Why are you all so religious
-
cant one be both at once?
surely agnostic is a workable option
-
B less religious. More spiritual.
Those so attached to religions will view this thinking as New Age. Only because their pastors use this to make spiritual people woo-woo and amounts to slander and to instill fear of going into a slippery slope of imagined fears becoming true.
When you think about it, religions incorporate many superstitions that are adopted from myths. When you read Joseph Campbell's books and hear his lectures, you will see where the word "Deus," meaning God, came from the Greek god Zeus. But this is fine imho, as this kind of "appropriation" is legitimate. You may call it a poetic license, but if you were to convert someone to your belief, you have to speak in the terminology you understand. This was what I was trying to make @TheSir understand in another thread.
Religions tend to follow rules to the letter. For very religious people, there tends to be an absence of context when they apply the written "law" with a broad brush, with no "ifs" and "buts." Which is why in a small group like a family or a small tribe, an elder takes the de facto role of leader because he is recognized for his wisdom and does not adhere to the rigidity of what is written, as what is written does not put into place all the instances where the rule does not apply. When the Ten Commandments say "Thou shalt not kill," for example, do we follow this law to the letter, or is it implied that "there are exceptions where the law does not apply?"
We follows laws when laws serve us, people, as Jesus would say so. The laws are followed when they are interpreted and implemented to the spirit, and it is in the spirit of love and the common good, which makes God happy. And when we are indeed endowed with the gift of the Holy Spirit, we are more spiritual than religious.
-
@yerrag said in Why are you all so religious:
B less religious. More spiritual.
And when we are indeed endowed with the gift of the Holy Spirit, we are more spiritual than religious.It's not that you have failed to make me understand your argument -- it's that I'm skeptical of the foundation of your argument. What I have been trying to point out to you is that the Holy Spirit is a religious concept. No matter how spiritual you are, the Holy Spirit will not come and declare itself to you as the Holy Spirit. You have adopted the concept and its name from religion.
As a religious concept, the Holy Spirit has certain attributes that affirm the divinity of Jesus Christ. If you do not recognize the divinity of Jesus Christ, you are not talking of the religious concept of the Holy Spirit. And if you are not talking of the religious concept of the Holy Spirit, your derivative spiritual concept of the Holy Spirit is necessarily false too. Hence to talk about the Holy Spirit at all would be dishonest.
In all other ways I do agree with your dichotomy between religiosity and spirituality. In your case it just doesn't have anything to do with Christian spirituality, and should thus exclude the Holy Spirit
-
Is the distinction between the spirit and the Holy Spirit that wide a divide? What if I just call it the Spirit instead of the Holy Spirit and just make it's holiness implied, would you object? So if a holy man who isn't Christian is filled with spirituality, would the spirit that fills him be any different from the one spirit also known as the Holy Spirit?
-
There is no need to know Somebody?
My Creator?It’s the greatest relationship I’ve ever had.
-
High metabolic rate
-
“For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:” (Romans 1:20, KJV)
Ray isn't the authority I have to report to. God is.
-
@Hando-Jin It's mostly posturing anyway! To say Ray wasn't religious is true in the typical sense. He did not ascribe to a religion. I think it's fair to say he's closer philosophically to religiosity than he is to pure atheism á la Dawkins. He said what he believes is close to process theology.
I once asked him 'Do you ever pray?'. He answered:
From Danny's interview with Ray. He mentions it in emails as well.
Danny Roddy: Well, that's good to know. Then, you told somebody somewhere that your idea was more like process theology. I've watched a few videos on that, but maybe you would replace God with consciousness. Is that right?
Ray Peat: Well, existence. I think Lenin gave a very good definition of matter. He said, "Everything we know is just memory and it's not matter. Everything we know comes from matter, and so matter is everything we don't know. Matter is possibility in the future." Nothing like the so-called materialists or religionists think of matter. Matter is nothing except what we can know and become.
Danny Roddy: I'm probably thinking about this too simplistically, but is that just the admission that we don't know that there is consciousness and memory, but it doesn't have to have ... The starting point is obscure?
Ray Peat: Yeah. You could make good guesses in all directions, but you can't work anything out in terms of forms, like that idea of Greek forms and atoms being number.
Danny Roddy: Is taking the leap to a specific creator not warranted?
Ray Peat: Yeah. If you have to leap, you're not there. The experience of, like Lenin said, that we have knowledge and experience, but where it comes from is always beyond what we know. It's always the future and potentiality. That means we're experiencing the nature of matter constantly. The present and the potential of our experience is what matter is. That's also the creative essence, which they call, "God," and put remotely somewhere else.
Danny Roddy: That's the idea behind process theology. It was this continual creation that things are in flux. Does that trend into the William James’ radical empiricism idea?
Ray Peat: Yep, yep.
-
For some, religion is a passageway, stemming from a need to believe in something, in a higher power.
Problems arise when you start to become too attached to religion, and end up distancing yourself from your own being, unconsciously spreading a meme that's not your own.
Those who are able to see beyond religion realize that we are in reality all creative beings, and that the biggest mistake is to think that God is outside of us, all of which is easier to observe and experience when our bodies are functioning optimally through a high metabolic rate.
Ray Peat was not religious, but his desire to maintain a high metabolic rate stems without a doubt from a desire to feel the presence of his own being and appartenance to everything around us that can only be achieved and maintaned through a high metabolic rate.
-
@Hando-Jin said in Why are you all so religious:
There's no need for it. Ray wasn't.
Hi, whether Raymond was "religious" or not, people dont have to do as he did, it's not intrinsically optimal to imitate Raymond.
From my experience, I suggest that there are several common factors that are associated with and/or contribute to belief in "religion":
The fact that children and young adolescents(to some degree, also women, and men who are not in optimal state), we are more inclined to believe in the claims of others, specifically when these claims arouse emotions such as fear, respect, "greatness", submission, that some of these lingering negative emotions can contribute in part to a phenomenon named "Stockholm syndrome", and that many of the people in our environment whom we tend to imitate and/or be influenced by, also believe in these claims
Potentially the innate instinct of children, women, and men who do not feel an optimal degree of energy and masculinity to want to associate, cooperate, and/or be protected by a man/men who tend to a higher degree of energy and masculinity, considering that nowadays in certain environments, there are few men who tend to an optimal degree of energy and Masculinity, this innate instinct may be directed towards the figure of a creator and/or a "god" rather than a man
some elements of religious texts can also arouse emotions that some people enjoy
In my experience, as a man(i dont know for women), i suggest the more we tend towards an optimal degree of energy, masculinity, sovereignty, consideration of our instincts and experiences above claims and theories, the lower our propensity for submission and fear,
The less we think and believe in "religion" and "god", up to a certain threshold where we no longer perceive the idea and/or feeling of a creator as something superior and external to us
-
@Hando-Jin Ray was a communist. Should I be one as well?
-
@Norwegian-Mugabe said in Why are you all so religious:
@Hando-Jin false. Almost all the greatest men in history were Christian Aryans. We should therefore produce more Christian Aryans. Atheism is unreasonable. Liberalism is dysgenic. Both atheism and liberalism needs to go.
Hi, There are reports of people who have abused children and practice Christianity, and/or claim to be Christian, and/or are considered Christian, including church people such as deacons, Priests
One report mentions over two hundred thousand cases of child abuse in the French church since 1950,
https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_indépendante_sur_les_abus_sexuels_dans_l'Église
just this phenomenon of child abuse by some "christians" within and with out the church is enough to demonstrate that being a "Christian" in it self does not make one tend towards an optimal degree of energy and masculinity
Also, I suggest that "History" is a fiction, which may be true, may be false, in which you are free to believe, it remains a personal belief, such as religion, and not a knowledge with a very high degree of credibility, specifically when these are events before our lifetime and the lives of our parents/grandparents, and we have no certainty that what is written is mostly true and/or totally true, and that potentially other writings claiming different perspectives have not been found and/or lost/destroyed
Thrive for the highest degree of energy
-
You could at least try to read some of the theory that Ray read!
Being a liberal seems a lot less logical in the face of reality.
-
@Truth said in Why are you all so religious:
@Norwegian-Mugabe said in Why are you all so religious:
@Hando-Jin false. Almost all the greatest men in history were Christian Aryans. We should therefore produce more Christian Aryans. Atheism is unreasonable. Liberalism is dysgenic. Both atheism and liberalism needs to go.
Hi, There are reports of people who have abused children and practice Christianity, and/or claim to be Christian, and/or are considered Christian, including church people such as deacons, Priests
One report mentions over two hundred thousand cases of child abuse in the French church since 1950,
https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_indépendante_sur_les_abus_sexuels_dans_l'Église
just this phenomenon of child abuse by some "christians" within and with out the church is enough to demonstrate that being a "Christian" in it self does not make one tend towards an optimal degree of energy and masculinity
Hi, Catholics are not Christians.
"Christian Aryans" who believe in some sort of racial supremacy are also deluded, but that's a different issue.Short list is they practice idolatry, commune with spirits (devils), worship a woman, call others "father", practice lifelong celibacy (which leads to those cases above).
“But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.” (Matthew 16:23, KJV)
“Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.” (Mark 7:7-9, KJV)
“But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.” (Matthew 18:6, KJV)
-
@Truth After Vatican II, the catholic church is not Christian but just a liberal political organization.
It is just a fact that the best people in history were Italian and Germanic Christian artist who managed to transcend the human. Bach, Michaelangelo, and Mozart are good examples. Europe at it's peak was the clear high point in human history and it was driven by Aryan Christianinty.Put yourself on fire for peak energy metabolism.
Ignore, judge, overcommit.
-
@Norwegian-Mugabe said in Why are you all so religious:
@Truth After Vatican II, the catholic church is not Christian but just a liberal political organization.
It is just a fact that the best people in history were Italian and Germanic Christian artist who managed to transcend the human. Bach, Michaelangelo, and Mozart are good examples. Europe at it's peak was the clear high point in human history and it was driven by Aryan Christianinty.Is it your thought that no non catholic true "christian" has committed child abuse in modern times?
You mentioned Bach, michaelangelo, Mozart, did they tend towards an optimal degree of energy, well-being, fertility, if so how do you know?
According to your beliefs, are there things associated with them that contribute considerably to the fact that the majority of people exposed to them tend towards a degree of optimal energy and well-being over the long term?
Thrive for the highest degree of energy
-
@Hando-Jin Since 1980-ties neoliberals have been dissolving social structures and lowering/removing moral standards... Populistic/superficial Left also has some fair share in this...
It has gone too far...
Our ecosystems want to counterbalance this... Therefore we have a social need for more constraints and guidelines. Many conflate this need for more structure with introducing religious approaches...Panta rhei... | Liberté 🏴 | It depends... ;-)
A little Learning is a dangerous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian Spring:
~Alexander Pope, An Essay on Criticism -
@Truth I do not put ultimate value on energy, well-being, & fertility. Like Schopenhauer and that dork Nietczhe after him, I think art is the heighest aim of humanity. Art trancends the will into objectivity. At certain times you can borrow the beatific vision for a moment. I think the adante on Mozart's 21 piano concerto is worth more than some neanderthal man having a high energy level and wanting to get laid(lol). I think it is a mistake to make a metabolic lifestyle the ultimate aim. Peat talked about this too. You want a good health to aid you in achieving your greatest potential. It is good that you attack pedo's though. These people should be publicly sterilized.
Put yourself on fire for peak energy metabolism.
Ignore, judge, overcommit.
-
@Norwegian-Mugabe said in Why are you all so religious:
@Truth I do not put ultimate value on energy, well-being, & fertility. Like Schopenhauer and that dork Nietczhe after him, I think art is the heighest aim of humanity. Art trancends the will into objectivity. At certain times you can borrow the beatific vision for a moment. I think the adante on Mozart's 21 piano concerto is worth more than some neanderthal man having a high energy level and wanting to get laid(lol). I think it is a mistake to make a metabolic lifestyle the ultimate aim. Peat talked about this too. You want a good health to aid you in achieving your greatest potential. It is good that you attack pedo's though. These people should be publicly sterilized.
why do you consider "art" to be mankind's highest goal when it's not necessarily associated with a significant increase in the degree of energy, well-being, joy over the long term, either for the person who supposedly made it, or for the people and/or majority of people exposed to it?
how do you measure what is positive and what is negative if not by its impact on the energy, well-being, joy, longevity, fertility of the person and/or the majority of people?
The point about "Christian" child abusers is that it shows that being "Christian" in itself doesn't make you tend towards an optimal Degree of energy and/or Masculinity, without considering other factors
Thrive for the highest degree of energy
-
@Truth These people were liberal. Read what I wrote about Vatican II. I have answered your other question previously both in this thread and in a previous thread. See what I wrote about overcoming the will through objectivity. You can also read again the answers I provided you when we discussed this earlier in the other thread. You are bringing up the same points again and again even though you have been given the answers.
Put yourself on fire for peak energy metabolism.
Ignore, judge, overcommit.
