|
|
Post by Rit on May 1, 2007 11:23:30 GMT -5
ah, i think i follow. hence the 'chemical hallucinogen', which typically throughout history has been used to bring this state about.
although, out of personal tastes, i find the idea of a chemical aid to be unsatisfactory. i want my god to be immediate and directly apprehendible, IF he exists.... and that's a big IF.
--------------------------------------
a believing christian might look on this conversation and think that we're totally missing the point, and making things more complicated than they need to be, and why the hell are we speculating on the nature of god, when we can just go by dogma and accept the Christian orthodox tradition as it is.
But i think their point of view is a mistake. Dogmatic tenets are not holy at all. Merely self-absorbed, gloomy, and in psychological bad faith through and through.
God is Imagination. And Everything that lives is Holy. We wrestle with as many ideas as possible, and we come to know god darkly through the clouded veils. Anything less than that is obscene.
The average typical American protestant is a sickness unto death.
|
|
|
|
Post by sisyphus on May 1, 2007 23:37:34 GMT -5
ah, i think i follow. hence the 'chemical hallucinogen', which typically throughout history has been used to bring this state about. although, out of personal tastes, i find the idea of a chemical aid to be unsatisfactory. i want my god to be immediate and directly apprehendible, IF he exists.... and that's a big IF. i know whatchya mean, ritty. i prefer the idea that, if "god" exists, "god" is prefferably immediately apprehendable and equally knowable to everyone... but think about this: we ARE chemicals. we are all simply big piles of chemicals and minerals running around together in symbiotic relationships that culminate to form our fleshy little bodies. every single thing we do with our bodies and minds affects our peception and our ability to percieve "god." hallucenogenic drugs are just the extreme. food, although neccessary, can be just as much of a drug as anything else. if eaten in excess, we become tired and over-weight, and this slows down not only our bodies but our minds (our minds are, after all, a physical part of our bodies). different foods contribute to different chemical reactions in our bodies. everything in moderation is usually the best approach, along with variety. some studies have linked tumeric (a spice used heavily in india) with success in math, for example. even the oxygen we breathe affects our perception... do we get enough? do we breathe deeply enough? (i find that when i spend time breathing deeply i feel like i get buzzed... i'm normally a rather shallow breather.. my nose is too stinkin small...) clearly we can come closer to knowing "god" by simply becoming more aware of ourselves and how we work...taking good care of our body machines so that our perceptions can function at optimum levels. |
|
|
|
Post by sisyphus on May 1, 2007 23:54:46 GMT -5
a believing christian might look on this conversation and think that we're totally missing the point, and making things more complicated than they need to be, and why the hell are we speculating on the nature of god, when we can just go by dogma and accept the Christian orthodox tradition as it is. But i think their point of view is a mistake. Dogmatic tenets are not holy at all. Merely self-absorbed, gloomy, and in psychological bad faith through and through. God is Imagination. And Everything that lives is Holy. We wrestle with as many ideas as possible, and we come to know god darkly through the clouded veils. Anything less than that is obscene. The average typical American protestant is a sickness unto death. i dunno if i'd go that far. thorny and i just went to a memorial service last sunday for his supervisor's mother. it was held in a protestant church and a very sweet and sincere preacher gave the eulegy. he had written a beautiful sermon that actually made me tear up a bit. not because i'm a christian or anything, but because the scriptural passages he used and the sincerity that he shared them with came through to me in such a way that i realized that on some level we both believed the same things. the passages he read had a metphorical ressonance for me that aligned a lot with natural cycles and concepts of right/wrong as concepts that simply promote life, progress, and growth... in any case, the experience confirmed for me the idea we're all holding different markers and labels for god, or essentially the unknown--the vanishin point in the perspective drawing that is our human concept of reality, and these markers are tailor made by us for ourselves based on our own personal and unique levels of experience . some people do get stuck in rigid forms dogmatism, and this is usally due to fear and the need to conform, from what i can tell. nevertheless, i have some friends who are religious who are very thoughtful and aware of these things, and who are actually managing to progress and push forward within the confines of their current faiths. they know what they need. it's when people become too lazy, guilty, fearful, or egotistical in their faiths (be those religious, political, or whatever...) that problems start to arise and progress gets snuffed out. and i think every faith harbors both said lethargic sorts of members and more "enlightened" members. i consider myself an agnostic, a liberal, an artist, et cetera. but i have known some dogmatic and idiotic agnostics, liberals, and artists. they're usually idiotic because they're living on borrowed faith. they'll grow up. hopefully. and i guess it's our responsibility to help them when we can (if they'll listen), seeing as how we're all part of the same organism. |
|
|
|
Post by sisyphus on May 1, 2007 23:56:32 GMT -5
God is Imagination. And Everything that lives is Holy. We wrestle with as many ideas as possible, and we come to know god darkly through the clouded veils.
loved this!
|
|
|
|
Post by Rit on May 2, 2007 7:31:58 GMT -5
ah, i think i follow. hence the 'chemical hallucinogen', which typically throughout history has been used to bring this state about. although, out of personal tastes, i find the idea of a chemical aid to be unsatisfactory. i want my god to be immediate and directly apprehendible, IF he exists.... and that's a big IF. i know whatchya mean, ritty. i prefer the idea that, if "god" exists, "god" is prefferably immediately apprehendable and equally knowable to everyone... but think about this: we ARE chemicals. we are all simply big piles of chemicals and minerals running around together in symbiotic relationships that culminate to form our fleshy little bodies. every single thing we do with our bodies and minds affects our peception and our ability to percieve "god." hallucenogenic drugs are just the extreme. food, although neccessary, can be just as much of a drug as anything else. if eaten in excess, we become tired and over-weight, and this slows down not only our bodies but our minds (our minds are, after all, a physical part of our bodies). different foods contribute to different chemical reactions in our bodies. everything in moderation is usually the best approach, along with variety. some studies have linked tumeric (a spice used heavily in india) with success in math, for example. even the oxygen we breathe affects our perception... do we get enough? do we breathe deeply enough? (i find that when i spend time breathing deeply i feel like i get buzzed... i'm normally a rather shallow breather.. my nose is too stinkin small...) clearly we can come closer to knowing "god" by simply becoming more aware of ourselves and how we work...taking good care of our body machines so that our perceptions can function at optimum levels. commendable observation. thorn (i think) also shares your view, though he failed to point it out to me yesterday in quite so direct a manner. |
|
|
|
Post by Rit on May 2, 2007 7:36:13 GMT -5
a believing christian might look on this conversation and think that we're totally missing the point, and making things more complicated than they need to be, and why the hell are we speculating on the nature of god, when we can just go by dogma and accept the Christian orthodox tradition as it is. But i think their point of view is a mistake. Dogmatic tenets are not holy at all. Merely self-absorbed, gloomy, and in psychological bad faith through and through. God is Imagination. And Everything that lives is Holy. We wrestle with as many ideas as possible, and we come to know god darkly through the clouded veils. Anything less than that is obscene. The average typical American protestant is a sickness unto death. i dunno if i'd go that far. thorny and i just went to a memorial service last sunday for his supervisor's mother. it was held in a protestant church and a very sweet and sincere preacher gave the eulegy. he had written a beautiful sermon that actually made me tear up a bit. not because i'm a christian or anything, but because the scriptural passages he used and the sincerity that he shared them with came through to me in such a way that i realized that on some level we both believed the same things. the passages he read had a metphorical ressonance for me that aligned a lot with natural cycles and concepts of right/wrong as concepts that simply promote life, progress, and growth... in any case, the experience confirmed for me the idea we're all holding different markers and labels for god, or essentially the unknown--the vanishin point in the perspective drawing that is our human concept of reality, and these markers are tailor made by us for ourselves based on our own personal and unique levels of experience . some people do get stuck in rigid forms dogmatism, and this is usally due to fear and the need to conform, from what i can tell. nevertheless, i have some friends who are religious who are very thoughtful and aware of these things, and who are actually managing to progress and push forward within the confines of their current faiths. they know what they need. it's when people become too lazy, guilty, fearful, or egotistical in their faiths (be those religious, political, or whatever...) that problems start to arise and progress gets snuffed out. and i think every faith harbors both said lethargic sorts of members and more "enlightened" members. i consider myself an agnostic, a liberal, an artist, et cetera. but i have known some dogmatic and idiotic agnostics, liberals, and artists. they're usually idiotic because they're living on borrowed faith. they'll grow up. hopefully. and i guess it's our responsibility to help them when we can (if they'll listen), seeing as how we're all part of the same organism. this too was great. i wouldn't dream of disputing it. i have an irrational hatred of dogmatics, t'is true. my blood boils over when i encounter one, though i'm always ready to be civil. i wish there were more religious people like yourself and Thorny. We must wrestle the mantle of religion from the dogmatics, and re-write the poetry of the world. |
|
|
|
Post by Rit on May 2, 2007 7:37:13 GMT -5
God is Imagination. And Everything that lives is Holy. We wrestle with as many ideas as possible, and we come to know god darkly through the clouded veils.loved this! heh... i can't take all the credit for that. It was thoroughly Blakean. |
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on May 2, 2007 8:52:46 GMT -5
ah, i think i follow. hence the 'chemical hallucinogen', which typically throughout history has been used to bring this state about. although, out of personal tastes, i find the idea of a chemical aid to be unsatisfactory. i want my god to be immediate and directly apprehendible, IF he exists.... and that's a big IF. i know whatchya mean, ritty. i prefer the idea that, if "god" exists, "god" is prefferably immediately apprehendable and equally knowable to everyone... but think about this: we ARE chemicals. we are all simply big piles of chemicals and minerals running around together in symbiotic relationships that culminate to form our fleshy little bodies. every single thing we do with our bodies and minds affects our peception and our ability to percieve "god." hallucenogenic drugs are just the extreme. food, although neccessary, can be just as much of a drug as anything else. if eaten in excess, we become tired and over-weight, and this slows down not only our bodies but our minds (our minds are, after all, a physical part of our bodies). different foods contribute to different chemical reactions in our bodies. everything in moderation is usually the best approach, along with variety. some studies have linked tumeric (a spice used heavily in india) with success in math, for example. even the oxygen we breathe affects our perception... do we get enough? do we breathe deeply enough? (i find that when i spend time breathing deeply i feel like i get buzzed... i'm normally a rather shallow breather.. my nose is too stinkin small...) clearly we can come closer to knowing "god" by simply becoming more aware of ourselves and how we work...taking good care of our body machines so that our perceptions can function at optimum levels. *grabs sisy & plants a wet smackeroo on her lips* |
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on May 2, 2007 8:56:27 GMT -5
a believing christian might look on this conversation and think that we're totally missing the point, and making things more complicated than they need to be, and why the hell are we speculating on the nature of god, when we can just go by dogma and accept the Christian orthodox tradition as it is. But i think their point of view is a mistake. Dogmatic tenets are not holy at all. Merely self-absorbed, gloomy, and in psychological bad faith through and through. God is Imagination. And Everything that lives is Holy. We wrestle with as many ideas as possible, and we come to know god darkly through the clouded veils. Anything less than that is obscene. The average typical American protestant is a sickness unto death. i dunno if i'd go that far. thorny and i just went to a memorial service last sunday for his supervisor's mother. it was held in a protestant church and a very sweet and sincere preacher gave the eulegy. he had written a beautiful sermon that actually made me tear up a bit. not because i'm a christian or anything, but because the scriptural passages he used and the sincerity that he shared them with came through to me in such a way that i realized that on some level we both believed the same things. the passages he read had a metphorical ressonance for me that aligned a lot with natural cycles and concepts of right/wrong as concepts that simply promote life, progress, and growth... in any case, the experience confirmed for me the idea we're all holding different markers and labels for god, or essentially the unknown--the vanishin point in the perspective drawing that is our human concept of reality, and these markers are tailor made by us for ourselves based on our own personal and unique levels of experience . some people do get stuck in rigid forms dogmatism, and this is usally due to fear and the need to conform, from what i can tell. nevertheless, i have some friends who are religious who are very thoughtful and aware of these things, and who are actually managing to progress and push forward within the confines of their current faiths. they know what they need. it's when people become too lazy, guilty, fearful, or egotistical in their faiths (be those religious, political, or whatever...) that problems start to arise and progress gets snuffed out. and i think every faith harbors both said lethargic sorts of members and more "enlightened" members. i consider myself an agnostic, a liberal, an artist, et cetera. but i have known some dogmatic and idiotic agnostics, liberals, and artists. they're usually idiotic because they're living on borrowed faith. they'll grow up. hopefully. and i guess it's our responsibility to help them when we can (if they'll listen), seeing as how we're all part of the same organism. *begins singing The Partridge Family*, " I think I love you so what am I so afraid of, I'm afraid that I'm not sure of a love there is no cure for..." ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on May 2, 2007 8:59:52 GMT -5
this too was great. i wouldn't dream of disputing it. i have an irrational hatred of dogmatics, t'is true. my blood boils over when i encounter one, though i'm always ready to be civil. i wish there were more religious people like yourself and Thorny. We must wrestle the mantle of religion from the dogmatics, and re-write the poetry of the world. *dons the black sunglasses* Then we're on a mission from God  |
|
|
|
Post by Rit on May 2, 2007 9:24:39 GMT -5
a mission wherein you know yourself to be a part of god, you don't have to be told it, nor do yuo have to read it in a book. Yet when you do encounter those, you recognize a kinship that pre-dates the Moment.
|
|
|
|
Post by sisyphus on May 2, 2007 11:24:09 GMT -5
God is Imagination. And Everything that lives is Holy. We wrestle with as many ideas as possible, and we come to know god darkly through the clouded veils.loved this! heh... i can't take all the credit for that. It was thoroughly Blakean. lol. i know. but you called it out. i love that part about 'clouded veils.' they sound like placeholder concepts to me. ya know, when i think about it, can many of us really take much credit for anything? sometimes i wonder if i've ever had an original idea. (i'd like to think i have, but usually my original ideas are more likely bizarre than profound...) i think that, to a degree, i might be good at synthesizing information, but so much of what constitutes my current 'belief system' (always upgrading) i think i absorb from thousands of different places...books..friends...et cetera..., every day. continuing in the "we're a social organism" vein, it's as if we exchange memes like our cells exchange minerals and such. |
|
|
|
Post by sisyphus on May 2, 2007 11:25:39 GMT -5
a mission wherein you know yourself to be a part of god, you don't have to be told it, nor do you have to read it in a book. Yet when you do encounter those, you recognize a kinship that pre-dates the Moment. lovely. spreadin' the love.  |
|
|
|
Post by Rit on May 2, 2007 12:12:06 GMT -5
i think i mentioned this before, but Rainer Maria Rilke's Book of Hours is simply the most devastatingly pure religious work i can think of in existence. It has none of the over-psychologizing of St Augustine, no overt-mathematical ontology of St Aquinas, no guilt of most of the Christian mystics like St John of the Cross..... just pure unadulterated sincere calm, eagle-eyed conversations with God. No anxiety (of the harmful sort).
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on May 2, 2007 12:13:04 GMT -5
I'll exchange some minerals w/you, sisy  |
|
