The mixing of religious and non-religious beliefs in an individual.
An atheist is simply someone who's God is the present moment, which is funny because that's also where God is found.
Tags: atonement, koan, nondualism, paradox, transcendence
I have been thinking the same thing for at least a dozen years now probably more than that.
I started by asking myself what I would do if I were to suddenly discover I was the only thing in existence.
I would wonder.. what am I, Where did I come from. Why am I here.
Then I would come up with a few hundred possible ideas and start exploring the plausibility of each of them...
Voila and so each of us is one of those ideas struggling with all those other ideas to be validated.
Making a belief module into a collective belief system is problematic as soon as you start getting into the specifics.
That is why Jesus taught the two basics. love truth and righteousness and love others.
Jesus also taught do not judge.
These are three basic foundational belief modules.
Once you form a collective, the differences in points of view start to take form. Now the individual has to start to conform to the consensus, the consensus then loses its integrity as it loses respect and love for the individuals who do not conform. If the individual does conform he loses respect for himself.
Another problem is collectives tend to attract like minds. That does not lead to tolerance.
We all believe this and if you do not believe like us then you are wrong because the consensus we have agreed upon says so.
Perhaps this is something to consider in this task of consensus building. Just because a group forms a consensus does not make it right. Eat sh*t, a million flies can't be wrong. I am sure the witches and gays and blacks of the world can attest to the invalidity that a consensus makes something right.
If it isn't right for all, then it isn't right at all. Thats a tall order to fill.
James, what makes you think Belief Modules or Open Source Religion has anything to do with collective thinking and if on occasion it does - so what.
The whole idea of Open Source is that people can take rummage through Belief Modules, freely take from them whatever they wish and assemble these beliefs into whatever form of religious thought and expression they so wish - without having to going through experts or central authorities.
If a group of people, however, wish to form a collective of some kind, why would I want to judge them or their motives for collaborating in a group.
As for Gene's comment above, I'm not sure his aphorism constitutes much of a belief module.
Kernel lately you seem to have a penchant for criticising me for saying the same thing as you.
I was pointing out the problems of making belief modules something to be adhered to by a collective, then you come along and point out how it is better for individuals to pick and choose their belief modules.
Now it is wonderful for you to point out the same thing from another vantage point but awfully rude of you to say
"so what' about my own contribution from the another vantage point.
James, is someone making Belief Modules into something to be collectively adhered to? I don't think any one is - but as you brought up this hypothetical possibility, I thought I would point out that Open Source Religion is not very conducive to collective movement. If I were to see my comments in terms of a criticism, it would be to ask you why you are bothering to highlight this hypothetical and unlikely hypothetical collectivity.
Sorry if you felt unnecessarily criticized.
And just what the heck do you think a RELIGION is? What does the R stand for in os R kernel? open source RELIGION! Have you ever even attended a church? Especially a christian church? Everyone wearing their "sunday go to church clothes" and standing and sitting on cue? SInging the same songs every week. Having communion, hearing the same preacher, putting their money in the same collection plate at the same time every week?
Hand in hand step by step, the army of the Lord marching to the same beat?
Did I not hear someone suggest that Sid collect belief modules that are consistant with his own understanding and beliefs?
That may not be your idea. But hey are you not a supporter of the BK set of belief modules. The same ones you post over and over and over again, and then pretend you want to pick and choose from belief modules other than those that support your BK mindset? No you want to come and indoctrinate all us ignorant unenlightened people into the light of the new and last religion, the final coming of God incarnate on planet earth for this cycle.
If you were really sorry Kernel you would stop doing it. But of course you like "poking" people to see how the react. Like a kid with a stick poking at a small insect or animal. Feel free to continue to entertain yourself while pretending it is in the pursuit of knowledge and understanding.
James, you need to know that I am not like you. If I were, would you be reacting as you are?
I have seen many Christian proselytizer hammer non-Christians into eventually leaving this site. I am sorry if I don't make you feel as welcome here as I should but I certainly do not intend to take credit that you feel you are being victimized here.
You seem to want to argue a lot. I don't. I like to also listen. I'm not sure you do . . . so I don't - or at least to what you want me to hear. I try to listen between the lines and, from time-to-time, feed what I think I hear back to you - complete with specific examples. Maybe, I should be more accepting of what I perceive to be your incongruencies. Remember the Johari Window?
If you would like me to stop showing you parts of yourself that I see and that I think you don't, then I'll stop giving you feedback like that. Is that what you want? I'm not sure what you're asking for James. Would you prefer we disengage. Then do so.
As for belief modules and the BKs . . . I think most of the Christians who have hung out here don't actually support the concept of Open Source Religion and, in a passive-aggressive way, have been trying to subvert its establishment.
I have no problem placing my spiritual beliefs against your spiritual beliefs, or Robert's or Jeff's or Khem's or any of the other detractors of non-Christian beliefs. In fact I am looking forward, in the coming weeks, to see what kind of Christian Belief Modules will be deposited in Sid's Belief Bank. As already stated, I suspect most Christians here would prefer to see the concept of OSR fail . . . but I could be wrong. But the future is a wonderful thing. Time will tell.
Just because you insult people, poke them, denigrate them with your snide remarks, does not make them victims. It just shows your own character. So trying to once again put me on the defensive and denigrate me by calling me a "victim" does not make me one. You can continue to be a bully, and I will continue to call you on your bullying tactics and continue to put the mirror in your face and maybe some day you will look into that mirror and see yourself as the bully you are. You being a bully does not make me a victim, as you see I have not been chased away like you have chased others away. It is not because I feel any effect from your bullying that I point it out. I point it out in the hope that at some point you will see it in yourself. But maybe you already know that and it is a learned behavoir that you have found works for you. Personally I have not been impressed with it and so I point it out.
What I would like you to do is use some manners and decorum if you feel you must look for faults in me.
I also do not need you to show me my faults. Every time I see faults in you or any one else here, I see that fault in myself. You may not see yourself in me but I certainly see myself in you and everyone else here.
This site is definitely not for me. Godspeed and Namaste!
Join The Open Source Religion Social Network
Welcome toThe Open Source Religion Social Network
Sign Upor Sign In
© 2013 Created by Sidian M.S. Jones.
Report an Issue |
Terms of Service
Please check your browser settings or contact your system administrator.