Solace of the Solitary

LOVE this Baba Fats!!!!! :D And yay for gems and crystals! hehe

Baba Fats said:

It depends on the bible you are reading, and the priest you ask to interpret it. Some believe that the bible condemns rape, while other believe that it means homosexuality. I have 3 different bibles at home, and none of them phrase it the same way.

I add the word "spiritualist" because I am. I do believe that something greater than us is connecting everyhing together. No, not a god. Not even a single, all-powerful entity. I agree that something that has influence over us is not plausible. But unlike you, I don't think that we have no control over our thoughts and actions. You say that they believe it because that's just the way it is, and that they can't not believe it, because that's just the way it is. I don't accept that.

People are not bad because they are wired that way due to their genetic code. We can change. We are Homo Sapiens. Self aware. A nervous animal does not have the cognitive functions to change itself. Sure, you can train it. But if you let up on the training regiment, it goes back to being it's old self. If a person wants to change, and really puts their mind to it, they can.

Western medicine and studies have proven that alternative medicine is false. But it's been used for thousands of years. if it didn't work, they would have stopped using it. American studies still claim that Weed does not help cancer and AIDS patients. But European studies prove otherwise. Science can be flawed. I would know. I'm in school for biology. In multiple years new finding have come out, and I had to relearn something that was taken for granted. You can't even site a journal or article in a science paper if it's older than 5 years. Experiments are not a perfect science. And the FDA, even, just found out that some companies are givingprescriptionantidepressants to kids when they specifically were told that the drug wasn't safe for them. As much of a scientist as I am, I understand that it's not perfect.

I believe in being a good person. I don't own much, and I am generous with the little I have. It's partly a cultural thing. But the culture spawns out of the religion that surrounds it. I believe in Karma, The 8 noble truths, and the golden rule. These ideas would not be around if not for the religion the people believed in. These religions came around during a time when people sacrificed animals and people to gods, when you could have your hand cut off for stealing. The concept of being a good person did not create the religion. the religion created the idea.

To me, at least, the terms refers to "something bigger than me". Something you can't necessarily define and pointed to. I know what will happen to me when I die. But I also believe that something connects us all while we are alive too. Do I know what that is? Not really. If I studied quantum physics, and understood the math, maybe I would have a better idea. But as for right now, it does have a slightly mystical feel to it. I know there is something physical going on. I like using gems to help heal from bruises and sore muscles. I don't believe that anything is reaching out through the rock, or that it is a mystical item left just for me to use. I know that crystals vibrate on their own just because of their molecular structure. And that that vibration has an effect on what is around it. No different than how radiation vibrates in it's own wavelength and makes you sick.

Growing locks, like I said, does not produce the spiritual experience. It is a way to feel more closely tied to your spirituality, and to express it to others. Sure, the majority of people don't see it. But you are not growing locks for them. You are growing them for yourself. The best christians never talk about god or their faith with anyone outside of church. They act on it. There's no reason to talk about what you believe unless you are trying to convert them, or answering a question. People see how you act, not what you say you believe. But because we can not see each other here, all we have is our words. So that has to do.

updated by @blessed-earth-mama: 07/23/15 08:01:00AM

Every one is right and no one is wrong.
We all live on earth but we also exist in our own world.
If you truly believe in something, then in YOUR world, it is completely right.
If you come across opposition in YOUR world, it is simply that someone has noticed you in THEIR world and you represent something THEY do not believe in or desire. So there is a clash, yet really you are both still right.
If I may use the totem pole idea.
Two people with clashing views on many levels sitting together studying a totum pole.
Would it surprise you to realise that they were not studying the very same Totem pole?
Later one will describe the wood, the coulours, the engineering behind its contruction, the other will describe the wood, colours, the symbolism on the pole and the feelings they had while there.
They will not describe the same Totem pole because they both experienced a different one in their own reality. It's paradoxical but think about it.
Reality is nothing more than perspective.
There is no such thing as absolute righ and wrong in a world of such individual worlds where free will reigns

Perfectly said, Lennie.

There's a picture of my wife and me at aBuddhisttemple in Canada. When we got there, She walked around a admired the beauty of it. She studied the inscriptions on pillars. I walked around in silent contemplation of the spirituality of the place. We both enjoyed being there, but for our own reasons. It's the same when we go hiking. She loves to take pictures and document what we see. I love to climb trees and rock jump across creeks and rivers.

That argument makes no sense to me. Reality is about what is real. Many children believe in Santa, but it doesn't affect to reality of the situation. You might say that he is real to them, but it doesn't mean anything.

Edit: Lennie, have you heard the argument that free will is an illusion. It's pretty convincing.

Finally, a huge freakin' arguement with 1 person that isn't me challenging the status quo on the site.Spirituality is a copout for explaining things which are either not as you think they are, or which you can simply not explain with current available knowledge. The example SE made of dreads giving some sort of extra sense. If it is true (I share Adam's vision on that, by the way) then it has nothing to do with dreads being spiritual or giving some mystical connection to the earth. It could be the dreads catching vibrations and these being transferred to the nerves on the scalp, similar to how whiskers work on cats. It currently cannot be explained nor confirmed, using mystical and spiritual explainations does nothing to further our understanding of the matter.Sensing someone's death is actually nothing new. It has been noticed in animals, even in scientific studies. Animals can sense harm to be done upon them in the future determined at random. My dogs predict storms. My dreams tend to predict future situations for me. Once I dreamt that when crossing the street a car would speed through despite the traffic light being red, sometime later I felt the situation was the EXACT same as in my dream, and I hesitated to cross the street and evaded the car that would've ran me over. If you attach mysticism and spirituality to these experiences it only becomes harder to understand them for what they are. They are there. You cannot explain them or even acknowledge them at all (if you dream of getting hit by a car 10 times and it doesn't happen, then the 11th time you do avoid getting hit by a car, you would obviously give weight to the predictions in your dreams, despite being incorrect the other 10 times).There was also the arguement that science is not always correct. Scientific method is always correct. Just as computers are always correct. People might incorrectly apply the scientific method just as they might give a computer an invalid command. Or they might lie and not write down the actual findings but what they would find more convenient to be the truth.

I didn't say that Science isn't always correct. I said it was flawed. For the exact same reasons you stated. Not all scientist are good ones. Take, for example, all of the fanatic christians who get degrees in science so thy can look credible on paper, while they really just want to make false claims about evolution and the real age of the universe to prove their religious beliefes

It's not science that is flawed in this example. The scientific community take these type of claims to pieces, thus solving the problem. Such "scientists" have zero credibility.

i love tjis post, very beautiful and well said.

Of course they have no credibility. So that wasn't the best example. But what I said a while ago about studies in America, claiming that Marijuana doesn't help Cancer and AIDS patients, and Studies in Europe stating the opposite, is an example of it. The studies in the US were funded by the government, and they refuse to accept independent research. That is a good example of how some scientific studies can be flawed.

There are no credible scientists that dispute the validity of the theory of evolution.There are archbishops that accept the theory of evolution as a credible explaination for the diversity of life, that goes to show you how silly the creationist view is.Scientific method is not flawed either. You cannot make a scientific arguement for Adam & Eve and "God created everything in 6 days". You cannot prove something which isn't true through scientific method.