I doubt Canute was arguing for Christianity; more for rationality. As an apparent non-christian Canute is the most rational and therefore unbiased personality I've seen on this forum, maybe also Raithere. I always have to stop to read his/her/their posts.
Why do people believe in God? - results
- Thread starter James R
- Start date
Re: Against God?
Addictions do not discourage or encourage self-respect in general, it all depends on the addiction and how you deal with it.
Not getting shirty but please don't make assumptions about what I've been taught. It's rather patronising.
Btw I'm not just God on Earth, I'm God forever.
Canute
My point was that religion cannot be dismissed as you did by calling it an addiction. Even if it was an addiction that would not affect it's truth or its value. Of course food addiction is healthy, we die without it.
I don't know what a 'Xian' is I'm afraid, nor what you mean by 'deny the self'. I'm a 'self' and proud of it.
Addictions do not discourage or encourage self-respect in general, it all depends on the addiction and how you deal with it.
Not getting shirty but please don't make assumptions about what I've been taught. It's rather patronising.
This seems a little contradictory, to put it mildly. I have always assumed that believing in God makes you a religious believer. Are you addicted to this view?
Btw I'm not just God on Earth, I'm God forever.
Canute
Re: Re: Against God?
Thanks for your reply, Canute. I'll try and clarify your questions. I didn't intend nor believe that I was "dismissing" religion by calling it an addiction. That would be to say I am "downplaying" religion, which I am not. Religion is all too important for its believers. Sometimes, to the point of oblivion of reality. I've known too man Xians who were showed the criteria of an addiction. As far as affecting its truth or its value, when one is addicted, they are in denial, so cannot rationalize or think for themselves. Just a comment about food addiction. Yes, we do need to eat. We need to eat healthy for life. The kind of food addiction I mentioned is like eating a half dozen donuts on a regular basis or having to have a Snickers everyday. If we use food for anything other than nourishment, we're probably addicted to something. This is off the subject, but high glycemic foods (potatoes, rice, pasta, bread, etc.) are very high in glycemics and are very addicting carbohydrates. However, this particular addiction is easy to overcome. After one week or so, the craving for these foods will be gone. Like any addiction, if you eat a piece of bread, for example, you'll crave more. That can also be applied to religious addicts. They crave the church. They crave the sermon. They crave the fantasy. They crave the fellowship. They crave the idea of everlasting life. They cannot see beyond this addiction. How can that be healthy? It's a hallucinogen.
I've explain the word "Xian" many times, but I will again for you. "Xian" means Christian. It's pronounced "Christian." "X" is the symbol for Christ as established by the RCC. It is in no way offensive nor intended to be. It's an abbreviation like "xmas." The "X" resembles the Cross of St. Andrew. It's the style of crucifix that Peter was crucified upside on. In fact, the "X" is the more common version of the crucifix. Many writers today are spelling Christian with an "X". It seems to be a popular thing. I'm seeing more books on Christianity published using "Xian." It's also well-publiziced on the web.
I don't recall saying "deny the self." This is opposed to what I believe. I heartily agree with you that I am my "self", and I am proud of it, too. God gave this "self" to us. The "self" includes the most important thing (not ego) but the soul. I'm glad that you are proud of your self. I wish everyone was!
As I see it, an addiction is an addiction. It is the denial of "self." Sure, there are other addictions that ruin your health (drinking, drugs, sex, food...etc.), but all addictions have the root criteria. Some are easier than others to give up. Until a person can let go of his addiction, and retain control of the "self," he is in denial that he has a problem. A religious addiction is hard to let go of because it is a psychological addiction instead of a physical addiction. This kind of psychological addiction dismisses the "self."
Okay, if I did, I apologize. There is no way I could know what you've been taught, but since you're a Xian, I assumed to know what you'd been taught. Perhaps you don't fall into the religiously addicted category.
Believing in God is not a religion per se. It's a belief. To believe in God, one does not need a church, a priest, pastor or vicar. One does not necessarily need fellowship, but this is not necessarily a problem. Most of the human race believes in a higher power they think of as "God." In fact, the name "God" doesn't need to be used. It depends on the believer. I personally don't like the name "God." This name has a visual connotation that I find unacceptable to my beliefs. This "God" is more like an entity. I see "God" as a pure force of positive energy with no name. I use the term "God" to identify what most other believers call it (not HIM!). I don't like the gender bias of a male god. God is neither male nor female. The kingdom of God equally resides males AND females without gender bias.
I refer to a religious addiction as going to church, fellowship with like believers, going through the motions of an ORGANIZED religion. I don't consider myself addicted to a belief, because I am always seeking the truth whatever that may be. I can say here that if I come close to some kind of "addiction," it would be to spread the truth about Xianity. I know that it is something I HAVE to do.
I really like this statement. You are so right! I couldn't have said it better! We ARE God FOREVER! We are the One Spirit of God FOREVER! We carry the One Spirit of God around with us for 70-75 years, but that's just a speck in eternity. We are God forever! What a beautiful thought. Thank you!
Thanks for your reply, Canute. I'll try and clarify your questions. I didn't intend nor believe that I was "dismissing" religion by calling it an addiction. That would be to say I am "downplaying" religion, which I am not. Religion is all too important for its believers. Sometimes, to the point of oblivion of reality. I've known too man Xians who were showed the criteria of an addiction. As far as affecting its truth or its value, when one is addicted, they are in denial, so cannot rationalize or think for themselves. Just a comment about food addiction. Yes, we do need to eat. We need to eat healthy for life. The kind of food addiction I mentioned is like eating a half dozen donuts on a regular basis or having to have a Snickers everyday. If we use food for anything other than nourishment, we're probably addicted to something. This is off the subject, but high glycemic foods (potatoes, rice, pasta, bread, etc.) are very high in glycemics and are very addicting carbohydrates. However, this particular addiction is easy to overcome. After one week or so, the craving for these foods will be gone. Like any addiction, if you eat a piece of bread, for example, you'll crave more. That can also be applied to religious addicts. They crave the church. They crave the sermon. They crave the fantasy. They crave the fellowship. They crave the idea of everlasting life. They cannot see beyond this addiction. How can that be healthy? It's a hallucinogen.
I've explain the word "Xian" many times, but I will again for you. "Xian" means Christian. It's pronounced "Christian." "X" is the symbol for Christ as established by the RCC. It is in no way offensive nor intended to be. It's an abbreviation like "xmas." The "X" resembles the Cross of St. Andrew. It's the style of crucifix that Peter was crucified upside on. In fact, the "X" is the more common version of the crucifix. Many writers today are spelling Christian with an "X". It seems to be a popular thing. I'm seeing more books on Christianity published using "Xian." It's also well-publiziced on the web.
I don't recall saying "deny the self." This is opposed to what I believe. I heartily agree with you that I am my "self", and I am proud of it, too. God gave this "self" to us. The "self" includes the most important thing (not ego) but the soul. I'm glad that you are proud of your self. I wish everyone was!
As I see it, an addiction is an addiction. It is the denial of "self." Sure, there are other addictions that ruin your health (drinking, drugs, sex, food...etc.), but all addictions have the root criteria. Some are easier than others to give up. Until a person can let go of his addiction, and retain control of the "self," he is in denial that he has a problem. A religious addiction is hard to let go of because it is a psychological addiction instead of a physical addiction. This kind of psychological addiction dismisses the "self."
Okay, if I did, I apologize. There is no way I could know what you've been taught, but since you're a Xian, I assumed to know what you'd been taught. Perhaps you don't fall into the religiously addicted category.
Believing in God is not a religion per se. It's a belief. To believe in God, one does not need a church, a priest, pastor or vicar. One does not necessarily need fellowship, but this is not necessarily a problem. Most of the human race believes in a higher power they think of as "God." In fact, the name "God" doesn't need to be used. It depends on the believer. I personally don't like the name "God." This name has a visual connotation that I find unacceptable to my beliefs. This "God" is more like an entity. I see "God" as a pure force of positive energy with no name. I use the term "God" to identify what most other believers call it (not HIM!). I don't like the gender bias of a male god. God is neither male nor female. The kingdom of God equally resides males AND females without gender bias.
I refer to a religious addiction as going to church, fellowship with like believers, going through the motions of an ORGANIZED religion. I don't consider myself addicted to a belief, because I am always seeking the truth whatever that may be. I can say here that if I come close to some kind of "addiction," it would be to spread the truth about Xianity. I know that it is something I HAVE to do.
Btw I'm not just God on Earth, I'm God forever.
I really like this statement. You are so right! I couldn't have said it better! We ARE God FOREVER! We are the One Spirit of God FOREVER! We carry the One Spirit of God around with us for 70-75 years, but that's just a speck in eternity. We are God forever! What a beautiful thought. Thank you!
Re: Re: Re: Against God?
It is debatable whether it is possible to live a happy life without a 'spiritual' dimension to it. Are happy people addicted to happiness? Perhaps, but life itself is predicated on being addicted to things. I suspect that many people follow their religion because they believe their religion is true.
I agree that God is a confusing term. However if this is your belief then I would call you a religious person, albeit that you don't want your religion to be socialised in any way.
How do you avoid the charge that you are simply addicted to your idea of God? Do you just say no I'm not, like Christians do when you accuse them of it?
Are you sure your argument is logical, and not a personal opinion based on your dislike of communal religion? Perhaps you are addicted to your view and therefore do not analyse it's rationality fully. There is no evidence at all that people who believe in God are simply addicted to the idea.
It is debatable whether it is possible to live a happy life without a 'spiritual' dimension to it. Are happy people addicted to happiness? Perhaps, but life itself is predicated on being addicted to things. I suspect that many people follow their religion because they believe their religion is true.
But at the same time the 'self' is what prevents us understanding what lies beyond the self.
Addiction is an affirmation of self and perpetuates it. This is why Buddhists espouse non-attachment as a means to understanding, (or consider it an inevitable consequence of understanding). Thinking is also considered to be an addiction. Addiction is the very opposite of a denial of self. The non-self cannot be addicted.
What made you think I am a Christian?
I agree that God is a confusing term. However if this is your belief then I would call you a religious person, albeit that you don't want your religion to be socialised in any way.
How do you avoid the charge that you are simply addicted to your idea of God? Do you just say no I'm not, like Christians do when you accuse them of it?
I'm very confused about what you believe. You seem to believe in exactly what you are calling a pointless addiction. If you can believe in God and not be addicted why is nobody else allowed to do the same?
It's a nice thouight and I don't want to spoil it, but I should add, to avoid confusion, that I did not mean 'God' in the way that you do.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Against God?
My argument is logical. I'm not the first to think of God in the way I do. I am opposed to organized religion. They take the focus OFF of God and onto their own agendas.
I wouldn't call my belief an addiction. There is no way I could be addicted to my own thoughts! First, let me explain that I am all for people believing in God whatever their perception of God may be. Believing in God is a BELIEF. God cannot be explained or proven. It's a personal perception. There may be a billion different perceptions of God, but there is only One God.
I agree with you. There is no way to have a happy life without a spiritual dimension to it. Are happy people addicted to happiness? Maybe. I don't think anyone's life is 100% happy all the time. "Into every life a little rain must fall." But it's an ATTITUDE. Believe me, I've had my share of thunderstorms, but I'm still a happy person. You are correct about people following their religion because they believe it is true. What I have seen among Xians is an 'emptiness' they are waiting for to be fulfilled. I was a Xian for a long time--a hardcore Xian. The 'happiness' I saw in my Xian friends was fake. It was always "Jesus this," and "Jesus that." Yet, they couldn't use their own minds to be happy. "Jesus" was in control of everything in their lives. When "rain" fell in their lives, they couldn't handle it. "Why did Jesus do this to me?" "Why did Jesus let this happen." "I go to church all the time." "I pray to Jesus all the time." "Why is Jesus punishing me?"
I so wanted to tell them, "Look, Jesus didn't do anything to your sorry ass, you did it to yourself!" But I couldn't express myself this way to them because they wouldn't understand it. Of course, leaving everything up to Jesus, they fell right back into their old patterns, and bad things would happen all over again to them.
You're right. They follow their religion because they believe there religion is true. I wouldn't say they are addicted to "God" per se. I would say they ARE addicted to "Jesus." Surprisingly, with Xians, you don't hear them credit "God" much. It's always "Jesus!"
Yes, for those people who are "addicted" to the "self!" I consider my "self" to be intellectual. I believe there is a higher power than my "self." I believe this "higher power" is leading me to the truth. "Self" addiction leads to other vile things. Money, sex, drugs, material things, pride, greed, envy, etc.
No, I don't think so. Affirmation of self does not perpetuate addiction unless it is an arrogance of the ego. Affirmation of the self perpetuates the higher power within us.
Yes, if it gets out of hand. The non-self CAN become addicted to whatever higher power they choose!
Because you seemed to be writing as if you were.
No, I wouldn't consider myself to be religious because I believe in God. I'm spiritual--not religious. Belief in God doesn't need to be organized or socialized.
Belief is not an addiction. Repetitive actions are addictions. How can one be "addicted" to their belief in God? That's like saying I'm "addicted" to myself! I believe God dwells within my heart. I don't pray to some being "out there," I pray within my "self." That is where my God dwells. That is where everyone's God dwells.
I see you're confused. There is a difference to believing in God and going to church and crediting Jesus for everything in one's life! I don't believe in Jesus nor do I believe in going to a church or organized group. God is with us individually. We are One with God. We don't need an organized group to enhance our relationship with God. That is very personal.
Yes, I knew that. Everyone has their own perception of God, but ultimately God is One and the Same.
My argument is logical. I'm not the first to think of God in the way I do. I am opposed to organized religion. They take the focus OFF of God and onto their own agendas.
I wouldn't call my belief an addiction. There is no way I could be addicted to my own thoughts! First, let me explain that I am all for people believing in God whatever their perception of God may be. Believing in God is a BELIEF. God cannot be explained or proven. It's a personal perception. There may be a billion different perceptions of God, but there is only One God.
I agree with you. There is no way to have a happy life without a spiritual dimension to it. Are happy people addicted to happiness? Maybe. I don't think anyone's life is 100% happy all the time. "Into every life a little rain must fall." But it's an ATTITUDE. Believe me, I've had my share of thunderstorms, but I'm still a happy person. You are correct about people following their religion because they believe it is true. What I have seen among Xians is an 'emptiness' they are waiting for to be fulfilled. I was a Xian for a long time--a hardcore Xian. The 'happiness' I saw in my Xian friends was fake. It was always "Jesus this," and "Jesus that." Yet, they couldn't use their own minds to be happy. "Jesus" was in control of everything in their lives. When "rain" fell in their lives, they couldn't handle it. "Why did Jesus do this to me?" "Why did Jesus let this happen." "I go to church all the time." "I pray to Jesus all the time." "Why is Jesus punishing me?"
I so wanted to tell them, "Look, Jesus didn't do anything to your sorry ass, you did it to yourself!" But I couldn't express myself this way to them because they wouldn't understand it. Of course, leaving everything up to Jesus, they fell right back into their old patterns, and bad things would happen all over again to them.
You're right. They follow their religion because they believe there religion is true. I wouldn't say they are addicted to "God" per se. I would say they ARE addicted to "Jesus." Surprisingly, with Xians, you don't hear them credit "God" much. It's always "Jesus!"
Yes, for those people who are "addicted" to the "self!" I consider my "self" to be intellectual. I believe there is a higher power than my "self." I believe this "higher power" is leading me to the truth. "Self" addiction leads to other vile things. Money, sex, drugs, material things, pride, greed, envy, etc.
No, I don't think so. Affirmation of self does not perpetuate addiction unless it is an arrogance of the ego. Affirmation of the self perpetuates the higher power within us.
Yes, if it gets out of hand. The non-self CAN become addicted to whatever higher power they choose!
Because you seemed to be writing as if you were.
No, I wouldn't consider myself to be religious because I believe in God. I'm spiritual--not religious. Belief in God doesn't need to be organized or socialized.
Belief is not an addiction. Repetitive actions are addictions. How can one be "addicted" to their belief in God? That's like saying I'm "addicted" to myself! I believe God dwells within my heart. I don't pray to some being "out there," I pray within my "self." That is where my God dwells. That is where everyone's God dwells.
I see you're confused. There is a difference to believing in God and going to church and crediting Jesus for everything in one's life! I don't believe in Jesus nor do I believe in going to a church or organized group. God is with us individually. We are One with God. We don't need an organized group to enhance our relationship with God. That is very personal.
Yes, I knew that. Everyone has their own perception of God, but ultimately God is One and the Same.
Most christians are not like this unless if you specifically are talking about religion.
I see this somewhat in the born again christians because salvation is collapsed into a minute period of time when it is infact infinite. I haven't read it yet but you might enjoy http://www.ccel.org/j/john_of_the_cross/dark_night/dark_night_bod0.9_ToC.html even from a non-christian perspective.
I don't think think this has to do with the religion but with human nature.
We believe that Jesus is part of the Godhood?
Organized religion is about finding out what is the Oneness and Sameness of God. Of course everyone knows that God would come to people in different ways because he is perfect and we are each different.
B
buddhafish
Guest
maybe you should be
:m: peace :m:
P. M. Thorne
Registered Senior Member
Canute:
I find your comments well organized and interesting. Yet, I do wish to bring something to your attention. Here is a quote from "Medicine*Woman." She writes:
"My argument is logical. I'm not the first to think of God in the way I do. I am opposed to organized religion. They take the focus OFF of God and onto their own agendas."
She is right! Once in a Sunday morning class, our pastor was asking what could hinder us in our relationship with God. After many suggestions, he seemed to be looking for one more, so I volunteered with: "Church." He, a man I had known for years, seemed stunned, and maybe embarrassed.
When I hear, "Come to Church, and find God," it makes me angry. I know those people. I was raised with them. The part that grieves my spirit is that spirituality is not some magic thing that we find and brag about, or that we hold up to show how superior we are, rather it is our connection with God. Spinoza says that it is innate in man to believe in God, and I agree. This philosopher meant all peoples. And yes, many are frightened away, or turned off, by the word "God."
Words, so far as I know, come from humankind. They have no magic power, unless we give it to them, in our minds. Why get hung up on them. Nor do I understand the big deal about "He, mankind, and so forth. When we muddy the waters with all our little quirks, we venture away from the main event just as surely as those whom we criticize. Am I right?
There are always those who spoil the stew, but hating the Church or hating Amway is never a solution. Churches have some solid citizens and good programs; Amway is a fine product. Yet new converts to either can be extremely annoying.
Truth is, sometimes I miss church, -the fellowship, the joy, the music! But, I remember dedication; I remember brotherhood; I remember enthusiasm. Where did it go? "Followers of Christ? Then why all the condemnation, and supercilious confrontations? Where is the love?
In addition, my beliefs have changed.
At one time I was almost consumed with anger. It took me a while to get past the anger, but I got past it. I do not necessarily blame organized religion, -or do I? Fact is, I am no longer angry. I wish them well. I truly do. Nonetheless, for the most part, the agenda of most organized religion is not what I am about. I still go once in a great while, but try to keep my mouth shut. Why do I go? Childhood memories, I suppose. My stepfather was a minister, and I am a graduate of a very good bible school, but my beliefs have changed from theirs as well, and that is okay with me, but not with them!
It took a long time for me to be free, and I love it. The amazing thing is, once I felt free, those opposed to my differences of opinion, no longer seemed so eager to give me a bad time. Just thought I would mention that.
I find your comments well organized and interesting. Yet, I do wish to bring something to your attention. Here is a quote from "Medicine*Woman." She writes:
"My argument is logical. I'm not the first to think of God in the way I do. I am opposed to organized religion. They take the focus OFF of God and onto their own agendas."
She is right! Once in a Sunday morning class, our pastor was asking what could hinder us in our relationship with God. After many suggestions, he seemed to be looking for one more, so I volunteered with: "Church." He, a man I had known for years, seemed stunned, and maybe embarrassed.
When I hear, "Come to Church, and find God," it makes me angry. I know those people. I was raised with them. The part that grieves my spirit is that spirituality is not some magic thing that we find and brag about, or that we hold up to show how superior we are, rather it is our connection with God. Spinoza says that it is innate in man to believe in God, and I agree. This philosopher meant all peoples. And yes, many are frightened away, or turned off, by the word "God."
Words, so far as I know, come from humankind. They have no magic power, unless we give it to them, in our minds. Why get hung up on them. Nor do I understand the big deal about "He, mankind, and so forth. When we muddy the waters with all our little quirks, we venture away from the main event just as surely as those whom we criticize. Am I right?
There are always those who spoil the stew, but hating the Church or hating Amway is never a solution. Churches have some solid citizens and good programs; Amway is a fine product. Yet new converts to either can be extremely annoying.
Truth is, sometimes I miss church, -the fellowship, the joy, the music! But, I remember dedication; I remember brotherhood; I remember enthusiasm. Where did it go? "Followers of Christ? Then why all the condemnation, and supercilious confrontations? Where is the love?
In addition, my beliefs have changed.
At one time I was almost consumed with anger. It took me a while to get past the anger, but I got past it. I do not necessarily blame organized religion, -or do I? Fact is, I am no longer angry. I wish them well. I truly do. Nonetheless, for the most part, the agenda of most organized religion is not what I am about. I still go once in a great while, but try to keep my mouth shut. Why do I go? Childhood memories, I suppose. My stepfather was a minister, and I am a graduate of a very good bible school, but my beliefs have changed from theirs as well, and that is okay with me, but not with them!
It took a long time for me to be free, and I love it. The amazing thing is, once I felt free, those opposed to my differences of opinion, no longer seemed so eager to give me a bad time. Just thought I would mention that.
PMThorne
I would go along with that. To me the problem is that religions have their roots in mysticism, in personal understanding, but mystical knowledge cannot be conveyed without corrupting it. Also organised religion naturally becomes enmeshed in secular affairs of state. No harm in that but eventually the simple messages get buried under beaurocracy and paraphenalia.
I like this Buddhist story (which I've probably used too much).
When the spiritual teacher and his disciples began their evening meditation, the cat who lived in the monastery made such noise that it distracted them. So the teacher ordered that the cat be tied up during the evening practice. Years later, when the teacher died, the cat continued to be tied up during the meditation session. And when the cat eventually died, another cat was brought to the monastery and tied up. Centuries later, learned descendants of the spiritual teacher wrote scholarly treatises about the religious significance of tying up a cat for meditation practice.
I would go along with that. To me the problem is that religions have their roots in mysticism, in personal understanding, but mystical knowledge cannot be conveyed without corrupting it. Also organised religion naturally becomes enmeshed in secular affairs of state. No harm in that but eventually the simple messages get buried under beaurocracy and paraphenalia.
I like this Buddhist story (which I've probably used too much).
When the spiritual teacher and his disciples began their evening meditation, the cat who lived in the monastery made such noise that it distracted them. So the teacher ordered that the cat be tied up during the evening practice. Years later, when the teacher died, the cat continued to be tied up during the meditation session. And when the cat eventually died, another cat was brought to the monastery and tied up. Centuries later, learned descendants of the spiritual teacher wrote scholarly treatises about the religious significance of tying up a cat for meditation practice.
P. M. Thorne
Registered Senior Member
Canute;
I love your Buddhist story. That is my first to learn of it. I have a Buddhist story too. I will do what I can from memory.
This Zen Buddhist priest waits for his student. The boy arrives distraught. "Master," says he, "I do not know what is wrong! I cannot concentrate on my lessons. When I pray, my mind wanders. I am not doing well at all, Master, and I do not know what is wrong with me. I do not know what to do!
The master replied, "Do not worry, my son, it will pass.
A few days go by and the student again approaches the master. This time his face glows with joy, and he can scarcely wait to tell his news. "Master!" he commences with restrained excitement, "it has happened. Now, I think more clearly! When I study, I learn quickly! My lessons are finished on time! You were right, Master. Things are going very well for me now."
The old master replied, "Do not worry, my son. It will pass."
This message, once learned, puts life in a more realistic light, do you not think so? (Please forgive my embroidering, but I do not have the quote at hand.)
One more quote, (from Marcus Aurelius Meditations):
"It can ruin your life only if it ruins your character. Otherwise, it cannot harm you--inside or out." [straight from the book]
My favorite things to read are usually philosophy and history, but for lighter days I love good quotes. Thank you for sharing. I am going to copy that. PMT
I love your Buddhist story. That is my first to learn of it. I have a Buddhist story too. I will do what I can from memory.
This Zen Buddhist priest waits for his student. The boy arrives distraught. "Master," says he, "I do not know what is wrong! I cannot concentrate on my lessons. When I pray, my mind wanders. I am not doing well at all, Master, and I do not know what is wrong with me. I do not know what to do!
The master replied, "Do not worry, my son, it will pass.
A few days go by and the student again approaches the master. This time his face glows with joy, and he can scarcely wait to tell his news. "Master!" he commences with restrained excitement, "it has happened. Now, I think more clearly! When I study, I learn quickly! My lessons are finished on time! You were right, Master. Things are going very well for me now."
The old master replied, "Do not worry, my son. It will pass."
This message, once learned, puts life in a more realistic light, do you not think so? (Please forgive my embroidering, but I do not have the quote at hand.)
One more quote, (from Marcus Aurelius Meditations):
"It can ruin your life only if it ruins your character. Otherwise, it cannot harm you--inside or out." [straight from the book]
My favorite things to read are usually philosophy and history, but for lighter days I love good quotes. Thank you for sharing. I am going to copy that. PMT
P. M. Thorne
Registered Senior Member
CANUTE:
All right. I give up. Why are you impressed?
I was not trying to impress you. I bought the book at B&N a short time ago. I have not finished it yet, because I am also reading other things. That quote stood out, so I thought I would throw it your way. It is not profound, but I would like to see it posted at every high school and college.
If you are thinking about getting the book, you might want to check one of the older translations as well, and compare before you purchase. I did not. However, a friend of mine told me that he has an older translation and did not see much difference, but he really likes modern writing . . . short and to the point- type thing.
In my humble opinion, much of the modern writing falls short by comparison. The long sentences, long paragraphs and so forth, of the older writ, if well written, kind of wraps around a person and can give one a feeling of higher intelligence, whether realistic or not. I have to read such writing over and over sometimes, but when studying, this is good. Most of the books I have are smarter than I am. This is how I learn! Cheers! PMT
All right. I give up. Why are you impressed?
I was not trying to impress you. I bought the book at B&N a short time ago. I have not finished it yet, because I am also reading other things. That quote stood out, so I thought I would throw it your way. It is not profound, but I would like to see it posted at every high school and college.
If you are thinking about getting the book, you might want to check one of the older translations as well, and compare before you purchase. I did not. However, a friend of mine told me that he has an older translation and did not see much difference, but he really likes modern writing . . . short and to the point- type thing.
In my humble opinion, much of the modern writing falls short by comparison. The long sentences, long paragraphs and so forth, of the older writ, if well written, kind of wraps around a person and can give one a feeling of higher intelligence, whether realistic or not. I have to read such writing over and over sometimes, but when studying, this is good. Most of the books I have are smarter than I am. This is how I learn!
Cheers! PMTP. M. Thorne
Registered Senior Member
Canute: All right, I shall try this again. (I just got bumped!)
Some time back, before I commenced actually trying to communicate with you good people, I read several messages on this forum, pertaining to various subjects, and somewhere I think someone was complimenting you, canute, about your responses. I believe it was this same person who mentioned that you did not believe in God???
Do I have that right?
If I do, the fact that you never did tell me why you were "impressed," made me wonder whether this omission means that you are rather passive, or just too polite to tell me that you did not expect one with so much simple rambling about "churchy-ism," (good word, huh?) to be reading such a "classy" book. Is it classy? I do not know. But I can tell you this, it is much easier reading then the King James Version of the Bible, and far easier than Spinoza, especially in The Ethics, where I read the same thing over and over.
Whereas, I am not attempting to have you tell me about your religion, -or lack of it, (unless you just want to), I cannot help but wonder where you are in education, because maybe you simply reserve much of yourself for those more on your level. It is a fact that non-believers are often convinced that they are non-believers, because of their higher intelligence. Uhhh. Please tell me you are not like that. I always like to believe the best of everyone, but go ahead hit with the truth.
This is very brazen of me, but people on this forum are not exactly shy. I think highly of education. Did you see "Good Will Hunting? If so, remember the guy in the bar, who had memorized text, so he could sound more intelligent, until the genius (Matt Damon's character) put him to shame. From my experience that would be the type of character that would use such a reason for his skepticism.
So, what is my problem anyhow? Just this, I happen to be over-blessed with imagination, and plenty of curiosity to go with it. I am seldom impressed, except with kindness/gentleness and intelligence. As for societies' best, people would all be pretty much the same, if stripped naked and left in the jungle near an ant hill.
Actually, it was kind of nice that you were impressed. I am, more or less, self-educated, and sometimes it is good to have a nod, because I am never quite sure where I am with society's expectations as regards my preferences in reading. I read what I like.
PMT
Some time back, before I commenced actually trying to communicate with you good people, I read several messages on this forum, pertaining to various subjects, and somewhere I think someone was complimenting you, canute, about your responses. I believe it was this same person who mentioned that you did not believe in God???
Do I have that right?
If I do, the fact that you never did tell me why you were "impressed," made me wonder whether this omission means that you are rather passive, or just too polite to tell me that you did not expect one with so much simple rambling about "churchy-ism," (good word, huh?) to be reading such a "classy" book. Is it classy? I do not know. But I can tell you this, it is much easier reading then the King James Version of the Bible, and far easier than Spinoza, especially in The Ethics, where I read the same thing over and over.
Whereas, I am not attempting to have you tell me about your religion, -or lack of it, (unless you just want to), I cannot help but wonder where you are in education, because maybe you simply reserve much of yourself for those more on your level. It is a fact that non-believers are often convinced that they are non-believers, because of their higher intelligence. Uhhh. Please tell me you are not like that. I always like to believe the best of everyone, but go ahead hit with the truth.
This is very brazen of me, but people on this forum are not exactly shy. I think highly of education. Did you see "Good Will Hunting? If so, remember the guy in the bar, who had memorized text, so he could sound more intelligent, until the genius (Matt Damon's character) put him to shame. From my experience that would be the type of character that would use such a reason for his skepticism.
So, what is my problem anyhow? Just this, I happen to be over-blessed with imagination, and plenty of curiosity to go with it. I am seldom impressed, except with kindness/gentleness and intelligence. As for societies' best, people would all be pretty much the same, if stripped naked and left in the jungle near an ant hill.
Actually, it was kind of nice that you were impressed. I am, more or less, self-educated, and sometimes it is good to have a nod, because I am never quite sure where I am with society's expectations as regards my preferences in reading. I read what I like.
PMT
PMThorne
I don't understand what's happening here. I was impressed because Marcus Aurelius is well off the beaten track for most people. That's all - no hidden meanings, disguised insults, sarcasm, or anything else. What's your beef? I think you're being over-sensitive.
I don't understand what's happening here. I was impressed because Marcus Aurelius is well off the beaten track for most people. That's all - no hidden meanings, disguised insults, sarcasm, or anything else. What's your beef? I think you're being over-sensitive.
P. M. Thorne
Registered Senior Member
Canute: Oh for heaven's sake! I was curious, so I asked. Now, I know, and thank you for answering! Cheers and buttercups! PMT
JesusRocksMySocks
Registered Member
Why do ppl believe in God?
Because we believe the truth!
Because we believe the truth!
I think the problem was that you thought you got 'bumped' and then started speculating on my motives. But I didn't mean to do that at all. I was just chatting. Email conversation are a nightmare for these kinds of misuderstanding. Actually I was interested in what you were saying and thought your quotes were great.