I think some times relligions separate us from God as they protect themselves against other relligions and by doing that they give an Ideia that there are particular ways to be connected to God and that if one tryes to do it in a different way one will not be saved! We should forget relligions and Just devote to God. And how??? EASY!!! just be constantly gratefull for what GOD (the UNIVERSAL BODY ,SPIRIT AND COUNSCIOUSNESS has given you.. give it the propper use and GOD will give you more. SPEAK to GOD and GiVE THANKS! Help each other and remember each other to evolve, thats why we are many and not just one! And face death as a removation of your spirit.. REmember everything will be toghether in the end as it was in the beggining, meanwhile, take the great ride! with consciousness!!
LOVE
That was indeed an instresting comment, my common sense is that God (if he is the loving god) not support our religions at all - since the most thinks that god has a need...
It's worth noting, perhaps, that there a lot of Christians who believe that being religious is bad, and that they should strive for spirituality instead...For what it's worth...
HM
I think that being relligious is not bad, I go to church many times but I try to find the essence of the beggining of that ritual and not follow the contemporary relligious way of any relligion. If you get to know some of them you will find that you could have invested your time in a better way by trying to knwow yourself as a fractal image of GOD that is the Universe and the Creator of all things
Just because: The issue is that religious people tend to worry about the rules/regs of the religion, and place a lot of importance on what was said in specific situations. Spiritual people worry more about being less worried about physical things, and try to be closer to God (or other appropriate deity).
And there's nothing wrong with either camp; I just dislike dealing with religious people when it comes to religious discussions...
HM
Have you heard about the new age? all new age separate you from God, The Masonery Too.
Remember when the relligions tell you that you have to find your own self your own good inside you they are wrong
There is a fairly recent field of study called memetics that considers culture as analogous to a biological population. A culture is made up of various ideas in the same way that a population is made up of various individuals (in the sense of biological entities). Each idea is made up of memes in the same way that an individual's biological makeup is done with genes. Ideas get transmitted from person to person and generation to generation in a way that is analogous to biological procreation, and ideas with the "best" memes get transmitted more for the same reasons that individuals with the "best" genes breed more. Ideas that have weak memes that do not allow them to be transmitted easily die off. It is a form evolution by natural selection applied to cultures and ideas.
Long story short: religions are units of culture; they are ideas. They are made up of a set of specific memes that are define them. These memes have evolved over the millennia to allow and encourage their own transmission in a very selfish way - just like genes have. In the same way that human genetic makeup predisposes us to certain characteristics - for example, males tend to be aggressive because aggression was a characteristic that allowed them to propagate their genes better - the memes of ideas like religion have evolved to allow ideas like religion to propagate.
For example, imagine two religions way back when. One religion has a meme that gives it the characteristic of promising divine salvation to believers. The other does not: it tells you that a god exists that wants you to do what it says, but it promises you nothing if you do. Which religion is going to propagate better (that is, which religion is going to encourage more followers)? Obviously the one that makes promises. Accordingly, you will find that virtually all modern religions promise some kind of long-term salvation.
If you analyze modern religions, you can see these parasitic patterns. Try it yourself. Look up a new or unfamiliar religion - or consider one that you already know - and put yourself in the shoes of someone who has never heard of it. Imagine coming across that religion for the first time, and try to identify the things about that religion that are part of the "sell" - the parts of that religion that are trying to get you to buy into that religion. Watch for things like promising you additional knowledge and/or benefits over non-believers, threats of immediate or long-term suffering if you don't buy into it, and so on - basically anything that makes the religion sound like it cannot be ignored and that you would need/want to accept it. Try it with multiple religions, and you will identify a set of memes that they share - things that those religions have in common that make them desirable to adopt (or rather, things that are trying to make them desirable to adopt).
Some memes - like the ones i've been describing so far - are akin to the genes in animals that make them appear more desirable to mates. For example, the peacock's plumes, or the woman's curves. Other memes... are more proactive. They are similar to the genes in animals that encourage aggression and territorial behaviours. The first group tries to spread the religion memes by making religion seem more attractive to potential hosts - the second group eliminates competing memes. You should be able to identify this set of memes, too, by watching out for the ways that religions attempt to disparage and/or destroy competing ideas.
But here's the important thing - none of this has anything to do with where the religion originally came from. Perhaps there really was a prophet or a guru or an interaction with a divine being that founded the religion way back when. However, as the religion was transmitted from person to person, and generation to generation, over time it evolved. The memes that were the most selfish - the ones that encourage the religion to spread the most - are the ones that became dominant. And the memes that discouraged the spread of the religion... got weeded out.
By this mechanism, what you know as a religion today has become little more than a virus - whose sole purpose is to spread itself. The original message of the religion may or may not even be present, but if it is, it has become subordinate to the memes that are designed to sell the religion to as many people as possible and crush any competing ideas.
Many religions share basic common beliefs, there was a creator and a creation, when you strip away the human control aspects of religion (or what you consider to be false) you are still left with this to ponder, for me this feeds curiosity and curiosity is a most valuable commodity
| albusa wrote: |
Have you heard about the new age? all new age separate you from God, The Masonery Too.
Remember when the relligions tell you that you have to find your own self your own good inside you they are wrong |
Um...no. Any religion should allow you to look inside yourself, and allow genuflection. You should be able to look at yourself honestly, and see your flaws as well as your abilities, and recognize that you are a functioning element of society with potential in some area.
By focusing on the rules of the religion, rather than its intent, you are essentially denying yourself that genuflection. By wrapping yourself up in all the rules you can, you can ignore your flaws, but to your detriment; you basically shield yourself from yourself.
Indi: I basically agree with what you said, except for two things. First, religion is hardly parasitic; that implies that religion is gain all of the advantages and the people using it gain nothing or actually pay a price. That's hardly the case. Generally, religion has helped to advance the culture that is part of it, and has provided shelter for people in rough times. It also helps to console the grief-stricken and helps to provide direction for the aimless. Yes, there has been a lot of abuse in the name of religion, but there has been the occasional reform to do deal with that. Even allowing for the legitimate issues, however, religion has more of a symbiotic relationship than parasitic, and tends to give far more than it takes.
Second, the base logic is flawed. If your logic about religion being the more salable the bigger the promises, then we would still be worshiping animal spirits. After all, God may be able to provide Heaven, but He rarely backs promises as often when it comes to health, wealth, and your enemies' heads. Your animal totems, however, did deliver on those promises (at least, more often), and promised Heaven besides, and the totem was more of a hands-on character to boot, with a personal touch to boot. In essence, when it comes down to it, what does organized religion offer that a personal totem doesn't?
[And beating to the punch, I hope: Societies tend to organize in bigger groups, and religion aids in that organization. Also, it is more able to deal with more temporal matters (such as defense and health, as well as charity), and gives a steadying influence as well as something to break through inertia (most civil rights have been, at least partially, thanks to religion, at least in Western society). So, yes, there is some advantage to organized religion. But how is that better than a personal deity that you can count on and go to for advice?]
HMREligion is only good until it doesn't try to unify the people's rellation with God. It has all the benefits that herecticmonkey and Indi point though. The society is improved by todays religion but only to a certain point because the evollution of society to higher levels is only possible with a more individual and more personal relation with GOD focused in the mental and spiritual evollution of oneself. Only with strong, focused and counscious individuals can be created a more evolved society. So the important thing to retain, I think, is that religion serves to aknowledge a common condition, the mortal human condition(wich may be done differently in different cultures) but it fails when it castrates the developing of more personal, intimante and therefore more responsible attitudes towards the evollution of the individual self wich will bring more benefits into society than a less evolved and more normalized(by particular religious beliefs and rituals) one.
Religion should encourage the people to feel GOD more other than pray standard prayers
| heartbeat wrote: |
REligion is only good until it doesn't try to unify the people's rellation with God. It has all the benefits that herecticmonkey and Indi point though. The society is improved by todays religion but only to a certain point because the evollution of society to higher levels is only possible with a more individual and more personal relation with GOD focused in the mental and spiritual evollution of oneself. Only with strong, focused and counscious individuals can be created a more evolved society. So the important thing to retain, I think, is that religion serves to aknowledge a common condition, the mortal human condition(wich may be done differently in different cultures) but it fails when it castrates the developing of more personal, intimante and therefore more responsible attitudes towards the evollution of the individual self wich will bring more benefits into society than a less evolved and more normalized(by particular religious beliefs and rituals) one.
Religion should encourage the people to feel GOD more other than pray standard prayers |
What? What benefits did i point out? How does "todays religion" improve society? How does a self-centered, personal relationship with any deity better society... wouldn't society be better off if people ignored the gods and focused on their relationship with each other... ie, their relationship with society? How do "strong, focused and counscious individuals" - for example, dictators, who are quite strong, focused and conscious for at least ⅔ of the day - create a more evolved society? How exactly does religion serve to "aknowledge a common condition", when the core of virtually every religion is to point out that members of the religion do not share the same condition as non-members (for example, members of the religion may (believe themselves to) be saved from postmortem punishment when non-members are not, or they may believe they have a deeper understanding of the universe than non-believers (which is something you're actually describing, oddly enough))? When you're talking about society evolving toward a "normalized" belief system... isn't that exactly the same thing as saying that you think society should evolve toward everyone having the same belief system... ie, yours?You got my point all wrong. please read it again and if you still really think I meant what you say I will explain why you should be more focused when reading, and not extrapolating completely ilogical meanings like when you thought that dictators were a good example of strong, focused and counscious individuals.
| heartbeat wrote: |
| You got my point all wrong. please read it again and if you still really think I meant what you say I will explain why you should be more focused when reading, and not extrapolating completely ilogical meanings like when you thought that dictators were a good example of strong, focused and counscious individuals. |
Oh, i read your argument. i just repeated it back to you, point by point, with one or two specific examples as additions. If you don't like it, perhaps you should consider your words more carefully.
For example, are not dictators strong and focused? Seems to me you have to be pretty damn strong and focused to run a dictatorship. In fact, a lot of times, you will hear dictators described as almost single-minded in their focus and determination. So it seems perfectly logical to me to call dictators strong and focused individuals. So either explain to me how dictators are not strong and focused, or explain to me how dictators can create a more evolved society. | HereticMonkey wrote: |
I just dislike dealing with religious people when it comes to religious discussions...
HM |
Yea, some of us can be a real pain. lol | Indi wrote: |
| heartbeat wrote: | REligion is only good until it doesn't try to unify the people's rellation with God. It has all the benefits that herecticmonkey and Indi point though. The society is improved by todays religion but only to a certain point because the evollution of society to higher levels is only possible with a more individual and more personal relation with GOD focused in the mental and spiritual evollution of oneself. Only with strong, focused and counscious individuals can be created a more evolved society. So the important thing to retain, I think, is that religion serves to aknowledge a common condition, the mortal human condition(wich may be done differently in different cultures) but it fails when it castrates the developing of more personal, intimante and therefore more responsible attitudes towards the evollution of the individual self wich will bring more benefits into society than a less evolved and more normalized(by particular religious beliefs and rituals) one.
Religion should encourage the people to feel GOD more other than pray standard prayers |
What? What benefits did i point out? How does "todays religion" improve society? How does a self-centered, personal relationship with any deity better society... wouldn't society be better off if people ignored the gods and focused on their relationship with each other... ie, their relationship with society? How do "strong, focused and counscious individuals" - for example, dictators, who are quite strong, focused and conscious for at least ⅔ of the day - create a more evolved society? How exactly does religion serve to "aknowledge a common condition", when the core of virtually every religion is to point out that members of the religion do not share the same condition as non-members (for example, members of the religion may (believe themselves to) be saved from postmortem punishment when non-members are not, or they may believe they have a deeper understanding of the universe than non-believers (which is something you're actually describing, oddly enough))? When you're talking about society evolving toward a "normalized" belief system... isn't that exactly the same thing as saying that you think society should evolve toward everyone having the same belief system... ie, yours? |
That's the thing though, people should be more willing to inprove their relationship with others as well as God. My opinion, God doesn't want us to stand on the sidelines when we see people in need of help, even if all it is is a simple hello. Do I want a personal relationship with God? You bet. But I should also want that relationship to shine through to other people by how I treat them. When people see how I act and react, it should show God working through me. Do I feel that way in the hopes of getting something out of it? No. Do not praise me because I'm doing what I should be doing. Praise God for giving me the courage or knowledge or whatever to do it. God should always get all the praise.
