Worrying generations

[Tao_Equus]

I am not sure I would ascribe such nobility to humanity, either. I am always asking myself that question... if people crave because they have not yet found the source of their craving (God), or if people crave because of the natural instincts of having a body gone awry. I just do not know. Maybe everyone is different.

.

The problem with even thinking on it in that way reduces it to a kind of perversion and I object to that. Addiction, a craving and need to satiate beyond reasonable measure, describes the religious compulsion that many people have. To think the source of all craving can be found and satiated in God is nothing but substitution of God as your internal focus of desire. Orgasmic religious ecstasy is an end that many religions seek when the congregations gather. And it is brought about through exploitation of well known methods of producing dopamine and endorphins. Nobody is experiencing God. They are experiencing the same brain chemistry that gives them sexual ecstasy.
Most addicts of any substance have long ago ceased to get any more than relief from the effects of withdrawal and are not seeking or expecting ecstasy. The substance of choice is no longer a means to pleasure but a relief from pain. Over usage of any means to pleasure has an incrementally lesser effect the more you use it. Additionally making a distinction between the initial 'seeking of pleasure' or "avoidance of pain" is highly subjective. Some people are merely 'highly sexed' while others use it as a means to satisfying some other aspect of their psyche. And the same goes for religion. Religion, it seems to me, is very rarely about what the individual can give to God and far more about what God can give that individual. This is because God only actually exists with the individual experience of the notion.

 

[17th Angel]

Lesbian muslims eh?

Well... at least they won't get pregnant.... too many children "raising" children these days...

 

[path_of_one]

Orgasmic religious ecstasy is an end that many religions seek when the congregations gather. And it is brought about through exploitation of well known methods of producing dopamine and endorphins. Nobody is experiencing God. They are experiencing the same brain chemistry that gives them sexual ecstasy.

I don't think enough studies have been conducted to know. Even if the brain chemistry were the same, that doesn't necessarily mean that the experience is. I've experienced both and I really don't think it is.

Religion, it seems to me, is very rarely about what the individual can give to God and far more about what God can give that individual.

I agree. I think it is unfortunate and this is why I challenge the usual way people treat religion and faith. I believe the question should be what we can give to God.

This is because God only actually exists with the individual experience of the notion.

That's a big leap, and it is not a necessary follow-up to the above observation. People are about what God can give them because they haven't done the work to let go of their ego. They are concerned with their own needs. People continue to create God in their image and demand things from God because they have not yet committed to giving up themselves. When we consider those that are deeply committed to giving up their egoic selves and serving others, we find God manifesting through them, and we find that they are generally unconcerned with what they receive. Giving becomes its own reward. Without that step, people go through the motions but are treating their religion like a bank account- put effort in so you can save for later.

I think our motivations are ultimately important, and impact the quality of the spiritual life, but I also think that whether someone is atheist or Muslim or Christian or Buddhist, even if someone is self-centered in what they expect to get out of ethical practice and (if applicable) their spiritual practice... acting ethically and spiritually also can lead, eventually, to the shedding of the self and a yearning for a deeper relationship with God- the kind in which we give without desire for reward. The kind that is built most solidly on the faith in God's justice and mercy.

It seems that for relatively few, the journey begins or rapidly progresses to giving up the self. For far more, the journey starts with practice that is confused with selfish ambition, but leads to expansion of generosity toward God.

 

[c0de]

Path + Tao




@ Path

That was a beautiful moment... I was inspired to write a fitting response after reading your words... but then... I made a huge mistake. I read Tao's words... and that just ruined it... all that jazz, that "zen" just ... poof, gone... replaced with firey... HATE!



@ Tao

You "object"?? ...EXCUSE ME but who (THE HELL) are you to to raise an "objection"??? There is no "problem" with her experience, and it is NOT a "perversion" !

 

[Tao_Equus]

I don't think enough studies have been conducted to know. Even if the brain chemistry were the same, that doesn't necessarily mean that the experience is. I've experienced both and I really don't think it is.

Well I have read of many studies over the years that have made just that link. I even remember some evangelical preacher on TV who said, and I paraphrase, "they all leave with wet panties". They probably will not achieve actual physical orgasm but the chemical process of arousal is the same.

The kind that is built most solidly on the faith in God's justice and mercy.

And where, exactly, do we find that?

It seems that for relatively few, the journey begins or rapidly progresses to giving up the self. For far more, the journey starts with practice that is confused with selfish ambition, but leads to expansion of generosity toward God.

True that being an unselfish person is not always easy but gets easier with practice. But as many atheists can attest it requires no God.

 

[Tao_Equus]

Path + Tao




@ Path

That was a beautiful moment... I was inspired to write a fitting response after reading your words... but then... I made a huge mistake. I read Tao's words... and that just ruined it... all that jazz, that "zen" just ... poof, gone... replaced with firey... HATE!



@ Tao

You "object"?? ...EXCUSE ME but who (THE HELL) are you to to raise an "objection"??? There is no "problem" with her experience, and it is NOT a "perversion" !

Sorry to get in the way of your ...erm.... jazz was it? But HATE? What HATE would that be? I think you are frustrated again, (your masters are counting on it), why dont you go get some release from these animations of western whores... just stay away from the Islamic archetype... you know how guilty that makes you feel.

 

[Tao_Equus]

thank you , Al-quran does help along the way in my life when mixed with some "lesbians-friends" who tries to get me into "their-way"....

It makes a useful pillow?

 

[Tao_Equus]

the whole get the log out of our own eye,

lol...not just a big beard you sport then

 

[c0de]

Sorry to get in the way of your ...erm.... jazz was it? But HATE? What HATE would that be? I think you are frustrated again, (your masters are counting on it), why dont you go get some release from these animations of western whores... just stay away from the Islamic archetype... you know how guilty that makes you feel.

ok ... I have no idea what any of this actually means...

but neWayZ, I just logged in to apologize for my previous.... "hateful" comments. They were definitely uncalled for...

... especially the comments I edited out :/

 

[Tao_Equus]

ok ... I have no idea what any of this actually means...

but neWayZ, I just logged in to apologize for my previous.... "hateful" comments. They were definitely uncalled for...

... especially the comments I edited out :/

Water of a ducks back buddy So thanks anyway but no need.

 

[Netti-Netti]

As someone who believes in One God, I tend to think about it in terms of: I am limited, changing, and dependent. So is everything and everyone else. God is the only eternal, unchanging thing there really is. God is the only solid ground of being.

Except panentheism would suggest that G-d is changing, too, and that He needs Creation to evolve Himself. This view can radically affect one's understanding of worship and ethics.

 

[c0de]

Water of a ducks back buddy So thanks anyway but no need.

... 10 character limits for post suck!!

 

[Faithful-Angel]

It makes a useful pillow?

Salaam everyone,

@ Tao..

What do you mean by "it makes a useful pillow?"

 

[path_of_one]

Except panentheism would suggest that G-d is changing, too, and that He needs Creation to evolve Himself. This view can radically affect one's understanding of worship and ethics.

I don't think panentheism necessarily suggests that, though I understand that it could be taken that way. I think panentheism points to the paradox that God is One, yet manifests in the diversity of all beings. God expresses Himself in diversity.

As for how such a view has impacted my own understanding of worship and ethics...

In terms of worship- I worship One God. I believe that in every being, is the little flame of God, waiting for us to make it bigger and to recognize our capacity to do God's will.

In terms of ethics- I believe all beings are expressions, manifestations of God. And so I seek to serve all beings out of love and devotion to God. I seek to recognize in them the potential they may not recognize themselves, and in so doing, to fan it to flame with the breath of compassion.

I would say that panentheism has not changed my own worship or ethics much at all. But of course, it could be quite different for another person. Mostly, panentheism in my life means that I am more constantly aware of God's presence in all moments of life (and therefore worship as constantly as I can) and that I feel that all beings must be treated with compassion and love (that my service to others is my service to God).

 

[path_of_one]

Well I have read of many studies over the years that have made just that link. I even remember some evangelical preacher on TV who said, and I paraphrase, "they all leave with wet panties". They probably will not achieve actual physical orgasm but the chemical process of arousal is the same.

I'm sure you have read those studies. If you'd like to send them to me, I would be happy to review them and give my professional opinion. But without references, I can only say that I doubt very seriously the analysis is accurate. Brain scans, like scriptures, must be analyzed and interpreted by someone. And those "someones" have their own biases.

I have read studies by respected scientists that suggest a "God-spot" in the brain that is activated in spiritual practice. But then, that would refute what you are saying.

As for the TV preacher... (1) gross and (2) irrelevant. He's a TV preacher. Do you expect me to take him seriously as a source of valid information?

And where, exactly, do we find that?

I've never had a problem saying we find it in ourselves. That doesn't make it non-God. You seem to see yourself as an independent organism. I don't kid myself.

True that being an unselfish person is not always easy but gets easier with practice. But as many atheists can attest it requires no God.

LOL- oh, we can go round and round with the logic on this one. Let me sum up...

Situation/Data: Both atheists and theists can become unselfish. Both atheists and theists can be selfish.

Your assumption: There is no God.

Your interpretation of the data: Because atheists can become unselfish just as theists do, that means there is no God. People must be doing it all by themselves.

My assumption: There is no self that can exist without God.

My interpretation of the data: Atheists can also become unselfish, just as theists do, when they are cultivating that which is from God in themselves. God can be working in someone even when the person is not aware of it or willing to acknowledge it.

Bottom line...

Both rest on beliefs/assumptions. Both interpret the data based on these biases. There is no way to prove either. And it is a pointless conversation, as we've discovered before.