Religion = Blind Faith ?

[crimsonlung]

The denial of UU as a branch of Christianity, primarily. I still maintain that my religion requires no blind faith.

Well, UU is not a religion, its also a beleif:

Here is their take on Death

Unitarian Universalism today is a theologically diverse religion in which many different beliefs about death and the possibility of an afterlife are welcome


What do Unitarian Universalists believe about the existence of a higher power?

Diverse beliefs about the existence of a higher power are welcome in Unitarian Universalist congregations.

These are quoted from the UUA website.

Kind of sounds like I can be Jewish, Muslim, Christian, or any other RELIGION and still can call myself a UU but if I am Muslim, I can't also call myself a Christian.

 

[crimsonlung]

They aren't exactly hidden away.
There are plenty of documentaries regarding mysticism in India and the east in general. There are plenty of claims. But people haven't grabbed onto it. People in the west seem to treat the east as something of lesser importance. I remember in high school, just about every civilisation in history was available for study in Ancient History class. But not India. Never India. There is so little focus on the history and religion of the Indian subcontinent, compared to other places in the world, and I am truly baffled by it.

I watched a documentary in Japan on a man that created a vending machine with live crabs in it. It was a 30 minute episode, so how come I can learn about this useless crap in the East, but not about meditating people in caves that can do magic like levitating? No offense, but that is a poor excuse. We have youtube and millions of people that would pay to see something like that on there.

 

[Storm]

Well, UU is not a religion, its also a beleif:

As a UU, you're quite wrong about that. Ours is simply not a doctrinal religion.

 

[Tathagata]

Taoism doesn't have a book that everyone follows, in fact,

Tao te Ching.

most Taoist associate themselves with other religions like Buddhism.

That doesn't matter. Though, Buddhism and Taoism can be considered equally religious or irreligious. I'd say both are more appropriately considered philosophies, but the immense devotional aspect of them qualifies them as religions.

I know historical figures exist because we have a general understanding they exist. There is libraries that have books about their lives. But you will have to be specific as to which Historical figures. Do you mean George Washington? We have his bones and there is no real point in feigning his existance. Christopher Columbus may never of existed, we cant prove that,

Ok, well one can say

but he also didn't part an ocean or live with Serpents. If there was a story about him that seemed far fetched I wouldn't believe it.

(Nagas = extraterrestrial serpent race)

Ancient accounts of extraterrestrial visitation is very common in the ancient records, particularly the Sumerian tablets, Egyptian hieroglyphs, and the Vedas. If a historical event occured in the past which involved alien visitation, then it should be taken with the same consideration and validity as any other historical account. This is because such an event doesn't defy current scientific understanding whereas miracles do and cannot be taken as valid or believable.

Its just odd that with new technologies and methods of communication and historical interrogation that are popping up today that more people are questioning religion. Coincidence?

The only encounters Buddhism has with science are encounters where they are collaborating and science actually agrees with or confirms the Buddhist doctrine. This counters your implication that as our knowledge and sophistication increases, Buddhism will become less relevant and plausible.

 

[crimsonlung]

As a UU, you're quite wrong about that. Ours is simply not a doctrinal religion.

What does that have to do with it? Doctrinal, non-doctrinal, UU is clearly not defined in any way.

Take a look at this:

UUA: Unitarian Universalist Views of God

the first paragraph:

"Many people have questioned whether any concept of God can be meaningful in a modern, scientific world. Others, however, find the idea of God to be profoundly meaningful. Among Unitarian Universalists (UUs) and other religious liberals, conceptions range across a wide spectrum."

This can't be called a religion, it has a "wide spectrum" of beleifs, and your arguing yourself into a hole here, even your "religion" is saying its not a religion.

 

[Storm]

What does that have to do with it? Doctrinal, non-doctrinal, UU is clearly not defined in any way.

Actually, it's quite clearly defined by the 7 Principles. Surely your desperate searching of our website has led you to them.

This can't be called a religion, it has a "wide spectrum" of beleifs, and your arguing yourself into a hole here, even your "religion" is saying its not a religion.

No, it's saying ours is not a faith based on doctrine.

 

[Father Heathen]

Kind of sounds like I can be Jewish, Muslim, Christian, or any other RELIGION and still can call myself a UU but if I am Muslim, I can't also call myself a Christian.

Some beliefs and practices from different religions are compatible with one another and can be combined, while others obviously cannot. Faith can be eclectic as long as it's consistent.

 

[Penumbra]

Actually, it's quite clearly defined by the 7 Principles. Surely your desperate searching of our website has led you to them.

No, it's saying ours is not a faith based on doctrine.

• The inherent worth and dignity of every person;
• Justice, equity and compassion in human relations;
• Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations;
• A free and responsible search for truth and meaning;
• The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large;
• The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all;
• Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.

Assuming those are the 7 Principles, there isn't really any faith in there, as you say.

 

[Storm]

• The inherent worth and dignity of every person;
• Justice, equity and compassion in human relations;
• Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations;
• A free and responsible search for truth and meaning;
• The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large;
• The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all;
• Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.

Assuming those are the 7 Principles, there isn't really any faith in there, as you say.

Indeed.

 

[Penumbra]

Indeed.

Kind of blurs the line between religion and not-religion, though, doesn't it?

I mean, even someone who is an atheist, reductionist, materialist, or whatever else, could agree with most or all of those principles. I know I do, with perhaps minor reservations about some of the vague phrasing.

It almost seems like "community" would be a better descriptor than "religion" for UU.

 

[Father Heathen]

Kind of blurs the line between religion and not-religion, though, doesn't it?

I mean, even someone who is an atheist, reductionist, materialist, or whatever else, could agree with most or all of those principles. I know I do, with perhaps minor reservations about some of the vague phrasing.

It almost seems like "community" would be a better descriptor than "religion" for UU.

There are atheistic religions out there, like some forms of buddhism and satanism, for example.

 

[crimsonlung]

Tao te Ching.



That doesn't matter. Though, Buddhism and Taoism can be considered equally religious or irreligious. I'd say both are more appropriately considered philosophies, but the immense devotional aspect of them qualifies them as religions.

Immense devotional aspect, can you go further on that? Do you mean it takes effort to believe in Taoism so that makes it a religion? It seems like if you can be Christian and still call yourself a Taoist, it pushes Taoism to the belief side of the fence, and not the religious side.

(Nagas = extraterrestrial serpent race)

Ancient accounts of extraterrestrial visitation is very common in the ancient records, particularly the Sumerian tablets, Egyptian hieroglyphs, and the Vedas. If a historical event occured in the past which involved alien visitation, then it should be taken with the same consideration and validity as any other historical account. This is because such an event doesn't defy current scientific understanding whereas miracles do and cannot be taken as valid or believable.

Yes, it doesn't defy scientific understanding, but, a Serpent from another planet or World is definitely far fetched. Do we see this in present times? Are we visited by ET Serpents this day and age? People who believe in Aliens are usually shunned by society as it is, so you can even say believing in aliens is its own religion. Yes there are some hieroglyphs of alien visitors but I've seen the documentaries on that. It still can't be proven if that really happened or if that was their own religious interpretation.

Which brings be to my main point, there is no proof TODAY, so don't you think its a coincidence none of your ET Serpent business is happening TODAY?

 

[Storm]

Kind of blurs the line between religion and not-religion, though, doesn't it?

I mean, even someone who is an atheist, reductionist, materialist, or whatever else, could agree with most or all of those principles. I know I do, with perhaps minor reservations about some of the vague phrasing.

It almost seems like "community" would be a better descriptor than "religion" for UU.

I don't think so, no. We're a covenantal religion. We have ministers and churches, we pray or meditate, we treat our Principles with all the reverence with which a Christian treats doctrine.

 

[Penumbra]

There are atheistic religions out there, like some forms of buddhism and satanism, for example.

I don't hinge the definition of religion on a god. Many forms of Buddhism are surely a religion. With Satanism, I think it depends on which subset one is talking about.

But I mean that list is basically something that secular humanists would agree with. If something makes no claims, and specifically no supernatural or metaphysical claims, then I'm not sure the word religion is most appropriate.

 

[crimsonlung]

Actually, it's quite clearly defined by the 7 Principles. Surely your desperate searching of our website has led you to them.

You say I'm desperately searching websites, but I'm not, I'm only on ONE website, your "religions" website. What else do I have to prove your beliefs are a belief and not a religion? You don't have a book i can physically hold look at in the library. And I did see the 7 points you mentioned, and in no way do I see anything about it being a religion. Can you show me a link or a quote or something?

 

[crimsonlung]

I don't think so, no. We're a covenantal religion. We have ministers and churches, we pray or meditate, we treat our Principles with all the reverence with which a Christian treats doctrine.

From what I understand, you don't have a centralized methodology of praying or meditating. You kind of do your own thing. In what way is that a religion?

What is preached at your church?

 

[Penumbra]

I don't think so, no. We're a covenantal religion. We have ministers and churches, we pray or meditate, we treat our Principles with all the reverence with which a Christian treats doctrine.

Can you clarify by what you mean by covenantal?

Would you say that prayer and meditating in UU is necessary, or merely common? It's not in the principles (at least not specifically).

 

[Madhuri]

I watched a documentary in Japan on a man that created a vending machine with live crabs in it. It was a 30 minute episode, so how come I can learn about this useless crap in the East, but not about meditating people in caves that can do magic like levitating? No offense, but that is a poor excuse. We have youtube and millions of people that would pay to see something like that on there.

You can watch stuff like that on youtube.
You can also find a bunch of documentaries around and websites dedicated to this stuff. It just isn't accepted by the general public because either they do not belong to a religion that believes in it, or they are sceptics who don't take it seriously from the get go.

 

[Mister Emu]

If you think about it, all religions are based on blind faith.

No, if you think about it, they are not.

There is not a shred of real life to anything in the Bible, in the Torah, in the Koran.

What? So Israel was never a kingdom in antiquity, the romans never occupied the region, and a man named Mohammed(sp) never existed? Perhaps you should revise your hyperbole.

Why did all the mysticism and elaborate stories such as Noah and his Arc conveniently happen at a time where we cant prove its existence?

Why did all the ancient past events happen in the ancient past? Really?

Where are the miracles today? You ask a Christian or a Muslim that, you will get a half baked answer about the religious times being over.

I don't know a Christian who would say anything like that... if you took the time to look into it there are many claims of Christian miracles in the modern era.

Or what about the cross Christ was allegedly crucified on, don't you think they would have that kept somewhere?

Many people claimed to have part of it in the past...

 

[Madhuri]

Part of the reason is that a lot of them don't want to be studied.

The kid that meditates in front of large groups of people has bodyguards that won't let cameras get too close. The Discovery Channel could only film from a distance and so things were not conclusive. That's the fault of the people that affiliate with the boy rather than the Discovery Channel camera people.

I do remember seeing the guy that went without eating and drinking for a while. The thing is, though, that experiments are repeatable. If something is truly phenomenal, hard proof is required. If different groups of scientists can study him or others like him and come to similar results, then they'd be onto something...

Lots of people claim stuff, whether it's past lives or seeing Jesus in a near death experience or being able to go without eating or whatever. For thousands of years people have been making claims like that, in both religions that are still around and religions that have passed away. With such a shaky track record of falsities, things that truly stand out need to be carefully studied, repeated, and proven before being labeled as something that truly astounds modern conceptions of physics.

I absolutely agree with all of the above. That's why it generally falls on the individual to believe or not believe.

I guess if I was that advanced, then other people's perceptions of me wouldn't bother me.

If I had some ability that totally astounds modern conceptions of physics, I would share it so that it can be helpful to the world.

I can understand your thinking, but when I put myself in that position, I would not want to expose myself. I mean, if you had some amazing mystical abilities, governments around the world would probably consider you a threat. There would be people who want to revere you as some sort of god, and others who would want you dead. You would have be constantly harassed whether by pilgrims or the media.

The thing is, a person who is striving to become enlightened needs to the time and energy to devote himself to these spiritual practices. As soon as you involve the world, there's no peace or time. These are people who retire from the world in the hopes of attaining liberation. It wouldn't make sense for them to make efforts to gain the attentions of other people. And for the most part, spiritualists tend to acknowledge the futility of trying to convince others. Throughout history, those who have shown some greater ability or power have been exposed to a lot of negativity, often hunted down and killed.

I would be so super careful if I had extraordinary abilities.

That's why in most fiction stories, the people with powers remain secretive :yes:
There's a very good reason for that.