religion - general discussion

[erikboy (imported)]

Remember what it was like before you were born? Neither do I. But all of a sudden, there you were! Same with me. How certain are you that the same thing can't happen again some time in the near or distant future after you (whatever 'you' is) die?

In other words, how certain are you that you are not repeatable? You probably wouldn't remember your former self, but are you certain you couldn't happen again sometime?

As I do not remember I have existed before, there is no verified connections between my current me and probable previous me.

At the same time there is no proof I haven't existed before. So, it all is on the level of belief.

Another interesting thing is that we know the population on earth has increased dramatically in recent centuries. Thus many of us existing here now have not existed here before - thus making incarnation theory very questionable.

[A-1 (imported)]

As I do not remember I have existed before, there is no verified connections between my current me and probable previous me.

At the same time there is no proof I haven't existed before. So, it all is on the level of belief.

Another interesting thing is that we know the population on earth has increased dramatically in recent centuries. Thus many of us existing here now have not existed here before - thus making incarnation theory very questionable.

No, no,

That can't be right. If you suppose that the Eastern reincarnation idea is correct we keep coming back until we reach an enlightened state.

Also, we DO NOT always come as humans, according to our Karma, we may have to come back as Jackasses or, perhaps, earthworms.

SO as the initiation of living souls into the reincarnation cycle goes on, unless as many reach enlightenment as start, there will be an increasing number of souls coming back because more start but few reach enlightenment.

Ah!, reincarnation... just keep doing it til you get it right... a bit like sex, don't you think?

See, and you thought that all that you had to worry about was GENDER...

[transward (imported)]

I think any discussion of religion should have the quote from Bokonen that, "Anybody who doesn't understand how a useful religion can be based on nothing but lies doesn't understand religion." For evidence see Scientology.

Transward

[sensenbender (imported)]

We have a saying where I come from...

...goes something like this....

...............Q. How do you stop a WOMAN from having sex?

...............A. Marry her...

...looks like it is mostly universal in it's truth value...

Well, maybe so, but notice I didn't say she didn't have sex after we married, I just said we didn't.

[sensenbender (imported)]

I think any discussion of religion should have the quote from Bokonen that, "Anybody who doesn't understand how a useful religion can be based on nothing but lies doesn't understand religion." For evidence see Scientology.

Transward

Scientology might be based on lies, but my religion is based on unknowns, not lies.

[Riverwind (imported)]

Religion,

based on lies or unknowns or wishful thinking or on future promises that can never be varified, trusting that some unseen man knows everything and is going to decide if you can go to a place in a magical new world were everything is wonderful and the only way to get there is to DIE.

RIGHT.

And remember to send money, that is the one real truth about religion, to get your MONEY.

RIGHT

River

[MacTheWolf (imported)]

Religion,

based on lies or unknowns or wishful thinking or on future promises that can never be varified, trusting that some unseen man knows everything and is going to decide if you can go to a place in a magical new world were everything is wonderful and the only way to get there is to DIE.

RIGHT.

And remember to send money, that is the one real truth about religion, to get your MONEY.

RIGHT

River

River

Send me $100,000 and the Reverend MacWolf will save your soul. Satisfaction is guaranteed.

Then again, at your advanced stage of rigarmortis, I wonder if there's any soul left

[sensenbender (imported)]

As I do not remember I have existed before, there is no verified connections between my current me and probable previous me.

At the same time there is no proof I haven't existed before. So, it all is on the level of belief.

Another interesting thing is that we know the population on earth has increased dramatically in recent centuries. Thus many of us existing here now have not existed here before - thus making incarnation theory very questionable.

Well there are some 'old souls' as well as new ones. Maybe most of us are new mixed among some that are old.

But actually, I wasn't thinking necessarily of some fixed stock of souls being recycled time after time. I was thinking what constitutes consciousness and is it repeatable? In other words if you are in the room with one other person, what terms would you use to describe the differences between your consciousness and his (or hers)? Are the things that make yours yours repeatable? Does the event that made you conscious of your surroundings happen only once in all eternity? Or might it happen again? And how certain are you of your answer?

Your allusion to this maundering being 'all on the level of belief' suggests that you are in the camp that holds that "that which is supportable only by belief and nothing else, is false".

[bobover3 (imported)]

What is supported by belief and nothing else may be true by accident, just as a stopped clock seems to tell the right time twice a day. Accident is not the same as accurate perception, or a method of attaining accurate perception.

A more obvious question is why one would hold unsupported beliefs. There are several equally weak reasons: to conform with others, seeking praise and acceptance while avoiding censure and ostracism; to assert that one's wishes are true, and that life is as one would want it to be; to placate a hunger for knowledge with invented certainties, because one is too vain to admit ignorance and too lazy to seek answers. Why devote oneself to such obvious folly?

[Arab Nights (imported)]

Does anyone think (know?) that if you cancel out sex in a relationship that you are more likely to have less arguing, negotiating and bitching?

QUOTE]

Sorry to be late on this, but I have been "in comunicado" for 3 weeks.

A bit ago, I had started a post. In summary, I have noticed that life has a cycle like a sine wave. On the domestic front, the cycle begins with moments that you remember to your grave with wifie, then life's inevitable shit happens, there is frustration and the usual tensions as two individuals try to deal with that issue, tension rises amd eventually it gets resolved or kind of recedes which is followed by moments that you remember to your grave and the cycle begins again.

My point was that with the inevitable lessening of hormones with more years, that cycle does not change. I was curious what happens with people who have jumped to no hormones.

Of all the people who looked at the thread, only mrt answered. You can look it up, but basically (from memory) he said that it was damn tough because sex was a part of life.

Or, as my Australian boss on a job in South America said, "The further you go, the more things stay the same."

The advice from all of this, quit intellectuallizing. We are here. Experience this life. Jump in and go for it. It will sort itself out over time.