My name is Wes and I am a new member here as well. I read your intro and all I have to say is just don’t let anything bother you. Adopt your own form of spirituality, and let it be non-passive resistance, Zen, or following Jesus’ Third Way. There needs to be nothing theistic about it, simply rational and philosophical. When you come into an argument with your old man or your family, just don’t be perturbed. If they love you, they should let you make decisions for yourself. A teacher of mine once told me, “Making up your own mind is the only freedom we really have.”
If you realize what all religions really strive for, then I think a compromise can be reached. You can have a spiritual side, you can admire and stand in awe of the infinite, the eternal, and the beauty of nature and what they call ‘God’. Yet you do not need to call it under the name of the Christian God or give it any one singular definition. Recognize that there is a Higher Power, and your father will agree and will understand. When he prays, you meditate. It will simply be ‘God’, as you understand him. This power greater than yourself can simply be a group of humanist and rationalist people who gather on-line to share each other’s wisdom. This collective here at LW is more powerful than you or me, and any one of us on our own.
Or it can be something deistic, pantheistic, or non-theistic—the choice is yours, and shall always be.
Just know that your way is ultimately the right one for you, and one day they might realize the inadequacies of anthropomorphic or cultural-specific monotheism. Practice turning the other cheek (Jesus was a philosopher- such a good one that weaker men deified him). They will see your enlightenment, whether you call it spiritual or not, through not your words, but your deeds. In the end, I’m not qualified to say this and mean no offense, but I’m guessing LW is not the spot for overcoming religion. Nor for overcoming family issues. Check out r/atheism or PM me at http://www.reddit.com/r/futurology/ my friend.
If they really love you, they’ll let you make decisions for yourself.
This isn’t actually true. If your parents don’t let you do what you want you shouldn’t modus tollens to thinking they don’t love you. That would be terrible.
It seems like my words are changed in your comment. Isn’t there a difference between what you want, and the decisions you decide yourself ?
I decide that it is not worth our discourse whether or not Benedict’s parents really love him or not.
I think we’re ending up doing this;
|Oh but dang if there aren’t like over a thousand comments here, jeez i don’t want to sound like i’m crying for attention but i’m TOTALLY CRYING FOR ATTENTION, srsly i need help you dudes
Assuming he was real, not divine (and knew it), and his ideas (e.g. Sermon on the Mount) were accurately depicted in the Bible, what would you call him?
The Jesus I’m describing is fervently Jewish, in case that wasn’t clear.
Edit in response to downvote: while I can certainly see how this could be interpreted as a simple attack on Christianity, considering that the figure in question apparently encouraged followers to give up their belongings to live in communes and made statements strongly indicative of encouraging followers to regard family members who were not followers as outgroup members, I think this is a fair descriptor.
It’s really hard to say, considering that practically everything recorded about him seems to have been filtered through Paul at some stage. You can take a stab at it with the help of some pretty sophisticated textual analysis methods (I think the Jesus Seminar did a pretty good, though not unimpeachable, job of this), but ultimately an analysis always depends as much on readers’ preconceptions as it does on the actual text. Kind of like trying to get an handle on Socrates’ ideas when all we’ve got to base them on is Plato and a handful of contemporary commentaries—except worse, since analogous commentaries don’t exist in this case.
I’d lean toward “dissident rabbi” based on the charitable version of my reading of the New Testament, but readings of the New Testament are notoriously idiosyncratic for the same reasons.
You can see my edit for further justification. Paul took up the mantle of leadership and effectively made the religion, but that doesn’t mean that Jesus wasn’t a cult leader.
Hindsight. How do you know he wasn’t? No matter what label you choose to give (H)im, that isn’t the point though, if you ask me.
By discussing this, we’re only giving in to this;
| Oh but dang if there aren’t like over a thousand comments here, jeez i don’t want to sound like i’m crying for attention but i’m TOTALLY CRYING FOR ATTENTION, srsly i need help you dudes
| Oh but dang if there aren’t like over a thousand comments here, jeez i don’t want to sound like i’m crying for attention but i’m TOTALLY CRYING FOR ATTENTION, srsly i need help you dudes
What do you mean “only”? In the context of a thorough introduction, and a relevant request for advice lampshading his degree of desire for an answer like this is certainly excusable.
It’s not “giving in” when you choose to do something you reflectively endorse doing without being subject to any more manipulation than a forthright request.
Indeed, I hoped to not give in to Benedict’s “totally crying for attention”. Yet, here we are discussing it even further. I am new to the site, and assumed it was not the place for paternal issues or internal conflicts with your God/deity of choice.
Hey Benedict,
My name is Wes and I am a new member here as well. I read your intro and all I have to say is just don’t let anything bother you. Adopt your own form of spirituality, and let it be non-passive resistance, Zen, or following Jesus’ Third Way. There needs to be nothing theistic about it, simply rational and philosophical. When you come into an argument with your old man or your family, just don’t be perturbed. If they love you, they should let you make decisions for yourself. A teacher of mine once told me, “Making up your own mind is the only freedom we really have.”
If you realize what all religions really strive for, then I think a compromise can be reached. You can have a spiritual side, you can admire and stand in awe of the infinite, the eternal, and the beauty of nature and what they call ‘God’. Yet you do not need to call it under the name of the Christian God or give it any one singular definition. Recognize that there is a Higher Power, and your father will agree and will understand. When he prays, you meditate. It will simply be ‘God’, as you understand him. This power greater than yourself can simply be a group of humanist and rationalist people who gather on-line to share each other’s wisdom. This collective here at LW is more powerful than you or me, and any one of us on our own.
Or it can be something deistic, pantheistic, or non-theistic—the choice is yours, and shall always be.
Just know that your way is ultimately the right one for you, and one day they might realize the inadequacies of anthropomorphic or cultural-specific monotheism. Practice turning the other cheek (Jesus was a philosopher- such a good one that weaker men deified him). They will see your enlightenment, whether you call it spiritual or not, through not your words, but your deeds. In the end, I’m not qualified to say this and mean no offense, but I’m guessing LW is not the spot for overcoming religion. Nor for overcoming family issues. Check out r/atheism or PM me at http://www.reddit.com/r/futurology/ my friend.
W
This isn’t actually true. If your parents don’t let you do what you want you shouldn’t modus tollens to thinking they don’t love you. That would be terrible.
It seems like my words are changed in your comment. Isn’t there a difference between what you want, and the decisions you decide yourself ?
I decide that it is not worth our discourse whether or not Benedict’s parents really love him or not.
I think we’re ending up doing this;
|Oh but dang if there aren’t like over a thousand comments here, jeez i don’t want to sound like i’m crying for attention but i’m TOTALLY CRYING FOR ATTENTION, srsly i need help you dudes
How do you know that Jesus was a philosopher?
Assuming he was real, not divine (and knew it), and his ideas (e.g. Sermon on the Mount) were accurately depicted in the Bible, what would you call him?
The Jesus I’m describing is fervently Jewish, in case that wasn’t clear.
Street preacher? Movement organizer? Dissident rabbi?
I’d lean towards cult leader.
Edit in response to downvote: while I can certainly see how this could be interpreted as a simple attack on Christianity, considering that the figure in question apparently encouraged followers to give up their belongings to live in communes and made statements strongly indicative of encouraging followers to regard family members who were not followers as outgroup members, I think this is a fair descriptor.
He (whether fictional or otherwise) seemed more like a celebrity than a cult leader. The real cult leader was Saul/Paul.
It’s really hard to say, considering that practically everything recorded about him seems to have been filtered through Paul at some stage. You can take a stab at it with the help of some pretty sophisticated textual analysis methods (I think the Jesus Seminar did a pretty good, though not unimpeachable, job of this), but ultimately an analysis always depends as much on readers’ preconceptions as it does on the actual text. Kind of like trying to get an handle on Socrates’ ideas when all we’ve got to base them on is Plato and a handful of contemporary commentaries—except worse, since analogous commentaries don’t exist in this case.
I’d lean toward “dissident rabbi” based on the charitable version of my reading of the New Testament, but readings of the New Testament are notoriously idiosyncratic for the same reasons.
You can see my edit for further justification. Paul took up the mantle of leadership and effectively made the religion, but that doesn’t mean that Jesus wasn’t a cult leader.
Hindsight. How do you know he wasn’t? No matter what label you choose to give (H)im, that isn’t the point though, if you ask me.
By discussing this, we’re only giving in to this;
| Oh but dang if there aren’t like over a thousand comments here, jeez i don’t want to sound like i’m crying for attention but i’m TOTALLY CRYING FOR ATTENTION, srsly i need help you dudes
What do you mean “only”? In the context of a thorough introduction, and a relevant request for advice lampshading his degree of desire for an answer like this is certainly excusable.
It’s not “giving in” when you choose to do something you reflectively endorse doing without being subject to any more manipulation than a forthright request.
I do not presume to know. I am a novel LWian.
Indeed, I hoped to not give in to Benedict’s “totally crying for attention”. Yet, here we are discussing it even further. I am new to the site, and assumed it was not the place for paternal issues or internal conflicts with your God/deity of choice.