I've come to believe recently in the inherent flaws associated with religous based institutions. Don't get me wrong, organized religon is great, it usually provides its adherents with an excellent moral foundation. The trouble starts when individual believers begin to coalsce into organized bodies, empowering themselves with the ability to create "dotrine" and "cannon." I feel that the best relgon is the one that is tailored to your lifestyle. In the end God, or whatever deity you adhere to belongs to no single group.
"Heavenly Spirit, we are traveling by many right roads to Thine abode of light. Guide us onto the highway of Self-knowledge, to which all paths of true religious beliefs eventually lead. The diverse religions are branches of Thy one immeasurable tree of truth. May we enjoy the luscious fruits of soul realization that hang from the boughs of scriptures of every climb and time. Teach us to chant in harmony the countless expressions of our supreme devotion. In Thy temple of the earth, in a chorus of many-accented voices, we are singing only to Thee. O Divine Mother, lift us on Thy lap of universal love. Break Thy vow of silence and sing to us the heart-melting melody of human brotherhood.Ó- Paramahansa Yogananda; Whispers from Eternity
After studying each gospel of the Christian New Testament (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John,) it seems like the community in Mark are most like this: problems start occurring when groups form. However, without a structure of interpretation in a community, you then have renegade people who come out and declare things in the name of God and say that they are justified just because of "their individual interpretation", and their unchecked behavior can be downright lunacy. I'm thinking here of Charles Manson, David Koresh, Jim Jones, Constantine, ..George W. Bush, ...etc.
Trouble with organized religions is that although they may give some sense of morals, that isn't the name of the game really. It is possible to be an atheist humanist and actually have better morals than many who attach themselves to organized religions. Surely the goal of religion is to know and have a relaion with spirit - morality is a secondary issue. It seems to me that external rules are very limited anyway. But if one is in touch with the spirit within, that is much more secure basis for action and seeing right from wrong. Usually, religions start off with an inspired teacher, and then through time the original spark is diminished. As you say, hierarchies are formed, who then dictate the 'true doctrine' or whatever, based not on their experience of God or the Divine, but on their own prejudices etc. This then leads to divisions, factionalism and so on - in the worst cases even to violence. All because people are hung up on forms of words spoken not by God or some Iluminated messenger, but a bunch of self-satisfied and ignorant bishops or their equivalent. The plus side is that traditions preserve teachings. Without the church for instance, what would we know to-day of christianity? However, I'm not really a fan of organized religion. Often it can actually be one of the main factors which hold people back from some actual connection of their own with the spirit.
thing is none of these people would have gotten very far in a world where everyone had their own personal religion. Without followers (people buying in to someone elses interpretations) each of these guys would have been harmless anomilies; "Really George? God told you to attack the middle east all by yourself? That's super....um, good luck with that".
but he didn't say that... he said God has no master which isn't true because nothing is the master of God
::stares blankly at Molly:: Did you pass second grade English? "God has no master" could also be written "God has no superior" which means "nothing is superior to God." I can't believe I even had to explain that...
I think I see where you're coming from Molly; since nothing is superior to God, then nothing must be the master of god. And I tend to agree; If I try to focus my mind on god I don't get nearly as far as when I try to focus my mind on nothing. I also suspect that alot of people in here who claim to be worshiping god are actually followers of nothing, otherwise why would these people who claim to be all hung up on God spend so much more time talking about nothing?
. knowing god , ya still can't say exactly what is god , and everybody knows god just the same . if someone persists in declaring 'what god is' , the statement is poetically good or bad in the same way as declaring 'what is tomato' . dost you know tomato like i know tomato ? when i am sad , i know tomato like you cannot know tomato because my sad is not your sad . people will write really bad poetry when they are exclusively sad , because depression is something less than being inspired . perhaps tho , they write on their rise from the abyss ... to make words of hope , to say god is hope . but not exactly . personally , the god i know is enduring , wise , and not very strong otherwise , with just enough power to move a little wind , to hold a feather or make a word of clouds . the 'is' word 'is' troublesome . very seldom 'is' 'is' exactly 'is' .
Actually she is. She is literally making something out of nothing. Molly the Hippy was revealed to be a persona several months ago. This is someone imitating a fundamentalist Christian. Why do you do this, Molly the Hippy? I don't get a rise out of pretending to be something I'm not. Have fun getting a rise out of people. I won't be joining in by having a pseudo-identity.