That’s very nice, but you only accept proof on your terms, which basically means, you want to see it with your eyes. Our eyes are weak, even compared with other life forms, how can anything, purely spiritual, be seen with these eyes, we have to learn to understand with all our senses, hearing especially. We cannot even see air, so what chance is there of seeing spirit. But we can, if we train ourselves, hear the spirirtual essence, far more easily than seeing it. Its not impossible to see it, but one has to prepare themself. This is the essence of religion, as stated in all scripture.
Jan, one first has to believe/accept that one can “hear the spiritual essence.” Ever. At all. That there is a good reason for doing so; a good reason to make that journey. Apparently you believe it and think you’ve determined a correct way to understand and experience “it.” In the paragraph above however you dismiss other’s need for proof, narrowly define what constitutes proof, and then tell them what they
ought to be doing instead.
Experience has taught me, (for whatever it’s worth to you), that as long as you try to tell others what they should do while simultaneously dismissing what (may) be important to them, you are crippling the communication and undermining your own efforts. This takes us back to square one: Is it more important to you to achieve effective communication, or do you have something else in mind--like trying to sound like an authority that need not consider in-depth just what it is that others understand, want or need. It
sounds like you have a narrow view of the rest of the world.
If we all saw it the same way, and if “religion” had not caused so much grief for Mankind, then none of this would be an issue.
Real religion has nothing to do with material life as we know it. It is concerned, purley with the soul, the essence of the body.
That is an opinion shared by you and others. Assert it until the cows come home, but it doesn’t make it true for everyone. If you understand that, then great. For now it doesn’t appear that you put much stock in the importance of understanding this.
When we see Israel pounding Palestine, and Palestine flying into Israeli buildings, that is not religion, they say it is in the name of their particular strand of religion. But what they are doing, has nothing to do with pure religion. But God knows that there are these classes of men, especially at this time, so he acts to protect His devoted followers.
I could easily say that atheism is based on fascism and natzi-ism based on the fact that hitler did not believe in a supreme being, he saw himself as a possible candidate, which is IMO, is atheism at its very worst. But that would not be a true statement.
Such a statement about Atheism would be very offensive to many people of all persuasions. To suggest such and then to smooth it over doesn’t remove all doubt that you don’t think this
is true.
All the same, even though you don’t see violent aspects of the Middle East conflict(s) as being “religion,” the fact remains that there is a lot of “religion” involved in what goes on over there--and spills over onto the rest of the world. Religion as an institution, and religion as various religious sects wish to define it. Doesn’t make it any less connected to religion simply because you define the term “religion” in a different way. Tell me that what I see and understand or have even experienced isn’t true, and all you’ve done is dispute what I say. Nothing more. Tell the folks in Palestine and Israel that religion has nothing to do with it. Well, you can try to anyway.
For most of the world, these atrocious acts are seen as having been spawned from hatred that has resulted from a difference in views about religion and how one group of religionists or other would ultimately come out on top--in control--in power--in order to shape the world around them the way they (and their religion) has determined it should be shaped... and ruled. All of this is very much a part of “religion” in many people’s opinion. To deny it doesn’t make it any less true for others.
Further, the importance of the subject being taught is relative--as it will always be when a collection of “ideas” and supposed historical “facts” are what’s being taught and/or actively pushed onto a world’s population.
That is a secular way of looking at it, but it does not enlighten the student.
Its like a lot of parents from 25 years ago, vowed they are not going to bring there children up the way they were brought up, no strickness, give the child what it wants when it wants, no religion and no matter what my child is right. 20 years on and we are beginning to understand what chaos is really all about.
Secular? Perhaps. And a realistic view, imo. “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink.” Simple, albeit general, truth.
Strictness is also a term that is defined in various ways. And while it may be true that a generation of parents may have been inappropriately lax in raising their children, that has little to do with my point.
Perception, Jan. And there have been some believers who have been, in fact, quite disrespectful…
Quite disrespectful is a tad different, than some of the profanity which has been exhibited.
But if that’s how one feels, that’s fair enough, but why the….. “right then! seeing as you don't see it my way, its my ball and I’m taking it home, complex”……. Which is constantly displayed by certain posters.
This a poster board, isn't it? LOL.
Yes, it is. A public forum where people can post as or when they like. I certainly don’t feel obligated to post anything unless I want to. I don’t know which posters you’re referring to, but isn’t it possible that some just determine that it’s a waste of time to reply to all that’s being spewed by others? Some of us have better things to do with our time than to argue with people--many of which can’t/don’t stay on topic, or who have serious difficulty seeing anyone’s view but their own.
As for the exchanges between Counterbalance and Jan Ardena, I’ve said all that I care to. Much of what you’ve written in each of your post here, I’ve already replied to in my first post to you. I can’t think of a good reason to repeat myself. Doesn’t mean I’m upset or taking my ball and going home. It means I value my time and that at this point I’m happy to leave your understanding of my view up to you.
~~~
Peace,
Counterbalance
