1 edit
Originally posted by Proper KnobYou have to have a reference point in determining what is true or false with regards to religion ............and the reference point is the authority.
Who decides what is 'falsity'? And how do you know if someone is knowingly presenting 'falsity'?
The authority sets the standards.
To know what is the authority the person must at least have common sense and honesty, and in this way they can determine out of all the religions claiming to be the authority which one is actually the authority.
If a person is motivated by personal gain then they will be biased with regards to the determination process needed to chooses correctly the true authority.
The person therefore must be honest enough to rid themselves of all biased involvements in the determination process.
In this way they will if they are sincere come to the correct decision in determining the authority.
With regards to spirituality and religion there is only one authority.......not two and not three.
There is an example to explain this.......
When looking for diamonds to purchase, the buyer must have a little common sense and knowledge about diamonds in the first place or they will possibly end up buying crystal instead of the real thing.................so likewise when determining the authority the person must also have some common sense and some basic knowledge of religious matters or they may end up with a false authority.
Even without an authority to have as reference, an honest person can realize what is a true thing and what is a false thing.
An example would be...........
The traffic rule book tells the driver not to speed, but without the authority of the traffic rule book the honest person who has common sense will know not to speed anyway without the reference of the driving rule book.
Originally posted by DasaMy belief system is not a "tactic". Nor is it "manipulative". Nor have I ever been "dishonest" with you. In fact I have never tried to divest you of your beliefs - at least in so far as they do not make unfounded assertions about me and my life and my spirituality. One wonders why - according to your own spiritual map - you feel the need to accuse others of "dishonesty" when clearly the only thing amiss in the whole dialogue - glaringly so - is your inability to process dissent and accept someone not sharing your belief system.
It is dishonest and a manipulative tactic.
Originally posted by DasaYour spiritual "traffic rule book" tells you not to eat meat. My spiritual "traffic rule book" tells me it's ok to eat meat. Anyone with common sense will know that not everyone accepts or submits to the same "traffic rule book".
The traffic rule book tells the driver not to speed, but without the authority of the traffic rule book the honest person who has common sense will know not to speed anyway without the reference of the driving rule book.
Originally posted by DasaI actually agree 100% with you on this. We live in an age of dishonesty. There is a thin veneer that keeps this modern world civil.
I am constantly being confronted by persons refusing to accept common sense, rationality, logic and true knowledge.
Sadly these are the symptoms of the age we live in when false religion allows for killing and false science presents everything has come from nothing.
It is the age of foolishness and bewilderment where dishonesty is encouraged by all who subscribe to falsity.
Also sadly no one is shamed by this.
Manny
Originally posted by FMFWhen it comes to spirituality and religion there is only one rule book.......not 2 or 3 or 4.
Your spiritual "traffic rule book" tells you not to eat meat. My spiritual "traffic rule book" tells me it's ok to eat meat. Anyone with common sense will know that not everyone accepts or submits to the same "traffic rule book".
You have invented your rule book to include killing and other things.
It is this inventing of your own personal rule book to ease the burden of conscience that is dishonest because you cannot do it.
Its like inventing your own rule book for driving on public roads and if you want to speed then you will put in YOUR rule book that speeding is acceptable.........so do you see why its dishonest to invent your own personal religious rule book which will allow FMF to kill without conscience.
Originally posted by DasaSo you say. But - as I have said - I do not share your belief system. So your assertions are wasted. Perhaps if I shared your belief system I would agree with you. But I don't, so I don't. You believe eating meat is wrong and you seek to project that belief on to me. I believe eating meat is ok but I do not seek to project my belief on to you. There is a difference between us: my belief system does not involve me making basically tyrannical assertions about your life. Meanwhile you are incessantly accusing me - and others - of lying, and other insults and abuse. It's having no effect. You are what you are, Dasa, and I don't seek to change that.
When it comes to spirituality and religion there is only one rule book.......not 2 or 3 or 4.
Originally posted by DasaBut Dasa, I am not inventing my own rule book for driving on public roads. Spirituality has nothing whatsoever to do with rule books for driving on public roads, except perhaps - in a sense - for religionists. I am not a religionist so your analogy fails.
Its like inventing your own rule book for driving on public roads and if you want to speed then you will put in YOUR rule book that speeding is acceptable.........so do you see why its dishonest to invent your own personal religious rule book which will allow FMF to kill without conscience.
Originally posted by DasaSo basically what you are saying is this -
You have to have a reference point in determining what is true or false with regards to religion ............and the reference point is the authority.
The authority sets the standards.
To know what is the authority the person must at least have common sense and honesty, and in this way they can determine out of all the religions claiming to be the authori ...[text shortened]... o has common sense will know not to speed anyway without the reference of the driving rule book.
If you are honest in your 'determination process' you will come to the conclusion that the Vedas are the 'authority' (still not quite sure what that means), any other conclusion will be due to biased decisions in the 'determination process'.
What about people who seek no 'authority'?!
Originally posted by FMFthis was much more directed at the world than just at you. you all keep complaining about dasa, how he is a troll, how he is stupid, how he doesn't debate but announces his wisdom.
If you don't like the way I post on this forum and you don't have much to say that's on-topic [except for some artless rehash of what I have been saying, as in this case] why not just PM me?
how many more before you said the same thing to him? how many complain he doesn't listen? yet you all keep indulging him. why? to show up how much smarter than him you are? you are flexing your intellect at a troll or a child. (in both cases the solution would be to ignore him).
Originally posted by ZahlanziI do not call him stupid. Others complain about how he doesn't debate but announces his wisdom, not really me. And I do not try to change his beliefs. I simply reject his projection of his "absolute truth" onto me. I have speculated about how he might be a troll in the past, but I don't treat him like a troll; I am respectful and patient. I really don't know why the most pressing issue for you is to complain to me about my posts. And here you are misrepresenting me and the way I post. Why?
you all keep complaining about dasa, how he is a troll, how he is stupid, how he doesn't debate but announces his wisdom.
Originally posted by ZahlanziSo your complaint is that I might eventually call him "stupid" although I haven't yet?
how many more before you said the same thing to him?
in both cases the solution would be to ignore him
I think I will take this little nugget of advice and apply it to you. 😉
Originally posted by FMFagain, the post was directed at the whole community and i included many different aspects in that post? would you like a formal apology and a statement that i shouldn't have used the "reply and quote" button? or you are comfortable missing the point?
I do not call him stupid. Others complain about how he doesn't debate but announces his wisdom, not really me. And I do not try to change his beliefs. I simply reject his projection of his "absolute truth" onto me. I have speculated about how he might be a troll in the past, but I don't treat him like a troll; I am respectful and patient. I really don't know why ...[text shortened]... complain to me about my posts. And here you are misrepresenting me and the way I post. Why?
Originally posted by ZahlanziApology? What are you on about? No. Just stop addressing me about Dasa. It serves no purpose. That will be sufficient.
again, the post was directed at the whole community and i included many different aspects in that post? would you like a formal apology and a statement that i shouldn't have used the "reply and quote" button? or you are comfortable missing the point?