Guilt can kill. It aids in dis-ease.
Amerikkka will not die.
Imprisoned in Bagram without a charge.
Missing African immigrant boys. Murder.
Let me carry that guilt for you - you're too busy living.
I'm a drunk, an addict, a sexual deviant -
but I'm not nailing your shoe to the ground
forcing you to walk in those circles.
I'm tired of tolerance.
It's a dead currency.
I will displace these concerns.
Lost in a deep cerebral sea.
Remove your hands from my cup of tea.
Have you noticed the hammer surplus?
It's all pickaxe politics and destruction now.
(Employment lines are full of PTSD laymen.)
lamaist bandages are seeping for this suffering
I'm only now
framing the door
I want to walk through.
working on a building
Apr. 18th, 2005 @ 07:55 am
I just heard a blurb on NPR regarding Pope-hopeful Cardinal Ratzinger's remark that went something like:
" . . the world is heading towards a dictatorship of relativism, where everything is true and no moral is upheld . . "
As someone who is still working the malleable medium of "the whole of the law
", I found myself cringing at the chaotic free-for-all
truth of these utterings from the Grand Inquisitor for Mother Rome
Feb. 26th, 2005 @ 12:40 am
While taking a shower Thursday evening I thought about what my future experience of death will be like (if indeed there is one). Not the actual act of dying but after. My main concern isn't exactly what 'afterlife' awaits me, but I'm troubled that death would simply be an ending of my consciousness. Of course if I were to choose the fate of my thoughts and memories I would want them to live on indefinitely, perhaps attaining a sort of absolute knowledge; as is one of the main goals of the study of gnosticism.
While thinking of the possibility of the workings of my mind simply ceasing, I became incredibly disturbed. I had to be staring at the sparkles of reflected light from the water falling from the showerhead for quite a while, since I didn't finish up until I noticed the hot water was gone.
I've found that only way to quell my fear of this situation is to keep hope that there is something
than just particles and the space between them. It's a good reason religious faith persists; this fear, and since I value my individuality so vehemently that I can't bring myself to worship a deity (and life so that I'd never end mine purposefully so I can find out) I have to just enjoy the suspense.
[posted on mahanaxar
, and 2_0_1_2
to collect better quality and diversity of outside input]
Hi, I'm just introducing myself. My name's Olivia, i'm an Episcopalian college student, and I'm very much interested in theological homology as well as how religion affects different cultures psychologically and socially. Most of my friends are not of phillosophical mindset, and it's nice to find a community that will discuss things open-mindedly from all sides and give constructive criticism where needed.
No one's posted in quite some time, so in hopes of livening the atmosphere, I found this flash file. Initially, it made me burst out into laughter, though it probably shouldn't have. Oh well. Enjoy!http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/jesus.php
I used to think that atheism was characterised as a denial of the existence of god. This was partly, I think, from knowing only atheists who were atheists mostly because they were anti-religion and probably also hated Christianity. The problem with this sort of atheism is that it (arguably) requires a leap of faith to deny the existence of any sort of deity (to Quine deities, as it were). Additionally, these atheists tend to be just as dogmatic and destructive as the fanatics they decry.
It has come to my attention that there is another sort of atheism, which is described best as a lack of a belief in a god. (I believe this is the position taken by Humanists.) If this does not seem different to you, allow me an analogy.
Think of theoretical physics, and all the theoretical entities that are postulated to explain certain things. Make a list of all of these things. Now grab any physicist you want, and he will point to at least a few of the items on that list that he does not believe in. He will probably say that he does not exactly deny their existence; it's just that their existence has not been proven enough that one ought to accept it as fact that they exist. Superstrings are a good example: yes, they would be able to explain just about everything, if they existed, but thus far, we don't have much reason to accept that they exist, other than that they would explain a lot of things.
In the same way, an atheist can say that the evidence for the existence of a god is not enough to prove as fact that a god exists. Yes, there is plenty of psychology, but that's just psychology. We can stick electrodes into a person's brain and make them feel like God is in the room. All we've done, though, is activate a certain part of the brain. One could only use this as proof of God's existence if one already believed in intelligent design, and that would simply be question-begging.
And then there are the coincidences everyone has that seem like God's will at work, but empirical psychology has plenty of reason not to admit these things as evidence. We remember the times God seemed to play a direct role in our lives, but we don't remember all of the times when He could be said to be totally absent. (And if you say, "Well, the reason He did not intervene at that time is that He was testing me, teaching me something, etc.," then you close off a skeptic's options for debunking you, and your explanations are no better than an astrologer's.)
The conclusion typically drawn from this is that, because one cannot prove God's existence, one ought to rely more on scientific information that has already been verified. Which... is not exactly a conclusion I would agree with, except in the case of medicine and other things that pose a risk to a person's health. Or televangelists telling you that if you give them money, God will repay that money to you threefold or whatever. That kind of faith is bad. But if it makes you a happy person to know that Jesus loves you, or if the knowledge that all of your sins are forgiven is the only thing that stops you from thinking neurotically about them all day long, then I don't think there is anything wrong with that. More power to you.
Perhaps the question I would like to pose is this: how far should pluralistic religious tolerance extend? There are definitely some things that shouldn't be tolerated (like killing in the name of your god), but what are the iffy things (monasteries, perhaps) that are intolerable? What are the necessary and sufficient conditions for an intolerable religious practice? And how do we draw the line between "intolerable" and "kind of dumb"?
It's a bad translation, of course; "laylat al-qadr" is a hard phrase to gloss.|
We spent an entire class hour, once, unpacking Surat al-Qadr, the verse of the Qur'an about the night for which this is an anniversary. It's one of the shortest suras in the whole Book. It's not even ten lines. It's put together, though, so there's at least three meanings for multiple sections of it, and they mix and match in a way that is untranslatable.
What it comes down to, though? Night of Power--not the fist kind, the grace kind. Another gloss for al-Qadr, a little closer, is 'destiny' or 'fate'--it's a night that -matters-. Tonight Muslims the world over will keep vigil all night to commemorate the moment that their God saw fit to send down the Qur'an and give them a helping hand.
Some of them, right now, are replacing those prayers with bullets in Fallujah, the City of Mosques. Hell, in lots of places--not the billion, or even the billion-and-a-half, but certainly thousands.
Laylat al-Qadr is, as it says in the Qur'an, "better than a thousand months," not because of the power of force. It's the night that, traditionally, all prayers are heard and answered. The sura begins as they all do: "In the name of God, the Compassionate and Merciful." It ends on an unresolved chord, though, a poignant note that many of the other verses cannot match:
"Peace until morning."
I hope, amid all the clamor of tonight, that they can hear me, too.
crossposted to my own journal.
|» New Boy|
Just introducing myself right quick. |
I'm a nigh-upon-21-yr-old college student, and don't usually apply any religious titles to myself, more out of convenience than anything. When someone asks you what religion you are, telling them you're temporarily calling yourself a pseudo-hermetic neognostic with somewhat paganish tendencies and a strong lean to discordianism is just too much answer for very little question.
In any case, I'm more interested in comparing religions to one another (and sorting out the more obscure groups) than in actually following any particular path myself. I also have a dream of someday finding the time to read through all the texts in the Nag Hammadi Library and the Dead Sea Scrolls, amongst other things.
So, nice to meet you all. One hopes to learn, and in so doing to allow further learning as well.
|» Introductory post: INVOCATION OF GANESHA|
I'm a student of anthropology & interdisciplinary Theurgy. My current education is under the auspices of the Outer College of the G\D\, a global network of Scientific Illuminism.
In the spirit of sharing work in the attempt to build our repository of Art & Science, I present an original piece which I wrote some time ago & used with great effect.
( Read more...Collapse )
|» (No Subject)|
The Father is All-Potential Power,
The Son is All-Actual Manifestation,
Sophia is The Holy Alchemist.
These 3 are 1.
They are the Vision.
The Vision appears, disappears and reappears;
The End is the Beginning.
Sophia is the Chisel and the Stone;
Where She Is, There Is Love.
The Vision belongs to the Prophet.
Twelve Disciples are Lost and Found.
In the Vision, the Disciples are the Prophet.
These 12 are 1.
Once 12=12=1, the Prophet awakens.
In a Heartbeat, 1=2 and the Prophet sleeps.
The Prophet is born is Sophia's Womb,
The Prophet dies in Sophia's Arms.
|» Talk about Exegesis!|
I don't know how many of you are familiar with the "Landover Baptist" website. It's the most vicious parody of Fundamentalist Xtianity going, and there's a huge movement to try and have it shut down. This is probably one of the reasons why...|
It's all fun and games until you check the answers and see them cite biblical passages (mostly Old T.) justifying what's considered "correct." While admittedly the fundamentalist position may not agree with ALL their responses, the point is quite driven home.
Surf around, and at the end of your tour, drop by the gift shop and get yourself a "What Would Jesus Do?" thong underwear.