Religion for the Non-Religious's topics - tribe.net

NON BELIEVER

2007-12-06T07:28:23Z

Enlighten me.

With no preaching.

qb

posted in Religion for the Non-Religious - 9 replies

Favorite Religion for the non-religious!

2006-08-23T02:29:29Z

What's your favorite religion.

I want to also know your LEAST favorite religion. I want to hear yall kvetch and moan and call g-d's thunder upon and fatwa against the faiths ya love to hate, o non-religious brethren.

My favorite is buddhism. Rational savagery delineates the conceptual limits. Died out in India and Sri Lanka, a whole damn faith rose from the dead, not after three days but three centuries.

Least favorite? Catholicism. I mean, where is this religion going fer goodness sakes.

Your additions most welcome!

posted in Religion for the Non-Religious - 6 replies

mustard seeds, mountains, credit scores

2006-08-23T00:01:46Z

can i ask a big favor?

to get out from under our HUGE mortgage payments, we need to refinance. in order to refinance, our credit scores have to be at 720 or higher.

can everyone here pray/meditate that the scores for my husband and i will be above 720 when the credit is pulled tomorrow (july 12)?

thanks. :)

posted in Religion for the Non-Religious - 3 replies

Toasting Political Christians

2006-06-22T03:47:27Z

Here's to The Moral Majority,
Apostles of Hatred and Fear:
As I watched Jerry Fallwell on TV last night,
MY Soul knew the Anti-Christ was here.

The Golden Rule he has turned into Lead:
Now it only reads "Do Unto Others".
He wants to insure we have Crosses to bear
And espouses laws to oppress his Gay Brothers.

His Dogma oozed out like Puss from Christ's Wounds
Reeking of Bigotry and Malice.
I'm certain his Holy Rituals produce
Vomit from Wine in his Chalice.

posted in Religion for the Non-Religious - 0 replies

Buddhist help to help yourself...

2006-02-05T19:56:30Z

Here are some fundamental characteristics of human development that lead to resilience, vitality, inner stability, and peace of mind:

We move from reliance on external authority to an internal center of resonance & wisdom based on observation, experimentation, and experience.
We bring fascination, curiosity, and interest to all aspects of our lives & to relationships. We are comfortable with differences, and are able to reflect on our own feelings, thoughts, and emotional reactions.
We take personal responsibility for our internal experience - we realize we create our own feelings of anger, contempt, and judgments with our demands that situations & people be different than they are. We cease blaming or making up excuses & reasons for our problems.
We see situations & people as they truly are & make our decisions based on current reality, not our hopes that people will change.
We become increasingly able to attune & resonate with our internal world - including our thoughts, feelings, and emotions. This ability to go deeply within ourselves decreases our need for either disassociation or external stimulation to relieve emptiness & boredom.
We realize that we are not our "minds," we are not all the teachings that have been put there. We exist beyond these teaching as essence.
We develop the will to do the things we know will help us feel stronger, healthier, more alive, and connected to others.
We develop the ability to self-soothe & calm ourselves when we are alone or with other people.
Our living becomes more congruent with our beliefs.
Our relationships become more authentic, trusting, open, and valued.
We are able to give & receive care, friendship, and support.
We accept the ever-changing nature of all life. The challenge of empowerment.
We affirm we have the power to take charge of our lives & stop being dependent on substances or other people for our self-esteem & security.
Alternative: We admit we were out of control with/powerless over _________ yet have the power to take charge of our lives & stop being dependent on substances or other people for our self-esteem & security.
We come to believe that we have the ability to develop our inner resources through a process of learning, exploration, daily practice, diligence, self reflection, and supportive relationships with others. (This is a new version of this step)
We make a decision to become our authentic selves & trust in the healing power of the truth.
We examine our beliefs, addictions, and dependent behavior in the context of living in a hierarchal, patriarchal culture.
We share with another person all the things inside of us for which we feel shame & guilt.
We affirm & enjoy our strengths, talents, and creativity.
We become willing to let go of guilt, shame, and any behavior that keeps us from accepting ourselves & others.
We make a list of people we have harmed & people who have harmed us, and take steps to clear out negative feelings by making amends & sharing our grievances in a respectful way.
We express love & gratitude to others, and increasingly appreciate the wonder of life & the blessings we do have.
We continue to trust our reality & daily affirm that we see what we see, we know what we know & we feel what we feel.
We promptly acknowledge mistakes & make amends when appropriate, but we do not say we are sorry for things we have not done & we do not cover up, analyze, or take responsibility for the shortcomings of others.
We seek out situations, jobs, and people who affirm our intelligence, perceptions, and self-worth & avoid situations or people who are hurtful, harmful, or demeaning to us.
We take steps to heal our physical bodies, organize our lives, reduce stress, and have fun.
We seek to find our inward calling, and develop the will & wisdom to follow it.
We accept that change, loss, death, and re-birth are part of the natural flow of life.
We grow in awareness that we are interrelated with all living things, and we contribute to restoring peace & balance on the planet.
This is active meditation, not medication with endless meetings for life that are depressing and disempowering. Without knowing this particular technique, I started to do something similar. Then, when I went to AA just for fun, I was so sad to see that people had to admit to being powerless to get to the first step. I never took that 1st step, I ran! I dosed myself with nutrition, love, silence, self sourcing. I quit sugar, caffeine, smoking all with ease. Not to mention my unmentionable ellicit illegal drug taking for like 16 years! And alcohol. I later found this, which is a more empowering 12 step for Buddhists.
BODHI'S BUDDHIST NON-THEISTIC 12 STEPS:

1. We admitted our addictive craving over alcohol, and recognised its consequences in our lives.
2. Came to believe that a power other than self could restore us to wholeness.
3. Made a decision to go for refuge to this other power as we understood it.
4. Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.
5. Admitted to ourselves and another human being the exact moral nature of our past.
6. Became entirely ready to work at transforming ourselves.
7. With the assistance of others and our own firm resolve, we transformed unskilful aspects of ourselves and cultivated positive ones.
8. Made a list of all persons we had harmed.
9. Made direct amends to such people where possible, except when to do so would injure them or others. In addition, made a conscientious effort to forgive all those who harmed us.
10. Continue to maintain awareness of our actions and motives, and when we acted unskilfuly promptly admitted it.
11. Engaged through the practise of meditation to improve our conscious contact with our true selves, and seeking that beyond self. Also used prayer as a means to cultivate postive attitudes and states of mind.
12. Having gained spiritual insight as a result of these steps, we practise these principles in all areas of our lives, and make this message available to others in need of recovery\

The 12 Steps of Liberation
>>>>>Said another way:

1. The truth of suffering. We experienced the truth of our addictions – our lives
were unmanageable suffering.

2. The truth of the origin of suffering. We admit that we craved for and grasped
onto addictions as our refuge.

3. The truth of the end of suffering. We came to see that complete cessation of
craving and clinging at addictions is necessary.

4. The truth of the path. We made a decision to follow the way of liberation and
to take refuge in our wakefulness, our truth, and our fellowship.

5. Right view. We made a searching and fearless review of our life. We are
willing to acknowledge and proclaim our truth to ourselves, another human
being and the community.

6. Right thought. We are mindful that we create the causes for suffering and
liberation. Our goodness is indestructible.

7. Right speech. We purify, confess and ask for forgiveness straightforwardly
and without judgment. We are willing to forgive others.

8. Right action. We make a list of all persons we harm and are willing and able
to actively make amends to them all, unless to do so would be harmful.

9. Right livelihood. We simplify our lives, realizing we are all interconnected.
We select a vocation that supports our recovery.

10. Right effort. We realize that continuing to follow this path, no matter what, is
joyful effort.

11. Right mindfulness. Through prayer, meditation and action we will follow the
path of kindness, being mindful moment by moment.

12. Right concentration. Open to the spirit of awakening as a result of these steps,
we will carry this message to all people suffering with addictions.

We move from reliance on external authority to an internal center of resonance & wisdom based on observation, experimentation, and experience.
We bring fascination, curiosity, and interest to all aspects of our lives & to relationships. We are comfortable with differences, and are able to reflect on our own feelings, thoughts, and emotional reactions.
We take personal responsibility for our internal experience - we realize we create our own feelings of anger, contempt, and judgments with our demands that situations & people be different than they are. We cease blaming or making up excuses & reasons for our problems.
We see situations & people as they truly are & make our decisions based on current reality, not our hopes that people will change.
We become increasingly able to attune & resonate with our internal world - including our thoughts, feelings, and emotions. This ability to go deeply within ourselves decreases our need for either disassociation or external stimulation to relieve emptiness & boredom.
We realize that we are not our "minds," we are not all the teachings that have been put there. We exist beyond these teaching as essence.
We develop the will to do the things we know will help us feel stronger, healthier, more alive, and connected to others.
We develop the ability to self-soothe & calm ourselves when we are alone or with other people.
Our living becomes more congruent with our beliefs.
Our relationships become more authentic, trusting, open, and valued.
We are able to give & receive care, friendship, and support.
We accept the ever-changing nature of all life. The challenge of empowerment.

And I also like the Native medicine wheel way. That really puts it into perspective! I think that having these substance abuse problems actually enhanced my life.

posted in Religion for the Non-Religious - 1 reply

Absolute V Relative Truth in Buddhism

2005-08-25T19:27:08Z

Am I to understand that relative truth includes existence and dualism, and that absolute reality transcends existing itself? Is that right?

And... doesn't this give rise to potential abuse as a kind of double standard?

posted in Religion for the Non-Religious - 2 replies

The 91st Psalm

2005-07-21T06:37:32Z

Here is the Lamsa translation of 91st Psalm:

"He who dwells in the protection of the most High shall abide under
the
shadow of the Almighty.
2. I will say of the Lord, He is my refuge and my fortress; my God;
in
him will I trust.
3. Surely he shall deliver you from the snare of the fowler, and
from
vain gossip.
4. He will cover you with his feathers, and under his wings you
shall
trust; his truth shall be your shield and buckler.
5. You shall not be afraid for the terror by night, nor for arrow
that
flies by day,
6. Nor for the conspiracy that spreads in darkness; nor for the
pestilence that wastes at noonday.
7. Thousands shall fall at your side and ten thousand at your right
hand, but it shall not come near you.
8. Only with your eyes shall you behold the reward of the wicked.
9. For thou, O Lord, art my trust; thou hast established thy
habitation
in the highest.
10. There shall no evil befall you, neither shall any plague come
near
your dwelling.
11. For he shall give his angels charge over you to keep you in all
your
ways.
12. They shall bear you up in their hands, lest you dash your foot
against a stone.
13. You shall tread upon the viper and adder; you shall trample under
foot the lion and the great serpent.
14. Because he has loved me, therefore will I deliver him; I will
set
him on high because he has known my name.
15. He shall call upon me, and I will answer him; I will be with him
in
trouble; I will deliver him and honor him.
16. With long life will I satisfy him, and show him my salvation.

posted in Religion for the Non-Religious - 1 reply

Sacred and Secular

2005-07-04T15:26:05Z

On Faith

SACRED AND SECULAR:
Religion and Politics Worldwide.
By Pippa Norris and Ronald Inglehart. Cambridge Univ. Press. 329 pp. $24.99

Reviewed by Os Guinness

Religion is the key to history, Lord Acton wrote. In today’s intellectual circles, however, it’s more like the skunk at the garden party. To many intellectuals, religion is a private matter at best, and most appropriately considered in terms of its functions rather than the significance of its beliefs, let alone its truth claims. At worst, it’s the main source of the world’s conflicts and violence—what Gore Vidal, in his Lowell Lecture at Harvard University in 1992, called “the great unmentionable evil” at the heart of our culture.

Such grim assessments are certainly debatable. It’s a simple fact, for example, that, contrary to the current scapegoating of religion, more people were slaughtered during the 20th century under secularist regimes, led by secularist intellectuals, and in the name of secularist ideologies, than in all the religious persecutions in Western history. But there is little point in bandying about charges and countercharges. If we hope to transcend the seemingly endless culture-warring over religion, we need detailed, objective data about the state of religion in today’s world, and wise, dispassionate discussion of what this evidence means for our common life.

Is religion central or peripheral? Is it disappearing, as Auguste Comte, Karl Marx, Friedrich Nietzsche, Max Weber, Émile Durkheim, Sigmund Freud, and other proponents of the strong secularization thesis have claimed? Or is religion actually resurgent, as more recent observers such as Peter Berger, David Martin, Rodney Stark, and Philip Jenkins have claimed? Is it a positive force, as some have argued from the evidence of the “South African miracle,” the peaceful transition from apartheid to equality? Or is it pathological, as much of the post-9/11 commentary has assumed without argument?

In their new book, political scientists Pippa Norris, of Harvard, and Ronald Inglehart, of the University of Michigan, contribute three things to the old debate: first, a summary of the present state of academic analysis of religion; second, new evidence on the state of religion in the modern world; and third, a new theoretical framework that they claim makes better sense of the evidence than previous theories.

The massive and detailed evidence of religion’s significance worldwide is unquestionably the chief benefit of the book, helpful even for those who will disagree with the authors’ conclusions. The data come from World Values Surveys, an international cooperative overseen by Inglehart, for which social scientists polled residents of more than 80 countries between 1981 and 2001. The findings cover a comprehensive sweep of topics, ranging from the personal importance of religion to the electoral strength of religious parties in national elections.

The weight of all the data, interestingly, points somewhere between the extremes of the debate. Religion is far from dead, and it certainly hasn’t disappeared—even in Europe, where the evidence for its demise is most powerful. But there is strong evidence that it has lost its decisive authority over the lives of adherents in the developed world—even in the United States, where American exceptionalism has long defied European trends toward secularization. There was certainly too much of an unacknowledged secularist bias in secularization theory, but at the same time much of the talk of the unabashed resurgence of religion is premature. For those who take faith seriously, the general trends in the modern world are sobering; the still-potent role of religion in the global south offers only false comfort, as most of the region is still premodern and has yet to go through the “fiery brook” of modernity.

Norris and Inglehart’s theoretical explanation of religion’s current condition will be more controversial: a revised version of the secularization thesis, which they base on the “existential security” offered by religion. In contrast to Weber’s view of modernization as “rationalization,” or Durkheim’s as “differentiation,” they trace the growing irrelevance of religion in the modern world to the fact that people can take security for granted. The more secure people become in the developed world, the more they loosen their hold on religion; religion, meanwhile, retains its authority among the less secure but faster-growing populations of the less developed world. “The result of these combined trends,” the authors conclude, “is that rich societies are becoming more secular but the world as a whole is becoming more religious.”

The main response to this theory will properly come from Norris and Inglehart’s fellow scholars, and is likely to focus on three aspects: the authors’ interpretation of the data they offer, their critiques of some of the currently flourishing theories, and their view of secularization as driven by the accrual of “existential security.” Their articulation of the last seems to me particularly disappointing, little more than a restatement of Lucretius’s “Fear made the gods,” and a crude explanation for the crisis of religion, which could be explained as easily by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s simple observation, “Men have forgotten God.”

What really ought to be addressed, however, are the implications of Norris and Inglehart’s findings for the Western democracies. They nowhere discuss religion as having more than a generic, functional role in assuring existential security. Such a view is inadequate for those who take the specific content of faith seriously, and who argue that faiths of a certain shape produce citizens of a certain shape, who in turn produce societies of a certain shape—in other words, that faith must be considered as a set of beliefs with particular consequences and not others. Weber’s magisterial work led the way in this direction, and Baylor University sociologist Rodney Stark’s important work on monotheism adds to it currently.

The condition of religion in the modern world is especially crucial to a society that links religion and public life in any way—and nowhere more crucial than in the United States. Religion in America has flourished not so much in spite of the separation of church and state as because of it. Far from setting up “Christian America,” or establishing any orthodoxy, religious or secular, the Framers envisioned the relationship of faith and freedom in what might be called a golden triangle: Freedom requires virtue, virtue requires faith (of some sort), and faith requires freedom. If the Framers were right, then as faiths go, so goes freedom—and so goes the Republic.

America has yet to experience the discussion of religion in 21st-century national life that “the great experiment” requires and deserves, not just from scholars but from a host of Americans—schoolteachers and political leaders alike. Norris and Inglehart provide data and arguments that will be an invaluable part of that discussion.

Os Guinness is a writer and speaker living in Virginia. His books include The American Hour (1993), Time for Truth (2000), and the newly published Unspeakable: Facing Up to Evil in an Age of Genocide and Terror.

From the Wilson Quarterly
http://wwics.si.edu/

posted in Religion for the Non-Religious - 0 replies

Christianity Vs Buddhadharma

2005-06-13T16:30:12Z

I was raised a Christian in the Uniting Church of Australia.

For the last two years I have been reading everything I could find on Buddhism, discovering a new world of insight into compassion and wisdom and finding a new lease of life on Lord Jesus' and St Paul's teachings.

I have been wanting to visit a sangha (buddhist temple) for ages and have only gone once when it was empty.

Perhaps it's because it is for me a foreign faith, and I am happy to benefit from it's teachings as a Christian.

I believe in God which is hardly in line with Buddhist teachings, so I am concerned that I will not really relate to the Buddhist culture and worldview, despite appreciation for the teachings themselves.

Or perhaps I am best staying in my birth faith, drawing what is useful from the other faiths and applying it in the context of a Christian ethos?

Has anyone else had experiences crossing between two religions, or living in two different faiths at once? How do others find themselves influenced by multiple belief systems and faiths?

Warm regards,

Paul Bard.

posted in Religion for the Non-Religious - 1 reply

the body of christ

2005-06-10T08:15:02Z

i was talking to my mom today and she started saying some crazy (i don't really mean crazy) stuff.

much to her amazement, i started taking notes.

my mom is a bit of a bible scholar--but she walks a different path than traditionalists.

Jesus said that he was going to prepare a place for us. the original greek doesn't say he's making a mansion for everyone. it says, 'in my father's house are many CELLS.' now, i was like: ok...so...cells like in a prison? lovely.

she's like: CELLS! like cellular biology! like, cells in a body!

then i started taking notes.

i've been trying to grasp the "we are all one" concepts. Jesus stressed the importance of being united--being one. the apostle paul trampled over those statements, and put it in more simplistic terminology: you are a foot, i am a hand in one body.

Jesus went deeper than that. cells! cells have unique characteristics, yet all function as one.

further...

my mom talked about communion (see the word UNION in there?), and how as the catholics believe, you really are consuming Jesus' body and blood. looking at it from a cellular level, taking in the blood of christ would be a cleansing experience. and if one cell in a body is affected, the whole body will be affected.

if ALL cells are working as one...

anyway. the implications are in my mind, but i can't quite get them out.

thoughts!?

--gertie

posted in Religion for the Non-Religious - 6 replies

Christ and ChristS

2005-06-10T02:11:11Z

You know how people say, God is in the details.

Well, I've come to say that God is in the context. God is in subtleties - acceptance, forgiveness, a benign intention etc are all invisible and yet can be FELT so immediately that it's like they're realer than real.

My understanding is that Christ is not causal, but a magnetic field which zaps into alignment particles charged in a certain way. I believe the alignment is of people who are loving and caring in the Christ field.

Just as, in the early Christian church, there was a spirit of loving acceptance between brother and sister, so I am attracted to spirital people, who represent the heart's deepest longing.

The simple fact is that we are no longer in the same world-context as the physical Christ, however. There seems to be a much higher level of noise-to-signal ratio.

Dostoevsky wrote a story where Christ physically returned to a witch-burning Inquisition in Spain. At the time he was recognized as the man, a silent recognition in the masses as he entered the square where the immolation was to take place.

Assuming Christ were to return today, he would perhaps use media to extend his message, as Mr Webber suggests in Jesus Christ Superstar. In which case, he would be a still, quiet voice of wisdom in a very noisy marketplace.

So it seems to me entirely possible that we may embody, to the degree to which we are aligned with love, aspects of awareness attributed to Christ. But within the modern context his message is one of millions of messages.

Is there room for several Christ embodiments? Out of the billions on earth now the might be at least two souls evolved to that level.

But why not twenty Christs or two hundred?

Warm regards,

Paul Bard.

posted in Religion for the Non-Religious - 0 replies

taking refuge in the different paths

2005-06-09T04:15:05Z

In Buddhism, taking refuge is a prayer by which one becomes aware of three aspects of consciousness normally not paid attention to:

- Awakened nondual awareness, "the Buddha".
- Inspirational teachings emanating from the spiritual, "the Dharma".
- And the supportive presence of other spiritual people, "the Sangha."

Likewise, one may be said to practice Christianity if one simply follows Christ's teaching. My understand of that is to forgive, and ask forgiveness, for ignorance and error arising from that lack of awareness, and to practice lovingness, caring, and peace as a lifestyle.

Healing a sense of unlovedness seems germinal in Christian spirituality, because once one becomes capable of loving, the whole world shines and looks beautiful.

It seems to me that a person takes refuge in their own, always-present characteristics of lovingness, awareness and caring. Even if these qualities are only present for a milisecond in awareness a few times a day, I understand that they enormously outweigh tens of thousands of degenerate and despairing thoughts.

Taking refuge, then, would seem to be a common factor in the world's religions of gently returning the awareness to the loving Creator from which it is never far.

I feel sure the equivalent traditions of refuge-taking in vedanta and islam are also uplifting and powerful, and I would love to learn more about them!

Warm regards,

Paul Bard.

posted in Religion for the Non-Religious - 0 replies