The religious right or left?

[Faceman]

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Now, if you ask me if I am sprititual, the answer is certainly, yes...just in a different way. There may in fact be a god, but I see 'Him' more as the total consciences of 'us' with us being the ENTIRE universe. We may think we are each different ppl, but in truth we are one in the same. Each of us are the universe becoming self aware of itself.

Sure... pantheism. My problem with pantheism is that if it's right, the universe is having a big wank. Whereas Christianity paints a picture of a creator God loving us. Loving another person vs masturbating. Which would you do if you were omnipotent and able to do anything and everything?
[/QUOTE]Yorick, this is offensive. Maybe he doesn't believe as strongly in Pantheism as you do in Christianity but if he does this is a thoughtless insult to his spiritual beliefs

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Faceman: quote: Sure... pantheism. My problem with pantheism is that if it's right, the universe is having a big wank. Whereas Christianity paints a picture of a creator God loving us. Loving another person vs masturbating. Which would you do if you were omnipotent and able to do anything and everything?

Yorick, this is offensive. Maybe he doesn't believe as strongly in Pantheism as you do in Christianity but if he does this is a thoughtless insult to his spiritual beliefs [/QB][/QUOTE]??? Insulting? How so.If the universe is all one being, then me loving God is me loving myself. I'm simply telling it like it is. If all is the one entity, then through life we are simply exploring ourself.

I'm pointing out, that if God is omnipotent and can do anything, why would he choose to explore himself/itself, instead of creating seperate awarenessess to give and receive love?

I used a crude example, but that's intentional. It's how I see it. Wank or sex, what would you choose?

I believe God IS omnipotent, and if he could, would do the most wonderful thing he could, simply because as an artist "he can".

If we are God, or if we are made in his image, the way of reaching that conclusion is the same. Know yourself, and you can get a window into the mind of God. I know what I would do if I were an omnipotent, eternal awareness. I would create another entity to share everything with.

[ 10-30-2003, 07:33 PM: Message edited by: Yorick ]

Originally posted by Yorick: If the universe is all one being, then me loving God is me loving myself. I'm simply telling it like it is. If all is the one entity, then through life we are simply exploring ourself.

IF, yorick. that's exactly the point. YOU believe that, but others dont, or may not necessarily. Faceman's just pointing out the need for consideration.

I was hoping that after your soul baring post you would have tried harder than this to be understanding of others.

[Faceman]

You have pointed out on another thread that you are not insulted by truths.
Yet other people are not as calm as you on this. I for example am currently VERY overweight (need to loose about 40kgs). I know I am, but if someone told me to the face I still would be insulted/offended, because it hurts me to be reminded of that truth
So it's not about proving if your statement was right. It simply carried the possibility of being offensive by choice of words: "So you believe in a masturbating universe, big deal" not an actual quote, just paraphrasing) which diminishes the value of the presumed divine essence by connecting it with something which in religions is commonly referred to as unclean or even sinful.

Many Christians would find it offensive if somebody diminished the importance of Jesus by calling him factually correct but simplicistic names, probably I would find that offensive myself, though an agnostic, only because I was raised in a Catholic enviroment and don't like my childhood pictures being shattered.


So whether or not your statement may be deemed correct, I think it is possibly offensive to people who strongly believe in pantheism in a similar way Maelakin's sig was offensive to you at the beginning of the other thread.

[ 10-30-2003, 07:43 PM: Message edited by: Faceman ]

[Yorick]

Originally posted by sultan: quote: Originally posted by Yorick: If the universe is all one being, then me loving God is me loving myself. I'm simply telling it like it is. If all is the one entity, then through life we are simply exploring ourself.

IF, yorick. that's exactly the point. YOU believe that, but others dont, or may not necessarily. Faceman's just pointing out the need for consideration.

I was hoping that after your soul baring post you would have tried harder than this to be understanding of others. [/QUOTE]??? I put down an "IF". IF so, then THUS.

Look, should I couch the terms? Soften them up? How else do I make a point? The point remains whether it's euphemistic or not.

I used the example to a pantheist friend the other day. He goes to my church. Great guy. He laughed when I made it. He wasn't offended because IT'S TRUE!!

If the universe and everything is one entity, then I am loving myself when I love my God.

If the Creator is a seperate awareness to me, then when I love my God, I am loving another being.

How else do you want me to put it? That is my singular problem with pantheism. What am I to do?

"Oh yes... I have a problem with pantheism, but I can't express it here".

A dedicated pantheist would agree with me... "oh yes it is like that". What's the big deal? A dedicated pantheist would agree and then say "but I still believe this is how it is. I believe I am part of a being having a toss".

We all need to know the pro's and cons of our worldview. If that's what it is, then that's what it is.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Faceman: You have pointed out on another thread that you are not insulted by truths. Yet other people are not as calm as you on this. I for example am currently VERY overweight (need to loose about 40kgs). I know I am, but if someone told me to the face I still would be insulted/offended, because it hurts me to be reminded of that truth So it's not about proving if your statement was right. It simply carried the possibility of being offensive by choice of words: "So you believe in a masturbating universe, big deal" not an actual quote, just paraphrasing) which diminishes the value of the presumed divine essence by connecting it with something which in religions is commonly referred to as unclean or even sinful. Many Christians would find it offensive if somebody diminished the importance of Jesus by calling him factually correct but simplicistic names, probably I would find that offensive myself, though an agnostic, only because I was raised in a Catholic enviroment and don't like my childhood pictures being shattered. So whether or not your statement may be deemed correct, I think it is possibly offensive to people who strongly believe in pantheism in a similar way Maelakin's sig was offensive to you at the beginning of the other thread.

For the umpteenth time, Maelakins sig targetted PEOPLE. It made derisive remarks about people who hold certain ideas.

Where is the insult in my comment? It is focussing on the IDEA.

Argue the point, not the person is the mantra for forum discussion. I am indeed arguing the point. A pantheist could be a genius. I know many Pantheists are brilliant. Confucious being one. Pantheists can be compassionate, explorative, retentive, self aware and spirited individuals like any other.

The IDEA is what i challenged. Lets understand the difference, please.

[Yorick]

Oh and Faceman... what is the problem with self love again?

There are two types of men. Ones that admit they masturbate, and ones that lie about it. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Faceman]

But in this case people are a part of the IDEA (which is the whole point of the idea). And these people might be offended if you're calling them "A part of a big wank". That's all I was saying.

ADD] Maelakin's sig was also targetting an idea ("Religion") and not people directly, but because religion is an idea which implies people as a part of it. the sig was offensive.

[ 10-30-2003, 08:05 PM: Message edited by: Faceman ]

[Faceman]

Originally posted by Yorick: Oh and Faceman... what is the problem with self love again? There are two types of men. Ones that admit they masturbate, and ones that lie about it. [img]smile.gif[/img]

The problem is that (due to the people that lie about it) it is not commonly accepted and widely considered shameful.
You know very well that this is again not the point.
Calling someone an ass and then going on explaining that an ass is actually a very smart animal and that he shouldn't be feeling insulted is not incredibly mature.
Again, possible offensiveness lies in subjective observation not in objective argumentation.

[ 10-30-2003, 08:06 PM: Message edited by: Faceman ]

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Faceman: quote: Originally posted by Yorick: Oh and Faceman... what is the problem with self love again? There are two types of men. Ones that admit they masturbate, and ones that lie about it. [img]smile.gif[/img]

The problem is that (due to the people that lie about it) it is not commonly accepted and widely considered shameful.
You know very well that this is again not the point.
Calling someone an ass and then going on explaining that an ass is actually a very smart animal and that he shouldn't be feeling insulted is not incredibly mature.
Again, possible offensiveness lies in subjective observation not in objective argumentation. [/QUOTE]Is it? By whom? As I said, show me a man who says he doesn't and I will show you a liar.

So if that's the cause of offense, then the offended could well do with a dose of some self acceptance. Let's not take ourselves too seriously Self love is simply not as fulfilling. That is the point I was making.

In any case, euphemism or no, the point is still made.

It's like people who write "f***" what's the point of that? When we read it we say the word in our heads so why do the consor thing? The meaning is still translated.

Same with the analogy. If I am one with the universe, and I make love to a woman, who is also one with me, then I am actually... engaging in self love... I mean, the meaning is still there.

The whole purpose to life in pantheist thought is self exploration. The universe exploring itself. Loving itself.

In any case, in answer to you thoughts about Jesus, the person I wrote the post to had no qualms about calling Jesus an advocate of slavery and a number of other mis/halftruths. I didn't see you protesting much.