A new religion

Originally Posted by celest

If you tell me your personal reason, I'll tell you why

No thats unfair, if its personal that's ok.

haha...clever but kind and considerate you are celest. Thanks

It's an anagram of he & she, I sometimes think in anagrams or rhymes, mybe I need a shrink

aren't we free to think as we want? Its only a name after all ...and that too a very personal thing...don't think it will make any difference to the characteristics of god herself. It is your personal relation with god...who is to interfere in it....as long as you don't interfere in anothers or force change leading to the manipulation of essential truth...

I had to look up for the meaning of anagram. That's a clever word then celest.

Originally Posted by Terra Tourist

Hi Chr1stian

I would like to know your definition of 'vice' and 'sin'.

Some people might suggest that drugs, alcohol or promiscuity are vices, yet we know many enlightened people have broken through the limits of their wisdom to experience 'god(s)' through such 'vices'.

Sin is a tough one to define IMO. There is no clear agreement on its root meaning. For me, the closest true definition is 'to miss the mark'. If you step out of the flow of your path, you will meet resistance from the universe. IMO, this is when you 'sin'. I don't know if we can have a one-size-fits-all table of sins. Perhaps it is a far more personal and subjective experience.

Thanks

Haha...eager to have another religion with loopholes which includes sin and vice as the purpose of birth and life!!

Hmm...there are a few that directly support such things in clauses, I have heard and most already have loopholes in terms of layers and layers of clauses surrounding the actual message to a human to be a human and spell it for him if he isn't wise enough to figure it out for himself.

Aren't you free to do what you want? Why do you want god to accept it? If it appears in a book labeled new religion which takes about the uncontaminated message, do you think all of gods laws and entire humanity over millions of years will just change, in a moment? I don't think so...I think I can even claim that I know it for a fact that it wont....

I hope it does, if it is goung to say something, that it is uncpntaminated hy human ego, there will be no point in stating anything otherwise anyway...there is enough of it in the world and some sick human minds already and will be useless and misleading attempt, weighing heavily on the conscience of its creator...and equally or perhaps even more heavily on the conscience of blind follower of a preacher who preaches against the soul...the follower has the freedom to and in fact must, check with his own soul before following something anyways..

I have a better idea for you Terra tourist....name all the things you would like to be exclusive of vice and sin..would be easier for the followers mind...won't have to waste energy on analysing and applying words and language to suit own inhumane purposes...let's start with...lies, deception, murder, rape, abuse of the weal helpless and vulnerable, psychological murder...your choice, you have already named abusecif addictive substances etc..what else... This way it will also be easier to propagate your ideas and perhaps you will get 'funding' too.

[Terra Tourist]

Originally Posted by lifensoul

Haha...eager to have another religion with loopholes which includes sin and vice as the purpose of birth and life!!

Hmm...there are a few that directly support such things in clauses, I have heard and most already have loopholes in terms of layers and layers of clauses surrounding the actual message to a human to be a human and spell it for him if he isn't wise enough to figure it out for himself.

Aren't you free to do what you want? Why do you want god to accept it? If it appears in a book labeled new religion which takes about the uncontaminated message..(I hope it does, no point and will be useless and misleading attempt otherwise anyways, weighing heavily on the conscience of its creator...and equallyor more heavily on the conscience of blind followers of the preacher who preaches against the soul...the follower has the freedom and in fact must, check wit his own soul before following something anyways.. ), do you think all of gods laws and entire humanity over millions of years will just change, in a moment? I don't think so...I think I can even claim that I know it for a fact that it wont....

Hi Lifensoul

I'm not entirely sure what you're asking here? Are you asking if I am 'eager to have another religion with loopholes which includes sin and vice as the purpose of birth and life'? Because the answer to that would be no. I am not eager for any religion to do anything.

Maybe I'm misreading what you wrote? Could you tell me again what it is you disagree with in my comment?

Originally Posted by Terra Tourist

Hi Lifensoul

I'm not entirely sure what you're asking here? Are you asking if I am 'eager to have another religion with loopholes which includes sin and vice as the purpose of birth and life'? Because the answer to that would be no. I am not eager for any religion to do anything.

Maybe I'm misreading what you wrote? Could you tell me again what it is you disagree with in my comment?

I edited my post...it migt be clearer?

[Terra Tourist]

Hi Lifensoul

I think you're mistaking me. I didn't start this thread. I'm not looking for a new religion. I was questioning the thread maker on 2 points which they put forward on the original post. I think you're reading my post and assuming things which aren't there. On top of that, you are arguing against things which I never wrote or even implied...what's that all about???

I don't propose a new religion, neither am I looking for loopholes in something (still don't know how you came to that conclusion). Rather, I am looking for clarity on a point within the original post.

Go back and read my post again, then remove all the wild assumptions you've inserted between the lines and then comment.

Originally Posted by Terra Tourist

Hi Lifensoul

I think you're mistaking me. I didn't start this thread. I'm not looking for a new religion. I was questioning the thread maker on 2 points which they put forward on the original post. I think you're reading my post and assuming things which aren't there. On top of that, you are arguing against things which I never wrote or even implied...what's that all about???

I don't propose a new religion, neither am I looking for loopholes in something (still don't know how you came to that conclusion). Rather, I am looking for clarity on a point within the original post.

Go back and read my post again, then remove all the wild assumptions you've inserted between the lines and then comment.

Originally Posted by Terra Tourist

Hi Chr1stian

I would like to know your definition of 'vice' and 'sin'.

Some people might suggest that drugs, alcohol or promiscuity are vices, yet we know many enlightened people have broken through the limits of their wisdom to experience 'god(s)' through such 'vices'.

Sin is a tough one to define IMO. There is no clear agreement on its root meaning. For me, the closest true definition is 'to miss the mark'. If you step out of the flow of your path, you will meet resistance from the universe. IMO, this is when you 'sin'. I don't know if we can have a one-size-fits-all table of sins. Perhaps it is a far more personal and subjective experience.

Thanks

There read your post again and quoted it such that it help remind you what you had written.

I know, you only proposed to allow for personalised, subjective and one size fit all definition of sin and vice...and exclude addictions and promiscuity.

I thought I was giving you more direct and better ideas, helping you, where you don't have to try hard and decipher the definition of sin and vice to make sure you are still within the path such that the universe won't resist your sin.

Oops, i seem to missed out the fact that you had excluded pomiscuity from the list of vice too in my post which listed the exclusions out, you see, i thought god was awaiting for your permission before he changes his entire system which he has been trying to get us humans to own up to our conscience and listen to our souls over the millenia. would that exclusion be an inexcusable sin? Do you think god will exclude it from the list of vice and sin that I forgot to include it on the list on your behalf in my previous post?

No? you prefer your right hand to not know what the left is doing? I thought I was helping you again. What if Christian didn't understand it and included strict definitions of sin and vice...you might end up sinning just because of his definition. You don't like any one helping you either? Okay. I shall back off then. No more responses to your comments here, unless you really want me to respond.

How does your conflict with your own conscience become anyones problem? Sorry to let you down. Your conscience and what you do is for you to deal with, if you don't it to see you, that's for you to deal with too. No one else's. So, nope. Not gonna remove anything from my post.

I truly am sorry. Am not talented in the mincing my words department.

Anyways. Thanks for the conversation and your posts Terra tourist...for helping us understand what might have gone on during the formation of so called religions some two thousand years ago. The three main ones, Christianity, Islam and Buddhism...all came about around the same time didnt they? +/-a couple of hundred centuries, not much in comparison to millenia. Weird..

No wonder people can see through the false facade of those religions.

[Terra Tourist]

Lifensoul

I really don't think you've grasped what I was writing. But hey, thanks for helping us understand how a person can jump in on a subject without any rational thought or perspective on the original point.

Originally Posted by Terra Tourist

Lifensoul

I really don't think you've grasped what I was writing. But hey, thanks for helping us understand how a person can jump in on a subject without any rational thought or perspective on the original point.

I accept the thanks. I like helping, I think its our basic responsibility to be humane towards each other and as gratitude to god and each other for earth, life and its experiences.

There was another point I wanted to make. Let's forget for a moment we exchanged any posts or that you said anything you did. Its a general comment, related to the topic (must be unusual of me). The point was that neither conscience nor god can be blindfolded. Its impossible and a vain attempt. Not even by changing definitions of gods laws and not even by misleading others into blindfolding their own conscience or their moral compass. No other entity's opinion really matters.

[Terra Tourist]

Originally Posted by lifensoul

The point was that neither conscience nor god can be blindfolded. Its impossible and a vain attempt. Not even by changing definitions of gods laws and not even by misleading others into blindfolding their own conscience or their moral compass. No other entity's opinion really matters.

Changing definitions of god's laws? Misleading others into blindfolding their own conscience or their moral compass? No other entity's opinion really matters?

Please explain more clearly. You're writing statements which seem to come from nowhere, have no clarity and are relevant to nothing previously mentioned. They're like a bunch of words glued together without sense.

I'm sorry if that seems harsh, perhaps English is not your first language? But something is getting lost in translation here.

I'm sincere when I say I don't mean to offend, but your posts have the tone of being very argumentative, yet it's almost impossible to sift out what you are arguing for or against.