Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Religion v Spirituality
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 73 of 161 (450631)
01-22-2008 9:48 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by Larni
01-22-2008 8:51 AM



This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Larni, posted 01-22-2008 8:51 AM Larni has not replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 76 of 161 (450684)
01-23-2008 7:53 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by nwr
01-22-2008 11:34 PM


Re: What is spirituality?
nwr writes:
I have been following this thread. It is now at 74 messages, but I still haven't a clue as to what "spirituality" means, if it even means anything at all.
I guess the whole point is to find a common meaning based in common sense and a bit if inspiration. I began with a statement I had read somewhere and thought it would make a good discussion. It certainly has but has gone off at tangents purely due to us being human.
Sprituality is seen as voodoo, supernatural, religious doctrine and non-existent.
I see spirituality as a transformation of self. Nothing more and nothing less. I have reached this conclusion through my own personal experiences, as does everyone else with theirs'.
I believe we have finished our physical evolution, i.e we will remain human beings. However,I believe there is another equally valid evolution occurring right now. I believe the spiritual evolution is the dawning of tranformation. This evolution is taking place within the consciousness and cannot be proved except by the results.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by nwr, posted 01-22-2008 11:34 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by nwr, posted 01-23-2008 8:20 AM pelican has replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 78 of 161 (450688)
01-23-2008 8:24 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by Granny Magda
01-23-2008 2:40 AM


Re: Paradox
magda writes:
The above statements would make much more sense if you substituted the phrase "world-view" for "reality".
But magda, I don't mean a 'world view'. I mean reality which only becomes s reality when experienced. You can have a view but you cannot experience a view.
the point about the flat earth was that they had evidence that the ocean fell over the edge, and they could not see land, and believed they were the only inhabitants of the world. This belief affected whole civilizations. It was primitive thinking that caused them to experience something as true that actually was not.
Do you imagine we are no longer primitive and we stop here? Strongly held beliefs today can be blown out of the water tomorrow just as they were then. It is in challenging the beliefs we know to be true that will change the world. There is no point in challenging beliefs you believe to be false, is there?
My reasoning is to look at the global experiences and find the common denominator that links us all together in a spiritual reality. All I can find is our humanity. Us. Each one of us.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Granny Magda, posted 01-23-2008 2:40 AM Granny Magda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Granny Magda, posted 01-23-2008 9:42 AM pelican has replied
 Message 84 by Larni, posted 01-23-2008 11:30 AM pelican has not replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 79 of 161 (450689)
01-23-2008 8:32 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by nwr
01-23-2008 8:20 AM


Re: What is spirituality?
What does education transform you into? And how can education have anything to do with a spiritual transformation, that is not on the curriculum?
I'm not speaking of changing what you know. I am speaking of changing who you are.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by nwr, posted 01-23-2008 8:20 AM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by nwr, posted 01-23-2008 8:50 AM pelican has replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 87 of 161 (450779)
01-23-2008 6:39 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by Larni
01-23-2008 8:41 AM


Re: Knowable spirituality
larni writes:
Without us there is no vaguely defined mumbo jumbo some flakes call spirituality.
Without us there is no consciousness.
You appear to have no real reason to believe there is a 'spiritual' existence.
That is because I haven't given you one.
Edited by Heinrik, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Larni, posted 01-23-2008 8:41 AM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Larni, posted 01-24-2008 3:21 AM pelican has replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 88 of 161 (450782)
01-23-2008 6:53 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by Larni
01-23-2008 8:44 AM


Re: Knowable spirituality
larni writes:
Cut the martyr talk and respond to post 67.
Or don't.
You see larni, when you make snide comments and add a few insults, I don't believe you want to know.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Larni, posted 01-23-2008 8:44 AM Larni has not replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 89 of 161 (450784)
01-23-2008 7:08 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by nwr
01-23-2008 8:50 AM


Re: What is spirituality?
It is terribly difficult to bring into one's awareness something that has not been experienced and is already believed to be something else.
It requires a shift in perception and yours is a physical world only. I learned everything I needed to know of the physical world and it wasn't enough. There was and is no meaning to our existence.
In my endevours to explain a new phylosophy, never once have I included the 'supernatural'. My definition of spirituality is based in the reality we live in now. I would term it 'down to earth' spirituality. However, whilst all the misconceptions you hold on to, for grim death, are actually blocking you from expanding your awareness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by nwr, posted 01-23-2008 8:50 AM nwr has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Woodsy, posted 01-24-2008 7:03 AM pelican has replied
 Message 96 by Stile, posted 01-25-2008 3:52 PM pelican has replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 90 of 161 (450789)
01-23-2008 7:42 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Granny Magda
01-23-2008 9:42 AM


Re: Paradox
granny magda writes:
I am loathe to continue this off-topic blather.: you might start by jumping off a cliff in order to challenge the belief in gravity, but I wouldn't recommend it : Your waffle is typical of kind of circular, meaningless, self-important, pseudo-profundity that I would expect from a sentence containing the phrase "spiritual reality". This is a perfect example of why I dislike the term. "Spiritual reality" my arse.
Well thanks for explaining that to me. I understand much more your point of view. Which is......................................????

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Granny Magda, posted 01-23-2008 9:42 AM Granny Magda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by Granny Magda, posted 01-24-2008 9:00 AM pelican has replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 95 of 161 (450948)
01-25-2008 3:07 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by Woodsy
01-24-2008 7:03 AM


Re: What is spirituality?
woodsy writes:
The beauty we experience in the physical world is not enough? The amazing dance of interwoven complexities that our knowledge of the physical world reveals to us is not enough? Our relations with other humans and other living things are not enough? Our imaginations and creativity here in the physical world are not enough?
I wasn't speaking on your behalf, only my own. An enquiring mind would have asked why?
You must be a greedy person indeed if all these are not enough!
A misconception on your part. Your assertion came from your judgement of me and you cannot prove it scientifically, so you are wrong mate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Woodsy, posted 01-24-2008 7:03 AM Woodsy has not replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 97 of 161 (451038)
01-25-2008 6:41 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by Larni
01-24-2008 3:21 AM


Re: Knowable spirituality
POST 1
heinrik writes:
Religion is concerned with knowing god and the afterlife.
Spirituality is concerned with knowing self and this life.
larni writes:
You have been asked several times to define 'spiritual' and you have not done so.
larni writes:
This is a discussion board, my friend. You cannot come here, assert what you reckon is true without even defining your terms.
I believe the terms were stated clearly in post 1. Your response to this 'discussion' (post 3)was to dismiss Heinrik's truth and replace it with one of your own. It was totally void of investigation on your part.
larni writes:
post 3.I actually hate the word spiritual. It gets bandied about the place a great deal in the wrong context.
Spirituality implies some etheric 'spirit' that is somehow distinct from the physical world: much like religion implies some deity (in most cases) somehow distinct from the physical world.
Eigther way you cut it both invoke something distinct from the physical world.
Knowing yourself and the world has nothing to do with spirit; it is simply being self aware and having an ability to be minfull of your self and environment.
Neither spirituality or religiousity are required.
larni writes:
Until you can you will be open to accusations of woo woo, magic and believing in what amounts to an overvalue idea.
Heinrik has not mentioned anything about woo woo magic or anything supernatural in his definition of spirituality. The woo woo came from you, my dear.
Edited by dameeva, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Larni, posted 01-24-2008 3:21 AM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by Larni, posted 01-26-2008 7:31 AM pelican has not replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 101 of 161 (451440)
01-27-2008 5:54 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by Granny Magda
01-24-2008 9:00 AM


Re: Still No Useful Definition of Spirituality
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Still No Useful Definition of Spirituality
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My dear boy, I have made my position perfectly clear, throughout this thread. If I must reiterate, very well.
I contend that spirituality is a meaningless term when used outside of an explicitly religious or supernatural context.
No, I believe this is the 1st time you have made yourself perfectly clear. This is the first clear example of what you believe spirituality is not. When you know what it is not, it stands to reason you must have an idea of what it is.
What is your definition of spirituality WITHIN the religious or supernatural context?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by Granny Magda, posted 01-24-2008 9:00 AM Granny Magda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by Granny Magda, posted 01-29-2008 8:02 AM pelican has replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 102 of 161 (451444)
01-27-2008 6:00 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by Larni
01-27-2008 5:57 AM


Re: Bump fo dameeva.
Bump fo dameeva.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bump.
Larni, these unintelligent, attacking, personal remarks are the reason I felt I was banging my head against a brick wall communicating with you. So I stopped and you move on to someone else. I truly put it down to your mentality age. Young! I hope so anyway.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Larni, posted 01-27-2008 5:57 AM Larni has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by Trixie, posted 01-27-2008 6:13 PM pelican has replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 104 of 161 (451455)
01-27-2008 7:01 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by Larni
01-27-2008 5:57 AM


Re: Bump fo dameeva.
Hi Larni, I had no idea waht the term meant or what you were implying. I THOUGHT you were being unconstructive, offensive and oppressive. Now that I understand the 'jargon' I KNOW you were.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Larni, posted 01-27-2008 5:57 AM Larni has not replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 105 of 161 (451471)
01-27-2008 7:59 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by Trixie
01-27-2008 6:13 PM


A BIGGER BUMP FOR DAMEEVA
"Bump for dameeva" means that by putting the post on, the topic is bumped up to the top of the list of the "All Topics" list, since posts are listed here in order of when the last post was made, with the most recent being at the top. It's a polite reminder that there is an unanswered question by dameeva.
It's not an attack
It's not a personal remark
it's not unintelligent.
It's standard forum speak for when you post to a topic as a reminder to someone else.
Well, thankyou. I had no idea of this forum jargon or the meaning. I now see that it is an excellent ploy for the unscrupulous, but I am not unscrupulous. Alas, unscrupulous people believe I am.
My post wasn't intended as a reminder just for the sake of it. There was a valid point that was connecting each of the quotes.
However, in my endevours to find the 'bump' rule in the forum rules, I actually, for the first time, read them. I know. Not good that, is it? I thought I already knew the rules as I have debated and discussed issues for many years. We think we know something when in fact, we don't.
I observe that some of these rules are broken consistently, mainly because they are ambiguous BUT there is one rule that definately is not. Because of you, Trixie, I have found that I am consistently breaking this rule.
I thankyou for indirectly putting me into the position of seeing my mistake. I will now correct that mistake. This is the rule I have broken.
RULE 9. Do not participate as more than one ID. You may change your user ID by going to your Profile Page and creating a new alias.
I have been participating as two identities. In my defense, I created two identities because I felt I needed some moral support. I also thought it would help to promote some points that I could not do alone.
In view of this obvious breaking of a clearly defined rule, there can be no excuses, no claims of innocence because the truth is:
I did not read the rules.
I prefer to judge myself and implement the consequences myself. I am my own judge and jury. In this case the punishment is a life time ban. I will retire DAMEEVA as from 1.2.08 (just to give myself time to pack my bags) unless a higher authority decides otherwise, in which case authority has the final say.
I have thoroughly enjoyed this forum and have learned a lot that otherwise I would not.
Edited by dameeva, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Trixie, posted 01-27-2008 6:13 PM Trixie has not replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 106 of 161 (451508)
01-27-2008 9:32 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by Larni
01-27-2008 5:57 AM


Re: Bump fo dameeva.
HELLO LARNI. ARE MY POSTS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF 'BUMPING?'

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Larni, posted 01-27-2008 5:57 AM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by Larni, posted 01-28-2008 3:40 AM pelican has not replied
 Message 108 by Admin, posted 01-28-2008 10:13 AM pelican has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024