We live in a time that challenges our deepest being.
And whether we are tending to religious in the traditional sense, non-denominational or even atheistic, there is a question of being that applies to all of us. Can we, within the respective paths we are walking find commonalities, despite our differences?
This is not a post of what is better, or what is wrong with people, but rather what is helpful to meet the challenges of today, to meet happiness and fulfillment and the commonalities between them.
As a guide I would share this video by Rupert Sheldrake, a scientist from Brittain with rather peculiar views, that frankly blows the mind and allows you to look at things from a wider perspective.
He discusses: spiritual practices, prayer, meditation, even pilgrimage, the commonalities between them in several religious and spiritual traditions and bridges the apparent gap between science and spirituality.
https://yewtu.be/watch?v=fiUE9jCTnOQ
I do hope you will enjoy this even more as much as I have.
On a different but connected field of inquiry, I came across this channel made by prof. Wilfred Bastiani. Brace yourself. He is quite compact and speedy, so, despite the uplifting classical music, you might want to pause here and there.
In this particular instance, this is about freedom, which brings choice. How do we really make choices? A mirror to look into.
https://ytprivate.com/watch?v=jUJMTeDX-xM&list=PLSpNjGeUKaXiRj20qQxx9UXFqyeFmUSsg
Peruse his channel for more food for thought.
Enjoy!
He is a psychologist and nothing at all to do with religion at all. All psychology wants to do is displace God and promote psychology as the new secular priestly caste, they have been in a turf war with other social scientists for decades and have more or less won this war. They have won it as they control the way we think about ourselves.
Beware of false prophets, they are demons in sheeps clothing.
Thank you for your closing up discussion comment. None is so closed minded as those who think they have the ultimate truth.
So, let me give you an olive branch and riddle me this:
When Paul writes about the source of division, what exactly does he points to as the source? I am sure you can find the answer to that question in 10 seconds. don 't you dare disappoint me now.
For the curious mind, what exactly is the ego? How was that looked at back then and what is the source of those views? Has Paul become a false prophet?
A 1000 years ago, a researcher in Baghdad catalogued all the plant species he could lay his hand on. Meticulously, he considered the environment and the millieu it grew in. He even made a taxonomy. When you read his book, there is a clear conclusion he had to draw. However, in the area he lived in, the grandson of Mohammad had just been brutally chopped into pieces and his wives were run barefooted through the desert. Why? You have to understand the influence Persians had on uneducated barbarians from the Arabian Peninsula. Because this grandson wanted to reform Islam for the stupidity by closed mindedness that was creeping in.
Had this scientist not ran tail and give in to his fear, he would have written about natural selection a 1000 years before Darwin. This concept of natural selection is as logical as the selection we perform when we breed new dogs, horses, chickens, etc.
Does this means that these thoughts are meant to replace God? What do you know of what God is? Is your view of God not rather anthropormorphized while the Psalmist says: what you know is only the whisper of the seams of his mantle?
How is this different from the radical materialism that Richard Dawkins espouses? How is it different from the level of suppression we are facing when we post on social media regardless what the subject is?
Red Toe? Red Shoes?
Ah ... ad hominem. How unimpressive.