Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Jodie.Lynne

The superiority of one's beliefs

311 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Habitat
10 hours ago, danydandan said:

Care to elaborate?

It is simple enough, especially in the instance of JC, who redundantly spoke of being acquainted with his "father", in "heaven". The way that "meeting" comes about, he says, is by a radical change into a state like that of helpless babies, unknowing, guileless, devoid of worldliness. It really is amazing how so few "Christians" dwell on that seemingly strange, but oft-repeated advice. It seems like a crazy idea, to those who are "lodged in the world". And it is certainly a very risky detour to take. But it seems perfectly reasonable to me, that to meet the Absolute, one must give absolute, singular attention to the task. That means a complete withdrawal from "the world", and whatever mental accretions of it you have acquired, and with no thought of what may lay ahead. This is the test that must be passed, and the pull of "the world", is for all but the very few, too strong, for this meeting to occur. If the world or any of its contents can distract you from God, you are like the suitor who vows everlasting love for the object of his affections, but can have his head turned by another. All division must go, to be united with God.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
joc
10 minutes ago, Habitat said:

It is simple enough, especially in the instance of JC, who redundantly spoke of being acquainted with his "father", in "heaven". The way that "meeting" comes about, he says, is by a radical change into a state like that of helpless babies, unknowing, guileless, devoid of worldliness. It really is amazing how so few "Christians" dwell on that seemingly strange, but oft-repeated advice. It seems like a crazy idea, to those who are "lodged in the world". And it is certainly a very risky detour to take. But it seems perfectly reasonable to me, that to meet the Absolute, one must give absolute, singular attention to the task. That means a complete withdrawal from "the world", and whatever mental accretions of it you have acquired, and with no thought of what may lay ahead. This is the test that must be passed, and the pull of "the world", is for all but the very few, too strong, for this meeting to occur. If the world or any of its contents can distract you from God, you are like the suitor who vows everlasting love for the object of his affections, but can have his head turned by another. All division must go, to be united with God.

And have you yourself made this transition?

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
49 minutes ago, joc said:

And have you yourself made this transition?

No. I am well aware of it, at times I have felt called, sometimes strongly, but like the great majority, the "world" has exerted too strong of a grip. This is the most un-dilettante like thing imaginable. It is the ultimate participation "activity", yet it only proceeds by inactivity, and passivity. You do "nothing". Doing nothing is harder than we imagine, and especially with the workings of the mind. One can come to sense that we are not the "driver", but the passenger, or else we could just pull over to the kerb and meet God. This a work of subtraction, not one of addition, it does not rely on cleverness, but a lack of our habitual contrivances. Or at least, the ability to put them in their place, which surely must be, subservient to God. Given the choice to do God's will, or our own will, we will almost always choose that which is known and familiar to us, our own will. One must become convinced, that the highest good, is not in the ephemeral things of what we know, the world, and that in the act of recognizing that, consummation of the "meeting", will be automatic. Or so we hear, from innumerable sages and luminaries. They have led the "horse" (the great mass of humanity ) to water, but they can't make it drink. Really, the thirst has to be such that it overwhelms all fear of the consequences of "letting go".

Edited by Habitat
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
joc
18 minutes ago, Habitat said:

No. 

Then what are you even carrying on about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
Just now, joc said:

Then what are you even carrying on about?

I think it is important that people understand the true core of what has been passed down from those few "teachers". If you cannot see the sense in what I am saying, it is only because you are very far from what is, at bottom, Truth.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
joc
1 hour ago, Habitat said:

I think it is important that people understand the true core of what has been passed down from those few "teachers". If you cannot see the sense in what I am saying, it is only because you are very far from what is, at bottom, Truth.

What is the sense in what you are saying if even you, who understand it so completely, are unable to acquiesce such wisdom?  It then becomes a moot point does it not?

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
1 hour ago, joc said:

What is the sense in what you are saying if even you, who understand it so completely, are unable to acquiesce such wisdom?  It then becomes a moot point does it not?

I think it takes a very unusual person to carry this to fruition. I am not that sure that even the exemplars of it, understood that. I  doubt that even the direct presence of the adept, can induce it in others, unless they are of the required aptitude. But, we can assume it is at least a potentiality in everyone, just a matter of to what degree. I suspect far more who never encountered JC, were inspired by the same interpretation of his words I have made, and carried it through. Were the disciples true followers, as in imitation, or just thralls following like a dog trots along behind its master ? More likely the latter. Understanding what really underlies this phenomenon, relieves one of wanting to be involved in formal, organized religion, which can be seen as a safe substitute for the real thing, but in the end, just a pallid, vicarious experience, by comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Debra F. II
20 hours ago, danydandan said:

But you still have not detailed what you found out about yourself, you glossed over it. 

What have you learned about yourself through all you your studying? 

May I also ask how in-depth do you go before moving on to the next one?

What I've learned about myself through it all, that is a LONG drawn out list that I'm still adding to, (to most, probably would find boring and just give leverage for others to be negative toward me and my beliefs for).

I'm not avoiding the question and I will give it some thoughts of where I'd even begin to answer...

Also if I were to answer here on this forum it might be getting off the subject and I wouldn't want to offend or upset anyone by doing that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Debra F. II
20 hours ago, danydandan said:

May I also ask how in-depth do you go before moving on to the next one?

Pretty deep, I've spent 8 yrs on one, three years on another,  2 years on the study of a different belief...

Some I can work through pretty quickly if I cant put it down, then again if I have to cross reference or work out areas of differences it can take longer. Others take longer just because I disagree with and struggle to get through it. Some things are I find so shocking I have to take time to process it before I can go on with it.

I try to research from the history and at the beginning (especially on some of the newer religions out there today) and up to the present, looking into how they've actually evolved. (But I also have a couple that I keep a close eye on and go back to often.)

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
6 minutes ago, Debra F. II said:

Pretty deep, I've spent 8 yrs on one, three years on another,  2 years on the study of a different belief...

Some I can work through pretty quickly if I cant put it down, then again if I have to cross reference or work out areas of differences it can take longer. Others take longer just because I disagree with and struggle to get through it. Some things are I find so shocking I have to take time to process it before I can go on with it.

I try to research from the history and at the beginning (especially on some of the newer religions out there today) and up to the present, looking into how they've actually evolved. (But I also have a couple that I keep a close eye on and go back to often.)

And do you think this is essentially a complex matter, or a simple one ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
On 12/29/2019 at 4:37 AM, danydandan said:

Thanks for that, not to be dismissive, but I was hoping to be reading a very detailed post about what you learned about yourself....that's the most important aspect of learning or studying. This isn't necessarily a judgement of you, as I don't know you for Adam, but from my experience people who tend to be looking for something by jumping around different beliefs forget about themselves and only really interested in self validation. As in once they find what they are looking for, go no further or search farther.

I never asked you, do you have a consistent religious preference?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
2 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

I never asked you, do you have a consistent religious preference?

Does it matter?

3 hours ago, Debra F. II said:

What I've learned about myself through it all, that is a LONG drawn out list that I'm still adding to, (to most, probably would find boring and just give leverage for others to be negative toward me and my beliefs for).

I'm not avoiding the question and I will give it some thoughts of where I'd even begin to answer...

Also if I were to answer here on this forum it might be getting off the subject and I wouldn't want to offend or upset anyone by doing that.

Discussions meander and evolve, a single sentence should really be all that's needed. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
joc
9 hours ago, Habitat said:

Understanding what really underlies this phenomenon, relieves one of wanting to be involved in formal, organized religion,

Okay, so basically...you've figured it all out but can't implement what you figured out because very few, if any can actually implement the understanding that you have...even possibly those who were the actual Masters of what it is you think you understand so well but cannot implement.  But understanding it gives you an out for being involved in organized religion.

Just making sure I wasn't missing something somewhere. :whistle:

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
6 hours ago, danydandan said:

Does it matter?

Discussions meander and evolve, a single sentence should really be all that's needed. 

I suppose it does if I asked you that question, if you choose not to answer that's  perfectly ok.

Peace

Edited by Manwon Lender
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
21 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

I suppose it does if I asked you that question, if you choose not to answer that's  perfectly ok.

Peace

Why does it matter, what bearing does it have on what we are discussing?

If you truly want to know PM me. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
9 hours ago, joc said:

Okay, so basically...you've figured it all out but can't implement what you figured out because very few, if any can actually implement the understanding that you have...even possibly those who were the actual Masters of what it is you think you understand so well but cannot implement.  But understanding it gives you an out for being involved in organized religion.

Just making sure I wasn't missing something somewhere. :whistle:

I think that "understanding" what these religious figureheads were banging on about, does  mean you can't be interested in the rituals of organized religion. It is like the difference between  reading a romance novel, and being involved in the romance of a lifetime.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Debra F. II
7 hours ago, danydandan said:

Why does it matter, what bearing does it have on what we are discussing?

If you truly want to know PM me. 

Well then in that case I'd have to say... back at cha' bro ; ) 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
joc
49 minutes ago, Habitat said:

I think that "understanding" what these religious figureheads were banging on about, does  mean you can't be interested in the rituals of organized religion. It is like the difference between  reading a romance novel, and being involved in the romance of a lifetime.

I wouldn't know...I have never read a romance novel.  Who does that?  I mean, except of course, you do...

Oh wait...I get what you are saying now!  You are drawing a parallel between understanding what a real romance is  by only reading romance novels...as compared to actually having a romance.

So what you are saying is that you have read the Romance Novel of the Ages....but have never fallen in love.   Okay...good point...I think...:unsure2:

.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
4 minutes ago, joc said:

I wouldn't know...I have never read a romance novel.  Who does that?  I mean, except of course, you do...

Oh wait...I get what you are saying now!  You are drawing a parallel between understanding what a real romance is  by only reading romance novels...as compared to actually having a romance.

So what you are saying is that you have read the Romance Novel of the Ages....but have never fallen in love.   Okay...good point...I think...:unsure2:

.

No joc, I don't read romance novels, but the analogy still has some useful application. I guess reading romance novels does do away with the "risk" of actual engagement with a real person, and reading the "novel" of a sacred religious text, as a substitute for the "living" God, has the virtue of safety, but is not the "real thing", just a representation of it, and is certainly not a satisfying one for those willing and capable of actual engagement.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
joc
15 hours ago, Habitat said:

No joc, I don't read romance novels, but the analogy still has some useful application. I guess reading romance novels does do away with the "risk" of actual engagement with a real person, and reading the "novel" of a sacred religious text, as a substitute for the "living" God, has the virtue of safety, but is not the "real thing", just a representation of it, and is certainly not a satisfying one for those willing and capable of actual engagement.

Are you  willing and capable of actual engagement?

  •  
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 12/29/2019 at 7:32 PM, danydandan said:

Are you bragging about something my three and two year old do like second nature?

Actually I was excusing my poor  typing skills

I grew up without computers or keyboards

There were typewriters but these were generally only used by certain types of people You had to spend some years learning to type quickly and accurately I think it took my wife several years a t school and then a few years at  work to be proficient in both typing and shorthand. 

I had to teach myself, aged in,my 40s or so.

I still can't touch type without looking at the key board ,but i can type very fast while looking at the keyboard.

However this means i have to go back every now and then to check what has appeared on the screen, and correct it  This is a bit different to a type writer where you could look at the keys and the paper at the same time.

  I  can type at a professional speed  (a bit over 75 words per minute) but then i have to spend some time going back and correcting errors. eg it took me about 2 minutes  to type this piece but  several minutes to proof read and correct it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 12/30/2019 at 3:31 AM, Sherapy said:

Certainly, Good Will has keyboards, if not they don’t cost that much on a amazon, or buy yourself a good computer Apple gives teachers discounts. 
 

And for goodness sake take a typing class, they are on YouTube for free. :P

lol See above

I can type at 75 words per minute 

However i've never bothered to memorise the location of all the keys on a board enough to use them instantly and accurately,  although I CAN recite them accurately from memory eg  qwerty poiuy asdfgh ;lkj  and so on.  While learning to use computers i both used and taught the computer programmes designed to allow children to learn to type  Its interesting back then kids were amused for hours just using the game type learning tools designed to teach touch typing. they were about the most fun a computer had to offer in a school.

  I was lucky to be able to book a couple of lessons a week in the school computing room which was very much in demand No one had hand held computers, and there weren't even any in class rooms  

Thus, i would be much slower trying to touch type accurately, for a long time, until i could instantly locate and use every key accurately every time 

I will not buy a new computer until the old one breaks down, despite getting family rates from my brother in law who owns a computing shop. It would be wasteful of resources.

However, you have a point about a second hand  keyboard . i will check that out  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 12/30/2019 at 4:50 AM, Sherapy said:

 

Profantiy in Literature is not used due to laziness or lack of a better word, but due to the “bad” word is the best choice for the intended purpose/point. 

 

Books such as Catcher in the Rye; The Great Gatsby; To Kill a Mockingbird; Of Mice and Men etc. etc.
 

There are also literary devices such as: invective, innuendo, for ex: used in Shakespeare’s, King Lear and Gulliver’s Travel (Jonathon Swift).

 

“I cannot but conclude the bulk of your natives to be the most pernicious race of little odious vermin that nature ever suffered to crawl upon the surface of the earth.”

these are devices uses to convey deep bitter or negative feelings about certain topics and around here get reported and are often the result of getting banned or threads closed on UM.

We all have used invective ( some use it lightly, some use it strongly ) and many use innuendo, and most of all so do you, 

This is not a judgment or having a go at you, because we all have posts using these devices, but my question for you since you hold yourself as so beyond role reversal and so much so you are impelled to lecture about it, help me understand how are you not presenting a false image and where you aren’t invective, when you are invective are you being lazy too?

I have not seen many posts where you aren’t invective. 
 

“Something’s  rotten in Denmark” 
 

lol dont try and teach your grandmother to suck eggs.

Indeed words can be used for effect 

However there are correct places for the use of all words and incorrect places for their use.

My point was that i had been so educated not to use swear words (especially in public)  that i couldn't do so even in a role playing exercise 

I was of two minds about  that, but in the end decided it was a good thing. Swearing and not swearing can both become habitualised  and i know which habrt i would prefer  Invective? I haven't got an invective bone in my body:)  This is your own nature playing out in your perception of others 

 

Invective
noun
 
  1. insulting, abusive, or highly critical language.
     

    invective

     noun

     

    in·vec·tive | \ in-ˈvek-tiv  \

    Definition of invective

     (Entry 1 of 2)

    1: insulting or abusive language : VITUPERATION

    2: an abusive expression or speech

    invective

     adjective

    Definition of invective (Entry 2 of 2)

    : of, relating to, or characterized by insult or abuse

     
    Well yep, I can be highly critical, especially where the criticism is well deserved and constructive.
    But if I am insulting it is to make a point or respond to an insult, and I am never abusive  (even if others perceive that i am. I never have an intent to abuse and i can only be responsible for my intent, not other's perceptions  
     
    Ps i dont play word games either. I say what i mean, and i mean what i say. Unlike some who hide or camouflage their true feelings with clever use of words. 
Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 12/31/2019 at 11:05 AM, Habitat said:

No joc, I don't read romance novels, but the analogy still has some useful application. I guess reading romance novels does do away with the "risk" of actual engagement with a real person, and reading the "novel" of a sacred religious text, as a substitute for the "living" God, has the virtue of safety, but is not the "real thing", just a representation of it, and is certainly not a satisfying one for those willing and capable of actual engagement.

Aren't all novels, a t least in part,  a form of romance novel  ?  Life itself is a form of romance (both the  romantic love  kind and the idealised symbolic idea of romance eg the romance of the bush or the romance of the sea. 

Jack Reacher is a romanticised ideal of a certain kind of man; the lone wolf epitomised 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
38 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

lol dont try and teach your grandmother to suck eggs.

Indeed words can be used for effect 

However there are correct places for the use of all words and incorrect places for their use.

My point was that i had been so educated not to use swear words (especially in public)  that i couldn't do so even in a role playing exercise 

I was of two minds about  that, but in the end decided it was a good thing. Swearing and not swearing can both become habitualised  and i know which habrt i would prefer  Invective? I haven't got an invective bone in my body:)  This is your own nature playing out in your perception of others 

 

Invective
noun
 
  1. insulting, abusive, or highly critical language.
     

    invective

     noun

     

    in·vec·tive | \ in-ˈvek-tiv  \

    Definition of invective

     (Entry 1 of 2)

    1: insulting or abusive language : VITUPERATION

    2: an abusive expression or speech

    invective

     adjective

    Definition of invective (Entry 2 of 2)

    : of, relating to, or characterized by insult or abuse

     
    Well yep, I can be highly critical, especially where the criticism is well deserved and constructive.
    But if I am insulting it is to make a point or respond to an insult, and I am never abusive  (even if others perceive that i am. I never have an intent to abuse and i can only be responsible for my intent, not other's perceptions  
     
    Ps i dont play word games either. I say what i mean, and i mean what i say. Unlike some who hide or camouflage their true feelings with clever use of words. 

 

38 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

lol dont try and teach your grandmother to suck eggs.

Indeed words can be used for effect 

However there are correct places for the use of all words and incorrect places for their use.

My point was that i had been so educated not to use swear words (especially in public)  that i couldn't do so even in a role playing exercise 

I was of two minds about  that, but in the end decided it was a good thing. Swearing and not swearing can both become habitualised  and i know which habrt i would prefer  Invective? I haven't got an invective bone in my body:)  This is your own nature playing out in your perception of others 

 

Invective
noun
 
  1. insulting, abusive, or highly critical language.
     

    invective

     noun

     

    in·vec·tive | \ in-ˈvek-tiv  \

    Definition of invective

     (Entry 1 of 2)

    1: insulting or abusive language : VITUPERATION

    2: an abusive expression or speech

    invective

     adjective

    Definition of invective (Entry 2 of 2)

    : of, relating to, or characterized by insult or abuse

     
    Well yep, I can be highly critical, especially where the criticism is well deserved and constructive.
    But if I am insulting it is to make a point or respond to an insult, and I am never abusive  (even if others perceive that i am. I never have an intent to abuse and i can only be responsible for my intent, not other's perceptions  
     
    Ps i dont play word games either. I say what i mean, and i mean what i say. Unlike some who hide or camouflage their true feelings with clever use of words. 

Ha ha ha ha ha You are not above human nature your just like the rest of us. 

 

Edited by Sherapy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.