Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4
#32954 05/22/03 09:33 PM
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 35
Member
Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 35
quote:
Experienced photoreaders are in a position to give helpful advice on the technology of reading this book. But if you want to heckle Christians, or proseletize your faith, this ain't the place.

I'm going to third that. For people who try to remain neutral on religion, the incessant whining of self-righteous skeptics is just as irritating as people who forcefully witness you with Chick tracts.






#32955 05/26/03 12:41 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 126
Member
Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 126
"Obviously since religion so complex, it is easy to abuse it and for people to mislead others. However, I believe that religion in itself without the added human interference, adaptations in order to satisfy ones self interests, is one of the purest commodities available to us."

What do you think religion is, in itself? Humans create religion, and humans enslave themselves and others to religion, in the same way as humans create governments and laws. Religion does not exist except in the minds of men, so your comment about the pure commodity of non-human-interfered religion does not make any sense, nor does it refer to any reality, as far as I can see. Religion is a dogmatized social system created around the mystical experiences of a few. Since all laws and systems which forever attempt to solidify some perception inherently are removed from the original truth, organized religion cannot be other than a system to imprison the individual. It has taken a living reality and stamped it into stone, killing it, with only the shadow to remain, much like Plato's cave. [Oh, and for those of you it thought it so clever to point out that this board deals with the tools of accelerated intellect, not with the content, so to was the war in Iraq discussed, with quite some fervor. Apparently religion is too tender a ground. I will not stand by idly and let people unreservedly impress their subconscious with such an agency as religion.]

Yes, you are correct in asserting that it is up to the individual to choose. It is also my intention to attempt to peel away the layers of religion so that the individual may see it for itself-- not in some illusory kernel of truth, but rather in the whole of its operation. And when it is thus perceived, no one can dare assert that a "pure" religion exists, apart from in the psyche of a human. Such an assertion violates any understanding of the order of abstraction by which the human mind operates, projecting a human power-complex into an outside perception in the manner of a schizophrenic. No, what we need is a religion of humanity: where the individual pursues and enters fully into his/her own experience thereby liberating the forces at work in his/her own nature. Religion would thus allow the entry of man's rational faculty, instead of its suspension; the beginning point of freedom and choice. This is the only way to an account of our Being, and a religion for our Time.

Now, go ahead and PR your Bible- as has been pointed out their is great significance to it, this I don't deny. And finally, I cannot help but respond to the idea that somehow I am just proselytising a faith, or attempting to "disprove or heckle" another. I am not doing either. I am doing philosophy. While you may not agree, or understand any or all of my positions, at least I have laid an eminently empirical groundwork for my beliefs. I have provided a court by which disagreements can be resolved; where, as Socrates admonished his followers at his death, misology- hatred of the argument, can be avoided.

It is fitting to quote, then, as ending in the theme of my religion for the Individual, Nietzsche, who said:
"There was only one true Christian and he died on the cross"

K.O.








#32956 05/26/03 01:05 AM
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 8
Member
Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 8
quote:
I will not stand by idly and let people unreservedly impress their subconscious with such an agency as religion.

It is also my intention to attempt to peel away the layers of religion so that the individual may see it for itself...

Now, go ahead and PR your Bible- as has been pointed out their is great significance to it, this I don't deny.


You are preaching a religion based on how helpful YOU are to those less wise. But we don't need your help to be enlightened, and we don't need your permission to read the Bible.








#32957 05/26/03 03:27 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 126
Member
Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 126
quote:
Originally posted by eryk:
You are preaching a religion based on how helpful YOU are to those less wise. But we don't need your help to be enlightened, and we don't need your permission to read the Bible.



Thank you for your response. Obviously, I disagree with everything you wrote, but at least you gave up your reaction for everyone to benefit by:

A) Its not preaching, its pointing out
B) It does not fulfill the criterion for being a religion, their are no metaphysical assumptions except the primacy of your own psyche in processing your own experience
C)It may be helpful to those who do not realize certain facets of themselves, is their something wrong with that?
D)No, you don't need 'my' help to become enlightened-- whatever the criterion you have chosen to qualify as enlightened-- but most people obviously need some stimulation to thought outside of their system-- personal, religious, social, etc. -- in order to see the boundaries for what they are.
E) My criterion for enlightenment, currently, is absolute freedom...not in the petty governmental/democratic sense but in the sense of experience
F)NO, you certainly don't need my permission to read the Bible, that was a figure of speech appropriate to the nature of what I said
G)To reiterate: I will not stop my deconstruction of religion, in the public eye
H) Seeing as how you did not argue or address me where my meatier arguments lie than I shall assume that your post was an emotional reaction to something which held meaning for you. This is not necessarily undesirable in my view, but, I would desire people to adopt the thinking which leads them towards freedom. If you had such freedom you would not have made the ridiculous assertions you did in your post.
I) If you want to argue me than address me at my 'core' arguments, don't resort to name-labelling such as: oh, he's just preaching another religion. Believe it or not, I think all would benefit by a more reasonable argument.

KO







#32958 05/26/03 03:55 PM
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 564
Member
Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 564
People are free to PhotoRead or regular read anything they wish to. I do not see why if a person wants to PR the Bible, or any other book, another person feels they have a "right" to question and belittle that persons reading choice. I, myself, bought the PR course to learn how to PR so I could PR the Bible.

KO, you say we have freedom, and we do.
BUT common sense and respect also play a part. FREEDOM to PR ANYTHING we wish to
COMMONSENSE to ASK questions but not to BELITTLE people or beliefs.
And RESPECT, you may not agree with people but allow them their freedom to disagree on certain things and listen to their reasons why. Do not belittle people or religion based on YOUR viewpoint of the matter.

[This message has been edited by jonah (edited May 26, 2003).]






#32959 05/26/03 03:56 PM
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 8
Member
Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 8
quote:
Seeing as how you did not argue or address me where my meatier arguments lie than I shall assume that your post was an emotional reaction to something which held meaning for you.

There is no meat to address, only illogical gristle:

quote:
Oh, and for those of you it thought it so clever to point out that this board deals with the tools of accelerated intellect, not with the content, so to was the war in Iraq discussed, with quite some fervor.

This is an argumentum ad antiquitatem, a fallacy of relevance. It means that something is true/ethical because it's been said/done before. Physician, heal thyself.

[This message has been edited by eryk (edited May 26, 2003).]






#32960 05/26/03 06:17 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 70
Member
Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 70
some people dont have their minds made up whether there is or is not a God to worship. some of them just follow this idea

"Well, I'm not sure if there's a God or not, but if there is, maybe I should pray. Just to have all my bases covered."

What can it hurt anyways? Sure, I found religion, I've seen it with my own eyes, and I'm only 16. Some people would call what I saw coincidence, but it was too exact for that. You dont have to believe in anything you can't fathom or except, but whats it hurt? Christianity never taught you to do anything evil or inhumane to people, mostly to be a good person and love God, why not "pray. Just to have all my bases covered."?






#32961 05/26/03 08:32 PM
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member

Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3
Kristoff, if you're a proponent of absolute freedom, as you referred to in your most recent post, perhaps you should consider the words of Actual Freedom's founder in the first article presented on his site: "If one is driven by some force then one is not actually free". He goes on to reflect on how he was driven to push his ideas on others (including ideas about religion and non-religion), and how this approach inhibited his attainment of absolute freedom.

I just joined this forum today, with the goal of learning more about PhotoReading. I was under the impression this is a forum about reading, not religion. The Bible is a book. To some, it is just a book, while to others, it is more than a book. In either case, it seems the member who originally posted on the topic was referring to it in the simple context of the PhotoReading technique, not to prosthelitize Christianity or any other religion to the other members of the forum. If people choose to read the Bible during their PhotoReading exercises, let them. If they choose to read The Tao Te Ching or the Bhagavad Gita or the Vedic scriptures or the Koran or any other religious or spiritual text, it is entirely their choice. In the original post, the questions were related to the type of results the PhotoReading technique produces, not the validity of the contents of the Bible.

Someone who refers to absolute freedom in his post should know absolute freedom comes only through being responsible for your own actions while allowing everyone else to be responsible for their own. You control your reality. Let everyone else be free to control their own.

-Kristen






#32962 05/26/03 11:35 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 126
Member
Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 126

And RESPECT, you may not agree with people but allow them their freedom to disagree on certain things and listen to their reasons why. Do not belittle people or religion based on YOUR viewpoint of the matter.

[This message has been edited by jonah (edited May 26, 2003).][/B][/QUOTE]

I'm listening. What is your viewpoint on the matter, given my criticisms? I don't know what you mean by belittling. I have levelled a serious challenge towards organized religion, is that necessarily equivelant to belittlement? If we replace that sentence with "challenge", I'll add the question: on who's viewpoint, if not my own, can I offer a challenge? Really, anything else would be dishonest.
And to continue. I never challenged your "freedom" to PR the Bible, or anything else. I offered some critiques which I believe to be of eminent importance when THINKING ABOUT RELIGION, which, I would hope to accompany PRing the primary source document for your specific belief. If this doesn't accompany PRing the Bible than I believe you are at risk for dogmatically accepting unnecesary and/or harmful ideas...this is true of just about every document dealing with morality, metaphysics, or significant life-forming prescriptions, not just the Bible. If that is belittlement in any way, than so be it.









#32963 05/26/03 11:53 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 126
Member
Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 126
quote:
Originally posted by Agent_Orange:
some people dont have their minds made up whether there is or is not a God to worship. some of them just follow this idea

"Well, I'm not sure if there's a God or not, but if there is, maybe I should pray. Just to have all my bases covered."

What can it hurt anyways? Sure, I found religion, I've seen it with my own eyes, and I'm only 16. Some people would call what I saw coincidence, but it was too exact for that. You dont have to believe in anything you can't fathom or except, but whats it hurt? Christianity never taught you to do anything evil or inhumane to people, mostly to be a good person and love God, why not "pray. Just to have all my bases covered."?


Well, that's not even a fraction of it. Religion has been behind many bloody conflicts in human history. In addition, religion has contributed much to misunderstanding of Humanity and Nature. I don't even know where to begin. Consider, to begin, how religious theology has contributed to much suffering in its hatred and fear of, among other things, human sexuality.
I have nothing against prayer in and of itself. But, if you're praying to a God which you know doesn't exist, than you may well end up finding many illogical reasons to actually start believing, you'll see signs, you'll convince yourself. I know this happens, I have seen it. The problem with prayer is that it can create hyper-suggestible states of mind...an ideal medium to imprint beliefs. Ignoring that possibility, than the other argument is that its a waste of your time. In the end, its not really prayer that I'm concerned about. As you point out religion, and prayer, can have positive effects as well, such as altruism.
What was your experience? I have a peculiar fascination with occult/mystical/"paranormal" experience, not as a dogmatic skeptic but as a matter of profound significance. As you should know, EXPERIENCE is something I'd put weight in.

Eryk, illogical quibble? Please, whereat?
My point about the Iraq war is that people were willing to digress the conventional bounds for what this board can be about. I would think that that is a possibility with this thread as well. It is a matter of your willingness to engage me in an argument about something which has deep significance for human potential. I'm always healing myself, because I'm always opening myself to mystery and growth.








Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4

Moderated by  Patrick O'Neil 

Link Copied to Clipboard
©, Learning Strategies Corporation, All Rights Reserved
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 5.6.40 Page Time: 0.067s Queries: 34 (0.024s) Memory: 3.2524 MB (Peak: 3.5976 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2024-03-29 15:22:58 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS