Why do we humans constantly engage in heated arguments about god using religion as “gods ambassador”?
I am Brio and there are certain general and personal truths about me that I and only I can understand and express. There is no other being on this earth that can possibly explain who I am better than Myself; even if I wrote a detailed Auto Biography it would not be as sufficient as myself explaining or showing those who want to know.
If some other group decided to spread “the truth” about brio just using some words and events percieved to be me and my truths then they are surely going to get “Brio” wrong. These groups will just spread their perceptions blindly using their own personal beliefs as fuel. So in essense they are NOT representing BRIO but themselves using Brio as a platform. Im gonna stop sayin Brio cuz its scaring me.
So why trust humans with something as potentially powerful as god?
When I hear my friends critisize jesus or god I can see it is religion they are scoffing at. This is because all they have ever heard of God is through some religious group.
If you do not believe in god Its 100% ok, but please do not base that belief on your hatred for religious groups or what they say is “true” about god. Make believe there is no religion and start fresh with just the universe and yourself. Now I sound like a damned religion… thnx for reading my pithy thoughts. -BRIO
Yes, but religion would be the vehicle to which some people have used/ had thrusted on them to help understand the concept of god. It’s very difficult to diverge from it if that’s all you know/understand.
to let you know, I agree that it’s not sufficient to use religion as a vehicle to the disproving of god.
First of all, your post is absolutely insightful and full of very thoughtful concepts. One cant really trust others as to the truth about God, it is only possible to really derive at this truth through ourselves, for in ourselves, being a product of the universe, must have in us the secrets of the universe, ie. the truth about ourselves. You should start a religion that focuses on the self rather than looking for something outside the self to derive at the truth about ideas of what I should do and how I should act as a human being. I would be glad to be a part of it or help produce it.
thnx for the comment, Iduno about starting a new religion, but what I would like to see is more people thinking independantly. In a way my creating a religion would go against this =c)
But thats the beauty of this religion. Its loosely based on looking at your own self for knowledge and truth. An independent way of finding this truth. We wouldnt provide any focus but that of focus on oneself, through the use of trial and error for obtaining your own truth. I think those who are more so “beyond” traditional religion would be attracted to this religion.
illative, brio, I agree most completely with everything you both have said. However, I don’t necessarily there is the need for a belief in God at all, or a “higher” power. Notice the emphasis on higher. There is no higher, higher is only in relation to lower. Higher is not “better”, higher relies on lower to be better. That’s my negation of God, but anyway that’s beside the point.
I also agree with you illative when you say, that religion is wrong to look to external sources for Truth. Just read my quote. =D
But you say there is no religion like this, not true. Many of the eastern religions are concerned with discovering truth from oneself. Many of the Native American tribes, were interested in visions, and discovery of truth, from a personal quest. I’d say they were maybe half and half self discovery and half external, because they believed that part of this discovery is made by forces outside the self. But at least this is better then the Christian philosophy, where you are told to submit yourself completely to God. I don’t know if I’m the only one that feels this way, but that’s just a deadly recipe for never discovering anything. /shrug
I guess when I think of “higher power” I am thinking of something MORE relevant to the universe than humans are.
If this earth had “no color” millions of years ago then surely now with 6 billion humans on it the color is changing to human. This earth is becoming (if not already) a human earth. We humans are more relevant to this earth than rabits are. Most of the problems and solutions on this earth is attributed, for the most part, to humans.
Imagine now this universe as a planet. Is there a being on this “planetary universe” that is most relevent? Can humans really be the most relevent being in this universe? surely there must be a higher more relevant being. If there is then that will be my god.
An alien race capable of 2 more emotions and higher consciousness is not my god. A higher being yes, but not the god of this universe in my ideology. A god would be something influencing the very existence of this “planetary universe” much like this earths is in human hands.
To me this is a true quest for “god”. Not faith but true searching and discovery. I don’t want religion to marr my journey with fanciful myths and empty promises. I can see an ant and know it is there existing, but the ant looks up and sees a moving obstacle, a danger possibly. The ant is amazed and stupified by a human or a dog or anything else its small brain was not intended to comprehend fully. I think we are ants also and there may possibly be a “human” staring down at us understanding that there are things we just cant fully comprehend.
This seems much more rational than religion, but what do I know about rationale, im just an ant.
I have heard a certain explanation of the need for religion. This explication is that the individual has religious experience; he goes to his religious community with it, which expresses truth; and in relating the experience to his community’s truth he finds meaning, and the religion flourishes with more insight.
Not sure what text to recommend for this explanation.
are you simply positing the idea that perhaps this intial experience might not necessarily be a religious one?
To me this could also be a “out of body” experience where at that time the person might have been in a higher state of consciousness but then interpreted it to be otherwise. The way I’m now seeing religion is that of a tool, and the tool is only as effective or ineffective as the person wielding it.
I assumed his “discovery of things” was not specific; infinite in types of discovery. Labeling an experience seems too definate in my view. Humans do not seem smart enough yet to understand anything as complex as god so how would they know when something is religious?
I totally agree with this. I believe religion is an ancient tool used to understand something beyond our capacity, but I do not believe this is the only tool much like I am sure you have more than just a hammer in your tool box. I think perhaps there can be several ways to “find god”; religion just being one of the most ancient ways.
Your in part correct, because your expressing in relation to you. With life being subjective, and each of us at our own little levels in being able to discern it; sometimes religion is better, sometimes it holds us back, just depends on the individual.
I understand your point here, and in some ways agree. But even though that higher cant really exist without lower, and depends on it as so; the mere fact that life is all about growth into something or someone higher due to our ever learning nature, suggest that we should at least believe in something being greater than us, even if its simply us at a later time.
Well, speaking philosophically, first, god is not complex but infinitely simple (despite being a Trinity) – pure being. If we ever mistake something being religious, it might be due to our own complexity – and solved by the unity in a complex religious society.