What is the starting point?

[wynn]

you do not have to believe that as soon as you choose to subscribe to the doctrines/teachings of a particular religion,that you are commited to that religion for life..

Any commitment that is made with a thought of plan B is not a commitment at all ...

is it ppl or circumstances that is convincing you?
if it is circumstances i would argue that it is god that wants you to turn towards him (not religion)
if it is ppl..well...thats a faith call as to their motivations for convincing you..

IOW do not place your faith in religion..place it in God..

But how can God be known without religion?



It seems that your position (and some other people's) is that it is possible to make reasonable, valid assessments of good and bad, right and wrong, true and false even prior to accepting a particular religious outlook.

As if one could be sure one has a degree of objectivity, relevance, wisdom even before one accepts a particular religious outlook.

I think it would be very nice such would be possible, but it seems to me it is not.

 

[wynn]

While (substantial) encouragement does have its place, I'm pretty sure that no amount of it is a substitute for one's own desire and will being behind an issue.

I suppose so. Actually, I think I can attest to that.

In know from sports, for example, that the coach isn't there to motivate the athlete, only to train him - although the coach might sometimes say a nice word of encouragement too. The motivation has to come from the athlete, or nothing.

It comes in at the point of conclusion, IOW we initially think or hear about something, perhaps act accordingly or somehow understand that information, and then we develop some sort of conviction one way or another.

But can one will oneself into having conviction?

For instance, one could ask, how did you develop the conviction that there are serious issues about approaching the starting point of spiritual life.

I don't know how I developed that conviction. I suppose it is simply because I have thought about the starting point of spiritual life a lot.

actually I was making the point that a lack of conviction finds its air in these three things, as explained in the purport ... eg, fear of personality, etc etc

I see.

And that these people have had a lot less attachment, fear and anger than me to begin with - which is why it was easier for them to take up spiritual discipline than it is for me?

Even if one is to accept that they have a greatly reduced influence of these things, you don't know what trials and tribulations they have gone through to be that way.

What I do know is that some of them are using their supposed or real advancement to blackmail me or betray me or just generally don't behave according to the standards they profess, while the general formula is that unless I surrender to these supposedly advanced souls, I am committing offenses.

"I have done it all in this one lifetime. You really owe me respect and submission, you must believe me and trust me and look up to me, and if you don't, you are an offender and will burn in hell."

"I am advanced, so I can do whatever I want, I can make empty promises to you, I can betray you, I can lie to you, take your money. But if you don't believe me and trust me, you are committing offenses, and you will burn in hell."

This is what I have a problem with.

seriously, the whole thing is about application and when one gets to it.

I have applied myself as much I could or knew how. Nothing happened. Well, except a host of questions related to the application, but for which I was severely criticized by other practitioners. So apparently I was doing something wrong in my presumed application, because apparently, those questions should not have come up in my mind if I applied myself correctly.

well now that you know, now what?

I started at the bottom of that list in BG 12 and fixed something for my mother, right after she asked me for it (even though I could have told her no or put it off).

 

[wynn]

i've been studying my religion for more than ten years(and still am)
the two weeks were the test, the validation pause.

Well, I think two weeks of a validation pause is very little.

well for me it was truth, objective reality, what is REALLY happening insde this world and outside it. as opposed to assumptions.

And you were sure you knew/know what reality is??

wow, never even heard of it before, so is it the vegetarian thingy or the yoga or what exactly makes you feel inadequate to join it?

No, it is the conviction or realization that I lack.

also, why that particular sect of Hinduism and not some other? is there something special about it or was it a random pick?

Hard to say exactly, but it is the only one that I know of that fit my preconceived criteria.

However, I am not sure that these criteria of mine are in any way absolutely reliable.

were you an atheist uptill now?or did you use to follow some other religion?

I've tried out several.

 

[Bishadi]

But how can God be known without religion?

by observing the garden with honesty

your position (and some other people's) is that it is possible to make reasonable, valid assessments of good and bad, right and wrong, true and false even prior to accepting a particular religious outlook.

absolutely!

do unto other as you would have then do unto you

do you want to hear a lie? NOpe

be cheated, etc etc etc...... NOpe

nor be told of magic as the cause (ie... just tell me the truth, then if i (anyone) has the drive, they have something to do with their lives; find the answers (but no one needs to lie to the kids (anyone) about reality and consider unanswered phenomenon as 'gods doing it')

As if one could be sure one has a degree of objectivity, relevance, wisdom even before one accepts a particular religious outlook.

you equal to jesus moses muhammad and any buddha, that ever lived

and each is equally born 'good' (without deceit, lies, BS and/or intent to harm)

as all are born (if conscious) with compassion, hardwired

I think it would be very nice such would be possible, but it seems to me it is not.

it is possible

DO NOT LIE TO THE CHILDREN and over time the nasties will go EXTINCT

that is the commitment each of us can maintain, to give OUR LITTLE part to EXISTANCE

basic

 

[Jan Ardena]

Signal,

But there seems to be this enormous gray area of "Which religion to choose? Where to start?"

What does 'religion' mean to you?
And what do want from a religion?

I suppose that in traditional theistic societies, this gray area was very small or didn't exist at all.
But nowadays, it seems like it is enormous, dominant, and many people find themselves in it.

This is mainly due to propoganda, which concentrates on highlighting at best,
the superficial side of religious institutes, and attributing political, and social acts, which can be construed as negative (without the full story), as acts driven by, and because of RELIGION.

I was able to find only very little about how to make this choice - "Which religion to choose? Where to start?"
There is the odd quiz at Beliefnet or Yahoo Answers and such about which religion one has a tendency toward. But apart from that, there seems to be no neutral authority that one could consult about this choice.

If you think about it, it is a nonsense question, as one always chooses that
which they are attracted to, for whatever reason.

Which house should I buy?
The one I like, and suits my circumstances, and can afford, or the one I don't like and doesn't suit my circumstances, or the one I can't afford?

The individual religions of course provide their own reasons and ways of doing things. But they all seem to require quite a considerable initial commitment.

Everything requires a commitment.

So what would be that initial appropriate attitude or outlook as one sets out on the path of searching for the Absolute truth?

What does "the Absolute truth" mean, for you?

jan.

 

[decons]

And this should help me how?

I tried to explain why religious text are constructed and why they belong to their eras.

By the way, what do you mean by absolute truth?

 

[lightgigantic]

But can one will oneself into having conviction?

No
But one can will one's self into action .... which may lead to certain convictions

I don't know how I developed that conviction. I suppose it is simply because I have thought about the starting point of spiritual life a lot.

So you think about something, try to act according to that thinking, and a conviction ensues, yes?

What I do know is that some of them are using their supposed or real advancement to blackmail me or betray me or just generally don't behave according to the standards they profess, while the general formula is that unless I surrender to these supposedly advanced souls, I am committing offenses.

"I have done it all in this one lifetime. You really owe me respect and submission, you must believe me and trust me and look up to me, and if you don't, you are an offender and will burn in hell."

"I am advanced, so I can do whatever I want, I can make empty promises to you, I can betray you, I can lie to you, take your money. But if you don't believe me and trust me, you are committing offenses, and you will burn in hell."

This is what I have a problem with.

even if that is the case how certain persons are, you don't sound convinced of the soundness of it.

I have applied myself as much I could or knew how. Nothing happened. Well, except a host of questions related to the application, but for which I was severely criticized by other practitioners. So apparently I was doing something wrong in my presumed application, because apparently, those questions should not have come up in my mind if I applied myself correctly.

On the contrary, the length and breadth of spiritual life is one of Q's and A's. There are details however on asking the right sort of Q the right sort of person at the right sort of time.

I started at the bottom of that list in BG 12 and fixed something for my mother, right after she asked me for it (even though I could have told her no or put it off).

So there you have it - a moment of applicatioin

 

[NMSquirrel]

Any commitment that is made with a thought of plan B is not a commitment at all ...

its a matter of commiting to god, not to any church.
(see also next answer)

But how can God be known without religion?

Do you agree or disagree with this statement..
'God can utilize us whether we believe in him or not..'

it is possible to know god and not be a part of any religion...
being part of a religion only helps to understand more about him..(lean not upon your own understanding,but seek the wisdom of others)

It seems that your position (and some other people's) is that it is possible to make reasonable, valid assessments of good and bad, right and wrong, true and false even prior to accepting a particular religious outlook.

um..yea..what he said..(bishadi);

absolutely!
do unto other as you would have then do unto you
do you want to hear a lie? NOpe
be cheated, etc etc etc...... NOpe

As if one could be sure one has a degree of objectivity, relevance, wisdom even before one accepts a particular religious outlook.

yes..(definatly not a perfect sense)..
a loose analogy would be..you get the tools during life..following god, teaches you how best to use the tools he gave you..

 

[wynn]

So you think about something, try to act according to that thinking, and a conviction ensues, yes?

Yes, I suppose so.

even if that is the case how certain persons are, you don't sound convinced of the soundness of it.

No, I am not. But neither have I excluded the possibility that this is how things really are and should be. Perhaps God is a Calvinist elitist after all.

On the contrary, the length and breadth of spiritual life is one of Q's and A's. There are details however on asking the right sort of Q the right sort of person at the right sort of time.

Ideally, I suppose so. But why does the threat of being an offender (and thus ending up in hell) have to hang over my head if I don't trust and believe everyone who expects me to trust and believe them?

Why am I, on the one hand, told to choose and be careful whom I inquire from, and on the other hand, threatened with doom if I don't listen to just anyone who wants me to listen to them?

It's like no matter what I would do, it would be wrong.

So there you have it - a moment of applicatioin

But if I take things at such a slow pace, I will never get anywhere, will I?

 

[wynn]

What does 'religion' mean to you?
And what do want from a religion?

I don't know, on both accounts.
I just have a big SHOULD in my mind - and wanting, desiring, choosing seem to have precious little to do with it.

This is mainly due to propoganda, which concentrates on highlighting at best,
the superficial side of religious institutes, and attributing political, and social acts, which can be construed as negative (without the full story), as acts driven by, and because of RELIGION.

I don't understand? Propaganda by whom - the religious or the irreligious?

If you think about it, it is a nonsense question, as one always chooses that
which they are attracted to, for whatever reason.

Which house should I buy?
The one I like, and suits my circumstances, and can afford, or the one I don't like and doesn't suit my circumstances, or the one I can't afford?

For me, it's more like "I need a house, but I cannot afford one."

Everything requires a commitment.

I'm not sure about that. Some things seem to go on just like that - or perhaps the commitment they require is so small it is hardly noticeable.

What does "the Absolute truth" mean, for you?

Again, I don't know, other than feeling an urge that it is something one should gain clarity of.

 

[lightgigantic]

Yes, I suppose so.




No, I am not. But neither have I excluded the possibility that this is how things really are and should be. Perhaps God is a Calvinist elitist after all.

hence thinking -> action - > conviction

Ideally, I suppose so. But why does the threat of being an offender (and thus ending up in hell) have to hang over my head if I don't trust and believe everyone who expects me to trust and believe them?

Failure is a concomitant factor of any action ... of course there are details of the thinking behind it that frame our convictions on it. For instance if you think that you have to trust everyone, if you think that hell (or even life itself) doesn't warrant a gradation of experiences aimed at reformation, etc etc .... then a type of conviction ensues.

Compared to one thinking that there is a means of applying one's self a few hours a day that warrants a gradation of experiences aimed at elevation, etc etc ... a type of conviction ensues

Why am I, on the one hand, told to choose and be careful whom I inquire from, and on the other hand, threatened with doom if I don't listen to just anyone who wants me to listen to them?

It's like no matter what I would do, it would be wrong.

If one is careful whom one inquires from, one wouldn't listen to just anyone.

But if I take things at such a slow pace, I will never get anywhere, will I?

You're capable of a higher level of application, if that's what you mean ....

 

[wynn]

Do you agree or disagree with this statement..
'God can utilize us whether we believe in him or not..'

I suppose I agree.

yes..(definatly not a perfect sense)..
a loose analogy would be..you get the tools during life..following god, teaches you how best to use the tools he gave you..

It seems you have quite a considerable trust in God, and that this trust is a given to you, you can think of it regardless of religion.

Do you remember how you have acquired this trust in God?

 

[wynn]

No, I am not. But neither have I excluded the possibility that this is how things really are and should be. Perhaps God is a Calvinist elitist after all.

hence thinking -> action - > conviction

Do you think it is possible, simply by action based on some line of reasoning, to gain conviction that God is not a Calvinist elitist, and to come to that conviction within some foreseeable time?

("Calvinist elitism" = predetermination; God predetermined who will go to heaven and who will burn in hell for all eternity, and souls can do absolutely nothing about it; no matter how much one may want to go to heaven or work for it, if one is predetermined to go to hell, one will go to hell.)

If one is careful whom one inquires from, one wouldn't listen to just anyone.

I am talking about unilateral incrimination by the other party: Someone can come and tell me something, even without my inviting them or inquiring from them, but by virtue of this person's high spiritual position, I automatically become an offender if I don't believe them.


A popular example of this are some Christian missionaries who will stop a person in the street, rattle down the message of the Gospel in ten seconds or so, and then say "Now you can't say you haven't heard the Gospel and you have no excuse anymore to not believe in God. At Judgment Day, you can't say anymore you haven't been warned."


But a similar principle seems to apply elsewhere as well. A devotee criticizes me (without my having asked for the criticism) or says something about me or others or the world, but if I don't believe him, he takes offense and I am an offender.

But if I take things at such a slow pace, I will never get anywhere, will I?

You're capable of a higher level of application, if that's what you mean ....

No, that is not what I meant.
No, I don't think I am capable of a higher level of application.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Signal,

I don't know, on both accounts.
I just have a big SHOULD in my mind.

Why?

I don't understand? Propaganda by whom - the religious or the irreligious?

By those with power and authority.
Some wish to promote their particular brand of religion, some wish to abolish religion altogether.

For me, it's more like "I need a house, but I cannot afford one."

Assuming "house" is metaphor for religion, why not?

I'm not sure about that. Some things seem to go on just like that - or perhaps the commitment they require is so small it is hardly noticeable.

I think it is more a state of mind.
But I would say that commitment is required for everything to do with existing.
If you enter into a religious establishment, then it is reasonable to
assume that you are there for a reason. A commitment of sorts, is necessary
for you to understand that reason. Otherwise what is the point of being there?

Again, I don't know, other than feeling an urge that it is something one should gain clarity of.

What is the urge?
And how did you happen to come by it?

jan.

 

[wynn]

I don't know, on both accounts.
I just have a big SHOULD in my mind.

Why?

Good question. Again, I don't know.

By those with power and authority.
Some wish to promote their particular brand of religion, some wish to abolish religion altogether.

But in an ideal society, such propaganda would not take place, would?

But we do not live in an ideal society, there is that propaganda, and there is that gray zone.

In an ideal society, going to a church/temple or some religious event, or practicing a religion at home would be normal, a given; nowadays it is connected with a host of issues about choice, commitment, availability, possible negative consequences ...
Not rarely, one has to choose between practice of religion and one's job.

Assuming "house" is metaphor for religion, why not?

Financial issues, not having enough intelligence nor enough conviction, disapproval from family.

If you enter into a religious establishment, then it is reasonable to
assume that you are there for a reason. A commitment of sorts, is necessary
for you to understand that reason. Otherwise what is the point of being there?

This is exactly what occured to me after entering a religious establishment. I realized I couldn't continue to go there in some effort to "find out what it was about", or to "figure out what my reason for going there" was, or to "experiment", or "inform" myself.

Given how the members there treated me, it was apparent I would have to fully accept that religion, even after my first visit there, if I were to go there again. No room for inquiry or experimenting or testing.

Again, I don't know, other than feeling an urge that it is something one should gain clarity of.

What is the urge?
And how did you happen to come by it?

I don't know. It seems I have always had it anyway.

 

[lightgigantic]

Do you think it is possible, simply by action based on some line of reasoning, to gain conviction that God is not a Calvinist elitist, and to come to that conviction within some foreseeable time?

("Calvinist elitism" = predetermination; God predetermined who will go to heaven and who will burn in hell for all eternity, and souls can do absolutely nothing about it; no matter how much one may want to go to heaven or work for it, if one is predetermined to go to hell, one will go to hell.)

Well if that's what one is going to accept as one's line of thinking, the scope for action is pretty dismal

I am talking about unilateral incrimination by the other party: Someone can come and tell me something, even without my inviting them or inquiring from them, but by virtue of this person's high spiritual position, I automatically become an offender if I don't believe them.

If a person is a high spiritual position, they have no requirement for neither unilateral incrimination nor having others believe them

A popular example of this are some Christian missionaries who will stop a person in the street, rattle down the message of the Gospel in ten seconds or so, and then say "Now you can't say you haven't heard the Gospel and you have no excuse anymore to not believe in God. At Judgment Day, you can't say anymore you haven't been warned."

thats ok
the next q should be what is the action that follows belief in god or accepting jesus or whatever they are advocating as the esteemed conclusion

But a similar principle seems to apply elsewhere as well. A devotee criticizes me (without my having asked for the criticism) or says something about me or others or the world, but if I don't believe him, he takes offense and I am an offender.

i think there is an element of social discourse which is just intrinsic to (material) existence. People are always offering unwarranted praise or criticism on anyone and everyone, so you just have to take it all with a grain of salt. Even in terms of mundane achievement, you really have to rise above it to get on with whatever one is doing.

No, that is not what I meant.
No, I don't think I am capable of a higher level of application.

Then why complain of the limitations or slowness of what you deem as your current capability?

 

[scifes]

Do you think it is possible, simply by action based on some line of reasoning, to gain conviction that God is not a Calvinist elitist, and to come to that conviction within some foreseeable time?

("Calvinist elitism" = predetermination; God predetermined who will go to heaven and who will burn in hell for all eternity, and souls can do absolutely nothing about it; no matter how much one may want to go to heaven or work for it, if one is predetermined to go to hell, one will go to hell.)

Well if that's what one is going to accept as one's line of thinking, the scope for action is pretty dismal

no it's not,
1-god gave a criteria to who goes to heaven or hell.
so you actually choose on what predetermined side you are.

2-we don't know what god predetermined for us.
so you can't use it as an excuse to not act.

imagine god hasn't predetermined those who go to hell, won't some people still do what would make them deserve to go to hell? all what it is is that when they are shoved in it -hell-, god would have known it all along.

give a life long gambler a hundred bucks and tell him you'll burn him if he gambles with it.

predetermination doesn't mean anything when the predetermined is unknown.

 

[scifes]

Well, I think two weeks of a validation pause is very little.

i'm not even 20 years old yet , i still remember those two weeks like an eternity.

And you were sure you knew/know what reality is??

i knew reality might not be what i have thought it to be, other parts of reality were reconfirmed.

No, it is the conviction or realization that I lack.

Hard to say exactly, but it is the only one that I know of that fit my preconceived criteria.

However, I am not sure that these criteria of mine are in any way absolutely reliable.




I've tried out several.

so you're saying you're tired of trial and error method?
well dig the crap out of your self and grab that thing you're looking for, i'm feeling weary just listening to you

your departure has been set from misery, where will your arrival be?

 

[NMSquirrel]

It's like no matter what I would do, it would be wrong.

it depends on who you listen to..humans tend to be negativly critical of others ..so if you are listening to an 'autopilot' opinion we can do no right..
(autopilot=without thought)
this is where i struggle with depression..(i blame my mom..lol)
no matter what i do or say someone else will tell me i am wrong..

But if I take things at such a slow pace, I will never get anywhere, will I?

if you travel an inch at a time you will still get to your destination..

 

[shichimenshyo]

Depends on how far away your destination is.