Values and religion

[Exaltist Ethan]

I wasnt sure how to word this question. It popped im my mind reading another thread. Took me a minute to figure out how to word it. But what values and questions lead you to the belief system you have? And what values/questions being answered in your religion are cornerstone for you? Like if someone were to argue against your religion or lack of what would they have to keep in mind

When I talk to ChatGPT about my beliefs it always throws around words like: Progression, creativity and interconnectedness. I don't use those words often to describe my own beliefs, but I'm not going to argue with the AI about it.

 

[osgart]

The human form strongly suggests intellect is an integral part of existence and it's programming. We are a unique balance of chaos and intellect.

I value the meanings of qualities of good character; the virtues. My values I impose upon an indifferent natural world.

Platonic truths and ideals such as mathematics, some logic, virtues, language, morals, meaning are no accident.

The universe is vaporous. The soul is what I know for sure is real and lasting. I'm a drop in the ocean of unconditioned foundational eternal reality.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I stated how I see things, and gave examples. I am sincere, and no insult was intended. You chose to see whats not there and respond with sarcasm, and belittling my integrity, rather than addressing what i said.

I think I'm quite justified seeing that as inappropriate.

I addressed what you said, not only in this thread, but in other places on the forum. You have a history of disparaging religion and people's religious views based on your limited experience and generalizing all religious views based on your limited experience with them.

Whether you realize it or not, my first response to you in this thread was a detailed response to your query to @mangalavara, but you took the opportunity to give your views on how religion is bad rather than engage me in anything regarding what I said in that post.

If you are somehow telling me you're turning over a new leaf and are genuinely here to learn, listen, and keep an open mind about people's religious views, I would welcome engaging in serious discourse with open arms. But you make it clear that you aren't in posts like these...

OK. Not meaningful to me.

I like you as a person. I really do. And I generally like reading what you have to say. But as with anyone else, I don't sit idly by when someone makes derogatory remarks about religion in general when they have a very limited perspective of what religion is.

 

[Audie]

I addressed what you said, not only in this thread, but in other places on the forum. You have a history of disparaging religion and people's religious views based on your limited experience and generalizing all religious views based on your limited experience with them.

Whether you realize it or not, my first response to you in this thread was a detailed response to your query to @mangalavara, but you took the opportunity to give your views on how religion is bad rather than engage me in anything regarding what I said in that post.

If you are somehow telling me you're turning over a new leaf and are genuinely here to learn, listen, and keep an open mind about people's religious views, I would welcome engaging in serious discourse with open arms. But you make it clear that you aren't in posts like these...


I like you as a person. I really do. And I generally like reading what you have to say. But as with anyone else, I don't sit idly by when someone makes derogatory remarks about religion in general when they have a very limited perspective of what religion is.

The forum rules say something about addressing
the topic and substance of a post, rather than offering
negrive opinions on the charcter, ability, motives
etc of the other poster.

It would be well for all to review that from time to time.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I won't answer for @mangalavara, but I, personally, have struggled to accept what I'm told at face value and have been compelled to question everything.

I posted an article yesterday that has since disappeared that discusses how the narrative one creates for oneself is an illusion...that the 'self' is an illusion. Eastern philosophy has been saying this for over 2500 years and discoveries are being made in neuroscience that validate this.

Eastern philosophy says there is no "self." Science agrees

“Why are you unhappy? Because 99.9 percent of everything you think, and of everything you do, is for yourself — and there isn’t one.”

bigthink.com

The questions"who am I?", "why am I here?", and "why is there suffering?" are the foundations of many philosophies, and there are branches of science that are dedicated to answering "what is the universe?"

This is, in my opinion, why these are both "big" and "real" questions.

Profound, I would say.

 

[DNB]

I wasnt sure how to word this question. It popped im my mind reading another thread. Took me a minute to figure out how to word it. But what values and questions lead you to the belief system you have? And what values/questions being answered in your religion are cornerstone for you? Like if someone were to argue against your religion or lack of what would they have to keep in mind

As a Christian, I'm intrigued by the depth of awareness that Jesus defines sin - not only the physical enactment of it, but also the mental entertainment of it. To me, this speaks louder than any other philosophy that attempts to address the human condition, and as to where man stands before the almighty and holy God.
The intent is what either indicts or exonerates in the eyes of God, who sees our hearts and weighs them accordingly. We all know that we may do the wrong thing but for the right reasons, and visa versa. But, even after all our pitfalls and lessons learned, we still on occasion, but inevitably, will make the wrong decision precipitated by the wrong intent. Those who recognize the bad judgment, repent.

And this is why Christianity is based on faith in Christ's atonement for our sins, as we acknowledge our own incapacity, or unwillingness more correctly, to do what we know is right - as the wages of sin are death.

Christ is the only human ever who loved God with all his heart, mind and soul, and his neighbour as himself - he attained to perfection. And this is why he is worthy of both his exaltation to the right-hand side of God, and our reverence and worship of him.

 

[Aupmanyav]

The universe is vaporous. The soul is what I know for sure is real and lasting. I'm a drop in the ocean of unconditioned foundational eternal reality.

That word creates ambiguities. Is it something that belongs to you or is common to all things (living or non-living) in the universe?
Advaita Hinduism dispenses with the word and replaces the unconditional foundational eternal reality as Brahman, which is not God.
Sankara (8th Century) said: "Brahma satyam, jagan-mithya .." (Brahman is truth, the perceived is an illusion).

 

[SalixIncendium]

The forum rules say something about addressing
the topic and substance of a post, rather than offering
negrive opinions on the charcter, ability, motives
etc of the other poster.

It would be well for all to review that from time to time.

Indeed it would.

 

[wellwisher]

As a Christian, I'm intrigued by the depth of awareness that Jesus defines sin - not only the physical enactment of it, but also the mental entertainment of it. To me, this speaks louder than any other philosophy that attempts to address the human condition, and where man stands before the almighty and holy God.
The intent is what either indicts or exonerates in the eyes of God, who sees our hearts and weighs them accordingly. We all know that we may do the wrong thing but for the right reasons, and visa versa. But, even after all our pitfalls and lessons learned, we still on occasion, but inevitably, will make the wrong decision precipitated by the wrong intent. Those who recognize the bad judgment, repent.

And this is why Christianity is based on faith in Christ's atonement for our sins, as we acknowledge our own incapacity, or willingness more correctly, to do what we know is right - as the wages of sin are death.

Christ is the only human ever who loved God with all his heart, mind and soul, and his neighbour as himself - he attained to perfection. And this is why he is worthy of both his exaltation to the right-hand side of God, and our reverence and worship of him.

This, indirectly, explains a main difference between religion and atheism. To Jesus, sin begins in the heart and mind; your inner intent, and not with getting caught, brought to trial and then sentenced; final confirmed sensory reality.

Some of the victims of police brutality had large rap sheets and therefore victimized ten times more people, than all these charges against them. These silent victims, without sensory confirmation by the system, still exist, but were not counted when these criminals met their terminal justice. To the Left, it is only what you can see that counts; video evidence. If a tree falls in the woods, and nobody is there to see or hear it, does it make a sound? Materialism may have to say no evidence, while religion will say yes, based on the intent of the natural physics laws of sound. Confirmed reality without senses.

If you only base your opinion on what you can sense, then technically the criminals lurking in the dark that nobody can see, is sinless. Also if you commit a crime, but have a good shady lawyer who gets you off and can purge your record, to materialists, you are innocent since there is no hard proof.

Religious tend to go deeper into the abstract world of conscience and natural and human intent, which goes beyond what is obvious to the five senses. For example, just because nobody in the Swamp has been punished does not mean that crimes were not committed. Shallow materialists may disagree; where is the proof. Spiritual Justice, on the other hand, is about an abstraction beyond the limited shallow and visible world seen and sensed by materialism.

Science has to stop at the hard evidence, and not natural intent that may not be visible; hypothesis. Hypothesis is not enough without sensory evidence. Liberalism stays in the shallows, while religion responds to a deeper standard that needs more brain power to process.

 

[Audie]

This, indirectly, explains a main difference between religion and atheism. To Jesus, sin begins in the heart and mind; your inner intent, and not with getting caught, brought to trial and then sentenced; final confirmed sensory reality.

Some of the victims of police brutality had large rap sheets and therefore victimized ten times more people, than all these charges against them. These silent victims, without sensory confirmation by the system, still exist, but were not counted when these criminals met their terminal justice. To the Left, it is only what you can see that counts; video evidence. If a tree falls in the woods, and nobody is there to see or hear it, does it make a sound? Materialism may have to say no evidence, while religion will say yes, based on the intent of the natural physics laws of sound. Confirmed reality without senses.

If you only base your opinion on what you can sense, then technically the criminals lurking in the dark that nobody can see, is sinless. Also if you commit a crime, but have a good shady lawyer who gets you off and can purge your record, to materialists, you are innocent since there is no hard proof.

Religious tend to go deeper into the abstract world of conscience and natural and human intent, which goes beyond what is obvious to the five senses. For example, just because nobody in the Swamp has been punished does not mean that crimes were not committed. Shallow materialists may disagree; where is the proof. Spiritual Justice, on the other hand, is about an abstraction beyond the limited shallow and visible world seen and sensed by materialism.

Science has to stop at the hard evidence, and not natural intent that may not be visible; hypothesis. Hypothesis is not enough without sensory evidence. Liberalism stays in the shallows, while religion responds to a deeper standard that needs more brain power to process.

Goes deeper?
Like what.

 

[wellwisher]

Goes deeper?
Like what.

Jesus said sin begins with the thought of sin, and not just with getting caught; proof in eyes of your peers. If you use the getting caught standard, you will be more concerned with being careful of your actions in the eyes of others, than in the consequences of your unseen actions on your victims. Even if you are not caught, such as the Swamp, their actions harmed people, which does not dawn on the shallow since they did not get caught, on paper. The spiritual person is thinking more forward in terms of the consequences of their possible future actions, including those which are not considered criminal, but can alter the trajectory of others.

Parent who do not structure children may think this is good since the child is happy being free. But this can have long term consequences when the child reached adulthood. The religious sense this future problem and may add more structure, which the child may not like in real time. This may look real time cruel to the materials stuck in the now. But later in life, this appearance of harm, allows more self control in terms of the young adult pursuing their life goals. One cannot see the future with only the real time empirical data in front of you.

The trans fad is causing young people to see the excitement of becoming this way, since it is being given center stage in terms of social hierarchy, pushed by intolerant bullies. They do not see the long term consequences, since their brain is not allowed to time project to the future, since the future is uncertain and cannot be seen with the senses. But the future can be inferred, but one needs to go deeper than the real time sensory excitement of a team protected by adult bullies.

 

[Audie]

Jesus said sin begins with the thought of sin, and not just with getting caught; proof in eyes of your peers. If you use the getting caught standard, you will be more concerned with being careful of your actions in the eyes of others, than in the consequences of your unseen actions on your victims. Even if you are not caught, such as the Swamp, their actions harmed people, which does not dawn on the shallow since they did not get caught, on paper. The spiritual person is thinking more forward in terms of the consequences of their possible future actions, including those which are not considered criminal, but can alter the trajectory of others.

Parent who do not structure children may think this is good since the child is happy being free. But this can have long term consequences when the child reached adulthood. The religious sense this future problem and may add more structure, which the child may not like in real time. This may look real time cruel to the materials stuck in the now. But later in life, this appearance of harm, allows more self control in terms of the young adult pursuing their life goals. One cannot see the future with only the real time empirical data in front of you.

The trans fad is causing young people to see the excitement of becoming this way, since it is being given center stage in terms of social hierarchy, pushed by intolerant bullies. They do not see the long term consequences, since their brain is not allowed to time project to the future, since the future is uncertain and cannot be seen with the senses. But the future can be inferred, but one needs to go deeper than the real time sensory excitement of a team protected by adult bullies.

I'd call someone whose only concern is with
getting caught a sociopath.
Atheists are not sociopaths.

It's not anything about " spiritual" or
" going deeper with religion".

We Chjnese are taught social responsibility, that our
actions have consequences for ourselves and
others.

I doubt any culture fails to have rules of conduct
and to instruct on the importance of an upright life.

You don't get to claim this as a spiritual / religious
exclusive or proclaim superiority to atheists on
this nonexistent basis.

Frankly I'd call it reprehensible to claim such
superiority and defame others in the process.

It would be well to consider the consequences of
such a sin.

 

[mangalavara]

Platonic truths and ideals such as mathematics, some logic, virtues, language, morals, meaning are no accident.

I’ve always thought this as well.

The universe is vaporous. The soul is what I know for sure is real and lasting. I'm a drop in the ocean of unconditioned foundational eternal reality.

I really like this. Beautifully said.

 

[Audie]

I’ve always thought this as well.



I really like this. Beautifully said.

What a remarkable way of thinking.

Somethung immune to detection is
" known for sure" but a hyena, clearly
evident as to chews your foot is but am
illusion.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I wasnt sure how to word this question. It popped im my mind reading another thread. Took me a minute to figure out how to word it. But what values and questions lead you to the belief system you have? And what values/questions being answered in your religion are cornerstone for you? Like if someone were to argue against your religion or lack of what would they have to keep in mind

Values: Compassion, skepticism, pluralism, pursuit of the well-being of conscious creatures, and openness as well as adaptability to evidence and logic.

Some of the questions:

- Was I really brought up in the "one true religion" out of the thousands of religions that exist?

- Why are we here?

- What happens after death?

- Does God really want us to condemn or preach to everyone who doesn't share our beliefs?

- Do people of different religions really deserve to go to Hell for eternity?

- Is it really virtuous to be homophobic, sexist, or religiously intolerant?

What has led me to the current Buddhist influences on my worldview is my practice of meditation and mindfulness, which has been a part of my life for the last few years but has also expanded ever since I started DBT and CBT—which I found out are heavily influenced by Buddhism.

 

[mangalavara]

Somethung immune to detection is
" known for sure"

In my experience, pure Consciousness cannot be detected with sense organs. However, I have realized, more than once, that I am that Consciousness. It happens in deep meditation. Some people call it ‘the soul’ or even purusha, but I prefer to call it the Ātman or ‘Self.’

but a hyena, clearly
evident as to chews your foot is but am
illusion.

The hyena and the foot are really there, and they are within Consciousness.

 

[Audie]

In my experience, pure Consciousness cannot be detected with sense organs. However, I have realized, more than once, that I am that Consciousness. It happens in deep meditation. Some people call it ‘the soul’ or even purusha, but I prefer to call it the Ātman or ‘Self.’



The hyena and the foot are really there, and they are within Consciousness.

This "consciousness" is the only thing you
know is real?

 

[mangalavara]

This "consciousness" is the only thing you
know is real?

I am Consciousness. I am real.

 

[Audie]

I am Consciousness. I am real.

That is unresponsive

 

[mangalavara]

That is unresponsive

If you want more detail, I’ll say that I have realized that all that I detect with the senses is within myself. They are real, but Consciousness is the Reality behind the real.