Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Whether we agree or have consensus is not the goal of spirituality. It is consensus between the individual and his divinity.
If one feels bothered about spiritual people not reaching consensus, he should question himself as to why it bothers him.
The problem with many of these "spiritual" people is that they don't leave it at their "consensus" with their divinity. If they did then it wouldn't be a problem. But they don't.
They argue with us, they argue with each other. Many claim they have immutable truth and if you don't share that immutable truth...you ain't spiritual.
So my question then is if a person holds that view...are they actually "spiritual"?... because it is apparent that this is part of their "consensus with their divinity"....
Questions are good, if coming from an honest, intelligent and informed place...
I'm not sure you have the "stance of secularism" exactly right or that your good question is really about secularism. Not an easy question to answer either, but I'm giving this answer as the best I can do at the moment. Perhaps in part to answer your question with another question or two.
For example, does a professor of religious studies need to know what it is to be a muslim or Christian or Mormon to be able to know about religion(s) and or to teach religious studies? My professor of religious studies certainly didn't. Does a doctor need to have had every disease in order to know their nature, their causes, their effects?
Also, of all there is to know about any subject, all students of these subjects are called upon to pass judgment as to what is worthwhile to know and what is not. That's a personal assessment of course, but an important one, and although we're not all likely to pass judgement along those lines in the same way, our best understanding of any of these subjects is dependent on that judgement.
Let me know if this helps any or if you can help me to do better, and I'll try again.
Secularism regards religion as a personal matter that does not belong in the public space. Am I right? This declaration cancels the practice of religion as a way of life. The most violent suppression of religion including its complete eradication from society by secularism was successfully implemented in China during the Cultural Revolution (1966 - 1976). It was quite an amazingly successful project. It cleared away the superstitious beliefs that would have hampered the phenomenal modernization of a nation making up a quarter of the world's population. The secular government of China lifted 800 million people out of poverty, and within a generation transformed a backward third world economy into a technological giant poised to overtake America, the so-called wealthiest and most powerful country on the planet.
What is there not to like about secularism? You tell me, or should I tell you? The Chinese are not into hypocrisy. They don't care for our brand of secularism that protects human rights and freedom of religion.
The problem with many of these "spiritual" people is that they don't leave it at their "consensus" with their divinity. If they did then it wouldn't be a problem. But they don't.
They argue with us, they argue with each other. Many claim they have immutable truth and if you don't share that immutable truth...you ain't spiritual.
So my question then is if a person holds that view...are they actually "spiritual"?... because it is apparent that this is part of their "consensus with their divinity"....
I would just let it go in one ear and out the other. Does it really matter to you that much that they call themselves "spiritual" though ? The same happens with people deeply entrenched in their organized religion.
It's not a topic worth discussing further with them because there is no leeway.
The problem with many of these "spiritual" people is that they don't leave it at their "consensus" with their divinity. If they did then it wouldn't be a problem. But they don't.
They argue with us, they argue with each other. Many claim they have immutable truth and if you don't share that immutable truth...you ain't spiritual.
So my question then is if a person holds that view...are they actually "spiritual"?... because it is apparent that this is part of their "consensus with their divinity"....
I can speak best about Buddhism.
There are two ways to approach Buddhism, in my view.
One way is to focus on the 'magic' aspects that cannot be determined to be true/real or not. I consider this to be shallow.
The other way is to focus on the wisdom of the teachings, remembering that the purpose of Buddhism is to reduce suffering. Using the tools that the Buddha gave us to think about how we conduct ourselves.
There's been a whole discussion here about whether or not the Red Sea parted. Does it really matter? What does believing in such a thing -- or not believing in such a thing -- get one? Why such a focus on the unprovable. In my view, the answer is because it allows one to use 'faith' and 'spirituality' to gloss over the lack of critical thinking about what matters. And what matters are the moral teachings, not the stories themselves.
To me it means that they are not following and serving God. That's not to say that they are an immoral person but, as a Christian, I believe that we are ALL supposed to love and follow God and to obey his commandments.
To me it means that they are not following and serving God. That's not to say that they are an immoral person but, as a Christian, I believe that we are ALL supposed to love and follow God and to obey his commandments.
Maybe they just don't believe in the stories told by one of the 45,000 Christian denominations but still believe in a higher power.
Questions are good, if coming from an honest, intelligent and informed place...
I'm not sure you have the "stance of secularism" exactly right or that your good question is really about secularism. Not an easy question to answer either, but I'm giving this answer as the best I can do at the moment. Perhaps in part to answer your question with another question or two.
For example, does a professor of religious studies need to know what it is to be a muslim or Christian or Mormon to be able to know about religion(s) and or to teach religious studies? My professor of religious studies certainly didn't. Does a doctor need to have had every disease in order to know their nature, their causes, their effects?
Also, of all there is to know about any subject, all students of these subjects are called upon to pass judgment as to what is worthwhile to know and what is not. That's a personal assessment of course, but an important one, and although we're not all likely to pass judgement along those lines in the same way, our best understanding of any of these subjects is dependent on that judgement.
Let me know if this helps any or if you can help me to do better, and I'll try again.
I you wanted to gain an understanding of Chinese culture, you could best obtain it not from someone who has made a thorough study of things Chinese, but from someone who sees the world through Chinese eyes. I think the same is true with religion. If I wanted to gain in-depth knowledge of Buddhism, I would expect that the knowledge I got directly from a Buddhist to be superior to any knowledge someone else had gained from simply studying Buddhism. And I certainly wouldn't get it from someone who considers Buddhism to be a "crock." Medicine is a science; religion is not. Therefore I don't believe your comparing the two is justified. If a person has had cancer, he'd be better able to tell you what it feels like to have cancer than an oncologist would.
First, it seems you didn't take the rest of my comment into account before you now seem wanting to shift the focus toward a question that has been answered many times before in this forum. By me and others, but OK then...
I suppose the best way I can answer your question again is to explain, yet again, the universal facts and truths we all share are those all reasonably intelligent mature people accept as fact and truth "beyond a reasonable doubt" without question, debate or controversy. I've provided many an example before, and I'm very hard pressed to think I need do so again for anyone who has been a part of this discussion as long as you have.
Whether the path (or forum) is one of religion, spirituality, politics, science, the law, I feel strongly about recognizing and/or distinguishing between what are our universal truths versus all the many claims, opinions and beliefs that can't be established as universal truths in any similar convincing manner.
it's a simple question.
waiting for an answer, waiting for examples.
what are examples of the " the universal facts and truths we all share" with regards to religion and spirituality, which is the topic and focus of this section of the forum.
i have not seen examples provided. i have seen readers ask for examples relevant to religion and spirituality, but no responses yet. (again, this has nothing to do with politics, science, or jurisprudence.)
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 01-09-2023 at 09:07 PM..
"Spiritual is not fact based rational thinking though and that is what this thread is about.
Spiritual is beyond that."
I would say it is both beyond and instead of rational thinking.
The use of reason is tied to a premise that provides the basis for the rationale. For example, your premise for this argument is a debate between two human beings. In the spiritual context, this conversation is a communion, an exchange of thoughts where thinkers are absent.
I could even go deeper and say that, spiritually, communion can take place without any movement of thought. It's quite intense when sensitivity is heightened.
And this is nothing bizarre. Are you capable of falling in love? Brutes can't do that. They cannot sweep women off their feet without saying a word. Spirituality is about love, love of anything and everything.
Last edited by myuen2; 01-09-2023 at 09:54 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
