Sorry. But I like church. I like monumental architecture. I like Catholic pageantry. I like Protestant ceremony. I wish we still ‘stood and voiced our minds’. I prefer the heroic pagan ethos to that of christian suffering. I prefer the historical narrative of Athens to that of Babylonian mysticism. But mostly I like the whole listening and singing and chanting together thing – because for a few minutes each week I get to feel part of an enormous extended family – a big, safe, pack. It has never bothered me that some people do not distinguish between mystical allegory and historical fact, while others fail to grasp the value of mystical allegory as more accessible, less subject to human error, and less fragile than reason. The reason that religion can be a problem is because we can, especially under democracy, use government to apply violence based upon on mythological principles, rather than use religion as a means of including others in our manners, ethics, morals, myths and rituals so that we extend kinship trust to those who are not our kin, and to ostracize those who will not adopt those manners, ethics, morals, myths and rituals. Not because myths and rituals are true, but because the cost of observing those myths and rituals is evidence of one’s commitment to his moral kin. Secular ratio-scientific education provides us with myths, but few and infrequent rituals, and ignores the necessity to pay costs to demonstrate and adhere to kinship trust that facilitates the extension of kinship trust. Consumerism is a nice temporary alternative to kin, but it’s a devil’s bargain. We are lost and lonely at the end of that selfish satisfaction.
Category: Religion, Myth, and Theology
-
Sorry. But I Like Church.
Sorry. But I like church. I like monumental architecture. I like Catholic pageantry. I like Protestant ceremony. I wish we still ‘stood and voiced our minds’. I prefer the heroic pagan ethos to that of christian suffering. I prefer the historical narrative of Athens to that of Babylonian mysticism. But mostly I like the whole listening and singing and chanting together thing – because for a few minutes each week I get to feel part of an enormous extended family – a big, safe, pack. It has never bothered me that some people do not distinguish between mystical allegory and historical fact, while others fail to grasp the value of mystical allegory as more accessible, less subject to human error, and less fragile than reason. The reason that religion can be a problem is because we can, especially under democracy, use government to apply violence based upon on mythological principles, rather than use religion as a means of including others in our manners, ethics, morals, myths and rituals so that we extend kinship trust to those who are not our kin, and to ostracize those who will not adopt those manners, ethics, morals, myths and rituals. Not because myths and rituals are true, but because the cost of observing those myths and rituals is evidence of one’s commitment to his moral kin. Secular ratio-scientific education provides us with myths, but few and infrequent rituals, and ignores the necessity to pay costs to demonstrate and adhere to kinship trust that facilitates the extension of kinship trust. Consumerism is a nice temporary alternative to kin, but it’s a devil’s bargain. We are lost and lonely at the end of that selfish satisfaction.
-
“Gods are important for the wisdom and virtues they represent. This is a point i
–“Gods are important for the wisdom and virtues they represent. This is a point in favor of polytheism. Not all wisdom and virtues are equally important for everyone.”–
Eli Harman
Source date (UTC): 2014-05-02 02:41:00 UTC
-
HAPPY MAY DAY!!!! BELTANE! –“May Day is related to the Celtic festival of Belta
HAPPY MAY DAY!!!! BELTANE!
–“May Day is related to the Celtic festival of Beltane and the Germanic festival of Walpurgis Night. May Day falls half a year from November 1 – another cross-quarter day which is also associated with various northern European paganisms and the year in the Northern Hemisphere – and it has traditionally been an occasion for popular and often raucous celebrations.”–
I want a raucous celebration to attend. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2014-05-01 05:33:00 UTC
-
SORRY. BUT I LIKE CHURCH. Sorry. But I like church. I like monumental architectu
SORRY. BUT I LIKE CHURCH.
Sorry. But I like church. I like monumental architecture. I like Catholic pageantry. I like Protestant ceremony. I wish we still ‘stood and voiced our minds’. I prefer the heroic pagan ethos to that of christian suffering. I prefer the historical narrative of Athens to that of Babylonian mysticism. But mostly I like the whole listening and singing and chanting together thing – because for a few minutes each week I get to feel part of an enormous extended family – a big, safe, pack. 🙂
It has never bothered me that some people do not distinguish between mystical allegory and historical fact, while others fail to grasp the value of mystical allegory as more accessible, less subject to human error, and less fragile than reason.
The reason that religion can be a problem is because we can, especially under democracy, use government to apply violence based upon on mythological principles, rather than use religion as a means of including others in our manners, ethics, morals, myths and rituals so that we extend kinship trust to those who are not our kin, and to ostracize those who will not adopt those manners, ethics, morals, myths and rituals. Not because myths and rituals are true, but because the cost of observing those myths and rituals is evidence of one’s commitment to his moral kin.
Secular ratio-scientific education provides us with myths, but few and infrequent rituals, and ignores the necessity to pay costs to demonstrate and adhere to kinship trust that facilitates the extension of kinship trust.
Consumerism is a nice temporary alternative to kin, but it’s a devil’s bargain. We are lost and lonely at the end of that selfish satisfaction.
Source date (UTC): 2014-04-28 10:20:00 UTC
-
“All Religions Need A Book”
[A]ll religions need a ‘book’. I have been working under that premise for over a decade. Once you have a book, philosophy doesn’t float. You have an authoritarian position to refer to. Debate over that position creates invention in the minds of those who are interested. If the book is very good, then the results are self organizing. If you have a book and advocates, then you have political means. If you have a book, advocates and members, then you political power. If you have political power you can institute your ideas. If your book morally condones violence in the pursuit of your ideas, you have an eternal irrevocable advantage independent of current circumstance. The problem for the west is that we have never had a book. Plato failed. The monarchs ruled by tradition. The church spoke in allegory. Smith Hume and Jefferson wrote advice not rules, and they created the catastrophic error that the near universal aristocratization of the English could have the same breadth of application as the doctrine of the church.
-
"All Religions Need A Book"
[A]ll religions need a ‘book’. I have been working under that premise for over a decade. Once you have a book, philosophy doesn’t float. You have an authoritarian position to refer to. Debate over that position creates invention in the minds of those who are interested. If the book is very good, then the results are self organizing. If you have a book and advocates, then you have political means. If you have a book, advocates and members, then you political power. If you have political power you can institute your ideas. If your book morally condones violence in the pursuit of your ideas, you have an eternal irrevocable advantage independent of current circumstance. The problem for the west is that we have never had a book. Plato failed. The monarchs ruled by tradition. The church spoke in allegory. Smith Hume and Jefferson wrote advice not rules, and they created the catastrophic error that the near universal aristocratization of the English could have the same breadth of application as the doctrine of the church.
-
“All Religions Need A Book”
[A]ll religions need a ‘book’. I have been working under that premise for over a decade. Once you have a book, philosophy doesn’t float. You have an authoritarian position to refer to. Debate over that position creates invention in the minds of those who are interested. If the book is very good, then the results are self organizing. If you have a book and advocates, then you have political means. If you have a book, advocates and members, then you political power. If you have political power you can institute your ideas. If your book morally condones violence in the pursuit of your ideas, you have an eternal irrevocable advantage independent of current circumstance. The problem for the west is that we have never had a book. Plato failed. The monarchs ruled by tradition. The church spoke in allegory. Smith Hume and Jefferson wrote advice not rules, and they created the catastrophic error that the near universal aristocratization of the English could have the same breadth of application as the doctrine of the church.
-
"All Religions Need A Book"
[A]ll religions need a ‘book’. I have been working under that premise for over a decade. Once you have a book, philosophy doesn’t float. You have an authoritarian position to refer to. Debate over that position creates invention in the minds of those who are interested. If the book is very good, then the results are self organizing. If you have a book and advocates, then you have political means. If you have a book, advocates and members, then you political power. If you have political power you can institute your ideas. If your book morally condones violence in the pursuit of your ideas, you have an eternal irrevocable advantage independent of current circumstance. The problem for the west is that we have never had a book. Plato failed. The monarchs ruled by tradition. The church spoke in allegory. Smith Hume and Jefferson wrote advice not rules, and they created the catastrophic error that the near universal aristocratization of the English could have the same breadth of application as the doctrine of the church.
-
GATES’ GO TO CHURCH. I GO TO CHURCH TOO. I TALK TO GOD. (PRETTY OFTEN REALLY) No
http://www.christianpost.com/news/bill-gates-reveals-family-goes-to-catholic-church-it-makes-sense-to-believe-in-god-116166/THE GATES’ GO TO CHURCH. I GO TO CHURCH TOO. I TALK TO GOD. (PRETTY OFTEN REALLY)
Now, my reasons for going to church, for talking to god are fairly intellectual, and not in the least superstitious or supernatural. But then that is based upon one’s ability to think in increasing degrees of abstraction from the more simplistic and anthropomorphic. I might prefer that ‘church’ preached the “Matter of Greece, France, Germany, and England” as myths, and I might prefer that the ‘church school’ taught physical fitness, military and political strategy, morality and the law, the use of money, and economics’. But I accept the simple fact that a polity must experience running, dancing, chanting, singing, reciting, together to help us ‘bond’ by reminding us of our origins as a pac; of surrendering our will to the group – which is the source of the feeling of ‘spirituality’, and the ultimate sense of safety that we can experience.
Source date (UTC): 2014-04-27 06:14:00 UTC