NaturaNaturans

Back to the basics of basics (for european and western culture). I think I need a refresh in order to contribute to the discussions here. This one needs no introduction: but to he honest i probally wont read it. And then we have this one: Translates to something like «the ancients on the train,» basically a quick overview of greek philosophy for people with amnesia. On the list: some esoteric book that i dear not mention and tao te ching, mainly for personal interrest but also for respect for this primarily eastern forum. leggo

I started with basic mat, based on my first name. Then i read something about Spinoza that resonated; natura naturans - nature natures. Cant argue with that. For some reason I highly resonated strongly with sol invictus, fire symbolism and Isha upanishad: 16. O Sun, sole traveller of the Heavens, controller of all, Surya, son of Prajapatiremove thy rays and gather up thy burning light. I behold thy glorious form; 1 am he, the Purusha within thee. So thats where the username and profile pic comes from, and my background pic is the iconic painting «the creation of Adam.» I think the «so close, but allways slightly Out of reach» is so true and beautifull. For my signature I went to the king of the Aesir, the all-father, and what he reported after having been iniated (not saying i am that):

Allow me to share some «scripture» (or old wisdom, i think that is more fitting). 23. Havamal (sayings of the high one (Odin)) It is fascinating to me how words written down 1200 years ago, and shared orally long before that, is just as true today. The most powerfull words i have read, are also the oldest: 16. Isha Upanishad (around 1000bc I belive) Funny thing is that i belive Isha Upanishad translates to approxamatley the same as Havamal: the highest teachings, something akin to that. Excerpt of another fav of mine, Hymn to Zeus (300bc) (which, just like the other ones, is about thw teaching of the highest god):

Love that term. Will look into some of the others as well, with time. Regarding «the unforgivable sin,» there is some twisted beauty in that as well. Not as in atheists are damned in this life and the following, but rather that listening and connecting to the divine inside, outside and around you is the way to «redemption». To me, redemption gives off a little original sin vibes, which im not a fan off, but I use that term in lack of a better one.

Can we please discuss Harry Potter instead? It at least contains wisdom, is loved by countless millions, is not taken literally and doesnt feel the need to specify that you shouldnt sacrifice your children in fire so the demiurge so a tribal god can inhale the smoke. OP asked about Jesus and Mohammed. Yahwe and Jesus is not the same, and it does not depend on who you ask.

Okay then, @Daniel, lets try. And ill try systemetically, and hope you will as well. 1. Unitarian Christianity is not a thing. The trinity has been at the very core of the faith at the very begininng. One off-shoot of christianity, so to speak, did just that: viewed christ as a prophet but not divine. Today we know them as muslims. Christ is mentioned more times then Muhammed in the quran. (And please dont bring up scientology or jehovas whitnesses or something, thats just dishonest). 2. As usual, you completley ignored the main argument: Yahwe is a tribal god and NT God is not. (OT even has a name, just like me and you, and a chosen tribe of israelittes. And cananites, who also worshipped him. Many would say that the israelites and cananites where practically the same people, snd a Google search will confirm that). Even with a basic and superficial understanding of the bible, you notice a massive disconnect in the nature of God and values. This is not some fringe belief, it is mainstream and has allways been so. 3. Yes, I am 100% certain that Marceon is among the earliest church fathers, credited with first canoniziation of NT. A simple look at his wiki page would confirm that. I am sure you looked it up aswell, but decided to ignore it since it doesnt fit your fanatical view on religion. 4. Yes, i have not read the evil creator. I have listened to the author however. Anyways, it is not relevant. Again: you do not need that particular book to understand that Yahwe is complete evil from a Christian perspective, and these ideas has been around for as long as Christianity has. 5. This leads to another interresting point: focusing on the soul and not the letter of the text, another schism between christianity and judaism. 6. No point in commenting on the version you googled Your way til in order to protect Your faith. The old covenant refers to jews, and nobody else. There is absolutley no other way to read that. 7. of course there is no such thing as jews and gentiles, unless you are a jew. Jews arent special in any way what so ever for the 8 billion people who are not jews. Most of the find the idea of the chosen people rather disturbing. Yet more evidence that OT god is a tribal god. 8. Why do you qoute me isiah, jeremiah and other prophets of judaism? It is, again, irrelevant to everyone not jewish. 9. No, I am very aware that Jesus despised the jewish priestly class and the temple/synagoge, and you know what, in the bigger picture, his «prophecy» was correct. 10. «Pagans struggle with this idea then and now. That too is part of the plan.» Most people consider statement like these as extremist, fundementaltist and insane, but it is okay. Take care.

Okay my Friend, to be honest i barley scim trough at this point. There is no point in arguing with one who whole hearthely belives that every word written on sheep skin in the Judean wasteland is literal truth, and resorts to qouting more sheep skin litterature when questioned. But sometimes it gets so ridicioulus that i feel the need to comment. Not for your sake, but for my own and the fact that this is an open forum. Rude, I know, but… without honesty we will never get anywhere. I thank God he didnt make me one of his chosen people.

Regarding this, i am ambilivent. I am of course not disagreing with you, because who am i. But from my perspective, I think it is important to live/practise/work as and towards something that is authentic. Authenticity being the key word here. forgive me for reposting this corny AI qoute, but its gold:

Sounds great to me

Thank you for sharing

Today I will start journaling. I have the following rules: - Do not compare yourself to anybody but yesterdays you. - Your body is a temple, treat it as it - value yourself because you are loved - Strive for authenticity - cost-benefit: you are constantly making choices, all the time, and for everything you choose you loose out on something else. Choose wisely - listen more

Just popped back in because 1) i loved it, 2) it got me thinking that rather than to learn, we should maybe want to «forget» (the programming). I know that was basically what the thread is about, but it struck me a little different now. All the insecurities of trying to fit in, endless hours of reading stuff i dont give a f about, trying to improve and forgetting to live. As children we are allways told, «be yourself, everyone else is taken.» BS, young me thought. But the people i like, are the one who truly are who they are, with all their flaws. Thank you

The reason I was hesitant to answer you on the name of God @Chang dao ling, is because throughout history and til today, the idea that the old testament god and NT God is not the same god. Marcion was one of the earliest church fathers, and he rejected he viewed OT got as tribal god/demiurge and NT God as God with a capital G. A self proclaimed angry, jealous and antropromorfic god who demands tribute and flattens cities to the ground is not consistent with the platonic/NT God, who is the "highest good" in lack of better term. In Cor it is written: The book "the evil creator," goes in great depth on this. Unfortunatley it costs about 60 euros (wonder why).

Also known as muslims. Edit: qouted the wrong sentence of Daniels post, so had to correct it.

Mhm, interresting to read your perspective. Christianity is the faith thats closest to my heart, and that i understand intuitivley (as a result of growing up where i did). I have, however, barley opened "the holy book," and I am only at church for baptisim, funerals, marriage etc. One thing I am gratefull for, is growing up in a lutheran and secular country, where there are no "high priests" and little to no dogma. How the church or member x at daobums demands that scripture should be interpeted, concerncs me somewhere between very little and nothing at all. I think it is a lot of beauty and power in it, and I wouldve loved to see how things turned out if it was not for power play, dogma and such. Influences on christianity (platonism, solar worship, mithra, mystery traditions etc.) is something Id like to look deeper into. Again, I am not a well read, but how many possible ways is it to interpet something like this: Time to brush the dust of my grandfathers mothers bible, and have a look. John maybe? One thing that I find very interresting, is that the only unforgiveable sin, is sin against the holy spirit. Any thoughts on that?

well worth a Watch in my opinion

Good evening godt folk, So, i have recently finished my economics degree. It could lead to decently well paid jobs, but, the problem is: i am not sure if its right for me. I love the theoretical stuff, but when it is all + and - and accounting i desbise it deeply. My options now are: finding a job, taking a few other courses in humaniora and use that to find another or related line of work. But this is not just about me. Id like to hear your experience, advice, what cources you have felt particularly rewarding (be it money/life view/spiritual... you get my point ; )

So, the bible consits of OT (jewish torah), NT about Jesus (gospels, letters and more). Giving the impression that the torah is sacred to christians as well, as i dont think many christians belive. Garden of Eden and the old laws might be neccesary for context, but… other then that, is the OT really important for Christians? Ive never met one who started qouted some Isiah passage in order to make a argument on christianity… My very uneducated opinion is that our beloved palestinian fellow for whom we feast every solstice, had huge problems with judaism and the synagoge. Further more, his teachings contradicts judaism enterily. A Christian is defined as «follower of christ,» and thats it. So, as i see it, If you recognize Christ as peak human/divinity, the holy trinity and try to live more like him, you are (imo) a Christian ✝️ A jew is… i am not really sure, but primarily an etnic group, who belived they were chosen by the tribal God Yahwe to conquer the holy land all the while talking about the horrible infidels (witch is 8 billion - 20mill ≈ 8 billion). It is also extremly «law-based» and.. yeah. So, why is the torah/OT in the bible?

I think it is more that nature is everything, the enviorment and ourselves. There is no good or evel, but potential. The potential of an oak is to grow tall. We dont judge Lions for eating an antilope. If the current goes north, dont try to said south. For Aristotele, humans had the following inclinstions: Eudaimonia is often translated to human flowering. The opposite, and least desierble condition was akrasia (non-manegment, lack of self controll.

So, I am now in the procces of reading this book. I do not read cover to cover, as it was written not in an attempt to win a pulitzer, but to reflect. This is reflected in the Norwegian tittle of the work: «to my self.» A little note before i continue: Aurelius wrote in greek, I am reading a Norwegian translation and translating it to english, so it will naturally be flawed. In the forward (by Viggo Johansen,) he raises the following question: how can a book written by the most powerfull person on the plannet, 1800 years ago, be relavent for us today? He writers: (…) every evening he (Aurelius) sits down to write, in order to remember who he is - a human. Not an emperor, but a human. For this reason, stoicism can appeal to the emperor himself, the slave Epiktet, and us. Our shell and roles are vastly different, but we are united in being human, and feel the same love, anger, desire to live authenticly, attempt to live morally and mortality. Since the will is free, we are free as well. We can be forced to act a certain way, but no one but our self controls our will, reactions and thoughts. What does it mean to be human? Science can not help us here. Science assumed that man and nature is purley material, but Viggo points out that this is just an assumption, and nothing more. A plausible assumption, but and assumption none the less. Wise men and traditions have, however, allways talked about spirit and soul. Aurelius writers: «Things can never touch the soul, but stand inert outside it, so that disquiet can arise only from fancies within.» Allthough we are more advanced technologicaly advanced today, are we any wiser? Do we understand what it is to be human? I would say no. I would even say we are less developted in this aspect. And i think this «book» shows that. It has been read and admired for almost 2000 years, by slaves, commoners and nobility as well - it touches on what it means to be human. Here are a few qoutes: I will also include Hymn to Zeus, witch was included in the Norwegian edition of meditations. It might be my favorite «poem.» Cleanthes, 331-232bc, Translated by Stephen Hanselman Any thoughts? ————————————————————- I made two very similar threads, so ill delete one of them and add them to this: First of all, the definistion: I hear it used quite a lot, but is it really a fallacy? To me, it seems to be the only form of ethics that is not arbitrary. Natural law, virtue ethics, appeal to nature, stoicism and its logos/universal order all seen pretty related to me (an amateur). Where do you stand on this? Is it a fallacy? Is there an eastern equilient? Daoism?

Id like to add one more statement: i belive that the abrahamic traditions that focuses on free will (in other words, reject fate) and a very black and white view on morals are more harmfull and less logical.

The very fact that there is nothing outside of nature, or you may call it cosmos, is why it appeals to me. It is about oneness, it seems. We are connected. Seperating mankind from nature is harmfull in my eyes. Alan Watts said something along the lines of: just as an apple tree apples, the earth peoples. And lastly, it would be stange to put a moral label on a lion killing an antilope. I to belive in faith. As did the pagan europeans. The tree norns, the moirar and the parcae, from norse, greek and roman tradition respictivley, snd deciding the fate of men. The Norns Urd, Verdandi, and Skuld under the World-tree Yggdrasil” by Ludwig Burger (1882) https://norse-mythology.org/gods-and-creatures/others/the-norns/ If you accept cause and effect, then there is no free will and everything is predetermined, or you might say destined. I lack the knowledge to respons to this, but if you have something to add, im listening. Does any beliefs of a culture with less focus work and radically different attitydes to these concepts, come to mind?

Thank you, beautifull Words

I do not like these terms, as i asscociate it with «alpha bros» preying on insecure teen boys trough YouTube, or fake gurus. However, i have been digging my self into a little bit of hole recently, and there are areas that need some… fixing. Do you have any rouitine, methods, practice, authors etc. that you follow and reccomend, and how do you approach these things yourself?