If you could invent a religion what would it look like?

[mfbukowski]

On 4/3/2017 at 3:18 PM, phaedrus ut said:

In February of 2016, an organization known as 92Y, led by Jewish principles, held a series of challenges as part of its 7 Days of Genius campaign. Among them was a challenge to create a new religion.

If you could invent a new religion what would it look like? 

 

Phaedrus 

Pretty much Mormonism as founded filtering out the Cartesian Neoplatonic rhetoric, more justification of theories of truth which can accommodate a more mystical perspective.

Leave in the pioneers, get rid of their cultural theosis.

More emphasis as Man creating his own reality- social constructivism.  As in the Man of Holiness and his mini-godlings creating reality as humans know it from matter unorganized.  You gotta leave the mythic mysticism in it- that is what religion is for. You could make the "spirit" the human unconscious for a nice modern but distinctly Freudian twist.  Nah, leave that part out.  Freud doesn't work.  Make the spirit consulting the "Ideal Person" within each of us kind of like meditation.  Make the quest for Zion more blatantly Utopian.

But we are getting there anyway.

Give us 50-100 years and we will be there anyway.

I'll  just wait.   It's pretty perfect as it is.

Edited April 7, 2017 by mfbukowski

[pogi]

33 minutes ago, Maidservant said:

I would dissolve every church and religion (and government and . . .).  I would nourish communities.

That will go over well  

You will nourish communities through what vehicle...post-it-notes?  You have dissolved the two most effective vehicles for supporting, sustaining, and nourishing communities - religion and government, so now what?  Anarchy with friendly post-it-note reminders to be kind?

Edited April 7, 2017 by pogi

[Calm]

Harmlessness is not kindness.

[MiserereNobis]

4 hours ago, pogi said:

 

I grew up more in the Phish generation and never was able to make it to a dead show   The closest thing I have experienced to a Dead show is smelling all of you Deadheads turned Phisheads at every Phish concert I went to 

Ha! Well we had no where else to turn at that time except to hang out with you custy's  But Phish certainly has their moments. I last saw Phish (in person, not counting streamed couch tour shows since then) at ****'s in Commerce City Colorado in 2015 when the songs of the encore spelled out 'thank you'.  Classic Phish phun!

Quote

I actually just watched it again a few months ago, right before watching the Bob Weir documentary on Netflix. 

 There is a multi-episode Martin Scorsese produced documentary on the Dead called "Long Strange Trip" coming out on Amazon at the end of May.  Here's the Rolling Stone review.

Quote

Excellent choice!  My kid is not old enough to enjoy it yet, but my wife can attest that I have been known to sing out loud in the shower... "there ain't no bugs on me. There ain't no bugs on me.  There may be bugs on the rest of you mugs, but there ain't no bugs on me."  

Well little bugs have littler bugs
Up on their backs to bite 'em
And the littler bugs have still littler bugs
And so ad infinitum!

[Maidservant]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

That will go over well  

You will nourish communities through what vehicle...post-it-notes?  You have dissolved the two most effective vehicles for supporting, sustaining, and nourishing communities - religion and government, so now what?  Anarchy with friendly post-it-note reminders to be kind?

The kind of communities I envision can only be created when the law is in the fleshy tables of the heart; which can only be come to by persuasion, never imposed from the outside.  So it's a very long journey until everyone wants that and is capable of it.  Me saying I would dissolve it, was just a thought experiment for my ideal, for the question.  Again, I could never impose such a thing on another without their full consent.

I disagree that religion and government are the 'most effective'.  They may have done well enough in the past (--really?), but I'd hate to think it's the best we can come up with both from imagination and behavior, as human beings on this planet.

And by the way, we have families as a vehicle for society.  The fact that we have other vehicles is based on the idea that there are some that are strangers and enemies to us, which is something I can't support (in the ideal).

And yes, we have on this planet huge scriptures (which I love) from several faith traditions, and we still can't manage to live them; and I think anything that can be said, can be better said much more briefly (i.e. post it notes, to be cute).

[Maidservant]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Harmlessness is not kindness.

Not sure what you are trying to say here?   Would you like to add?

I haven't thought of it before now, but if anything, harmlessness ends up (in my mind) being a fusion of kindness, integrity, freedom, and redemption.  In any case, I want to be harmless to anyone in my presence--that they would be able to trust and not fear--they would know that I would never hurt them (=safety).  As well, I would cultivate the power to limit anyone's harm toward me (and others needing defense).

But maybe you are trying to say that kindness is an active blessing of others?  Anyway, I'll let you tell me what you meant.

[probablyHagoth7]

5 hours ago, Maidservant said:

The kind of communities I envision can only be created when the law is in the fleshy tables of the heart; which can only be come to by persuasion, never imposed from the outside.  So it's a very long journey until everyone wants that and is capable of it.  Me saying I would dissolve it, was just a thought experiment for my ideal, for the question.  Again, I could never impose such a thing on another without their full consent.

I disagree that religion and government are the 'most effective'.  They may have done well enough in the past (--really?), but I'd hate to think it's the best we can come up with...

Your comments remind me of 3 related statements:

1. “I would rather have a free press and no government, than a government and no free press.” Thomas Jefferson
2.  ...the word had a greater tendency to lead the people to do that which was just; yea, it had more powerful effect upon the minds of the people than the sword... Alma 31:5
3. “I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves.” Joseph Smith

Edited April 8, 2017 by probablyHagoth7

[Calm]

For me, harmlessness might occur due to apathy as much as interest.

[thesometimesaint]

If all men were angles no government would be necessary, and if all men were devils no government would be possible.

[The Nehor]

On 4/7/2017 at 6:40 PM, Maidservant said:

The kind of communities I envision can only be created when the law is in the fleshy tables of the heart; which can only be come to by persuasion, never imposed from the outside.  So it's a very long journey until everyone wants that and is capable of it.  Me saying I would dissolve it, was just a thought experiment for my ideal, for the question.  Again, I could never impose such a thing on another without their full consent.

I disagree that religion and government are the 'most effective'.  They may have done well enough in the past (--really?), but I'd hate to think it's the best we can come up with both from imagination and behavior, as human beings on this planet.

And by the way, we have families as a vehicle for society.  The fact that we have other vehicles is based on the idea that there are some that are strangers and enemies to us, which is something I can't support (in the ideal).

And yes, we have on this planet huge scriptures (which I love) from several faith traditions, and we still can't manage to live them; and I think anything that can be said, can be better said much more briefly (i.e. post it notes, to be cute).

While trying to improve the structures in our society has merit the LDS faith frankly admits that no system or philosophy will institute perfection. It will always come down to individual choice. As one Mission President taught me: (paraphrased) "God the Father lost a third of the hosts of heaven. The idea that you are going to come up with some approach that will lead to the universal redemption of all mankind is arrogance."

Jesus could not get the religion he taught to endure more then a few generations. We can but it is not because we are better then the Savior.

I also disagree with the idea that teachings can be kept short and retain their full import. Wanting things to be simple is admirable when teaching children or those who are beginning to advance. Continuing to do so as you mature in the faith is often a symptom of laziness.

[Rajah Manchou]

On 4/8/2017 at 4:27 AM, mfbukowski said:

Pretty much Mormonism as founded filtering out the Cartesian Neoplatonic rhetoric, more justification of theories of truth which can accommodate a more mystical perspective.

Leave in the pioneers, get rid of their cultural theosis.

More emphasis as Man creating his own reality- social constructivism.  As in the Man of Holiness and his mini-godlings creating reality as humans know it from matter unorganized.  You gotta leave the mythic mysticism in it- that is what religion is for. You could make the "spirit" the human unconscious for a nice modern but distinctly Freudian twist.  Nah, leave that part out.  Freud doesn't work.  Make the spirit consulting the "Ideal Person" within each of us kind of like meditation.  Make the quest for Zion more blatantly Utopian.

But we are getting there anyway.

Give us 50-100 years and we will be there anyway.

I'll  just wait.   It's pretty perfect as it is.

This is good.

Also, increased emphasis on the Gentiles carrying the scattered from the isles of the sea, and the four parts of the earth, to the lands of their inheritances. An American Church can only grow so far.

[Maidservant]

On 4/7/2017 at 6:51 PM, probablyHagoth7 said:

Your comments remind me of 3 related statements:

1. “I would rather have a free press and no government, than a government and no free press.” Thomas Jefferson
2.  ...the word had a greater tendency to lead the people to do that which was just; yea, it had more powerful effect upon the minds of the people than the sword... Alma 31:5
3. “I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves.” Joseph Smith

Cool.  Bingo on the Joseph Smith quote.  I forgot about the Alma verse, nice.

A quote I also love goes thus: “When men are pure, laws are useless. When men are corrupt, laws are broken.” Benjamin Disraeli

[Maidservant]

On 4/7/2017 at 8:25 PM, Calm said:

For me, harmlessness might occur due to apathy as much as interest.

Okay.  I guess we are just looking at it a different way, ha ha.  For example, apathy is or can be . . . quite harmful.

In any case, the journey I imagine for myself is something quite active and would take a lifetime and require massive amounts of day in and day out examination of myself and repentance until I would never be found harming another being.

[Maidservant]

On 4/8/2017 at 8:31 AM, thesometimesaint said:

If all men were angles no government would be necessary, and if all men were devils no government would be possible.

Bingo.

[The Nehor]

On 4/8/2017 at 10:31 AM, thesometimesaint said:

If all men were angles no government would be necessary, and if all men were devils no government would be possible.

Acute, obtuse, or right angles?

[Maidservant]

17 hours ago, The Nehor said:

While trying to improve the structures in our society has merit the LDS faith frankly admits that no system or philosophy will institute perfection. It will always come down to individual choice. As one Mission President taught me: (paraphrased) "God the Father lost a third of the hosts of heaven. The idea that you are going to come up with some approach that will lead to the universal redemption of all mankind is arrogance."

Jesus could not get the religion he taught to endure more then a few generations. We can but it is not because we are better then the Savior.

I also disagree with the idea that teachings can be kept short and retain their full import. Wanting things to be simple is admirable when teaching children or those who are beginning to advance. Continuing to do so as you mature in the faith is often a symptom of laziness.

Yes.  I do think it was the devil that invented religion, as such (per . . . . ).  Jesus said he had a Message.

I see where you are coming from with on your last statement; obviously my life has been enriched by study--opened my mind as to the purpose of life, etc.  However, what I love about "pure religion" is that you can be UncaBillyBob without any mental knowledge whatsoever and if you can manage to love your wife, kids, neighbors, and keep honest--you got it in one.  No amount of measuring the distance between here and Kolob could improve on that.  The older I get, I get weighted down by all the the things I "know"--and they really haven't gotten me that much farther than who I ever was, for better and worse.  The things I really know from life are from passing through hell in this lifetime and clawing my way out.

[Calm]

28 minutes ago, Maidservant said:

Okay.  I guess we are just looking at it a different way, ha ha.  For example, apathy is or can be . . . quite harmful.

In any case, the journey I imagine for myself is something quite active and would take a lifetime and require massive amounts of day in and day out examination of myself and repentance until I would never be found harming another being.

Kindness can be harmful.  Seen it a lot.

"Harmlessness" seems too much a result of chance to be a quality sought after, imo.  Think of lifesaving medication, how wonderful it is that the doctor knows that such can help a person and prevent blood clots from damaging crucial muscles...until it turns out the patient is allergic to it and goes into anaphylactic shock.  Parents stand up for and protect their child from any and all harm, this kid grows up feeling loved and appreciated...and can't manage to function in his chosen field because of politics that leave him shocked and depressed.  A forest fire approaches and friends join in helping save the homes by building trenches and soaking everything down so no harm is done...which is great until it is found there is not enough water left to fight the fire at a crucial point because a water delivery copter is busted and so it spreads and wipes out massive amounts.  A driver gives a ride to someone walking home from the bus on a cold night to save them from freezing and then hits a patch of ice and ends up killing their passenger.

Edited April 10, 2017 by Calm

[Calm]

6 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Acute, obtuse, or right angles?

Right angles, of course.

[Jeanne]

Maidservant...you have a beautiful way with words..do you write books or anything..just had to point that out..

[Jeanne]

35 minutes ago, Calm said:

Kindness can be harmful.  Seen it a lot.

"Harmlessness" seems too much a result of chance to be a quality sought after, imo.  Think of lifesaving medication, how wonderful it is that the doctor knows that such can help a person and prevent blood clots from damaging crucial muscles...until it turns out the patient is allergic to it and goes into anaphylactic shock.  Parents stand up for and protect their child from any and all harm, this kid grows up feeling loved and appreciated...and can't manage to function in his chosen field because of politics that leave him shocked and depressed.  A forest fire approaches and friends join in helping save the homes by building trenches and soaking everything down so no harm is done...which is great until it is found there is not enough water left to fight the fire at a crucial point because a water delivery copter is busted and so it spreads and wipes out massive amounts.  A driver gives a ride to someone walking home from the bus on a cold night to save them from freezing and then hits a patch of ice and ends up killing their passenger.

When reading this post..and a very good one, a question came to mind and forgive me if it has no bearing on the OP.  But I wonder..and have had to wonder during my lifetime if by loving someone too much...we hurt them.  This is not tough love nor deliberate...it is a nature of loving.  So..my religion would have to have boundaries that would allow people to grow...no matter how painful that may be. is it even possible to love someone too much?

Edited April 10, 2017 by Jeanne

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, Maidservant said:

Yes.  I do think it was the devil that invented religion, as such (per . . . . ).  Jesus said he had a Message.

Yes, and that message was a distinctly religious one. Get right with God now!!! He backed it up with amazing promises to those who followed through and terrifying promises to those who would not.

Pretty sure that is religion.

[Maidservant]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

Kindness can be harmful.  Seen it a lot.

"Harmlessness" seems too much a result of chance to be a quality sought after, imo.  Think of lifesaving medication, how wonderful it is that the doctor knows that such can help a person and prevent blood clots from damaging crucial muscles...until it turns out the patient is allergic to it and goes into anaphylactic shock.  Parents stand up for and protect their child from any and all harm, this kid grows up feeling loved and appreciated...and can't manage to function in his chosen field because of politics that leave him shocked and depressed.  A forest fire approaches and friends join in helping save the homes by building trenches and soaking everything down so no harm is done...which is great until it is found there is not enough water left to fight the fire at a crucial point because a water delivery copter is busted and so it spreads and wipes out massive amounts.  A driver gives a ride to someone walking home from the bus on a cold night to save them from freezing and then hits a patch of ice and ends up killing their passenger.

I see what you mean.  But, this might be where we diverge, since none of these items fall into my definition of 'harm' (which I guess I didn't really make clear either).  Getting hurt is not harm (to me). Pain is not harm.  Harm is oppression and violation.  So harmlessness doesn't mean to me that we never get hurt.  We can all be a part of accidents and things we didn't mean to do. There is always some struggle in relationships and in being human. That's not harm (to me).  And we obviously hurt (and harm) people, due to our ignorance.  Hence the lifetime journey to gain the wisdom needed and to live by it.  Harm requires responsibility, which none of those examples show.  Anyway, I appreciate what you are saying, but just trying to be more clear in where I am coming from also.

Edited April 10, 2017 by Maidservant

[Maidservant]

1 hour ago, Jeanne said:

Maidservant...you have a beautiful way with words..do you write books or anything..just had to point that out..

That's very kind, Jeanne :).

Well . . . I write and I breathe . . . and sometimes I forget to breathe.

[Maidservant]

28 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Yes, and that message was a distinctly religious one. Get right with God now!!! He backed it up with amazing promises to those who followed through and terrifying promises to those who would not.

Pretty sure that is religion.

Yea, I guess we'd have to get into micro-defining the term/concept of religion (which I already found myself doing with the term 'harm', sigh, me!), and . . . not this thread, lol.

[mfbukowski]

4 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Acute, obtuse, or right angles?

Clearly obtuse.