Designing a New Religion

[Netti-Netti]

That was regarding the resurrection of the dead. The verse from 1 Cor 12 was regarding the Body of Christ--many members being baptized into it by one Spirit.

In answer to your original question, I would say the fulfillment of spirit potential takes the form of incarnation, transfiguration, resurrection and ascension. This transformation takes place "in Christ" and could be said to make the individual part of a larger unity, the resurrected body of Christ.

In Christian theology, there have been many discussions of eschatology. Some of them place an emphasis on some dramatic future End Times. Other emphasize the here and now and the importance of Divine Immanence. Although some of Paul's descriptions do suggest a future that is not yet here, there are other parts of his gospel that emphasize existential immediacy and our ability to respond to G-d's Immanence.

 

[seattlegal]

In answer to your original question, I would say the fulfilllment of spirit potential takes the form of incarnation, transfiguration, resurrection and ascension. This transfomation takes place "in Christ" and could be said to make the individual part of the resurrected body of Christ.

1 Cor 12 talks about people being members of the Body of Christ while they are still living here on earth, by being baptized into the Body of Christ by one Spirit. If you are talking about the Body of Christ as an institution, it is one that is instigated by the Spirit, and not by the Body. (To think that it is instigated by the Body is tantamount to idolatry, imo, therefore the commitment would be to the Spirit, where ever it is found. Similar to your God dependence.)

 

[Netti-Netti]

1 Cor 12 talks about people being members of the Body of Christ while they are still living here on earth, by being baptized into the Body of Christ by one Spirit. If you are talking about the Body of Christ as an institution, it is one that is instigated by the Spirit, and not by the Body.

Agreed. Btw, I do not equate the body of Christ with the church or a ecclesiatic community and have a real problem with that. If you recall, I believe Jesus ushered in a universal priesthood.

To think that it is instigated by the Body is tantamount to idolatry, imo, therefore the commitment would be to the Spirit, where ever it is found. Similar to your God dependence.)

The Greek term for "body" is more abstract and does not necessarily support a literal view of a physical body. To me Paul's use of the term suggests a unified totality that is comparable to a fully integrated and fully functioning organism that it evolves and renews itself over time.

It appears Paul's use of the term soma for "the body" is intentionally different from his use of the term sarx with reference to the flesh. The one appears to be more abstract or poetic, the other is more concrete. More recently, theologians see soma as existential embeddedness, the person-environment nexus.

Regarding G-d dependence, to me it is an ontological reality in the sense that G-d is that in terms of which everything has existence. The psychological aspect would be a recognition/appreciation of this fact. I think the commitment flows from the recognition. This is probably why world religions tend to emphasize the need to replace illusion (faulty knowledge or failure to see the world as G-d Creation) with knowledge. There is no real religious commitment and no real effort to enact one's religious duties without that knowledge.

 

[seattlegal]

Agreed. Btw, I do not equate the body of Christ with the church or a ecclesiatic community and have a real problem with that. If you recall, I believe Jesus ushered in a universal priesthood.

The Greek term for "body" is more abstract and does not necessarily support a literal view of a physical body. To me Paul's use of the term suggests a unified totality that is comparable to a fully integrated and fully functioning organism that it evolves and renews itself over time.

It appears Paul's use of the term soma for "the body" is intentionally different from his use of the term sarx with reference to the flesh. The one appears to be more abstract or poetic, the other is more concrete. More recently, theologians see soma as existential embeddedness, the person-environment nexus.

Gotcha. Soma can be in reference to both the natural body (psychikos) of those living in the flesh, and to the spiritual body
(pneumatikos) of the resurrected. Flesh (sarx) and it's impulses can't inherit a part of the soma. (Hence the differences stressed between the fruits of the spirit and the works of the flesh in Gal. 5.) (Analogous to the wheat and the tares.)

Regarding G-d dependence, to me it is an ontological reality in the sense that G-d is that in terms of which everything has existence. The psychological aspect would be a recognition/appreciation of this fact. I think the commitment flows from the recognition.

Thank you for taking the time to explain it more clearly.

 

[TealLeaf]

Surrender to the interactive optimization of the Universe. Resistance is futile.

You have been optimized.

 

[Netti-Netti]

Surrender to the interactive optimization of the Universe. Resistance is futile.

TL, why would anyone want to resist? To entertain the illusion of having a power independent of G-d's empowerment?

As a supervisor once told me: stop this foolishness.

 

[TealLeaf]

As to all this talk about Jesus Christ, the body, flesh and spirit how does it get folks to behave as better and more altruistic people?

Also isn't the origin of the word "soma" from a entheogenic plant juice consumed by early Hindu Brahmins? How did it get hooked up with some sort of Christian body? It seems kind of contrived.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soma

Well here goes. This is what I have so far in terms of the superficial details of a new religion called Transparency or Nirmaladtha:

Transparency/Nirmaladtha

PS - I gave a Baha'i dude a hard time about proselytizing an extant religion in this thread so it would be unfair, and I would be remiss, if I didn't say the same about all this discussion of Christian details. So again this thread is about designing a new religion and it s not about any extant religions.

 

[seattlegal]

Surrender to the interactive optimization of the Universe. Resistance is futile.

You have been optimized.

Hehehe! It's up to you whether you want to pay attention to and learn about your environment, and then make intelligent choices (or not) as to how you wish to act (or not.) If you can escape cause and effect, that would be a real trick!

As to all this talk about Jesus Christ, the body, flesh and spirit how does it get folks to behave as better and more altruistic people?

Seeing how everything is interconnected and how this interconnectedness affects the outcome of your actions and/or interactions does sometime have that kind of effect on people, especially when this interconnectedness brings out compassion in people.

Also isn't the origin of the word "soma" from a entheogenic plant juice consumed by early Hindu Brahmins? How did it get hooked up with some sort of Christian body? It seems kind of contrived.

Soma - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That's the English word derived from Sanskrit. For the Greek word, check out the page from the blueletterbible for Strong's Greek 4983--soma.

Well here goes. This is what I have so far in terms of the superficial details of a new religion called Transparency or Nirmaladtha:

Transparency/Nirmaladtha

PS - I gave a Baha'i dude a hard time about proselytizing an extant religion in this thread so it would be unfair, and I would be remiss, if I didn't say the same about all this discussion of Christian details. So again this thread is about designing a new religion and it s not about any extant religions.

Hehehe! Art brings up the Baha'i viewpoint, you tell him not to, then you bring up Sikhism. When someone else brings up The Body of Christ as an example of a commitment to an institution and clarification is sought regarding this point, and then you whine about, even after you said that your new religion would be like the Bible or Koran, but more up to date?

{What did you expect to get when you started this thread on the Comparative Studies board, the description of which is "Comparing religious beliefs across human history and cultures?" Perhaps it would have been better on the Belief and Spirituality board, the description of which is "General thinking beyond the boundaries of religion and organised belief?"}

 

[TealLeaf]

Seeing how everything is interconnected and how this interconnectedness affects the outcome of your actions and/or interactions does sometime have that kind of effect on people, especially when this interconnectedness brings out compassion in people.

I was looking for something more specific than this. How does one given model of the Christian Godhead get people to behave better than any other model of the Godhead?

Art brings up the Baha'i viewpoint, you tell him not to, then you bring up Sikhism. When someone else brings up The Body of Christ as an example of a commitment to an institution and clarification is sought regarding this point, and then you whine about, even after you said that your new religion would be like the Bible or Koran, but more up to date?

Well it did seem that Art's original comment wasn't particularly related to the subject of this thread but was rather a thinly veiled guise to proselytize his religion. As for this most recent talk about the body of Christ it seems similarly unrelated but perhaps I'm wrong.

As for Sikhism I only mentioned it briefly in passing and even then it was in search of a new or novel synthesis of the concept of God. As for my reference to the Bible and Koran I merely mentioned those, again in passing, to describe the character of the project at hand. For what it is worth I had thought to say the Bible, Koran, Bhagavad Gita, etc. but decided on the former for brevity.

All that aside you didn't say what you think about the superficial aspects of the novel religion called Transparency or Nirmaladtha that I have described.

Transparency/Nirmaladtha

So what do you think?

 

[Netti-Netti]

So what do you think?

I'd still be interested in a rationale for a new religion. What's wrong with the ones we have already? Maybe stick with the religious tradition you were raised with???...

 

[seattlegal]

All that aside you didn't say what you think about the superficial aspects of the novel religion called Transparency or Nirmaladtha that I have described.

Transparency/Nirmaladtha

So what do you think?

I wouldn't want to be required to carry a timepiece at all times. {Bad pun intended.}
I can also see your interest in the Greek word soma from the description of Nirmaladtha. Achieving interconnectedness via the imposition of a drug culture isn't my cup of tea. {Another intentional bad pun.}

 

[wil]

So again this thread is about designing a new religion and it s not about any extant religions.

Ok, then, let's everyone start by sending in a monthly fee to me. You see no religion or religious members currently send tithes to me...so this is ok. And we won't have any tithe system as other religions use that. So it'll be a sliding scale based on your availabilty, 1/2 of your tax bill or 1/3 or your utility bill, or 1% of your retirement account whichever is greater calculated on an annual basis. You only have to pay once a year, on your birthday and I'll send you a thank you card from the dollar store.

One week of service is required each year as well. You will perform this exactly opposite your birthday, so six months later. I'll have a list of things to do when you get here.

Monthly devotional, each month on the day of the month of your birth send me a text message indicating how much you appreciate me allowing you a place for service and taking some of your hard earned funds off your hands.

On your behalf I'll think about you everytime you send me money...

oh...afterlife...you want some sort of assurances...sure there will be an afterlife...and if you've served well and kept up on your payments, you'll not have to continue doing so.

 

[TealLeaf]

I'd still be interested in a rationale for a new religion. What's wrong with the ones we have already?

This question has been addressed previously in this thread. Back then I said:

a way to deal with major problems like environmental degradation and over population

Besides what's so wrong with exercising a bit of creativity in this field? What's wrong with something like:

Transparency/Nirmaladtha ????

Maybe stick with the religious tradition you were raised with?

Not everyone was raised with a religious tradition and some were raised with more than one. Some people were even raised in Scientology and Wahhabism

I can also see your interest in the Greek word soma from the description of Nirmaladtha.

Again I'm not interested in the Greek definition of the word so much as I am the Sanskrit or English definition:

soma - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

 

[lunamoth]

Since religion is about an intentional way of conducting one's life, maybe the place to start is to define where you want to end up.

 

[seattlegal]

Since religion is about an intentional way of conducting one's life, maybe the place to start is to define where you want to end up.

"Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?"
"That depends a good deal on where you want to get to," said the Cat.
"I don't much care where –" said Alice.
"Then it doesn't matter which way you go," said the Cat.
"– so long as I get somewhere," Alice added as an explanation.
"Oh, you're sure to do that," said the Cat, "if you only walk long enough."

~Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland​

 

[Netti-Netti]

Since religion is about an intentional way of conducting one's life, maybe the place to start is to define where you want to end up.

This would be ideal. The problem is knowing the comparative advantage of one religion over another with respect to an intended goal.

In real life, I suspect people drift toward other religions out of curiosity.

 

[TealLeaf]

Since religion is about an intentional way of conducting one's life, maybe the place to start is to define where you want to end up.

In short the place I would like to end up is in a healthy, happy, peaceful, prosperous, stable and sustainable society. Of course sustainable in conjunction with the rest is the tricky part. And while the details laid out in Transparency/Nirmaladtha don't necessarily get us there some of the details that will be described in its book could.

 

[TealLeaf]

Just thought that I would point out that since Nirmaladtha is now in the public domain in theory anyone who wants to can step up and author its book.

 

[Dream]

The entire concept of designing a religion with future generations in mind is delusional. As if you could program a happy, stable, sustainable, prosperous and peaceful society filled with human beings. If the brick breaks under its own weight, what of the building?

 

[TealLeaf]

The entire concept of designing a religion with future generations in mind is delusional.

Again it seems that you are calling Jesus, Muhammad, the Buddha, etc. "delusional".

I'm being too cynical and less than helpful.

You might be right about that.

Here, I will design a religion that is not a religion:

First, my religion that is no religion has several basic object lessons for people to meditate about that will guide them into a healthy lifestyle! Secondly, I will make not judging others unfairly a cornerstone of it. Finally, I will place several pleasant and unifying community events in it set on certain days of each year.

That's not only less cynical but it is more in line with the spirit of this thread which is after all:

Considering that all major religions predict the end of an era and the coming of a new prophet and further considering that we are fast approaching the ultimate carrying capacity of the Earth it seems reasonable to me that a major new religion or philosophy could very well be on the horizon.

If you were charged by God, the Universe, the people, the Illuminati or who/whatever to design a new religion for the whole Earth and all of mankind taking into account modern scientific knowledge and comparative religious study what would your new religion look like?

Would your religion have one God, many Gods or no God at all?

And what about rituals and institutions? Would there baptism, monastic communities, etc.? Should there be priests or religious professionals?

And what about things like marriage? Same sex marriage? Polygamy? Monogamy?

Should there be any religious articles such as rosaries, the Mormon's undergarments, the Sikh's combs and daggers?

Any dietary restrictions?

I have some ideas myself that draws from Buddhism, Christianity, Mormonism and Sikhism among others but I get fuzzy when it comes to how to draw lines around God and the Universe.

Finally, I will place several pleasant and unifying community events in it set on certain days of each year.

I like that idea. I should have added holy days/holidays to the list of questions I asked in the opening post.