"Kernel" wrote:
K> "Good question but when you say "Battle-Plan", who do you suppose we are at war with."
Ummm, well, reading between the lines of your words & this forum generally, i would say that the old 'Get Smart" tv-series, had a group entity called "Chaos", which might be a good starting-point for describing the institutionalized cointelpro mk-ultra mind-controllers slave-traders, & empire-builders, who ruthlessly pillage and plunder our innocent populace.
And i would think that someone with a handle like "The Kernel" would be up-to-speed on these realities of the spiritual battle-field in which we find our-selves. Are you seriously lacking in knowledge about how this spiritual side of the battle is shaping-up, sir?
I find the words on your page inspirational and as they were posted on ,y birthday I had to send you a gift. Unfortunately I don't know how the credits work, so you get a freebie. Alison
The relationship between Love and Law seems like a most cmplex area you've chosen to study. On impulse, the first things that came into my mind were Shakespeare and the bible as interesting sources to draw from. And I suppose something like Hatred and Anarchy as interesting opposites from which to bounce your ideas from.
It's heartening that a few on RG like yourself are appreciative of my areas of biological -psychology input.
As a human species we were born with similarly ready developed biologically innate templates to assist us into early basic 'functional reality' interaction with the wider world, where from then on we learn to adapt to survival processes of a general agreed upon reality. Unfortunately most of the human species throughout history and to this day, unknowingly or knowingly, choose to continue to remain and live their entire lives within only the base 'functional reality' . And as always has been the case, the few that do transcend to experience greater levels of reality continue to be viewed as genius, eccentric or mad. Schrodinger's cat in reality is both dead and alive. It's just that we've been saitised into our blinkered confinement of perception even though we actually exist in this glorious milieu of phtonic chaos, which on a smaller fundamental quantum scale of our truer make-up reveals that we exist everywhere and in all states where even time does not exist. The true essence of our interconnectivity with everything and holistic sense of belonging to a composite being, dare i say it, is I believe closer to understanding our very Godlike nature.
“Can I change reality or simply my perception of it?” How profound. Within that simple question, I'm sure, is the holy grail of clearer understanding to all our efforts.
I agree re giant thought pattern, this universal mind.
We know so little
and there is so much to learn,
we are just beginning to know - through science -
what the wise have known
for thousands of years,
even touching the knowledge
known by every stone.
you wrote: "The more scientists look into the the quantum world the more it looks like an enormous complex thought that exists in exquisite patterns that are being discovered and expressed through mathematics." Which scientists? In which books or articles or online where?
The core crew will still be around: Sid, db, Jeff H, James, Woody, John, Susanna, Denita, Quintessence, Astrologer, Dane, MUwaM, RevLGKing, others...
We will have failed at least one more time in populating TSC with authoritative content that is interesting to more than the dozen or so people that contributed to it.
Stanley Krippner will make an eloquent direct challenge to RG Members to compile evidence for Acts of God.
RG membership > 2000
Contributions > $10,000
ReDefinition of God solidifies around vibrations (Music, Color, something new related to subtle energies not directly perceptible by the human sensory organs)
Sid pisses off some important people and gets more than a few death threats.
_____________
Change of topic. Regarding TSC, you need to make a formal statement of agreement on James' definition of Soul or a counter-proposal that is not in the form of a question. Something like replace "something or someone" with "entity that is characterized scientifically as:
* alive
* self-aware
* inorganic
* non-local
....
Whatever yoiu perasonally believe is needed as part of the definition of "Soul."
I tghink James' psotion is that everything has an identifiable Soul, but not necessarily an identifiable Spirit.
Hi. I watched the news clip. It left me wanting to know more about how the group went from young girls with an idea to a million or so numbering religion. It's amazing.
I am so glad your workplace does that. I've never known anywhere to. Wish it was at a national level! It would be hard though - much opposition from media, advertising, retailers... Public holidays bring in a lot of revenue.
I watched the video link you gave me. Very in-line with my personal beliefs and it gave me a greater understanding of the question you were asking me too.
How to go about societal change? Whoa... I suppose with a desire to do so and an honest attempt made. We are always changing, learning, becoming something new so I think we can create religious/spiritual belief/non-belief and yes, cultural integrity tolerance.
To me, giving all people the right to celebrate their own religious beliefs as a 'public' holiday would be conducive to cultural tolerance and would mean that one religion doesn't get to force it's holidays/beilefs on others. Atheists could have non-secular days off equivalency. If one belief system wasnt allowed to dominate all people then I believe we would have to think more about tolerance for all others and change toward this would happen more naturally. Awareness could raise more easily and presumed agreement in belief would dramatically lessen. Could this then extend beyond the borders of our own country?
Obviously, I don't have all the answers and I'm smart enough to know I don't. I guess it's a little bit idealistic but I believe the possibility is plausible for the future. We could have 300 or more cultures with 3 000 000 or more beliefs living in harmony in just one small area of earth.
Speech habits is a difficult one but we've changed our speech patterns radically before. And I do believe it needs conscious changing now. I'm sitting here wishing I still had my old reference books from when I did Feminist Studies at uni so I could give you some solid names and dates. I've moved country over a dozen times since then - they're long gone :) The best example I can think of in the English language is 'mankind' and 'man' to mean all people male and female. It's a relatively recent phenomena that occured by no accident but was created by design and took over 100 years to be passed into grammatical rule. This occured prior to women being formally voted as human. Now, most people wouldn't even know that this purposeful alienation to cultural and evolutionary history for half of the english speaking population ever happened. History proves we can change our speech patterns/habits if we want to. Does this promote cultural/religious sensitivity? I guess it depends whether it is viewed from the speakers point of view or the listeners.
Your assessment of RG is pretty right on. Has built some relationships for me that were inspiring and useful, thought provoking, career enhancing, helpful to research, a-musing my artwork. I honor that. What is this kernel, this source code and how is it different from present RG?
Hi. I would say that we need to extend our comprehension of 'religious freedom'. Rather than overhaul religion, I think we need to overhaul societal structures that favor certain beliefs above others such as our public holidays, easter, christmas, new years... These favor Christian beliefs. We need to examine some basic social interaction that ostracize certain groups. Eg. Someone sneezes, 'bless you', ostracizes the atheist. We need to overhaul the assumptions of morality whereby a Christian is automatically assumed to be a moral, upstanding member of society but an agnostic or atheist is questionable. So, to answer the question directly, I believe we need to revamp societal assumed normatives.
Tough question. I don't know that I can choose one of those answers and actually be honest because none of them are my honest opinion. I suppose if I was backed in a corner unable to give my true opinion then I would vote to abolish religion entirely because that's the only answer that leaves me the freedom to believe as I do.
I saw Sidian's profile on twitter & asked what religion 2 was. He gave me a link. I followed it here. Once here, I took a look around a few times, then decided to join. I wasn't sure at first because religion/belief convo's can get pretty heavy with people holding very strong beliefs and can be easy for conflict to occur. But this site does seem fairly respectful of differing belief systems, which is good. I enjoy philosophical debate providing it can be had without anyone feeling personally attacked.
What would I say? Yes, you're right in many regards re relationships and entertainment. And you're wrong - there is a lot of progress made here that is "between the lines", personal spiritual growth and heightened consciousness... among some participants. Some are nuts. Some are rigid proselytizers - who seem to have left. There was a point when there were more sophisticated, engaged, lengthy, erudite (but not merely intellectual), poetic, and passionate conversations and a couple of the key participants are now busy elsewhere. My participation in RG has had a profound effect on me and I'm grateful for that. So, my question to you is this: what do you think a site like this should be accomplishing or should be working towards?
Kernel John's Comments
Comment Wall (104 comments)
You need to be a member of The Open Source Religion Social Network to add comments!
Join The Open Source Religion Social Network
K> "Good question but when you say "Battle-Plan", who do you suppose we are at war with."
Ummm, well, reading between the lines of your words & this forum generally, i would say that the old 'Get Smart" tv-series, had a group entity called "Chaos", which might be a good starting-point for describing the institutionalized cointelpro mk-ultra mind-controllers slave-traders, & empire-builders, who ruthlessly pillage and plunder our innocent populace.
And i would think that someone with a handle like "The Kernel" would be up-to-speed on these realities of the spiritual battle-field in which we find our-selves. Are you seriously lacking in knowledge about how this spiritual side of the battle is shaping-up, sir?
Respectfully;
Charles ...
The relationship between Love and Law seems like a most cmplex area you've chosen to study. On impulse, the first things that came into my mind were Shakespeare and the bible as interesting sources to draw from. And I suppose something like Hatred and Anarchy as interesting opposites from which to bounce your ideas from.
It's heartening that a few on RG like yourself are appreciative of my areas of biological -psychology input.
As a human species we were born with similarly ready developed biologically innate templates to assist us into early basic 'functional reality' interaction with the wider world, where from then on we learn to adapt to survival processes of a general agreed upon reality. Unfortunately most of the human species throughout history and to this day, unknowingly or knowingly, choose to continue to remain and live their entire lives within only the base 'functional reality' . And as always has been the case, the few that do transcend to experience greater levels of reality continue to be viewed as genius, eccentric or mad. Schrodinger's cat in reality is both dead and alive. It's just that we've been saitised into our blinkered confinement of perception even though we actually exist in this glorious milieu of phtonic chaos, which on a smaller fundamental quantum scale of our truer make-up reveals that we exist everywhere and in all states where even time does not exist. The true essence of our interconnectivity with everything and holistic sense of belonging to a composite being, dare i say it, is I believe closer to understanding our very Godlike nature.
We know so little
and there is so much to learn,
we are just beginning to know - through science -
what the wise have known
for thousands of years,
even touching the knowledge
known by every stone.
The core crew will still be around: Sid, db, Jeff H, James, Woody, John, Susanna, Denita, Quintessence, Astrologer, Dane, MUwaM, RevLGKing, others...
We will have failed at least one more time in populating TSC with authoritative content that is interesting to more than the dozen or so people that contributed to it.
Stanley Krippner will make an eloquent direct challenge to RG Members to compile evidence for Acts of God.
RG membership > 2000
Contributions > $10,000
ReDefinition of God solidifies around vibrations (Music, Color, something new related to subtle energies not directly perceptible by the human sensory organs)
Sid pisses off some important people and gets more than a few death threats.
_____________
Change of topic. Regarding TSC, you need to make a formal statement of agreement on James' definition of Soul or a counter-proposal that is not in the form of a question. Something like replace "something or someone" with "entity that is characterized scientifically as:
* alive
* self-aware
* inorganic
* non-local
....
Whatever yoiu perasonally believe is needed as part of the definition of "Soul."
I tghink James' psotion is that everything has an identifiable Soul, but not necessarily an identifiable Spirit.
I have been a member of RG for over 1 year.
Lots happening right now at the RG Network. I have "jumped in with both feet" and joined the "Source Architects HQ" Group.
Sid is saavy. He will listge to us ancients if we have something coherent to say (in 25 words or less).
I am so glad your workplace does that. I've never known anywhere to. Wish it was at a national level! It would be hard though - much opposition from media, advertising, retailers... Public holidays bring in a lot of revenue.
How to go about societal change? Whoa... I suppose with a desire to do so and an honest attempt made. We are always changing, learning, becoming something new so I think we can create religious/spiritual belief/non-belief and yes, cultural integrity tolerance.
To me, giving all people the right to celebrate their own religious beliefs as a 'public' holiday would be conducive to cultural tolerance and would mean that one religion doesn't get to force it's holidays/beilefs on others. Atheists could have non-secular days off equivalency. If one belief system wasnt allowed to dominate all people then I believe we would have to think more about tolerance for all others and change toward this would happen more naturally. Awareness could raise more easily and presumed agreement in belief would dramatically lessen. Could this then extend beyond the borders of our own country?
Obviously, I don't have all the answers and I'm smart enough to know I don't. I guess it's a little bit idealistic but I believe the possibility is plausible for the future. We could have 300 or more cultures with 3 000 000 or more beliefs living in harmony in just one small area of earth.
Speech habits is a difficult one but we've changed our speech patterns radically before. And I do believe it needs conscious changing now. I'm sitting here wishing I still had my old reference books from when I did Feminist Studies at uni so I could give you some solid names and dates. I've moved country over a dozen times since then - they're long gone :) The best example I can think of in the English language is 'mankind' and 'man' to mean all people male and female. It's a relatively recent phenomena that occured by no accident but was created by design and took over 100 years to be passed into grammatical rule. This occured prior to women being formally voted as human. Now, most people wouldn't even know that this purposeful alienation to cultural and evolutionary history for half of the english speaking population ever happened. History proves we can change our speech patterns/habits if we want to. Does this promote cultural/religious sensitivity? I guess it depends whether it is viewed from the speakers point of view or the listeners.
Welcome to
The Open Source Religion Social Network
Sign Up
or Sign In
Top Content This Week
What is God? And why the idea of God?
God's Attitude
God God Para Gate
Latest Activity
Predestined for Glorification
Are Your Religious Beliefs Plausible Facts of Prbable Fiction?
What is God? And why the idea of God?