Go to The Reverend Kooka Speaks About Religious Bulls#!t
- Add a comment
- Go to WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT, THE FIRE OR HOW YOU GET IT STARTED?
Ody
Because of thinking like that the Middle East has been a war zone for most of its history. You really just have no clue and refuse to see the big picture.
posted by
kooka_lives
on December 8, 2005 at 12:24 PM
| link to this | reply
Kooka -
With you, it’s definitely not about agreement, but only disagreement. That is why there is no point in continuing. Certainly, beliefs should not be forced upon people, but it is not possible to legitimize the beliefs of others in your own mind, unless you’re willing to compromise your own belief system, which is clearly unnecessary. It is not possible to have a respect for beliefs that make no sense to you, but it is possible to have an understanding that there may be another path with which you are unfamiliar. Forming basic agreement with people upon which you can build is the cornerstone of progress and something that I hope you will consider. It has been nice conversing with you. Goodbye.
posted by
telemachus
on December 8, 2005 at 12:04 PM
| link to this | reply
Ody
It is not about agreement. That will solve nothing and you are just wasting your time there. History has already shown us this. You need to learn to accept other's beliefs as being right for them and as legitimate as any you hold dear. You need to show respect by allowing them to have their beliefs without the feeling of being judged or having other's beliefs forced on them.
If people would do that, then the idea of forcing an agreement would not be needed at all and there would be no conflict. You keep trying to guilt me and make ti seem as though I were the one creating the conflict because I will not agree with you. But you are the one who keeps forcing the issue saying we must agree otherwise I am hateful and evil. I am being reasonable and not going to just agree for the purpose of agreeing, that would solve nothing and only feed your ego.
If agreeing is so important, then why can you not agree with my concepts of acceptance, which have proven to work much better than you ideas of forced agreement? Why? Because then you would not be proven right and you really want that high ground.
So until you learn to respect and accept my beliefs and the beliefs of others, you will not find this goodness you claim to be searching for. You will only be creating an illusion for yourself that you are right. You need to be proven correct only helps to add to the truth that you have a dangerous messiah complex right now. It is pointless for this to continue until you are able to open your mind and see reality and start to actually be willing to work towards goodness and right.
posted by
kooka_lives
on December 8, 2005 at 10:17 AM
| link to this | reply
Kooka
So, is it fair for me to assume that there is nothing in this universe that you think men would mutually agree to be good, under any circumstances whatsoever? That seems to be your contention. And is it fair for me to understand that you favor disorganization over organization? If these are in fact your beliefs there is little reason for us to have any further discussion because disagreement here leaves no further visible room for compromise that I can discern at this juncture. 
posted by
telemachus
on December 8, 2005 at 9:03 AM
| link to this | reply
Ody
Are you really so lost and clueless?
The first example was perfect and obviously went over your head because you refuse to accept the true logic that is there. There are going to be times when there is no fire needed, but some will just refuse to accept that. Even in a blizzard you can survive without a fire if you know what you are doing. After all if you build a snow cave you do not want to start a fire in it, and yet you can survive if you made it right without the need for fire.
In that first situation, what is the 'clearly common goal'? To be comfortable and survive? Well the guy is comfortable and surviving just fine without fire is doing that by not creating fire and instead desiring to conserve resources for later. The guy who is not comfortable without a fire is in some sense working towards that, but he is also being foolish in case they need to resource for others things. Yet is his mind he believes he is working towards the goals of comfort and survival.
That first statement is truly a very valid example and is a very good analogy of just what is happening in the world and this country today. In fact you right now are trying to tell me I need to build a fire and I keep trying to point out that I am comfortable without a fire. You refuse to believe me and keep telling me I better build that fire because you believe I need to build a fire. Maybe because the example really fits you so well you refuse to see it for what it is.
Your annoying need to force fire on me and others who clearly have no need for it is causing a great deal of conflict. We take that to the bigger picture and we see those who think like you everywhere in the world causing the problems and the wars and the terrorist attacks and so on. Doing all you can to say that there always needs to be a fire is a very dangerous thing.
What path am I on? My own path that is actually a healthy path that is filled with moral values, goodness and joy. It is a good path that allows for me to look at the other paths openly and see that hey are not for me and understand the flaws in them. But my path does not have a name, nor does it need one. All I need is to know that it is the right path for me. And that the path is comfortable enough that there is no need at all for me to start a fire.
There is also no worshiping taking place on my path. I do not practice the idea of worship. I know this is hard for you and other believers to understand, but you need not worship anything to be happy. As for self worship, take a look in the mirror. You have a huge messiah complex going on, and if that is not a form of self worship, I know not what is.
"What are you thoughts about more efficient ways to get spiritual fires started in the modern world?"
To allow people to build fires as needed and not force them to build fires or teach them only one way. You have all the ways presented and allow for them to openly choose which one is best for them. Then to accept their fires or lack of fires as being what is best for them. That has been the main concept of my postings here for some time now. Most of my posts really must just go over your head if you have not seen me putting that message out there.
"In your blizzard, there would be no argument about the benefit and need of fire.'
Actually I just showed you the error of that here in this comment. if one were to build a snow cave, then they would not have a need for fire. So depending on the situation, someone with survival knowledge would not benefit from a fire and would find it better to not even try to start one up. So before I even got this far your point was already contended.
"Simply because modern organized religion seems ineffective at bringing about the fire does not justify a disorganized approach."
Well it is better than the organized approaches. In fact if you really look at what is working best for people and the people who are more likely to get along with other and truly be accepting of others, it does seem to be those who go about life in a disorganized approached, having found their paths on their own and with or without a belief in God, they figured out their beliefs on their own and those beliefs are personal to fit their needs. So far the organized approach has only proven to fail time and time again and cause wars and the real problems we face right now as a society.
posted by
kooka_lives
on December 8, 2005 at 8:17 AM
| link to this | reply
Let's make a fire!
In your first scenario, you have simply altered the analogy to the extent that it is no longer cold enough to justify the fire for both parties, solely to facilitate disagreement, which invalidates the example. Secondly, you then introduce methodological (what I like to refer to as doctrinal) disagreements that prevent cohesive movement toward what is clearly a common goal for both. This is a spectacular example of what commonly happens in theology in the modern world and, regrettably, often prevents many from finding the fire.
In particular, I like the following statement that you make in this post:
“We each have to find our paths in life through beliefs and views and so to try and claim that any one belief is truly wrong or anyone is truly right is to say that the method is more important than the results.” –Kooka_lives
Clearly your statement here hits upon much of the problem that we presently see in the world over religious controversy. We must learn to acknowledge the RESULTS that are the focus of the common goal and then examine the paths to determine which is most efficient for us. If we select a particular path, we err to then turn around and constantly berate people who are on other paths.
We should only really be subject to criticism if we fail to embark upon any path at all. Kooka, what path have you chosen? I would very much like to know the nature of your path. Is it solely familial worship or self worship or what is it really? Please post and tell us about your personal path. I would be very interested to learn about it.
And certainly we must constantly examine and analyze the paths before us to determine which seems most efficient. Certainly, the masses have spoken with regard to the paths that prove most popular, but are they the most efficient for truly getting the fire? What are you thoughts about more efficient ways to get spiritual fires started in the modern world?
In your blizzard, there would be no argument about the benefit and need of fire. If possible, working together would bring it about more efficiently. Simply because modern organized religion seems ineffective at bringing about the fire does not justify a disorganized approach. Rather, perhaps it justifies a new approach.
posted by
telemachus
on December 8, 2005 at 5:45 AM
| link to this | reply
kooka_lives - good analogy --- has someone mentioned that yet?
But really this is exactly how some people have boxed in their thinking. So called enlightenment or spiritual growth is ridgidly prescribed, inflexable to the extent of missing the entire point. When these same ridgidly thinking people commit all forms of attrociuos actions attempting to force everyone into their pre-determined mold, they don't understand the backlash. Waddya mean I can't do what I want and break all of my own rules making you a better person? ......this is the only way, it's for your own good.
posted by
gomedome
on December 7, 2005 at 4:59 PM
| link to this | reply
good analogy at the risk of repeating blackcat
posted by
Xeno-x
on December 7, 2005 at 1:48 PM
| link to this | reply
very good analogy. I always say, to each their own. : )
btw... I now have "We didn't start the fire" by Billy Joel in my head. So thanks for that. LOL
posted by
-blackcat
on December 7, 2005 at 10:37 AM
| link to this | reply