Why an Atheist in the R&S Forum?

[rodentraiser]

It's the Religion and Spirituality forum. I can be an atheist and be spiritual. The title doesn't specify what religion has to be here (Wiccan is a recognized religion) and it doesn't say what you have to be spiritual about.

Christians like to gatekeep when it comes to religion and I'd like to take this opportunity to remind them that religion doesn't always equal Christianity. There are other religions out there. The question should be, why wouldn't I be in the Religion and Spirituality forum?

[cb2008]

Love in not about falling in love and falling out of love. That falling in and falling out is something else, it is being human, full of wants and desires, never full filled.
Love is always within, it is the love of the divinity within.. It is what flows freely for no reason at all, unconditionally, for your friend of long time, for the friend you just met, the woman who loves you. It is not the man or the woman or the puppy, it is the love for the divinity that is within me that is within you. That love does not diminish, it stays the same, and flows the same way, and always reflects.

[Tzaphkiel]

Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes

No, you still love something that was external to you.
Yes, that could be the conclusion to your non sequitur.

nothing external is needed for love. that's the whole point.
if something external is needed, then that love is transient and conditional.

whereas love that is there no matter what, just is. unconditional.

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by cb2008

Love in not about falling in love and falling out of love. That falling in and falling out is something else, it is being human, full of wants and desires, never full filled.
Love is always within, it is the love of the divinity within.. It is what flows freely for no reason at all, unconditionally, for your friend of long time, for the friend you just met, the woman who loves you. It is not the man or the woman or the puppy, it is the love for the divinity that is within me that is within you. That love does not diminish, it stays the same, and flows the same way, and always reflects.

This is word salad.

[cb2008]

Originally Posted by rodentraiser

It's the Religion and Spirituality forum. I can be an atheist and be spiritual. The title doesn't specify what religion has to be here (Wiccan is a recognized religion) and it doesn't say what you have to be spiritual about.

Christians like to gatekeep when it comes to religion and I'd like to take this opportunity to remind them that religion doesn't always equal Christianity. There are other religions out there.

The bolded, can you expand on what that means to you? I truly would like to know. To me the two sounds mutually exclusive, and that is because spiritualism includes the knowledge of divinity.

I have no opinion about whether atheists belong here or not. I just would like to share experience and information with others who are religious and spiritual in this space. It is truly wonderful when that happens.

[chief scum]

Originally Posted by chief scum

It is funny that you apply the word overthink to me, because I view everything from the elementary level.

You were writing about love, and I wonder if you have ever experienced taking care of someone through the hardest time of their life. Where nothing is about you.

Originally Posted by ElijahAstin

Weird flex, but okay.


I pitched in with caregiving when my mother slowly died of ALS in my late teens and early twenties. Any other questions?

It wasn't a question. It was something to think about. When love isn't all about you.

And I have no idea what "weird flex" means.

[Tzaphkiel]

Originally Posted by LearnMe

Not sure I follow...If my wife had not come along externally, I'm not sure I'd be loving her today. What you write sounds like someone attempting to spin more pretzel logic around what it is to love another. Are we not able to appreciate both the internal and external aspects of what makes for loving other than ourselves?

it is simple.
feeling love is not dependent upon or contingent upon anything external.
it exists within us. it is not caused by nor is it reliant upon nor is it generated by external objects.


i have no idea what the question at the end of post above is asking or what it means.

[Tzaphkiel]

Originally Posted by ElijahAstin

Sorry, but you’re wrong. I would fall out of love with my wife if she turned out to be unfaithful, or became abusive, or did any number of other bad things that are inconsistent with my vision of who a good friend, partner, and parent to our child should be. If I did those same bad things to her, she would be well within our rights to do the same.

I wouldn’t fall out of love instantaneously. I would probably experience a period of disbelief and try to restore our relationship to its prior healthy and mutually respectful equilibrium. I would also be heartbroken and mourn the loss of the relationship. But sooner or later I would fall out of love and move on, however awful and surreal the feeling would be at the time. This is something I never expect to happen and greatly hope will never happen. But it could happen, and it would hardly defy the laws of physics if it ever did happen.

It’s called having self-respect, and setting boundaries, and knowing what you can and can’t take and do and don’t deserve in a loving relationship. You might hold yourself to different standards, which is fine for you and 100% your prerogative. But you are completely and undeniably wrong if you assert that other peoples’ vision of love is a mere transaction, or “barter,” to use your parlance.

but the post above is describing conditions. so it is conditional.
if the conditions aren't met, then the love is removed and the relationship is dissolved, that is what the post above describes. it also acknowledges that the other person in the relationship would likely do the same if certain conditions weren't present. that is an agreement between the people in the relationship, so yes that is a transaction, in the sense that "transaction may be used to refer to an agreement reached between two or more parties whereby they make reciprocal concessions."

this is talking about the ideas under discussion, using the views expressed in post above as an example. my comments are not talking about any individual person on the forum, or anyone's specific marriage or family.

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel

but the post above is describing conditions. so it is conditional.

Exactly. That’s why I said most forms of love are (and should be!) conditional.

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by rodentraiser

It's the Religion and Spirituality forum. I can be an atheist and be spiritual. The title doesn't specify what religion has to be here (Wiccan is a recognized religion) and it doesn't say what you have to be spiritual about.

Christians like to gatekeep when it comes to religion and I'd like to take this opportunity to remind them that religion doesn't always equal Christianity. There are other religions out there. The question should be, why wouldn't I be in the Religion and Spirituality forum?

It's funny...I had just walked into my home office, thinking about posting something sort of like this. My take on it was going to be that christians (especially) -- at least on this forum -- often tend to think that atheists feel that it has to be a choice: EITHER spirituality OR science. And it doesn't have to be that at all.

Quite a while ago I posted a story about an experience I had which -- for me -- sort of proved the concept of past lives. I didn't ask anyone else to believe it. And for a very simple reason: I had no even somewhat conclusive evidence. It was purely anecdotal on my part. But gee...several of the religionists jumped all over me. And yet they make the assumption that religion does seem to always equal christianity. I'm Buddhist. To me that is very spiritual. BUT, I don't ask people to believe what I believe because I have no conclusive evidence. Just as they have no conclusive evidence...but insist christianity is the 'right" religion. That's why I usually want to talk about principles -- which they almost never do -- while they keep wanting to prove what they can't prove. Let me be blunt about -- what I see as the 'magic' in christianity is...well, I'll be nice and just call it silly. But, in the NT there are quite a few valid principles. It isn't science OR religion, even for an atheist.