Religious 'connection'

[Catholic_Lady]

There is a connection, of course.

Is it stronger than connection to someone in my country who has a different religion? I guess it depends on what other similarities I have with them.

[Little Rik]

Any reason why you ask only religious people and not also people who follow spirituality which are also theists or theists in general?

Oh come on Rik, at least admit that you hold an unfaltering belief in all the bullshit your swami-guy told you.  You're as religious as any theist.

I did asked several times to different atheists........WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RELIGION AND SPIRITUALITY........guess what son...
Nobody was able to tell me the difference.
In fact they all say...............religion and spirituality are the same thing.
This only show how stupid some people are.  

Oh by the way thanks for tell me that you too join the ranks of the fools.  

[Whateverist]

Oh come on Rik, at least admit that you hold an unfaltering belief in all the bullshit your swami-guy told you.  You're as religious as any theist.

I did asked several times to different atheists........WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RELIGION AND SPIRITUALITY........guess what son...
Nobody was able to tell me the difference.
In fact they all say...............religion and spirituality are the same thing.
This only show how stupid some people are.  

Oh by the way thanks for tell me that you too join the ranks of the fools.  

I totally respect your right to hold an opinion different than my own.  I assume your beliefs are genuine at least from your own point of view.  However in my opinion your beliefs and those of any fundamentalist religionist share many points in common.  One is an unwavering certainty in a system of beliefs which you share with a wider community and which you obtained from a recognized leader of said community.  Another is your insistence that those who approach questions of meaningfulness and purpose in a manner different from your own are flat out wrong.  

I understand that you are entirely satisfied with the truth and accuracy of your beliefs, but I also note that all fundamentalist religionists are as well.  So fine, if you prefer to brand your unshakable beliefs as spirituality rather than religion, you go right on ahead and do so.  But please try to recognize that others will describe your beliefs by what they can observe in your behavior and what they hear you say.  You call it stupid but then you subscribe to a rigid jargon we don't share, so no offense taken.  Since a person can be judged as accurately by his detractors as by his supporters you do me great honor.

[Little Rik]

I did asked several times to different atheists........WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RELIGION AND SPIRITUALITY........guess what son...
Nobody was able to tell me the difference.
In fact they all say...............religion and spirituality are the same thing.
This only show how stupid some people are.  

Oh by the way thanks for tell me that you too join the ranks of the fools.  

I totally respect your right to hold an opinion different than my own.  I assume your beliefs are genuine at least from your own point of view.  However in my opinion your beliefs and those of any fundamentalist religionist share many points in common.  One is an unwavering certainty in a system of beliefs which you share with a wider community and which you obtained from a recognized leader of said community.  Another is your insistence that those who approach questions of meaningfulness and purpose in a manner different from your own are flat out wrong.  

I understand that you are entirely satisfied with the truth and accuracy of your beliefs, but I also note that all fundamentalist religionists are as well.  So fine, if you prefer to brand your unshakable beliefs as spirituality rather than religion, you go right on ahead and do so.  But please try to recognize that others will describe your beliefs by what they can observe in your behavior and what they hear you say.  You call it stupid but then you subscribe to a rigid jargon we don't share, so no offense taken.  Since a person can be judged as accurately by his detractors as by his supporters you do me great honor.

Life in this finite universe is all about confrontation.
If I say that somebody else is wrong is up to the other person to prove me wrong.
If the other person get offended then what is the point in being in a forum?
They should join a club in which everybody think in the same way.

As far as we are here in a forum the participants should be prepared to confront other people point of view.
By the way a fundamentalist rely on dogmas.
I do not.
I have no dogmas so I can not possibly be a fundamentalist.
NDEs which I believe in are based on science not on dogma.
The very science that contradict atheists.
Most atheists rely on dogma.
They say that the consciousness is a product of the brain and when the brain die also the consciousness die.
These kind of unproven statements taken as real evidence automatically end up in the corral of dogmas so it is quite obvious that most atheists are fundamentalists considering that they rely on dogmas.  


One more point.
You say...................an unwavering certainty in a system of beliefs which you share with a wider community and which you obtained from a recognized leader of said community............

This has very little to do with anything.
Suppose you study in order to become a doctor or suppose you train in order to become a black belt.
You of course must have total belief in the system that your trainer or teacher teach you.
Are you follow a religion in this case?
You have no idea what a religion is nor what spirituality is all about.  

[Succubus]

A coherent definition of 'spirituality' would be a good starting point.

[Whateverist]

I totally respect your right to hold an opinion different than my own.  I assume your beliefs are genuine at least from your own point of view.  However in my opinion your beliefs and those of any fundamentalist religionist share many points in common.  One is an unwavering certainty in a system of beliefs which you share with a wider community and which you obtained from a recognized leader of said community.  Another is your insistence that those who approach questions of meaningfulness and purpose in a manner different from your own are flat out wrong.  

I understand that you are entirely satisfied with the truth and accuracy of your beliefs, but I also note that all fundamentalist religionists are as well.  So fine, if you prefer to brand your unshakable beliefs as spirituality rather than religion, you go right on ahead and do so.  But please try to recognize that others will describe your beliefs by what they can observe in your behavior and what they hear you say.  You call it stupid but then you subscribe to a rigid jargon we don't share, so no offense taken.  Since a person can be judged as accurately by his detractors as by his supporters you do me great honor.

Life in this finite universe is all about confrontation.
If I say that somebody else is wrong is up to the other person to prove me wrong.

On this I disagree. If you assert that someone is wrong it is up to you to back up that charge or else be prepared for everyone to dismiss it as just one more of Rik's personal opinions espoused as fact. You know, business as usual for you.

By the way a fundamentalist rely on dogmas.
I do not.
I have no dogmas so I can not possibly be a fundamentalist.
NDEs which I believe in are based on science not on dogma.
The very science that contradict atheists.

That might mean something if a) you could back it up with citations from respectable scientific institutions and b) we didn't all already know that you hold what you call "intuitional science" in the highest esteem. I won't discuss NDE's with you as you do hold their importance as a matter of faith while I consider them a joke. No sale. Of course you have many dogmas. You are forever challenging people to tell you true meaning of philosophy or the true purpose of human existence which you act as if only you know. These are some of your many dogma. You seem incapable of considering any question without immediate rushing to judgment and immediately chiseling your choice in stone.

Most atheists rely on dogma.
They say that the consciousness is a product of the brain and when the brain die also the consciousness die.
These kind of unproven statements taken as real evidence automatically end up in the corral of dogmas so it is quite obvious that most atheists are fundamentalists considering that they rely on dogmas.  

At least quote us properly. Most atheists would say that consciousness is supported by the brain in exactly the same way that respiration is supported by the lungs or digestion is supported by the gastrointestinal tract. Terminate the operation of any of these organs and they no longer support those processes. Consciousness cannot "die" as it is not alive, anymore than digestion is alive. However indications of either processes continuing after death is lacking.

Your claim is that consciousness continues unsupported. Is that true of digestion and respiration as well? If you had any serious evidence to offer, we'd at least look at it but not NDE's. We'll never agree about those and the dogmas of intuitional science do not have standing among any atheists I know.

One more point.
You say...................an unwavering certainty in a system of beliefs which you share with a wider community and which you obtained from a recognized leader of said community............

This has very little to do with anything.
Suppose you study in order to become a doctor or suppose you train in order to become a black belt.
You of course must have total belief in the system that your trainer or teacher teach you.
Are you follow a religion in this case?
You have no idea what a religion is nor what spirituality is all about.  

Can't deny it, can you? But no, what is true regarding the efficient learning of a craft does not apply to answering questions of meaning or purpose. If you choose to adopt that of your master, then you are like a child walking around the house in his daddy's shoes. You can't shortcut a thing like that. The minute you defer judgement on meaning and purpose to another, you are lost. Game over. Better luck next time .. if there really is a next time. Oh wait, you have a dogma for that.

---

A coherent definition of 'spirituality' would be a good starting point.

*my bold*

You know Rik doesn't speak coherent.  That's just mean.

[Little Rik]

A coherent definition of 'spirituality' would be a good starting point.

The effort of reaching and merging with the divinity within.  

Isn't that so simple?

[GrandizerII]

A coherent definition of 'spirituality' would be a good starting point.

The effort of reaching and merging with the divinity within.  

Isn't that so simple?  

What do you mean by "divinity"? And what do you mean by "divinity within"? And what do you mean by "merging" with such a divinity?

[vorlon13]

The effort of reaching and merging with the divinity within.  

Isn't that so simple?  

What do you mean by "divinity"? And what do you mean by "divinity within"? And what do you mean by "merging" with such a divinity?

[Little Rik]

Life in this finite universe is all about confrontation.
If I say that somebody else is wrong is up to the other person to prove me wrong.

On this I disagree.  If you assert that someone is wrong it is up to you to back up that charge or else be prepared for everyone to dismiss it as just one more of Rik's personal opinions espoused as fact.  You know, business as usual for you.

In the old Rome the forums were places where people went with the main scope of arguing about different topics.
It was a kind of mental medicine for the masses.
Someone start saying something that he-she believe in regardless of any evidence then somebody else said.........you are wrong because of this or that ......and the discussion continue on and on.
To say that an assertion must be back up with evidence is pure crap.
It is by argue that the truth may pop up.
However when an assertion void of any evidence is not allow to be scrutinized then it become a dogma.
The forum should be there just for this scope which is to scrutinize an assertion.      

By the way a fundamentalist rely on dogmas.
I do not.
I have no dogmas so I can not possibly be a fundamentalist.
NDEs which I believe in are based on science not on dogma.
The very science that contradict atheists.

That might mean something if a) you could back it up with citations from respectable scientific institutions and b) we didn't all already know that you hold what you call "intuitional science" in the highest esteem.  I won't discuss NDE's with you as you do hold their importance as a matter of faith while I consider them a joke.  No sale.  Of course you have many dogmas.  You are forever challenging people to tell you true meaning of philosophy or the true purpose of human existence which you act as if only you know.  These are some of your many dogma.  You seem incapable of considering any question without immediate rushing to judgment and immediately chiseling your choice in stone.

The problem lie with people that are not able to prove me wrong.
If I chisel my choice in a stone people should be able to UNchisel my assertion off the stone.
It is all so simple Whatever.
The point is that most people are unable to do so.
Nothing to do with me being a dick.  

Most atheists rely on dogma.
They say that the consciousness is a product of the brain and when the brain die also the consciousness die.
These kind of unproven statements taken as real evidence automatically end up in the corral of dogmas so it is quite obvious that most atheists are fundamentalists considering that they rely on dogmas.  

At least quote us properly.  Most atheists would say that consciousness is supported by the brain in exactly the same way that respiration is supported by the lungs or digestion is supported by the gastrointestinal tract.  Terminate the operation of any of these organs and they no longer support those processes.  Consciousness cannot "die" as it is not alive, anymore than digestion is alive.  However indications of either processes continuing after death is lacking.

Your claim is that consciousness continues unsupported.  Is that true of digestion and respiration as well?  If you had any serious evidence to offer, we'd at least look at it but not NDE's.  We'll never agree about those and the dogmas of intuitional science do not have standing among any atheists I know.

That is a total disaster mate.  

Consciousness is not alive?
Are you kidding me?
Have you ever seen a vehicle going without a live driver or a vehicle that has not being programmed by a mind?
The matter can not possibly move unless a live mind direct her and as far as we know the body is made of matter so matter without a live mind is nothing.
Yours is a terrible dogma mate.
One of the worse I ever heard in fact.  

One more point.
You say...................an unwavering certainty in a system of beliefs which you share with a wider community and which you obtained from a recognized leader of said community............

This has very little to do with anything.
Suppose you study in order to become a doctor or suppose you train in order to become a black belt.
You of course must have total belief in the system that your trainer or teacher teach you.
Are you follow a religion in this case?
You have no idea what a religion is nor what spirituality is all about.  

Can't deny it, can you?  But no, what is true regarding the efficient learning of a craft does not apply to answering questions of meaning or purpose.  If you choose to adopt that of your master, then you are like a child walking around the house in his daddy's shoes.  You can't shortcut a thing like that.  The minute you defer judgement on meaning and purpose to another, you are lost.  Game over.  Better luck next time .. if there really is a next time.  Oh wait, you have a dogma for that.

---

Is all about learning whatever.
It doesn't really matter what you learn.
Without a teacher that has got the correct knowledge the job is next to impossible.

A coherent definition of 'spirituality' would be a good starting point.

*my bold*

You know Rik doesn't speak coherent.  That's just mean.

Yeah, sure.  

---

The effort of reaching and merging with the divinity within.  

Isn't that so simple?  

What do you mean by "divinity"? And what do you mean by "divinity within"? And what do you mean by "merging" with such a divinity?

When you can not think of something you automatically go within (within in your mind) in search for that something.
All inventions and discoveries were made by searching within.
All gurus from all ages have gone through this system.
Jesus, Buddha, Shiva, Krishna always tell us to discover the divinity within.
Even Einstein got his theories by searching within.
An old saying............if you want to know all know yourself first..........
That tell you that within you got a mine of consciousness gold so something great and big must be there.
Spirituality is there to reach that great consciousness within.

Merging yourself in that great consciousness is the goal of any spiritual aspirant.
As a tiny drop of water merge into the ocean she become the ocean herself.
The same goes for anyone who practice spirituality.
His-her consciousness reach parallelism with the great consciousness so there are no more differences between you and the divinity within.
You become God.