posted April 26, 2013 02:32 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Heart--Shaped Cross:
It seems reasonable to ask why they choose to post in a forum devoted to religious tolerance, if they are so fundamentally intolerant of religion in general. Again, it seems reasonable to suggest a discussion as to whether it might be beneficial to everyone involved if these posters had their own space; one dedicated to religious intolerance.

---

I can only think of one person who continually does this (is intolerant), so I am not sure what your gripe is really about or who it is with...

posted April 26, 2013 06:21 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Heart--Shaped Cross:
Fundamentalism is not religion, any more than psuedo-science is science.

---

I'd say fundamentalism, rooted in the Reformation where Protestantism began, and developed by theologians whose level of scholarship was breathtaking, makes a lot more sense than modern forms of Christianity, where people claim to "follow the Bible" and ignore most of its major themes, instead improvising doctrines according to their own fancy.

I have more respect for fundamentalists; at least when they say they are following the Bible, they make an effort to be convincing about it.

posted April 26, 2013 08:45 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Heart--Shaped Cross:
My sentiments exactly. What irks me is the atmosphere of pure irony surrounding this anti-religious, New Age breed of fundamentalist. Their fundamentalism consists precisely in their interpretation of all religion as fundamentalism. In fact, fundamentalism is only religion in the sense that pseudo-science is science, or in the sense that a charlatan, claiming to be a psychic, is psychic.

---

By my observation, New Age types tend to favor a literal Biblical interpretation. This has long surprised me. My expectation was that 'spiritual' people would consider the matter (any matter, actually) from a spiritual perspective. That's rarely the case. I recall a conversation I had here on LL many years ago where someone expressed disgust at the crucifix. The blood, the torture, etc Why would anyone choose to worship such a hateful instrument of pain? There really isn't much you can say to that. It can be incrediably difficult to step outside a materialistic mindset. It's also difficult to separate a religion's politics from its offered path. And, frankly, not everyone wishes to do that.

Perhaps this isn't the best place for the conversation you wish to have? Maybe another site? Again, this is a New Age group. Therefore, orthodox religion will be approached from a New Age perspective.

quote:

---

"The fact that true scientists are as rare as saints in the Church does not at all alter the fact that it is they who represent science. Because it is not the sick and deformed who represent a family, but rather its healthy members."
~ Valentin Tomberg

---

Tomberg! A man strangely appropriate to the discussion. Nice choice.

posted April 26, 2013 09:33 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
I'd say fundamentalism, rooted in the Reformation where Protestantism began, and developed by theologians whose level of scholarship was breathtaking, makes a lot more sense than modern forms of Christianity, where people claim to "follow the Bible" and ignore most of its major themes, instead improvising doctrines according to their own fancy.

I have more respect for fundamentalists; at least when they say they are following the Bible, they make an effort to be convincing about it.

Whereas all the Christians I know harp on some verses 'til they are blue in the face and scoff at me for mentioning others, like the ones about election. I would say that is pseudo-religious, since they ignore much of the Scriptures, on purpose.

---

posted April 26, 2013 09:51 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by shura:
Do you remember, juni? Oh, what a grand fiasco that one was! Such fun.

---

Indeed I do. That was one of my first real learning curve of the internet. In attempting to express my thoughts, reflecting spirituality of a higher realm and it turning into a brouhaha was crazy.

Lesson 101: State thoughts or beliefs as such it isn`t taken as a personal attack.

lesson 102: lesson 101 doesn`t work on the `net.

lesson 103: I love agent 26, tink & pixle no matter what. Forever and ever amen.

posted April 26, 2013 09:52 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by shura:
By my observation, New Age types tend to favor a literal Biblical interpretation. This has long surprised me.

---

I've only just become aware of the tendency, and my reaction is closer to shock than to surprise (though Scorpios, I know, are supposed to be immune the shocks "that flesh is heir to"). I'm reeling at how seemingly opaque otherwise clear-headed and fair-hearted folks can be. I thought, if anyone could understand my position, surely, they could. I was bitterly wrong.

posted April 26, 2013 10:36 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by shura:
By my observation, New Age types tend to favor a literal Biblical interpretation. This has long surprised me. My expectation was that 'spiritual' people would consider the matter (any matter, actually) from a spiritual perspective. That's rarely the case.

---

Not exactly sure what you are saying here. But if you mean, New Age types prefer to speak of the Bible's literal translation instead of spiritual applications, I have some ideas for why that may be the case.

I think it's because people tend to use religion or religious argumentation as a way of controlling others. "New Age types" might be responding more to the control dramas than the content. Speaking for myself, if someone is trying to get me to read more about Christ, pray to Christ, be interested in the Bible...then there ought to be some reason for doing so, not just because someone wants to make a convert or have a follower for their ego's sake. So I would look to the Bible itself to find that reason.

And what I find when I look there is a hodge podge of contradictory exhortations and injunctions that turns me off to the idea of becoming a self-professing Christian.

posted April 26, 2013 10:40 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Heart--Shaped Cross:
I would very much appreciate it if you would, at least, refrain from putting words in my mouth. I am not a follower of the Bible,

---

I never said you were. You are putting words in MY mouth now.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Heart--Shaped Cross:
This much ought to be apparent from your own insistence upon misinterpreting them, despite the obvious clarifications I have made.

---

You're just better than me. Good for you.

posted April 26, 2013 11:15 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by juniperb:

lesson 103: I love agent 26, tink & pixle no matter what. Forever and ever amen.

---

What a lovely thing to read this morning you too.

Lessons 101 & 102 have been a learning curve for me too.

shura, it took me a minute but i remember that one too now I was not very popular with you guys back then. we've come a long way.

posted April 26, 2013 12:13 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
Not exactly sure what you are saying here. But if you mean, New Age types prefer to speak of the Bible's literal translation instead of spiritual applications, I have some ideas for why that may be the case.

I think it's because people tend to use religion or religious argumentation as a way of controlling others. "New Age types" might be responding more to the control dramas than the content. Speaking for myself, if someone is trying to get me to read more about Christ, pray to Christ, be interested in the Bible...then there ought to be some reason for doing so, not just because someone wants to make a convert or have a follower for their ego's sake. So I would look to the Bible itself to find that reason.

And what I find when I look there is a hodge podge of contradictory exhortations and injunctions that turns me off to the idea of becoming a self-professing Christian.

I'm not someone who can pick and choose from a book and say I reverence the whole book. I find it odd that anyone does so. As a "New Age type" what interests me is discovering more about reality and tossing out all the superfluous rhetoric that might hold me back.

---

Hello Faith I apologize if "new age type" offended you. I did hesitate after typing it tbh for fear it might be misconstrued. Nothing patronizing was intended. The New Age movement can be hard to pin down. eg There is very little if anything in the way of formal doctrine. So, I went with 'type.' Again, no offense intended. There is quite a lot I appreciate about the movement. In the grand scheme of things it's been useful in many ways.

Yes, I do think New Age proponents respond to the "control drama." There is a distinct "don't tread on me" quality inherent in the New Age approach to religion, isn't there? I respect that. More than I could ever tell you, in fact. Anyway, this is what I mean when I say it can be difficult to separate the politics from the path. Even if successful, you will then be met with the problem of submission to that path, rather then to an individual or a collective of dubious intent. Submission is a massive issue for the modern day Western mind. And with admittedly good reason.

No, I do not mean application. I mean translation. Jesus led his disciples to the mountain. Literal translation: Jesus walked up a hill with his disciples, sat down and had a chat. (followed by hordes of Biblical archeologists and historians arguing over which hill it was lol) Esoteric translatioin: Christ led his disciples to a higher state of consciousness wherein he could better transfer wisdom. There is no esoteric translation I'm aware of which will interpret "mountain" otherwise. From Thelema to Anthroposophy to Sufism, the meaning of "mountain" is clear. (valley and plain, too) Nicodemus met with Jesus at night. Literal translation: Nicodemus met with Jesus after the sun set. Esoteric translation: Jesus met Nicodemus in what we commonly call the astral realm. Again, mutually agreed upon meaning.

Two small, simple examples. The Bible is nothing but this though. (the Quran and Torah, as well fwiw) As I recently commented in another thread, religious texts are not meant to be read literally. This is why, from the Bible to the Gita, they were long kept from the uninitiated. Do otherwise and the confusion and contradictions you mentioned become deeply frustrating, impossible to overcome obstacles. Read these texts with an informed, trained spiritual eye and the contradictions fade away.

posted April 26, 2013 12:22 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by T:
What a lovely thing to read this morning you too.

Lessons 101 & 102 have been a learning curve for me too.

shura, it took me a minute but i remember that one too now I was not very popular with you guys back then. we've come a long way.

Wonder how Philbird is doing these days....

---

awww Juni loved you from the start. I just thought you were a fiesty little wench. You won me over with 'tinkle' though.

posted April 26, 2013 12:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Heart--Shaped Cross:
I've only just become aware of the tendency, and my reaction is closer to shock than to surprise (though Scorpios, I know, are supposed to be immune the shocks "that flesh is heir to"). I'm reeling at how seemingly opaque otherwise clear-headed and fair-hearted folks can be. I thought, if anyone could understand my position, surely, they could. I was bitterly wrong.

Would that Love were not hung upon a cross, but, alas, in this world, it seems a more fitting place, than cleanly set upon some remote and gilded throne. Nevertheless, to each their own.

---

posted April 26, 2013 01:50 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by shura:
Hello Faith I apologize if "new age type" offended you.

---

Hi shura,

I was not at all offended.

quote:

---

Originally posted by shura:
As I recently commented in another thread, religious texts are not meant to be read literally.

---

I don't know how anyone could ever prove that definitively. Which is why it's an area of study I usually leave alone. I feel that if one is elevating their interpretations to the level of "divinely inspired" or whatnot, there is potential for delusion and also isolation: once you've departed from the literal meaning of the words, you can end up in a no man's land of personal meanings.

Obviously we all have our individual values; but in my experiences, I've found that those who take an interest in theology are more inclined to try and change others. And if someone's pushing a highly personal or eccentric belief system on me, and blowing the trumpet beforehand like they are announcing divine truth, that doesn't sit well with me at all.

However, it all depends on how each person handles it.

Suffice it to say I greatly appreciate conversations free of agenda on both sides.

posted April 26, 2013 08:04 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:

Not exactly sure what you are saying here. But if you mean, New Age types prefer to speak of the Bible's literal translation instead of spiritual applications, I have some ideas for why that may be the case.

I think it's because people tend to use religion or religious argumentation as a way of controlling others. "New Age types" might be responding more to the control dramas than the content. Speaking for myself, if someone is trying to get me to read more about Christ, pray to Christ, be interested in the Bible...then there ought to be some reason for doing so, not just because someone wants to make a convert or have a follower for their ego's sake. So I would look to the Bible itself to find that reason.

And what I find when I look there is a hodge podge of contradictory exhortations and injunctions that turns me off to the idea of becoming a self-professing Christian.

I'm not someone who can pick and choose from a book and say I reverence the whole book. I find it odd that anyone does so. As a "New Age type" what interests me is discovering more about reality and tossing out all the superfluous rhetoric that might hold me back.

---

posted April 26, 2013 08:08 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by shura:
...
No, I do not mean application. I mean translation. Jesus led his disciples to the mountain. Literal translation: Jesus walked up a hill with his disciples, sat down and had a chat. (followed by hordes of Biblical archeologists and historians arguing over which hill it was lol) Esoteric translatioin: Christ led his disciples to a higher state of consciousness wherein he could better transfer wisdom. There is no esoteric translation I'm aware of which will interpret "mountain" otherwise. From Thelema to Anthroposophy to Sufism, the meaning of "mountain" is clear. (valley and plain, too) Nicodemus met with Jesus at night. Literal translation: Nicodemus met with Jesus after the sun set. Esoteric translation: Jesus met Nicodemus in what we commonly call the astral realm. Again, mutually agreed upon meaning.

Two small, simple examples. The Bible is nothing but this though. (the Quran and Torah, as well fwiw) As I recently commented in another thread, religious texts are not meant to be read literally. This is why, from the Bible to the Gita, they were long kept from the uninitiated. Do otherwise and the confusion and contradictions you mentioned become deeply frustrating, impossible to overcome obstacles. Read these texts with an informed, trained spiritual eye and the contradictions fade away.

---

Fantastic explanation, shura.... :thumbsup"

posted April 26, 2013 08:27 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Heart--Shaped Cross:

For me, Divine Diversities is a part of the forum to respectfully celebrate the diversity of religious faiths. But I realize that, for others, it's just a place to go and hate on religion....

What do you think?

---

I believe I understand what you're saying here HSC... refreshing to my soul.

I had seen a quotation in a book about a year ago... Can't remember it exactly, but this is the image.

A person is pointing out the Moon to people...
and these people just stand there staring and arguing about the FINGER---
when the 'point' was about the Moon!

When I present something here, I am "sharing" and discussing my life-experience, and what it has meant to me, or how it helped or hindered me in some way.... I like indiviuals discussing their views, and while that's going on, I attempt to see the "common denominator."

An issue for me is that there are certain posters who will go to another forum and speak of things mentioned 'here', with others, and in unexpected super-negativity and seemingly (sorry)-twofacedness, like they act as your friend, then do a 'flipping' of sorts.

I try not to go to certain sections of LL because I don't want to be 'shocked' like that--- (even though it's good that I know). I'm into being fiesty, and discussions, but CHOOSE not to consciously 'harm' ... I hope you can gently understand that? I am a BIG believer that people need to be given the space to be able to change behaviors and be accepted as students of life & getting along...

Hey Faith, remember some attempts you and I made to discuss "faith" ... I didn't "realize" about your NAME. I made the mistake of thinking you were "religious" if you know what I mean... dam it, I wasn't able to 'stay' and thoroughly get into the matters with you. You make some excellent remarks. --- (Distractions that I must deal with in my sense-environment, and resulting health issue coming from it...)

When I come to DD, I LOVE to ponder what you all are saying, and often have to go think about it for a while.

I love what's happening here right now. There's more openness.... There are some good things going on.

As for the 'astrologer/y'~whatever... I think sometimes they wrestle with issue that are FAR deeper than appears. I think it's good for them to have 'friends' to bounce off of. I feel it would be damaging to them to feel banned in some way.... Like I said before----I SENSE there's healing going on....

Iron sharpens iron... and deep calls unto deep

posted April 26, 2013 11:06 PM            

I appreciate your comments. I would have quoted that section by shura, but you beat me to it.

quote:

---

An issue for me is that there are certain posters who will go to another forum and speak of things mentioned 'here', with others, and in unexpected super-negativity and seemingly (sorry)-twofacedness, like they act as your friend, then do a 'flipping' of sorts.

---

Maybe I'm misreading you, but I don't think what happens in one forum needs to stay in that forum -- this isn't Vegas. Again, I'm not sure if I know the sort of instances to which you are referring, but I do know that it is difficult to judge when a person is being sincere, especially over the internet. We are all so flawed and multi-faceted, it seems to me that we all have two faces -- at least two. Speaking for myself, I know I can make deeply heartfelt apologies in the morning, and be right back to my old "sinful" self in the afternoon. If I'm lucky, I'll summon up the humility and the courage to apologize again before bed, lol. Or just to make some gesture of friendliness. i know my perceptions of people, and my responses to them, are frequently nuanced. Sometimes it is nice to diffuse tension by freely relating to different sides of one person from different sides of oneself, regardless of what has gone before. Maybe it is an Aquarian thing, but I try to see each encounter as fresh, and to respond as I would respond if no history existed. Still, a remnant of the old dispute will often creep in, maybe in the form of a light-hearted jab. It may seem passive-aggressive, but it's more of an honest admission; to withhold it would be to deny it, and to pretend to a wholeheartedness which I do not possess.

I don't know if any of what I've just said is entirely clear. It all makes sense to me, but it's not very easy to communicate.

---------------------------------------

Faith and shura,

My feeling is that we are always interpreting (or "translating", if you prefer). Whether it is the Bible, the newspaper, the words of a teacher or a friend, or the post right in front of us -- everything is subject to interpretation and misinterpretation. We do our best with the light that is given us. Often, I see a number of ways to "take" something, and I choose to take it in whichever way seems most beneficial. The intentions of the author are important, and I try to discern them, but whether or not a text is explicit, I am not beholden to it, and the more obscure a saying is, the more at liberty I feel to interpret it by my own spirit. If something wise and good can be made, even from a foolish and wicked saying, I will try to make it wise and good. Not everyone can appreciate that, but I guess I don't really need them to, after all.

I think we understand each other, and can agree to disagree, but if anyone still wishes to discuss this, I'm not going anywhere. I would, though, like to suggest that there is so much more upon which we unanimously agree, and that it might be healing for everyone if we focused a bit more on those areas.

posted April 27, 2013 01:23 AM            

About keeping things 'in vegas' ... I think you picked up on my nuance, but you had the kindness to want to clear that up... yes and no.

Yes, same-topics are freely discussed from different forums at different angles... I think that's rich! And, I've noticed that you are among those members here who kindly leave the interconnective links-- fantastic bridge-building! ...

No, I was alluding to something a little more towards marginalization, and put-downs-- rather than honest constructive feedback, as you are apt at giving. I so appreciate the respect and kindness you include, along with your Scorpio feelings.

I'm trying to come out of my hermit-shell a bit more. Am still a bit skittish, but building confidence. My exo-skeleton may still be forming, so I appreciate the care, time, understanding, and some encouragement.

posted April 27, 2013 01:28 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Heart--Shaped Cross:

I've only just become aware of the tendency, and my reaction is closer to shock than to surprise (though Scorpios, I know, are supposed to be immune the shocks "that flesh is heir to"). I'm reeling at how seemingly opaque otherwise clear-headed and fair-hearted folks can be. I thought, if anyone could understand my position, surely, they could. I was bitterly wrong.

Would that Love were not hung upon a cross, but, alas, in this world, it seems a more fitting place, than cleanly set upon some remote and gilded throne. Nevertheless, to each their own.

---