Stuck (primarily for theists)

[wynn]

can one think of anything that one doesn't learn from people?


from recognizing the different political machinations pertinent to general categories of person : kannistha, madhyama and uttama.

I've been telling you that since day 1 when you first hinted at it.

Instead you insist you are not qualified to make such distinctions and have no option but to blindly follow whoever and whatever - which of course, is a plan for failure.

It is also you yourself who keeps telling me, more or less directly, that I am disqualified!

This is the basic problem with esp. theists: They tell people what to do, and then they list a hundred reasons why they are not qualified to do it.

How does that make sense?
How does it make sense to tell someone "Do such and such" and then explain to the person in length why they are unable or otherwise not in the position to do so?

 

[wynn]

This is to LG -

My perspective on things had better be prefaced by what it stems from:

One, I'm a solitary, eclectic witch with strong Buddhist leanings. Not really an uncommon thing under the Pagan umbrella.

Two, I used to be an anarcho-syndicalist.

Therefore...I find the idea of assuming that anyone else's understanding of deity is superior to one's own is a false idea...considering the nature of the apprehension of Spirit-something that CANNOT be expressed adequately in words-why on earth would you accept the authority of another in this matter? Seek the Source, and when, after spending some years looking, you find it,then you know.

...I think that it is far more important to quest internally for a personal, intimate connection with Spirit than it is to take the seductive path of accepting, whole-cloth, the answers of others...because the fact of the matter is (and drawing on the tao te ching here) the description is always going to fall far short of the reality.

...I believe that it is the act of questing for the personal connection that makes us better human beings; whether or not we seek what we find in some degree...and even if we do, there can always be better connection, more improvements to be made...if you're in a body you are not perfected. We're all mad around here, Alice.

...I embraced Paganism because of a moment of ecstacy I had. I cannot explain it. I can only tell you that I was impressed upon with the tremendous sacredness of Life.
...Buddhism I take on because it is wise, kind, and useful.

But don't take my word for it. Or anybody's. To paraphrase a Zen buddhist saying, all the holy books are just fingers pointing at the moon. Go see the moon, then you don't need the guy standing there with his finger pointing at it.

Go find your own damn truth.

If one were to take the approach as sketched out above
then one would also have to categorically avoid anything connected to your tradition, namely GV.
One would have to purge out of one's system all the premises that can be traced to GV.

 

[Sarkus]

Given that a person normally learns about God from people, this puts one at the mercy of those people.
...
How can a person inquire about God, without falling into the machinations of interpersonal politics?

from recognizing the different political machinations pertinent to general categories of person : kannistha, madhyama and uttama.

I've been telling you that since day 1 when you first hinted at it.

LG, perhaps the issue is that you really have been telling Signal (and people in general) what to do rather than listening to what Signal is actually after?

 

[chimpkin]

then one would also have to categorically avoid anything connected to your tradition, namely GV.
One would have to purge out of one's system all the premises that can be traced to GV.

I don't think so...I think what the deal is, is that you recognize that there's different approaches, equally valid-depending on the wiring of the person in question...but they are guidelines, not laws?
And there's nothing that says you have to follow a guidebook-or, conversely, forge your own trail, so to speak...If what other people have written, or have to say is helpful, you can use it...but you don't need it or them, and you certainly shouldn't worship it.

People are absolutely not the gatekeepers.


And you must reject the "wisdom" of others as more valid, if it conflicts with your deepest intuitions and spiritual impulses.
I guess you could say... throw the bathwater out, but if there's a baby in there, keep it?

Eventually, you have to step beyond the teachings and the practices... and get to the essence, which is indescribable.

Anybody have a problem with the above?

Someday I won't just have glimpses of what is, provided I keep dinking away at it.

 

[wynn]

I don't think so...I think what the deal is, is that you recognize that there's different approaches, equally valid-depending on the wiring of the person in question...but they are guidelines, not laws?
And there's nothing that says you have to follow a guidebook-or, conversely, forge your own trail, so to speak...If what other people have written, or have to say is helpful, you can use it...but you don't need it or them, and you certainly shouldn't worship it.

People are absolutely not the gatekeepers.


And you must reject the "wisdom" of others as more valid, if it conflicts with your deepest intuitions and spiritual impulses.
I guess you could say... throw the bathwater out, but if there's a baby in there, keep it?

Eventually, you have to step beyond the teachings and the practices... and get to the essence, which is indescribable.

Anybody have a problem with the above?

Someday I won't just have glimpses of what is, provided I keep dinking away at it.

That is all fine and well - unless one already has a horrid religious/spiritual experience that one wishes to recover from.

If I had the chance to do it all over again, I would go about it differently.

But I don't, I have an experience, a knowledge that I cannot undo, that trouble me, and at the same time don't know how to deal with.

 

[Lori_7]

That is all fine and well - unless one already has a horrid religious/spiritual experience that one wishes to recover from.

If I had the chance to do it all over again, I would go about it differently.

But I don't, I have an experience, a knowledge that I cannot undo, that trouble me, and at the same time don't know how to deal with.

wait a minute! please clarify. your experience was religious, or spiritual? from what i recall, i've only heard you speak of a horrid religious experience, not a spiritual one...

 

[wynn]

There isn't really a difference, if by "religion" we mean 'service to God', which is what I mean here.

 

[Lori_7]

There isn't really a difference, if by "religion" we mean 'service to God', which is what I mean here.

YES THERE IS A DIFFERENCE. and if you were to ever realize that, we could stop having this conversation.

 

[wynn]

There is a difference between "service to God" and "spirituality"?

 

[Rav]

That is all fine and well - unless one already has a horrid religious/spiritual experience that one wishes to recover from.

If I had the chance to do it all over again, I would go about it differently.

But I don't, I have an experience, a knowledge that I cannot undo, that trouble me, and at the same time don't know how to deal with.

Sounds to me like you were involved with a borderline cultish type Christian movement, such as those that like to micromanage the lives of their members and lay on a heavy gilt trip when you try to leave. I've known a couple of people who have experienced temporary psychological breakdowns as a result of such practices/pressures. Then again, I'm just taking a stab in the dark here.

I understand that some of those experiences may have been very personal and/or are things you just generally don't feel inclined to talk about, but I'd be curious to hear anything you might feel inclined to share.

 

[chimpkin]

difference between a design diagram of a desk lamp and an actual desk lamp.

Religion being the wiring diagram, connection with spirit being the desk lamp.

Sorry I think in metaphors. Poet's avocational hazard?

I have an experience, a knowledge that I cannot undo, that trouble me, and at the same time don't know how to deal with.

Yeah, I don't think any of us can unwrinkle this without specifics.

Going through my own completely different sort of suffering ATM...and my suggestion is to sit with your feelings of profound discomfort without trying to change them, dodge them ,escape them, do anything else but breathe and feel them. Just calmly feel them and breathe steadily.

I have taken this up, and you'd be surprised what this can accomplish.

It may feel like you're disemboweling yourself, depending on what you're trying to move through. Life can be like that.

:shrug:

On semi-awake reflection, it seems someone, somewhere, has drilled very firmly into your head a set of preconceived notions about the nature of deity,and that you MUST go through some person-ideally them-to get to deity.

If I am correct...then, welcome to the lovely world of having been programmed. If actual abuse, beyond mere verbal abuse was involved of any sort the programming was set much harder.
If you were under 12 when it occurred, the programming is set harder, as the brain's wiring is actually being crafted rapidly, and the neurons are more pliable.

If all that's off-base, I apologize. I've had a shitty night.

 

[wynn]

YES THERE IS A DIFFERENCE. and if you were to ever realize that, we could stop having this conversation.

Even if we are to go with your understanding of "religion" (ie. 'institution', 'organized religion'), it's still not clear how one can have spiritual experiences that are separated from religion, what to speak of making spiritual progress.

 

[Mind Over Matter]

* * *
DISCLAIMER:
This thread is meant primarily for theistic input.
Atheists are welcome to ask questions, provided those questions are not anti-theistic in nature.
* * *


Given that a person normally learns about God from people, this puts one at the mercy of those people.

The theistic discourse is embedded in psychological and social issues, thus effectively becoming a matter of interpersonal politics between the person who seeks God and the person who (presumably) knows God.

This political factor sets the scene for all kinds of abuse.


Is there a way to avoid it?

How can a person inquire about God, without falling into the machinations of interpersonal politics?

I can only speak for myself, but, in my experience, the following simple concept from scripture is true: “Seek and you shall find.” Somewhere in our seeking there must reside a nascent hope, a hope that an answer may just lie somewhere, an answer to a question we may not even be able to formulate completely, but the answer to the question of what this life is all about.

If there is no God, then I submit that no answers worth having are to be found. But I also submit that the answers do come when we earnestly seek, for no other reason than that there simply is a God who can -and desires to- answer them. Keep seeking-it doesn’t matter so much where we seek, but as we seek for truth we’re seeking our own integrity as well, because we’re also acknowledging, at least tacitly, that we’re not already whole-that we’re lost, after a fashion- that we don't already know.

God’s bigger than all religions and all attempts at describing Him, of course. I just happened-over time -to increasingly recognize the voice of truth-of the true Shepard-in the CC, where the clearest expression of Gods’ nature and will reside in her teachings, but not after straying very far and wide into other, mainly non-Christian religions. Just keep seeking-God will honor it, cuz He's there and that's what He wants us to do.

 

[Mind Over Matter]

OP:

MoM how and why do you think your posts are answering the question? All you're doing is espousing someone's view (either your own or the church's) of how things are.
IOW you're a perfect example of Signal's original point.
Listen to me, because my view is that I'm right.

I don't see any problem with responding to any posts from this thread. Besides, I responded to some posts of the thread creator. Please see post #53, my response to OP question.

 

[lightgigantic]

It is also you yourself who keeps telling me, more or less directly, that I am disqualified!

where?

 

[Lori_7]

There is a difference between "service to God" and "spirituality"?

i guess it depends on how you define spirituality...

Definition of SPIRITUALITY
1: something that in ecclesiastical law belongs to the church or to a cleric as such
2: clergy
3: sensitivity or attachment to religious values
4: the quality or state of being spiritual

which definition are you referring to?

Even if we are to go with your understanding of "religion" (ie. 'institution', 'organized religion'), it's still not clear how one can have spiritual experiences that are separated from religion, what to speak of making spiritual progress.

if you take religion as a whole, you could say that about any experience, not just spiritual ones. i suppose that the majority of religions would describe all experience as spiritual, whether you recognize that or not, because you are a spirit, and there are spirits, and we are spiritually influenced, again, whether you recognize that or not.

it all comes down to whether you're being led by the spirit or by men who tell you what to do. which one are you seeking, because you can't serve both. the spirit doesn't tell you what to do as men do. the spirit changes you from the inside out, through interaction. that's what i call spiritual experience. it leads you to repentence, not out of fear, not of approval seeking, but out of understanding through experience. therefore, you can not rely on others to give you this understanding. you can't really know something without experiencing it. you can know about it, but it doesn't even seem like you're paying attention to that.

can you remember jesus ever having anything good to say about the religious people of his time? ever patting the on the back and saying, "you're doing a great job?" no. never. all he ever did was criticize and correct them. when he said to them, "you are the teachers, and you don't know this?", i think this was probably his expression...

and that conversation (with nicodemus) was about the EXACT SAME THING i and others are trying to explain to you right now.

you know how, according to the bible, the spirit is supposed to accomplish a work in you. in my experience that work had much to do with the annihilation of my fear and ego. you can't repent if you're afraid of what other people will think of you, and you can't repent if you're ego is in the way. it seems like you're so afraid of being wrong that you're paralyzed. and the first thing god's going to show you, and continue to show you, is how wrong you are all the time, and you will have to learn to be ok with that, and you will when you realize that god loves you anyway, and you'll learn to love yourself anyway, and you'll learn to love others anyway, and it will change you and your life.

 

[Mind Over Matter]

But the problem is that an ignorant person per definition does not know where to look.

So why instruct them to go "to the right source", when they don't know what that is?

An ignorant person does not know whether the RCC is the right source or not.
So telling them to go to the RCC is useless.

Well, we're not going to get rid of our ignorance by standing still. The hope that I alluded to comes from a dim knowledge-a "measure of faith". We don't believe in or worship any Church-we're to believe in God- and the Church is merely the guide helping get us to Him. But whatever the voice we may be listening to at any point in time, it's our own internal measuring rod that must make the determination whether or not we're hearing the voice of truth-or a foreign one.

We, each of us, are "of God"-we're part of His being, made in His image, and so we're equipped already to know His voice. We're also equipped to remain in darkness, to reject that voice. Pope Benedict says that there is "a contradiction in our being"- that we easily fall into egoism and sin rather than pursue the good we know we should. But we're still the judge-we have to be-we have no choice, in fact. And just because the Church proposes something to be true doesn't make it true. From our own perspective we believe we're either navigating to the truth, to the Shepard's voice, and come to agree with it-or we don't-but either way we must remain honest-true to our own conscience.

St Augustine, to paraphrase, said that he didn't find God at first because he was looking on the outside for something which existed within. The Church's role is really only to lead us to the Father-to that something within. And every which way that we're willing to seek is another step closer to that end, IMO. I'm only saying that if we continue to look, aggressively so to speak, I believe we'll end up agreeing with the CC. And what's her central message? It's simply that our hope is not in vain after all. It's the message that God exists-God is!, God is love, and God, the foundation of the universe, has always desired that all live engulfed in this love-in an eternal happiness that only He can bring to realization in us. .

 

[Adstar]

Looking within, one runs into the danger of solipsism - solipsism is short of insanity.

Looking without, one runs into the danger of being swallowed by interpersonal politics.


So where should one look?

Well i guess i will go back to my original answer. Talk to God direct.

I have managed to avoid interpersonal politics because i have never trusted in any theist to be my guild in my faith to God. That’s not so say that other theists have not had effects upon me.

I do not belong to any denomination. I am a person who read the Bible, sought guidance from God and believed.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[Adstar]

I don't like looking at things that way.



Epistemology, even religious epistemology, doesn't simply reduce to power. Obviously interpersonal issues are going to intrude upon any sort of person-to-person discourse. But questions of 'who's on top' can't be allowed to obscure or replace the 'fact of the matter' issue. Ostensibly at least, that's what people are actually talking about.

I'm not a theist, nor am I "seeking God". But just in general, whenever I inquire about anything among other people, I consider myself an 'intellectual free-agent'. I always make my own decisions (I know of no way to avoid doing that). So intellectually, I treat other people as 'resource persons'. I decide whether or not particular individuals seem to know anythng that might be valuable to me. If I think that they can be helpful, I devote some time and effort reading/listening to what they say and then thinking carefully about it afterwards.

But I never give anyone a blank check. (I wouldn't give a blank check to Jesus Christ if he ever returns.)

I guess that I developed that approach in response to university professors. They may claim all kinds of intellectual authority and in many cases they deserve it. But whatever their intellectual authority, they are still just 'resource people' to me, people who can provide me with information that may or may not prove to be true, helpful or relevant. I still need to decide for myself what I think about what they say.

"Resource persons" I agree with your thoughts here.

When i talk to other people of faith i look upon them as being potential resource person. I have read many of their offerings but am always using the scriptures as a template testing them against the Word of God and seeking confirmation through the Holy Spirit.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[gmilam]

Even if we are to go with your understanding of "religion" (ie. 'institution', 'organized religion'), it's still not clear how one can have spiritual experiences that are separated from religion, what to speak of making spiritual progress.

My ex wife told me that I was the least "spiritual" person she ever met. I am firmly rooted in the materialist perspective. But even I have had "spiritual" experiences.

They typically take the form of "understanding". Feeling my connection to events that have been in process for thousands of years, in terms of human civilzation. Billions of years in terms of the universe in it's current form. Eternity in terms of, well... eternity.

These insights, these glimpses of eternity, can be accompanied by feelings of ecstacy, peace and well-being. I actually chalk the "feeling" up to a rush of endorphines (or some sort of neuro transmitter). But that doesn't make it any less real.