in Harmony or do Movements seek to serve only one particular path? Surely the answer to these questions lie in how each Movement manifests in society. Do they seek to control? What qualities do they demonstrate? How do they go about achieving their objectives? How does an individual exercise sufficient understanding to discern the difference between theory and reality in their attempt to decide these things?

For me theologies are coded messages delivered within a given specific cultural settings which are commonly meaningless to people outside a particular culture; and which change internally within people as time passes. I take the view that it’s best to leave other peoples’ cultures to them and concentrate on understanding your own. Without people put human understanding on their personal agenda as a goal they will, if they open they mouth - or write, end up doing something similar what I did recently - deliver something incomplete - because their understanding is incomplete.

This happened to me because of what was not included by me, could not and should not have been included by me in what I wrote. So, I offer my apologies here for the incompleteness of that expression of mine and the inevitability of my wrong action. The misunderstandings I caused were fundamentally because what I was trying to express can’t be publicly expressed. It can only be understood, which is why I was wrong to say what I did; I just didn’t foresee my error.

I’m aware there are people in this world that only ever use their intellect sparingly, who don’t have any defined path, whose capacity to fix their focus makes it difficult for them to relate to others. Unless I have the special skills that are needed to include people who have any particular deficit I can’t meet their needs. I maintain we are all in that boat; unless our perception has already become God-like. I am not like that. I just feel bad when I begin to realise that I got it wrong. Are we not all like me? Or do we all have the required powers of discernment already developed and ready to help such people? In which other way could any of us be entirely inclusive?

I do admire the inclusiveness of the various descriptions and tags I’ve seen used to address issues here but. I’m going to bow out of PeaceNext, not because it isn’t interesting - it is - it’s extremely interesting. My problem is it’s consuming time I don’t have to spare; and there’s the gob-stopping email load. My primary interest is in how to act responsibly and to achieve my objective and I need to devote a lot more of my time to activities that will achieve that end. I have benefited from my time here; I’ve learnt some lessons. Sorry about the hornets nest. My apologies to all.

Permalink Reply by Maya Safira Muchtar on February 8, 2010 at 6:51pm

This is an interesting question indeed. I am interested in the topic about Truth that was written by Rev. Douglas (thanks for your thoughts).
It is true that throughout history we have killed each other in the name of Truth. But who knows what Truth is anyways?
I have pondered on this for years and one person's Truth is not the same for the other. So, how are we to stay united as one Humanity
If we keep on claiming out Truth is the only Truth?

I have seen and experienced friends and families being separated just because everyone is so adamant about their Truth.
I think it is not only sad but I find it quite ridiculous. What is the whole point then in believing that we are all children of God?
Or yes, if we put it that we have the DNA of Kane and Abel, of course we would start killing each other. Be it for reasons of religion or
Anything, we still claim it as Truth.

However I am very much inspired and enlightenend by what Krishna said to Arjuna in Bhagavad Gita.
When Arjuna asked about Truth to Krishna, he answered, "Just forget about Truth and just do what is Right". I think doing what is Right
Is very flexible. It depends on the time and situation, always contextual. Therefore it is never rigid.

Of course this is just imho. As to the question about do we need churches...If churches are defined as an institutionalized religion
where dogmas and doctrines are so dominant....No. I don't think we need it. Churches (be it Islam, Christian, Jew, Hindu, etc) will tend to always create a
Sun Tzu's battlefield. It creates competitiviness in prosetelyzing, growing the churches, conversions, suspicions, and always creating a gap amongst humankind.
However we do need support groups and community gatherings to interact. But we are free from proseletyzing and confines of doctrines and dogmas.

Thanks for sharing all of your views that are valuable to me.

Love n light,
Maya

Permalink Reply by Maya Safira Muchtar on February 8, 2010 at 6:56pm

This is an interesting question indeed. I am interested in the topic about Truth that was written by Rev. Douglas (thanks for your thoughts).
It is true that throughout history we have killed each other in the name of Truth. But who knows what Truth is anyways?
I have pondered on this for years and one person's Truth is not the same for the other. So, how are we to stay united as one Humanity
If we keep on claiming our Truth is the only Truth?

I have seen and experienced friends and families being separated just because everyone is so adamant about their Truth.
I think it is not only sad but I find it quite ridiculous. What is the whole point then in believing that we are all children of God?
Or yes, if we put it that we have the DNA of Kane and Abel, of course we would start killing each other. Be it for reasons of religion or anything, we still claim it as Truth.

However I am very much inspired and enlightenend by what Krishna said to Arjuna in Bhagavad Gita.
When Arjuna asked about Truth to Krishna, he answered, "Just forget about Truth and just do what is Right". I think doing what is Right
Is very flexible. It depends on the time and situation, always contextual. Therefore it is never rigid.

Of course this is just imho. As to the question about do we need churches...If churches are defined as an institutionalized religion where dogmas and doctrines are so dominant....No. I don't think we need it. Churches (be it Islam, Christian, Jew, Hindu, etc) will tend to always create a
Sun Tzu's battlefield. It creates competitiviness in prosetelyzing, growing the churches, conversions, suspicions, and always creating a gap amongst humankind.
However we do need support groups and community gatherings to interact. But we are free from proseletyzing and confines of doctrines and dogmas.

Thanks for sharing all of your views that are valuable to me.

Love n light,
Maya

Permalink Reply by Rev. Douglas Walker on February 8, 2010 at 10:31pm

Dear Maya,
From my experience I had to let go of all ideas of God, to experience God Beyond Ideas, and let go of Truth to expeience The True beyond truth. This is to scary for most people because it is like falling into the void with a blind fold on and they are afraid there will be nothing there to catch them or to secure them. It is also much easier, for most, just to believe what they are told.

Now I am not as interested in Truth as I am in The True. What is the True you might ask? Imagine two people meet and can't speak and they know no sign language so no concepts can be communicated. They stand face to face looking deeply into each other. They meet heart to heart and recognize the One in each other. This is The True.

My experience brought me to a new world, a world of Both/And. This is a world where differing views are not mutually exclusive but part of the larger fabric of co-created reality, each a point of light in the central sun. I do not claim this to be better or worst than any other view, just different. And i like it.

Blessings - Doug

Maya Safira Muchtar said:

This is an interesting question indeed. I am interested in the topic about Truth that was written by Rev. Douglas (thanks for your thoughts).
It is true that throughout history we have killed each other in the name of Truth. But who knows what Truth is anyways?
I have pondered on this for years and one person's Truth is not the same for the other. So, how are we to stay united as one Humanity
If we keep on claiming our Truth is the only Truth?

I have seen and experienced friends and families being separated just because everyone is so adamant about their Truth.
I think it is not only sad but I find it quite ridiculous. What is the whole point then in believing that we are all children of God?
Or yes, if we put it that we have the DNA of Kane and Abel, of course we would start killing each other. Be it for reasons of religion or anything, we still claim it as Truth.

However I am very much inspired and enlightenend by what Krishna said to Arjuna in Bhagavad Gita.
When Arjuna asked about Truth to Krishna, he answered, "Just forget about Truth and just do what is Right". I think doing what is Right
Is very flexible. It depends on the time and situation, always contextual. Therefore it is never rigid.

Of course this is just imho. As to the question about do we need churches...If churches are defined as an institutionalized religion where dogmas and doctrines are so dominant....No. I don't think we need it. Churches (be it Islam, Christian, Jew, Hindu, etc) will tend to always create a
Sun Tzu's battlefield. It creates competitiviness in prosetelyzing, growing the churches, conversions, suspicions, and always creating a gap amongst humankind.
However we do need support groups and community gatherings to interact. But we are free from proseletyzing and confines of doctrines and dogmas.

Thanks for sharing all of your views that are valuable to me.

Love n light,
Maya

Permalink Reply by Marilyn Louise Copeland on February 9, 2010 at 6:12am

Dear Anand,

Just wanted to add another comment on the topic of churches and if we need them.There is a movement within the Catholic Church where people gather in smaller groups known as Small Church Communities. They come together to prayer, read the scriptures,share life's stories, love and companion one another on the spiritual journey within a home environment. Sometimes there is a Charity or project which is supported by the group. It seems to met a need for deeper friendships and experience of God's love.

There are also within most other Churches I would think many small groups who gather for various reasons - Prayer, Meditation, Social Justice, Charity work etc.
I can't help but wonder ,if the old " Dinosaur " ever did keel over and die as we know it, if it might be these small groups who will be the Church of the future, in an entirely new form - ? Perhaps then ,doctrine, dogma , heirarchy,etc. will become a thing of the past - who knows ? And maybe a much simpler living out of faith based on Love ,and acceptance of all religions will come about. Won't it be interesting and exciting to watch and see !!

This discussion just goes on and on Anand - Look what you have started !!! Love and warm Blessings, Marilyn

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• …
• 6
• Next ›
• Page