P
Princely
Guest
Ok. But when your pain comes remember, "The Lord is righteous and He loves righteous works."
Peace is my gift to you, I do not give it as the world does.
Ok. But when your pain comes remember, "The Lord is righteous and He loves righteous works."
Peace is my gift to you, I do not give it as the world does.
L
Lunitik
Guest
It is not a gift, it is a bargaining chip.
Pain or servitude, peace is only based on avoiding hell.
It is not even worth as much as what left my rectum earlier.
Peace is found by finding yourself, you have made it clear you have not even looked.
You refuse that God is within us, you know nothing.
L
Lunitik
Guest
When you know true peace, not even torturous pain can shake it.
You do not have peace because you still fear the consequences your God can instill.
Your peace is just a consolation, you remain empty handed.
You do not have peace because you still fear the consequences your God can instill.
Your peace is just a consolation, you remain empty handed.
M
mojobadshah
Guest
People have their freedom of expression in public, but there is a limit to freedom of expression in commerce. Should it be that way. I think so, but I also think that protection should also be granted to expressions that are thousands of years old and were original and not universal when they were created such as many of the Aryan expressions e.g. God < Ahura Mazda, Son of God < Zarathushtra , Holy Spirit < Spenta Mainyu. Learning from all religions sounds like a good idea. It's sort of the sychronist path, but that's not the way things are. I think if people appreciated sychronisity more there would be a lot more Muslims than there are Christians today because Islam goes one step further then Christianity when it comes to embracing religions. Islam acknowledges all the people of the book from the Zarathushtrians, Jews, Christians, and Muslims. The initial 3 religions exclude the Muslims. Sufism goes one step further than Islam in incorporating Hindu and Buddhist elements. But I still do think there is something very powerful about an authentic religion like Zoroastrianism, which originated many of the expressions that are exploited today, and all in all I don't think that religions are about finding truth. They're about control as cliche as it sounds. Christianity was initially created by Jews for Jews with the hopes of subjecting their gentile overlords, and thanks to sell outs like Constantine who rejected native traditions Europe is Christian, and we can also attribute the rise of Islam which was a way for the Arabs to subject their Persian overlords to the Roman wars with the Persians. Now that that's all over with I just want to see the Aryan people get what they deserve: the exclusive right to use the expressions they created in commerce. Not to say that people shouldn't be able to express themselves, in public anyway.
L
Lunitik
Guest
It is precisely because religions INCLUDING Zorostrianism have become about control that for me you have to find your own truth, you cannot rely on any present body to know anything of truth because that isn't their purpose. What is more, the further back you go, the more likely it is that these things have been molded to a particular groups needs again as a means to control directly as part of the religion - it is basically like old school patriotism...
Any identification with anything will block your route to truth, all identification is utterly false, and while I respect Zarathustra it is HIS experience which he talks about, it can never be yours or mine. If we try to emulate another persons experience we are making our existence null and void, just a carbon copy, and that is absolutely wrong. That doesn't mean we can't take some things from his words along the way, but ultimately religion must transcend texts all together, it must become your daily experience, and in that there is no thinking about other religions at all, there is only living life.
It is almost certain that Hinduism, Zarathustrianism and Mithraism have an ancient ancestor in common for the simply reason that each talk about the same certain Gods. The very fact they have split shows there is something basically wrong with their ideas about oneness. It is why I love the Sufi's, because they are trying to bring everyone back together, but I love Zen more because they are trying to bring about uniqueness in everyone, free from all concepts where Sufism still works with things like God and love - both are merely ideas, you don't know their truth.
Yet, you say religion isn't about finding truth, it seems then that you are fine with their lies... nothing wrong with that but that isn't my purpose in delving into them. I am not interested in a society of slaves, my whole interest is that everyone find absolute freedom.
radarmark
Quaker-in-the-Making
This is not to be construed as truth from on high... it is merely what I have experienced on my own or gleaned from logical relationships or readings.
There is but one religion. It is the religion of everyone from Zarathustra to Matthew Fox. It is the direct experience of G!d (which also prompts us to emulate H!m in love and peace and unity and other perceived behaviors or character traits).
All Religions are thus fingers which may point at the one true religion. All really spiritual Religions are equivalent in their content if not their form. If it does not matter if an Tewahedo Christian speaks to G!d in Amharic or a Quaker in Esparanto, how can it matter if a shaman speaks to G!d in Ainu or an Ahmadiyyan in Punjabi?
All Religions may (I use this because there can logically be Religions that are not spiritual--I consider material monist scienfistic atheism to be one) be separate paths to the same end-point.
It is by their teachings and their results whereby we may judge a Religion to point towards the religion.
There is but one religion. It is the religion of everyone from Zarathustra to Matthew Fox. It is the direct experience of G!d (which also prompts us to emulate H!m in love and peace and unity and other perceived behaviors or character traits).
All Religions are thus fingers which may point at the one true religion. All really spiritual Religions are equivalent in their content if not their form. If it does not matter if an Tewahedo Christian speaks to G!d in Amharic or a Quaker in Esparanto, how can it matter if a shaman speaks to G!d in Ainu or an Ahmadiyyan in Punjabi?
All Religions may (I use this because there can logically be Religions that are not spiritual--I consider material monist scienfistic atheism to be one) be separate paths to the same end-point.
It is by their teachings and their results whereby we may judge a Religion to point towards the religion.
Etu Malku
Mercuræn
- Messages
- 1,439
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 38
What happens when one is quite sure there is no god?
Without the god factor, what would be the 'same end-point'?
radarmark
Quaker-in-the-Making
Let me through out a few. G!d, to me, is just the experience of something beyond the mundane, scientistic world we usually inhabit. Like in AA, use "your higher power", if that works.
Shamanism and real ecoism really do not have a G!d (nor really does Buddhism nor Daoism). And I do mean to include those.
The "same end point" would be having the experience of "your higher power". Does that work? Experiencing Tathagatha (that which has gonebeyond) or the Dao would thusly be included.
Excellent point!
Shamanism and real ecoism really do not have a G!d (nor really does Buddhism nor Daoism). And I do mean to include those.
The "same end point" would be having the experience of "your higher power". Does that work? Experiencing Tathagatha (that which has gonebeyond) or the Dao would thusly be included.
Excellent point!
Etu Malku
Mercuræn
- Messages
- 1,439
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 38
Actually, that does make sense and does fit in with Luciferianism. Thanks.
seattlegal
Mercuræn Buddhist
How am I supposed to be a heretic if there is only one religion? 
*pouts*
*pouts*
radarmark
Quaker-in-the-Making
I hereby dub thee "official heretic" of this heretical enterprise!
seattlegal
Mercuræn Buddhist
M
mojobadshah
Guest
Atheism is about finding the truth. Religion is more of an outdated psychology. The language is more mystical but also more mysterious and lacks definition. It's true Zarathushtra's experience can never be mine, but a part of it, his works, can be recreated and expressed through various art forms so that others can experience an [Aryan] tradition inspired by potentially 8000 years of soul.
And you're right religion is form of patriotism, but some religions like Christianity don't do a good job of it, especially when you realize that most Christians are Aryan by national and linguistic association, but their propagating a Semitic tradition and worshipping not Aryan but Semitic gods. Sure the gods of all the relgions could be interpreted as the same god, but people forget the cultural association with their respective gods. Jesus = God was Jewish. Christian authority structure has been getting away with it because for one thing most people don't even understand how languages and cultures have developed and most people aren't aware of one culture's affinity with another culture in this context. Most people have never even heard of the term Indo-European (Aryan). But if Christian authority structures were to emphasize, over, and over again, how a lot of us are Aryan speakers, we have our respective Aryan cultural heritages distinct from the Biblical or Semitic ones I think that people would really start to realize how duped they've been.
L
Lunitik
Guest
This is exactly why I cannot respect any "orthodox" religion!
Atheism isn't about any truth either, it is just as blind as any theism...
Religion is just as valid a science as any other field when practiced correctly, it is merely the subjective investigation into existence where science is the objective. Ideally, both should be integrated again, they both were approaches to philosophy once and should be again.
I cannot forgive the idiocy which has come from faith based beliefs, I am only interested in experiential pursuits. There is something very valid about religion, and it has nothing to do with psychology, but few ever pursue this. For me, this the crime of all believers. They have made the whole subject something utterly disgusting for people, yet there is no other way to understand the universal "whys".
NiceCupOfTea
Pathetic earthlings
- Messages
- 1,242
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 0
so aryan and semetic does not really matter.
and its in the Bible that Gentils are grafted into the root of Israel. So its not forgotten, which is why support for Israel is high amongst conservative Protestant Christians no matter how misguided that support may be.
and the God revealed to Jesus transcends all this aryan semetic nonsense anyway.
radarmark
Quaker-in-the-Making
Let us try to make some sense here. Atheism is the belief there is no higher power. Theism is the belief there is. At this level it is either-or. They are mutually exclusive. Which are you Lunitik?
Theism can be divided into deism, exo-theism, auto-theism, pantheism, and panentheism. Deism is the belief that at least one deity created the universe, but then withdrew from it eternally. Exo-theism is the belief in at least deity, which then interacts with the universe. Auto-theism is the belief that one's self is the deity (a kind of solipsism). Pantheism is the belief that the universe is the deity. Panentheism is the belief that the deity is both the universe and something (exo-theistic) beyond.
That all being said what you appear to preach is panentheism. Is this correct Lunitik?
Theism can be divided into deism, exo-theism, auto-theism, pantheism, and panentheism. Deism is the belief that at least one deity created the universe, but then withdrew from it eternally. Exo-theism is the belief in at least deity, which then interacts with the universe. Auto-theism is the belief that one's self is the deity (a kind of solipsism). Pantheism is the belief that the universe is the deity. Panentheism is the belief that the deity is both the universe and something (exo-theistic) beyond.
That all being said what you appear to preach is panentheism. Is this correct Lunitik?
M
mojobadshah
Guest
Atheism is the negation of God and the supernatural. When I say God I'm talking about the God of the Levant religions (Zoroastrianism and the Abrahamic faiths), "a single all mighty all knowing creator of the universe that fathered mankind." Atheists deny the existence of God and the supernatural because there is no empirical way to prove that God existence. Therefore God might as well not exist. Until the existence of God can be proven there we have no reason to assume that God exists. It is pure delusion and outdated belief system. Religion was science before we had the scientific method, but it's not science anymore.
God revealed to Jesus? Are you serious? That was all politics. God (in the Levant sense) never revealed anything to anyone. We know that a lot of the expressions in the New Testament originated elsewhere. One of the people who these ideas originated with were the Aryans. The Aryans are alive an well. Christians were deluded into Christianity. It's not like they willingly accepted this Semitic heritage and rejected the Aryan heritage. They were subjected to it and now it's ingrained. Even I have trouble denying that. But its this delusion called religion that ties the Aryan people to the Jews, Semites. Beyond they have more commonalities to the Aryan heritage all sprung from the Proto-Aryan (Indo-European) language, culture, and history. Conservative Protestant Christians are deluded. If they want to support the Jewish state so much they should just live there. They can go to Isreal. Pick up the Israeli or Semitic language Hebrew, and adopt their Israeli culture and celebrate observations like Chanakah. The Aryan word is much more widespread than the Hebrew word.
Atheists can believe there's a higher power, just not the supernatural.
M
mojobadshah
Guest
Zoroastrianism and Christianity and Islam deal with both a Holy Spirit or postive energy and a Hostile Spirit or negative energy. Zoroastrianism, Christianity, and Islam and Buddhism all entail the path to achieving and inner peace. In Zoroastrianism and Christianity this inner peace is described as "the kingdom." The Ijtihad in Islam leads to the same place. And in Buddhism its called Nirvana.
Etu Malku
Mercuræn
- Messages
- 1,439
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 38
I am an Agnostic Luciferian . . . Agnostic in that I admit that I "do not know" whether there is or isn't a Higher Being, I neither deny this or accept the idea. Luciferian in that I believe in and live by the Principles of Lucifer as understood by the Ordo Luciferi.
Which 'theism' would you lump Me in?
radarmark
Quaker-in-the-Making
Agnosticism can be used as separate axis. But I beleive (correct me if I am wrong) that in gerneral Luciferians are auto-theists (the diety is within).