Religionist enjoys Condeming people. do u think its healthy ?

[The_Child]

Sir child i luv the last part- teaching positive teaching and,,,,,it makes the world a more livable place,,

so what you are saying pariho lang ang mga theist, atheist, mysticism?
committing the same crime po of indoctrination?

your luv of Catholicism may justify your claim that mysticism, etc is a quasi-rational system, (its like "i luv my own my native land complex") so its understandable,
but in fairness i haven't encountered any teachings in mysticism that forcibly that talks about intolerance against other religion, worst other denomination. they dont scare abouit hell, & reward you of some heaven just to solicit a "good beheavior". they dont talk about hot tempered, jealous god.
Mysticism is all about searching god w/n & not in some far away heaven; now if that doctrine is crazy then so be it, but at least they dont have the doctrine that condemns other faith,
a god that has anger management issue, a god that would send his only son to be murdered to atone other peoples sin? now talking about being rational or quasi-rational,,would it be that the doctrine of the church is the craziest doctrine as compared to the craziness of ateism, mysticism?

in a way your message is clear- pariho lang tayo (religion,atheism,mysticism, etc) my kagaguhan

though let me add,,RELIGION is always at the top of the chart when it comes to craziness,,
ooopps spare buddhism po

it wouldnt be fair to reduce me to a catholic. Im a catholic depending on the weather.

mysticism, i believe is, supra-rational. It is beyond reason. by quasi-rational, i was referring to "Mystics", quote and quote. because mysticism, is in the end, Silence. mystical experience could never be explained by words, could never be taught by words, wasnt that the origin for dyana -> chan -> zen, the silent buddhism? it is said, the Buddha just smiled and gave away a lotus flower to a disciple and by that he transmitted enlightenment that started dyana (india) chan (china) and the zen (japan).

mysticism is originally, in greek which may be understood as hidden concealed silent. i dont believe the fruits of mysticism can be taught in its pure sense by institutions or by other people. it is a path every man or woman, must take, must discover, must qualify, for his/her ownself.

mysticism has no doctrine, exactly, it must be beyond doctrines. mysticism which is taught is a contradiction, which has doctrines is a contradiction, which has organizing committees is a contradiction. thats what i think. mysticism, or the thought of it, must wish itself not to be edified.

the doctrines of the church are sometimes crazy, indeed, and sometimes has some sense. but so far, i have not encountered anyone from other camps to present a statement which is lesser crazier. sa ibang salita, kung kagaguhan lang naman ang paguusapan ang mga ideya at doktrina ng kristyanismo, ay walang katapat sa kabila, lalo na sa mga nagpapanggap na may-alam, the intellectual poseurs. akalain nila na sila lang ang marunong magbasa.



i have no problems with atheism nor mysticism. my problem is with people who are so full of themselves and they call themselves, seculars, humanists, mystics, atheists, theists, religionists, intellectuals, scientists, priests, or what have you. they think the world revolves around their imagination and delusions of grandeur.

cheers!

[miyay]

why not teach positive teaching instead? and by positive i mean, to clamp the pie-hole from defining and edifying statements on regards to topics like God, the Soul and the World, which are things that could never be proven, even with the sick method of thinking employed by many of them.


what could be the negative effects of this? it makes the world a more livable place, i know i want to enjoy my sunday mornings without their banter.

cheers!

yup, hard to define god, the soul and the world. i don't think we can rationalize these concepts. we can only experience them for ourselves. i think, teachers preach their own interpretations based on their own experiences, theories and faith. some recognize that each experience is unique and therefore do not force their beliefs on others. while, some, in their pride, think that theirs are the only truths.

the question is, how should the listeners/readers take these in? with a grain of salt. after all, to each his/her own. cheers to choice!

[miyay]

i would be wary on mysticism taught but mysticism shared is most welcome. buddha took in some students so maybe he wanted to share his wisdom. i never understood why some masters/mystics would shroud their wisdom in exclusivity through silence

[Tirong-say]

do you think religionist who always talks about fire and brimstone to people are considered healthy?


Is indoctrinating people with HELL considered healthy?

its taught in MASS
in bible preachers
in TV

these people always like to confuse people with this fear , emphasizing the bible verses that always talks about problem like second coming.

why not teach positive thinking instead.

what could be the negative effects of this? could this be the reason why followers always end up doing the same thing over again , even after going to church.

Preachings and homilies would always site the ugliness of damnation not because to strengthen one's affinity towards religion, but to remind it's follower's consciousness that there will be punishment if they would commit sins. I do not see any negative impacts on this endeavour for the mentioned sins is also atoned with our supposed human laws, our laws which regulate morality, ideal way of living, pro life, so on and so forth.

I could say that preachings and homilies as intended for the spiritual life, has a great contribution for the betterment of human kind, it ought to control the very dark side of a man and thus promoting well being for everyone.

[flying fish]

it wouldnt be fair to reduce me to a catholic. Im a catholic depending on the weather.

mysticism, i believe is, supra-rational. It is beyond reason. by quasi-rational, i was referring to "Mystics", quote and quote. because mysticism, is in the end, Silence. mystical experience could never be explained by words, could never be taught by words, wasnt that the origin for dyana -> chan -> zen, the silent buddhism? it is said, the Buddha just smiled and gave away a lotus flower to a disciple and by that he transmitted enlightenment that started dyana (india) chan (china) and the zen (japan).

mysticism is originally, in greek which may be understood as hidden concealed silent. i dont believe the fruits of mysticism can be taught in its pure sense by institutions or by other people. it is a path every man or woman, must take, must discover, must qualify, for his/her ownself.

mysticism has no doctrine, exactly, it must be beyond doctrines. mysticism which is taught is a contradiction, which has doctrines is a contradiction, which has organizing committees is a contradiction. thats what i think. mysticism, or the thought of it, must wish itself not to be edified.

the doctrines of the church are sometimes crazy, indeed, and sometimes has some sense. but so far, i have not encountered anyone from other camps to present a statement which is lesser crazier. sa ibang salita, kung kagaguhan lang naman ang paguusapan ang mga ideya at doktrina ng kristyanismo, ay walang katapat sa kabila, lalo na sa mga nagpapanggap na may-alam, the intellectual poseurs. akalain nila na sila lang ang marunong magbasa.



i have no problems with atheism nor mysticism. my problem is with people who are so full of themselves and they call themselves, seculars, humanists, mystics, atheists, theists, religionists, intellectuals, scientists, priests, or what have you. they think the world revolves around their imagination and delusions of grandeur.

cheers!

good post the child,,and i think Ms Charm has the same concern (in her case tantrum) when it comes to people as what youve said "so full of themselves & call them selves"

[handsoff241]

Stereotyping check... please be negative first with this ailment before lambasting a collective noun.

A reminder from:

Sasha Grey DT Fans' Club

[regnauld]

Stereotyping check... please be negative first with this ailment before lambasting a collective noun.

A reminder from:

Sasha Grey DT Fans' Club

porno nasad!

[cromagnon]

I've read and watch people "literaly" been to HELL, so wither we like it or not, there is Hell.

I think your the confused bro.

You know whats the common reason why people don't believe in God? They just try to justify everything that they will do is correct!, There just coward in facing reality of reward and punishment.
or They're just afraid of Hell, doing everything to erase it in their conscience cause it's bothering them haunting them like a wild beast day and night? hehehe

Without Hell it's like saying there's no good or evil forces that ever existed. and without this, why bother lying or cheating? Where this good and evil thing grounded if no Hell or no God?

Where is your belief in good and evil grounded?

your response pls.

as u requested, response

it's bothering them haunting them like a wild beast day and night? hehehe

this is the feeling of guilt , since we were a child we are already programed about the fear of hell.
but for me its depressing for most children to see such a cruel world they existed.

then introducing the pleasure of heaven , with the consequence of hell.

as Einstein quote:

if to live on earth is based on punishment with hell, and reward with heaven.
then were sorry.

from the documentation the secret:

u want to experience positivity , u must avoid talking or thinking about negative thoughts e.g. hell.

A concious person is aware of the consequence of his action.

[cromagnon]

[quote]

I've read and watch people "literaly" been to HELL, so wither we like it or not, there is Hell.

this people are scizophrenics

I think your the confused bro.

You know whats the common reason why people don't believe in God

? They just try to justify everything that they will do is correct!, There just coward in facing reality of reward and punishment.

its called living with less supervision

Without Hell it's like saying there's no good or evil forces that ever existed. and without this, why bother lying or cheating? Where this good and evil thing grounded if no Hell or no God?

why , bother , bec lying leads to distrust , distrust leads to less opportunity - nones smart enough to do that.

Where is your belief in good and evil grounded?

golden rule
your response pls

[Kenshiro]

do you think religionist who always talks about fire and brimstone to people are considered healthy?


Is indoctrinating people with HELL considered healthy?

its taught in MASS
in bible preachers
in TV

these people always like to confuse people with this fear , emphasizing the bible verses that always talks about problem like second coming.

why not teach positive thinking instead.

what could be the negative effects of this? could this be the reason why followers always end up doing the same thing over again , even after going to church.

The title of this thread is more of condeming the Christians. As you see Unbelievers such you are hypocrite as well.
Never mind arguing about hell. If you dont believe it then dont we as Christians are not forcing you. Its your own choice what to believe.

We teach the Bible since it says depicts heaven and hell as truth. So you also teach your "own doctrine" forcing people to believe you, you sound like a fanatic as well.

You talk about negativity is bad and all should be positve just shows you are ignorant. Negativity has its own advantage as well in reality.