So, I have done a small amount of research and thinking since my post last night and have come up with some new questions and comments on this "religion," as I still can't see it as an actual religion.
Most of my thoughts are based around this claim, that it is a viable religion. I understand the thought that it's a religion because of its communal aspect, but religion goes so much deeper than that. The community needs a belief to share, not just the acceptance of an absence of belief.
Beyond that, I like the questions that a Universist is to ask themselves; Who am I?, Where did I come from?, Why am I here?, Where am I going?, What does it mean to be human?, Why does the universe exist?, Does God exist?, etc. Those are questions everyone should continually ask themselves no matter their religion. They lead to seeking knowledge, confirming beliefs, realizing need for change in a belief, or even need for a belief. A Universist, as far as I have learned, asks these questions but never answers them. What the...?
So, if you ask questions but never answer them, what good are you doing? If they are to doubt, where does that fit with a religion giving you fulfillment and enlightenment? In the article in the Tribune, the founder stated that "he missed the sense of comunity that church gave him and the SPIRITUAL UPLIFT". How do you get "spiritual uplift" form doubt? How do you get the fulfillment and purpose that any religion is supposed to bring from a religion devoid of answers and actually requires that you not find answers?
Am I missing something here? Any sort of commenting and debate is much welcomed.
19.11.05
Inscription à :
Publier les commentaires (Atom)
8 commentaires:
Universist do answer those questions, but they acknowledge they could be wrong, and don't try to impose them on others, or take a permanent, unchangable stance on those issues.
As for "spiritual" I find freedom and discovery more uplifting than compliance and acceptance of other' dogma.
Those two things are not necessarily mutually exclusive, anon.
I guess my question for you is, Jane:
What exactly is it that you find so fascinating about this new religion? And what is it that you see there that appears absent in Christianity? realizing that those two things may or may not be the same or similar
or am I asking the wrong questions?
call me this afternoon.
more on mr baker... just so you know where your fount of information is comming from incase you didn't click on his link... do so and you will find him descrbibg himself as "Universist,{Universism, not to be confused w/Universalism}, Deist, Pantheist, apostate, Ex-Christian.UPDATE:Recently co-opted Satanism/Luciferianism into my philosophical path , My moral philosophy can be summed in, the golden rule, or the, wiccan rede...or some Satanic ethics ," and you will find under his list of fav. books the satanic bible.
there is an awful lot of satan in that description, and satan has a way of distorting the truth in such a way that one can thing they are moving towards God and the truth when infact they are doing just the opposite. (think eve and the forbidden fruit....) just think about that would you?
love you.
Thanks, Maggen. I do have no intention on following Universism, it has just intrigued me, as other religions do. Mostly it just confuses me. I have another post forming in my head on some new thoughts and issues with it. It'll be up soon.
Love you, and I shall write you a real email/letter soon!
I'd rather have truth than spiritual uplift, or even perhaps fulfillment. Fortunately for me, Christianity tends to give all of those--although "uplift" is a strange term for this, since joy and happiness are not the same thing; it's not always going to be a fun, happy ride--too many people fall away when they face struggle or hard times. God warns us that it's going to be tough. Conversely, those struggles can bring us closer to God if we let them--Lewis wrote that suffering is God's megaphone to a deaf world.
I don't like to apply the word "religion" to Christianity--you can be religious about it and still not really be a Christian, not hit the core and essence of it. Going to church and going through the motions, or even believing in the doctrines or institution, that doesn't bring life (it can even deaden, like the Pharisees and scribes); what gives life is a relationship with the Creator, and that is something that can be tangible. All the trappings could be stripped away, as long as that is there. Perhaps too that leaves things somewhat more open that we realize: the thief on the cross never did make a "confession of faith," but he clearly believed, and Jesus promised him paradise. At the same time, the parable of the sheep and the goats can be unsettling, because so many who call on God's name are rejected, not having fed the poor, visited those in prison, caring for the marginalized.
{Quote;Maggen/}maggen said...
more on mr baker... just so you know where your fount of information is comming from incase you didn't click on his link... do so and you will find him descrbibg himself as "Universist,{Universism, not to be confused w/Universalism}, Deist, Pantheist, apostate, Ex-Christian.UPDATE:Recently co-opted Satanism/Luciferianism into my philosophical path , My moral philosophy can be summed in, the golden rule, or the, wiccan rede...or some Satanic ethics ," and you will find under his list of fav. books the satanic bible.
there is an awful lot of satan in that description, and satan has a way of distorting the truth in such a way that one can thing they are moving towards God and the truth when infact they are doing just the opposite. (think eve and the forbidden fruit....) just think about that would you?
love you.
{Unquote/}
Greetings.
first my interest in Satanism and my Universism are two different things. I happen to have found enough grounds for beeing able to borrow from or mix the two together for my own personal path.
I'm likely the only individual you will find amongst the Universist Movement that has done this.
Allthough some other Universists may find inspiration in some other rationalist religions philosophies and/or symbolisms{such as Buddhism or Taoism for example}-though most not to a very great degree..
I'd also like to stress for you Christians here that Wicca and Satanism are COMPLTELY different, and I personally have only somewhat studied Wicca, but beyond enjoying the sound of the Rede at times, I've not adopted any Wicca into my path.
Of course, I assume that most of you Fundamentalist/Evangelical Christians believe all religions/faiths/philosophies/beliefs and unbeliefs that are not your own{including many Christian sects} are hellish deceptions invented by your devil. I know you do, I was once one of you and held the same prejudiced and ignorant views for many years.
Yes, in my personal profile I mention Anton Laveys "Satanic Bible", I'm not much a fan of Anton himself, but alot of what he wrote was right on the nose{not "all" mind you}.
I am curiuos if anyone here has actually read Laveys book anyhow? And, if you've only "glimpsed" and immaturely judged it on the surface level, a prejudgement rather skin deep, w/out actually at least "intellectually" contemplating.
That's the problem w/so many fundamentalist/evangelical/orthodoxChristians, wuilling to preach, not willing to listen or "consider" others views so much.
You say Satan has a way of distorting the truth. But, there simply put-IS NO "SATAN".
If you'd do some actual research into the origens of the idea and word Satan{as well as "Lucifer"}, some historical,semantic origens,mythological,philosophical,scientifical, genuine inquiry; you'd know that Satan was in the Jewishs criptures{The Tanakh; Torah and prophets} NOT a evil fallen angel opoonent of YhWh, rather "Satan" was a title{not a "proper name"} in most contexts referring to any angel sent out by YhWh to "oppose" or frustrate the plans of humans{Satan beeing the hebrew word for what in our language is "adversary/opposer"}, ask any Jew worth his/her salt, and you will get a similar answer.
In the book of Job, Satan is a more specific angel in this context, still a "title"-not a "proper name"; and in this story/parable Satan is again-not the enemy of YhWh, but rather an attorney of sorts, a court prosecuter in YhWh's heavanly courts-NOT the "enemy" of YhWh.
Again, ask any Jew worth his/her salt, any Rabbi worth his/her salt and they will tell you a similar story.
Satan did not come to be thought of as a fallen angel till mere centuries before the alleged time of Jesus; certain sects of the Jews had,because of contact w/non-Jewish/Israelite{or "pagan"-originally a insult meant to any non-monotheistic peoples}cultures,people,and mythologies. They then adopted those myths ideas of an opposing spiritual force to the head creator deities.
Probably the biggest influence on this conception of the fallen angel Satan{merely a mis-aplication of his/it's "titles" semantic meaning}was The Pre-Islamic Persian "Zoroatrianism" religions "Ahrihman"{god of death/destruction}, as well as several others-chief amongst after Ahriman was the Egyptian deity-"Set"
In time they and then the early Church also misapplied the word "Hel"{a Norse goddess},adding on one "L" to a misintpretation of the Hebrew word "Hades"{the grave} and Gehenna{a place where refuse and the dead were burned, a literal place}-thus you have the myth of eternal hell"fire" torment after death.
"Lucifer" was never even in the Scriptures period. Lucifer is the translation of the Roman word combo "Lux" and "Ferre"{menaing "light-bearer"}-and this was a title/poetic name that Roman poets gave to the planet Venus as the morning star{Venus was seen by them as a brilliant star, first amongst those to show at nigth and last amongst those to fade in the morning}.
It took many centuries for "Lucifer" to be solidified as another popular name for the Christian devil. It wa sin use after a few centuries of the Christian faiths existence, but it was'nt until later that it got more widely used as a name for the christian devil, it officially became very popular just a few centuries or so agowhen the Christian poet John Milton wrote the epic poem "Paradise Lost".
"Lucifer" is not mentioned in Isaiah,contrary to popular indoctrinationand apologetics; The supposed mention of "Lucifer" therein is a mention of the fall of a Human Babylonian king-given the poetic title "son of morning'dawn star/morning star"- which was later confused by Church scribes w/the very few verses in the New Testament which refer to -as in Pauls epistle- "Satan appears like an angel of LIGHT" and Jesus "I saw satan fall from heavan like LIGHTning", thus a sad mistranslation which has been used for centuries to spook people into following the "one true faith"{one of many alleged "one true faiths" whose claims to such are no more porvable than some of the other "one true faiths", and the bickering over whose faith is the "one true faith" has led to centuries of persecutions,PREJudice,intolerance,oppressions,wars and destruction}.
Don't believe me? Fine. I challenge you to do the reseach and you will find I am correct{for the most part; some of the minutets details may be slightly off, but the generality of it all is 100% verifiable as known and testable/quantifiable facts.}
Now, as to why one would be or would embrace elements of "Satanism/Luciferianism", simple- it's mere philophy,"symbolic" religion meant for "symbolic" psychological inspiration{the famous psychologist Carl Yungs psychological theories on the collective unconciuos and "archetypes" are one way to back up such a thing}, it based on an elaborate philosophic set-up {borrowed ideass from several other philosophies, and more specifically-whichever ones are most appealing to the individual, as satanism/luciferianism is about individualism and free-thought}and on "semantic" meanings of the words; Satabists are "opposers" of the status quo,herd mentality,hypocrisy,tyranny,etc.
The Lucifer principle{or "Luciferianism"} comes in semantically as "Enlightenment/light-bearer" to mean enlightenment and self-betternment, to make oneself a better person and human beeing.
That sums it up pretty much.
I've allready defended and discussed Universism, and again, Universism and Satanism-Two different religious philosophies.
Mixing works sometimes, just look at Christianity, it is a mixture of Judaism w/ancient pagan religions ideas.
You will argue that this is mere "Demonic deception", however, I re-iterate it is well established FACTS.
You can argue against gravity, but if you jump w/out a parachute you'll still go splat!
It's funny how modern Christians will accept some scientific,historical,mythlogical,psychological,etc, facts... whilst they will igonre and demonize all those that they don't agree with, that contradict their most fundamental beliefs preached by ancient herdsmen,cult leaders,and cult leader followers from aeons ago and their prejudices and superstitions based on the fact they existed thousand sof years ago and did'nt have the knowledge of things that we do not to know better. In fact, there are many things that even fundametnalist christians today accept as factthat were once demonized by the Church, and I suspect that in a few centuries{sad it has to take so long}the facts they now ignore and/or demonize will also eventually be admited to by them as FACTS!
I also must say to this comment
"just so you know where your fount of information is coming from"
...that is incredibly ignorant,hypocritical, and PREjudgemental of you to judge the validity of the facts or info I speak simply because I believe different than you, simply because I happen to find some inspiration in the satanic myth{from the perspective of the character as a rebel against hypocrisy and tyranny...not some baby raping,pure death and blind hate stupidity}.
When a Christian speaks verifiable FACTS to me on something, and it can be verified, I accept it, I don't say.. "oh, they are christian, so they must be a liar and all the scientists and people of fact that say that they are right in that particular thing must all be liars too!!!"
Now, to argue AUTHORs points on Universist Movement; the author says
{Quote/}
The community needs a belief to share, not just the acceptance of an absence of belief.
{Unquote/}
Who said anything about us sharing the acceptance of the ABCENCE of BELIEF? Universists don't reject "belief", many of them are Believers in something... Deists for example believe in a intelligent first cause creator/force.
What they share in a absense of "FAITH"{that is 100% certainty/absolutes in things not yet proven and which may contradict mountains of ammased evidences}.
Our commonalities and an absence of faith and a love of uncertainty and the open minded ongoing "search" for truth.
Some in the movement call it a "religion", others "philosophy" or "philosophical movement" or "religious philosophy"/"religious philosophy movement",etc. Religion has a few different contexts and meanings, one is "to bind", we are "bound" as a community of like minded "seekers" in our open-minded "uncertainty" and lack of "faith".
I'm glad you like the questions we aks ourselves. The reaosn we never come to an ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY conclusion is because the fact IS that no matter how much one researched, no matter HOW MUCH they think deeply about things, in one lifetime we simply fo not have enought time or mental energy to learn it ALL, to know everything about everything and every belief/unbelief, and we simply have not reached enough knowledge about the Universe or even our own minds and selves scientifically to make an absolute 100% certainty conclusion w/out deluding ourselves.
Once one "thinks" they've discovered the absolute truth, they need to go back and start again, because they obviuosly have'nt REALLY fully thought through all views or researched such, and they obviuosly don't realize the complexity and depth of the Universe and ourselves- and that there is SOOOO much more we have yet to discover before we can say "AHA! 100% SPIRITUAL/MORAL/THEOLOGICAL TRUTH THAT APPLIED TO ALL BEEINGS PERIOD!"
Do you consider Buddhism to be a "real" religion? I bet you do. It is amongst the top five largest religions in the world; get ready for the kicker..
It does not teach absolute truth, it does not teach a universal answer/conclusion, or a conclusion at all.
Sidharttha Guatema{the Buddha} was a non-theist, was a ancient spiritual philosopher and rationalist, he even taught his followers to question him himself and to continually question their own beliefs continually.
Sound familiar? It should. Sidharrthas religion was akin to early Universis{or UniverSAMism at least}-it was an advanced,rationally spiritual philosophy.
He never taught "conclusion".
I suppose mosty of you are not aware of such things. This is because you've reacehd your "absolute conclusion" and have gotten comfrotable in your little box and the cage you've placed your god into and your morals and philosophies. Why continue to to search, why study other religions and philsoosphies[of "all" kinds] in depth or even very much, you've got the answers that have been handed down to you second hand for centuries, all others are evil demonic deceptions that need to be exposed or the relatively decent people following them will be sent by a loving sky daddy to an eternal torture session w/out reprieve, you arrogantly think you have the ONLY way and must save all the evil wretched sinners from your self-invested devil-a scare tactic into the worlds biggest cult, a reflection of your own egos and fears!
The sad thing sit hat you likely assume we are all empty and w/out any joy or peace, because yours is the only way to reach such things.
That's sad, I pity your ignorance and arrogance.
We've found "enlightenment", enlightenment does not mean "absolutes/100% certain conclusion". Enlightenment means reaching that stage of understanding to realize that "I don't know it all! I don't have all the answers and probably never will, but the journey is the joy".
Uncertainty is the greatest spiritual uplift, no more fear of made up hells, no more fears that there are wicked invisible beeings hiding around every corner waiting to pounce on ya, know more assuming everyone else that does not share in your personal beliefs about such things is wrong and eternally damned and must be condesndingly loved and saved by you and your god. This is the greates uplift one can experience, I have found joy and an uplift in theological uncertainity and in reason that I never found in faith and in Biblegod and Jesus.
But, of course, what do I know, I only think I feel joy and happiness and spirtual uplifting because the devil has me dooped into thinking so{sad thing is that the other absolutist faiths that exist can and do say similar things about you Christians; what good does it do the human race to prejudge each other like that? The last couple thousand years shows the fruits of such beliefs, "ye shall know em by their fruits" to quote your own faiths founder}.
Thank you for your time and for reading this patiently.
In Reason:
The very irreverand Bill Baker
Enregistrer un commentaire