Unpopular Opinions

[Apech]

1 hour ago, old3bob said:

 

(maybe some did but some have the skeletons of 100 million people in their closets...)

who, why, what?

[Cobie]

.

Edited August 6, 2023 by Cobie

[Apech]

5 minutes ago, Cobie said:

@Apech thanks for the  ‘smiley’.  It did make me laugh. 

(re https://www.thedaobums.com/topic/54959-unpopular-opinions/?do=findComment&comment=1010619 )

Will there be a special award for the post you found most unpopular?

 

 

Yes of course it will be an amulet 🪬 which makes everyone instantly revolted by anything you say.  The runner up will get two amulets.

[Cobie]

.
 

 

Edited August 6, 2023 by Cobie

[doc benway]

19 minutes ago, Apech said:

Yes of course it will be an amulet 🪬 which makes everyone instantly revolted by anything you say.  

 

I don’t need an amulet for that!

[Apech]

15 minutes ago, Cobie said:

I think I already have this effect in sufficient measure. Could I swap the amulet for cash instead? 
 

 

The amulet will be legal tender in both Antarctica and North Korea.

[Cobie]

.

Edited August 6, 2023 by Cobie

[liminal_luke]

For the longest time I couldn't find my amulet but it's recently turned up.  

Edited August 6, 2023 by liminal_luke

[Apech]

7 minutes ago, Cobie said:

Oh dear, that’s no use to me. Basically whoever wins it, is the one that needs it least. 

We need a little market on the forum, so I could try find someone who would want to buy it of me.

Hmm, but why would anyone want such an amulet? @Apech I demand a better award. 

There is a special category event which you can enter.  It is called most annoyingly  insistent on getting an award person.

 

It is a tough competition but you may wish to enter.

[Cobie]

.

Edited August 6, 2023 by Cobie

[Apech]

2 hours ago, Cobie said:

.

Oh!

 

[old3bob]

11 hours ago, Apech said:

who, why, what?

 

I don't know the accurate numbers  but there has been a couple of thousand years of various degrees of genocide against various native people, along with however many non-native peoples caught the wrath of inquisitions  and such...

Edited August 7, 2023 by old3bob

[old3bob]

Eureka...here is the most powerful of amulets, just beware of the smiling face which may not be what it appears...

[Daniel]

On 8/5/2023 at 12:41 PM, liminal_luke said:

 

It's been a long time since I participated in anything distinctly Jewish, but back in the day keeping shabat, davening, celebrating the various holidays -- it all felt "spiritual" to me.  I probably have a more expansive definition of spiritual than you're using and it's true that I wasn't studying Kabbalah.  Still, it seems to me that the Orthodox would view all Torah study and halakic observance as spiritual, no?

 

Yes, in that the divine presence rests or dwells among those who are learning and participating.  But there is a hard break between that presence and God.  The idea that is generally brought by modern Judaism and othodox ( not ultra-orthodox ) is similar to the neti-neti concept of the ineffable brahman.  The word "dwelling" or "resting' cannot be applied to absolute trascendence because those concepts are comprehensible by the human mind.  As soon as it is imagined, it is "false" by default because the absolutely transcendent cannot be conceived by a human mind.  Conceived, literally.  If God is imagined as "dwelling" or "resting" that individual has given "birth", "concieved" a "god" of their own imagination.

 

Quote

Ah, I just read your definition of "spiritual" above.  So maybe we are using the word differently? 

 

I'm describing a theological concept, I was asked for my take on the "differences in the way God is described by the big-three".  "Spiritual" as a theology, as a god-concept, would be describing a theos ( Θεὸς ) in terms of spirits and souls.  Part of this idea includes an inherent spirit-to-spirit or soul-to-soul connection.  And it is not limited to human souls/spirit.  Speaking only for myself, when I have a "spiritual" feeling when doing something "Jewish", it's feeling that spirit-to-spirit connection.  But that connection could be to the "spirit" of the words I'm speaking, to the "spirit" of the ritual I'm engaged in, the "spirit" of the other people who are particiapting with me, the "spirit" of the other people who are particiapting globally and historically, the "spirit" or inner meaning and significance of the practice, etc.  It keeps going, on and on and on. Ultimately for me, the divine presence is being revealed, and I have an opportuity to connect with it, but, in a very limited way.  If I'm fortunate, in a profound and awe inspiring way.

 

But I don't think it's limited to that, for example, the same connection and revelation happens for me when someone wishes me a good morning, if it's spoken sincerely.  Or even if they share a recipe.  But none of that is a theology.  This phenomena is included in the theology of "spirit", it is predicted by it, explained by it, and accurately modeled by it, but, the theology isn't required.  The theology is just a construct for something immaterial, vital, essentially unique, and inherently inter-connected.

 

This same theology can be applied much much further though.  And that's where Christianity picks up.  But, it is somewhat precarious. 

 

Quote

Still, I think once you've said that God is one you're automatically in the area of spirit and God's immanence. 

 

Immanence, for me, would be God investing itself, immersing itself.  The proclaimation "God is one" I think is more about absolute authority, Adon Olam ( Eternal-Hidden Master ).  The 5th line describes it well I think. 

 

Quote

To me, oneness implies non-dualism.

 

There's different types of oneness.  חד, יחד, אחד.  The proclaimation is echad with an aleph and a segol.  Both are significant.   Technically the aleph implies an inherent never ending duality, seperation, reflection, and connection.  It's constructed with two yuds reflected and inverted on opposite sides of the vav, which is surprisingly "yin-yangy" for lack of a better word.  So, the oneness brought by that proclamation is a unification, not a nullification.  Generally, non-duality, would be bitul.  Still a really cool concept, super useful, as long as it isn't plucked from its context and applied as a moral construct.

 

Quote

So even if regular folk aren't studying the spiritual aspects of Torah in an explicit way it's there and bubbles up experientially.  Leaders can forbid the study of Kabbalah but they can't take the spirituality out of Judaism.  (That's my "unpopular" opinion.)

 

Here we certainly agree.  Although, I would use different examples.  My favorite is "Mazel-tov!"  Technically that's praising an angel.

 

Edited August 7, 2023 by Daniel

[old3bob]

On 8/5/2023 at 8:39 PM, old3bob said:

I sure don't agree with a "God" that would use Job as cannon fodder for an x amount of time...even with any hidden or greater meanings in doing so.

 

...and does anyone know how "God" could break the law of karma with Job since Job had done nothing to get the incredible tormenting that came his way,  and which he did not volunteer for or knowingly make a deal about for what took place?   So if "God" could break universal karmic law as described in the Book of Job then everything falls apart in the universe does it not?   Breaking karmic law  is not possible as it is known, which is different than satisfying karma in a lawful way that supersedes  it with higher law such as with miraculous healing which would otherwise remain under basic karma so to speak. 

[Apech]

13 hours ago, old3bob said:

 

I don't know the accurate numbers  but there has been a couple of thousand years of various degrees of genocide against various native people, along with however many non-native peoples caught the wrath of inquisitions  and such...

 

Yes history sucks.  Everyone is violent.  Even the Buddhists.  In group preference is hard written into the human mind I think.  War is normal, empires are normal.  Sad but true.  The contest remains as to who has the best formula for belief and living.  As things are best assessed by results the winner is right.  In fact might is right.  But then maybe this is just how the Tao is destroyed in the human world.

 

 

[Daniel]

On 8/6/2023 at 4:43 AM, Apech said:

There was a time I agreed with this.  But then 'my god-concept' says it's ok to drive a truck into some innocent people or strap a bomb to me in a crowd.  Or my god concept says he gave us this land and we can steal it from those who live there - and shoot them if they object.  Or my god-concept says I can invade Middle east countries and kill their leaders so they can have our special values.

 

What's most important is whether or not you and I agree that these things, as written, are wrongful actions.  After that, what's important is whether or not the vast majority of Muslims, Christians, and Jews, world-wide, agree that these things, as written, are wrongful actions.

 

Beyond that, perhaps it's useful to explore what's going on with these things.  I consider them political not theological where religion is being used/abused to seize power and resources, and used/abused to influence and manipulate people.  It's not just "abrahamics" that do these things.  But, a "law-giving-executive" deity is fertile ground for this sort of manipulation and power-grab.

 

Quote

I was good friends with an Orthodox Jew some years ago and I have to admit while I kind of admire the Jews in a lot of ways, their obsession with laws and rigid interpretation of the rules for living made me wonder which part was 'spiritual' in any way.  For instance don't push a baby in a pram on the sabbath because the wheels might cause ruts in muddy ground like ploughing (which would be classed as work) - also even weirder don't use the toilets in MacDonalds (even if you don't eat anything) because someone might see you coming out and think you had gone non-kosher.

 

Yup.    Those are the rules.

 

Quote

 

Without offence (even though this is unpopular opinions) the outlook of most that I knew was very materialistic and weirdly obsessed by gambling.  In the end I couldn't make head or tail of what they thought they were getting out of it.

 

No offence?  None taken!  Sincerely.  If this is what your friend told you about their practice, then this is what your friend wants you to know about their practice.  I don't see much benefit from getting involved in that. 

 

Quote

Christianity is no better by the way - and certainly in the Anglican and other Protestant churches there is literally nothing spiritual that I can detect.  Although I have to say that over the last few days the Pope held a youth congress in Lisbon which was attended by 1.5 million young people which is quite impressive.  I don't know any other religious leader who could raise such a crowd.  So maybe the Catholics got it right after all.

 

Ah.  For a spiritual christian experience, I recommend an American vibrant black church and let the spirit move you. 

 

Also, I've met at least two christians who completely turned their lives around as a direct result of the indwelling of the holy spirit and donning Jesus as their armor.

 

Regarding Catholics, I think there's good and bad like everythng else.  It's a huge institution, which instituional problems.  And the child-sex-abuse scandal cannot and should not be ignored.  As far as the connection the Pope has with the adherent, again, could be good "spiritual", could be bad "spiritual".  It all depends on the spirits that are involved. 

Edited August 7, 2023 by Daniel

[Daniel]

On 8/5/2023 at 2:31 PM, Nungali said:

What ?   You said temple was destroyed due to major transgressions ;  " as a result of repeated major transgressions "  and 

" While in exile, the leadership codified the law, setup academies to teach the law and the mythology to the people in hopes of preventing future exile, perhaps to fulfill the prophecy of Deuteronomy 28.   " 

 

I am talking about the major tenets of Judaism ( ie their religion ) being a system of law . and you are saying 'but they are not natural laws .'   Errrr ...  wot ?   
 

 

Are you saying the temple was destroyed due to transgressions about  grafting trees   and mixing linen and wool ?

 

The Rabbis who codified the law believed that the transgressions might have been the cause, or they thought it was a prophecy that was playing out in Deut. 28.  There is an effect for these actions, but it's not a 1-to-1 cause and effect, like boiling water or making ice.

 

According to the story, the 1st temple was destroyed for 3 reasons.  Murder, Immoral sexual behavior, and idolatry.  It took around 600 years for the consequences of these actions to occur.  Transgression and consequence are complicated concepts.

 

On 8/5/2023 at 2:31 PM, Nungali said:

You keep referring to tenets of Judaism as law . Just as I said , even while trying to explain that it is not

 

OK... I can use other words.  Decree, ordinance, commandment.... it doesn't change that these are not considered to be laws like natural laws.  That sets up the human as a deity over the natural law.  That's not what the ancient hebrews did.

 

On 8/5/2023 at 2:31 PM, Nungali said:

I am not attacking it, or saying it is wrong nor that it doesnt have benefits , its just a fact and the way people thought in the past , before  the 'materialistic  age'   and its well accepted in the fields of anthropology and comparative religion .

 

I know you're not attacking it.  The point is, those ideas were rejected by the ancient hebrews.  I understand that academics and scholars say a lot of things about Judaism, but a lot of it is bunk.  All one needs to do to confirm it is research all the so-called canaanite/ugarite/akkadian/babylonian connections to the hebrew myths.  It's all ridiculous.   Hebrew scripture was written on animal hide, using a specific ink, it's intended to be perishable so that it, the scripture, does not become an idol.  Scholars simply don't have anything on which to base their assumptions.  The dating methods used are circular logic.  Often they don't even know the hebrew mythology well enough to make any judgements at all, and virtually none of them know the hebrew language.  They refuse to consult with Rabbis, of course, because they're not sciencey.

 

Edited August 7, 2023 by Daniel

[old3bob]

3 hours ago, Apech said:

 

Yes history sucks.  Everyone is violent.  Even the Buddhists.  In group preference is hard written into the human mind I think.  War is normal, empires are normal.  Sad but true.  The contest remains as to who has the best formula for belief and living.  As things are best assessed by results the winner is right.  In fact might is right.  But then maybe this is just how the Tao is destroyed in the human world.

 

 

well history sucks in many cases but again I would definitely not say in all cases.  As for the "Tao being Destroyed" in the human world I hear that as sounding like an absolute which would be like saying the Kali Yuga is absolute and the end,  yet we know the cycles keep taking place and a Sat Yuga will return.  So if said that Tao in human world is totally destroyed then there would be no humans left along with incredible destruction to other realms and an end to the great cycles,  but that is not so is it,  since we could say human Tao even if largely buried and not in much effect still rises and comes back after an x amount of time in the next phase of the cycles.  (because of the Great Tao)

Edited August 7, 2023 by old3bob

[Apech]

36 minutes ago, Daniel said:

 

What's most important is whether or not you and I agree that these things, as written, are wrongful actions.  After that, what's important is whether or not the vast majority of Muslims, Christians, and Jews, world-wide, agree that these things, as written, are wrongful actions.

 

Beyond that, perhaps it's useful to explore what's going on with these things.  I consider them political not theological where religion is being used/abused to seize power and resources, and used/abused to influence and manipulate people.  It's not just "abrahamics" that do these things.  But, a "law-giving-executive" deity is fertile ground for this sort of manipulation and power-grab.

 

In part just to stay on my own message of Unpopular Opinions - I would say it doesn't matter diddly squat whether you and I agree they are wrongful actions.  They happen and are allowed to happen (encouraged perhaps) by the almighty, which leaves some believers asking 'why oh Lord did you let this happen?' and others saying 'In your name oh Lord I did this thing'.  If you mean that you and I, as fellow DaoBums and therefore men of integrity and virtue can agree - well sure, of course.

 

 

36 minutes ago, Daniel said:

 

Yup.    Those are the rules.

 

If I can develop a little why I find these rules so odd and unrelatable.  It seems to me that if you decide that there are a set of written rules which are basically what God wants ... and over time ... thousands of years in fact as with any legal system there are question for clarification and interpretation then those rules get tighter and tighter, simply because no one is going to say ... oh well good point forget about that one in that case.  More and more restrictive over time.  But with very little clarification on the why ... why can't I do this ... and so on.  As a vaguely English person I found this kind of mind blowing.  Although as I hinted at before - kind of impressive non the less.

 

36 minutes ago, Daniel said:

 

No offence?  None taken!  Sincerely.  If this is what your friend told you about their practice, then this is what your friend wants you to know about their practice.  I don't see much benefit from getting involved in that. 

 

Well I was never going to be 'inner' I accept that.

 

36 minutes ago, Daniel said:

 

Ah.  For a spiritual christian experience, I recommend an American vibrant black church and let the spirit move you. 

 

Also, I've met at least two christians who completely turned their lives around as a direct result of the indwelling of the holy spirit and donning Jesus as their armor.

 

Regarding Catholics, I think there's good and bad like everythng else.  It's a huge institution, which instituional problems.  And the child-sex-abuse scandal cannot and should not be ignored.  As far as the connection the Pope has with the adherent, again, could be good "spiritual", could be bad "spiritual".  It all depends on the spirits that are involved. 

 

I live now in a Catholic country - having been born in a Protestant one - and I am learning to relate to the level of 'mystery' still preserved in Catholicism - particularly around the Virgin Mary.  There's a lot of heart in it and an acceptance that there are 'things' beyond the mundane in the Saints and so on.  

 

Unpopular Opinion : I don't think the child sex scandals have hurt the Catholic church as much as its crazy attempt to update itself - and actually despite sadness for those who were abused I don't think this matters as much.

[Daniel]

On 8/5/2023 at 4:12 PM, Mark Foote said:

That was a lot of work, thanks for that.

 

No problem... hopefully it wasn't to much work for you to unpack it.

 

Quote

Sorry to be a tad dense (some would say, brick-like).  I was looking for something more like:

 

Immanent:  existing or operating within; inherent.

transcendent:  beyond or above the range of normal or merely physical human experience. 

 

spiritual (here's where the African familiarity comes in):  An African-American musical tradition rooted in slave folk songs.

spiritual, take 2:  relating to or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things ("I'm responsible for his spiritual welfare"); relating to religion or religious belief ("the tribe's spiritual leader").

(Oxford lanuguages, courtesy Google)

 

OK.  Still holding the previous parameters...

 

Transcendent God = ineffable, beyond words, beyond human conception, or imagination.  But! it's still an agent, a deity.

Immanent God = directly invests itself in the material world, and individuals are immersed in it.

Spiritual God = a deity which is defined in terms of spirits and souls:  immaterial, vital, inter-connected, inherently unique essence.  Again, the African San tribe is good for this.  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_religion#Trance.  Hunting... tracking.... indwelling of a spirit.  It's primitive, in a good way.

 

So for Christianity, there is Immanent and spiritual.  Modern Judaism rejects that, generally.

 

Quote

 

Ok, that gives me a general sense of what you mean when you say that "Theology of Moses = Transcendent+Immanent".  He performed miracles seemingly from within (immanent), while crediting the divine without (transcendent).

 

That would be theosophy:  how the miracles were performed.  I'm talking about how their god is described differently in each of the big-three.  It sounds like you reviewed Exo 3?  The description for God there is invested in the physical world, Moses is immersed in the experience, then God reveals itself to be completely beyond all time and space.  Transcendant+Immanent, kinda-sorta Panentheism, but God is an agent, a being, with preferences and a plan.

 

Quote

I guess I can see Jesus's spirituality as immanent, as "operating within, inherent".  On the cross, though, it was transcendent ("why hast thou forsaken me?").  

 

Phillipians 2...  

 

6  Who, existing in the form of God,

did not consider equality with God

something to be grasped

 

7  but emptied Himself,

taking the form of a servant,

being made in human likeness.

 

Psalm 22 is **how** he emptied himself, **because** equality with God cannot be grasped/seized.  It needs to be invested.

 

Quote

The definition of spiritual above doesn't really seem to match your use, at least so far as the quotes you provided.  Your references all have to do with "the spirit of God", "spirit of the Lord". 

 

Spirit indwelling or resting on an individual or group.  When Joseph and Daniel are interpretting dreams, this is how God is being described and introduced as interacting with the material world through a medium or a channel.

 

Quote

Sounds like with your use of transcendent, immanent, and spiritual, we're talking about the trinity in another guise:  the father, son, and holy ghost.  

 

That's a totally different animal as far as I'm concerned.

 

Quote

 

 

Edited August 7, 2023 by Daniel

[Daniel]

1 hour ago, Apech said:

 

In part just to stay on my own message of Unpopular Opinions - I would say it doesn't matter diddly squat whether you and I agree they are wrongful actions.  They happen and are allowed to happen (encouraged perhaps) by the almighty, which leaves some believers asking 'why oh Lord did you let this happen?' and others saying 'In your name oh Lord I did this thing'.  If you mean that you and I, as fellow DaoBums and therefore men of integrity and virtue can agree - well sure, of course.

 

Before discussing it, i think it's important to confirm that we both agree on these as wrongful actions.  It's a crazy world, I appreciate the confirmation.  Regarding "Why did the Lord permit it?"  That's pages and pages and pages of typing.

 

 

1 hour ago, Apech said:

If I can develop a little why I find these rules so odd and unrelatable.  It seems to me that if you decide that there are a set of written rules which are basically what God wants ... and over time ... thousands of years in fact as with any legal system there are question for clarification and interpretation then those rules get tighter and tighter, simply because no one is going to say ... oh well good point forget about that one in that case.  More and more restrictive over time.  But with very little clarification on the why ... why can't I do this ... and so on.  As a vaguely English person I found this kind of mind blowing.  Although as I hinted at before - kind of impressive non the less.

 

Rules change, they get updated.  Even in the ultra orthodox world.  It's written in Deut 17 that the "judges of the day" decide whether for strictness or for mercy.  A whole law can be abandoned if it's harmful.

 

 

1 hour ago, Apech said:

I live now in a Catholic country - having been born in a Protestant one - and I am learning to relate to the level of 'mystery' still preserved in Catholicism - particularly around the Virgin Mary.  There's a lot of heart in it and an acceptance that there are 'things' beyond the mundane in the Saints and so on.  

 

Unpopular Opinion : I don't think the child sex scandals have hurt the Catholic church as much as its crazy attempt to update itself - and actually despite sadness for those who were abused I don't think this matters as much.

 

It's different in America.  Many people left the church and christianity because of it.

[Apech]

48 minutes ago, Daniel said:

 

Before discussing it, i think it's important to confirm that we both agree on these as wrongful actions.  It's a crazy world, I appreciate the confirmation.  Regarding "Why did the Lord permit it?"  That's pages and pages and pages of typing.

 

 

 

Rules change, they get updated.  Even in the ultra orthodox world.  It's written in Deut 17 that the "judges of the day" decide whether for strictness or for mercy.  A whole law can be abandoned if it's harmful.

 

This I didn't know - thanks for the clarification.

 

48 minutes ago, Daniel said:

 

 

It's different in America.  Many people left the church and christianity because of it.

 

I'm sure many left the church because of it here too - the Pope has just visited this country and some people put up posters saying 4000+ people were abused by priests - so there is recognition and regret - the Bishop of Lisbon is resigning - not because he abused children but because he was ineffectual in dealing with it.

 

 

[liminal_luke]

2 hours ago, Apech said:

 

If I can develop a little why I find these rules so odd and unrelatable.  It seems to me that if you decide that there are a set of written rules which are basically what God wants ... and over time ... thousands of years in fact as with any legal system there are question for clarification and interpretation then those rules get tighter and tighter, simply because no one is going to say ... oh well good point forget about that one in that case.  More and more restrictive over time.  But with very little clarification on the why ... why can't I do this ... and so on.  As a vaguely English person I found this kind of mind blowing.  Although as I hinted at before - kind of impressive non the less.

 

 

Seemingly ridiculous rules serve an important function: they reinforce insularity.  If a person wanted to create a community that kept themselves separate -- with a clear ingroup and a clear outgroup -- lots of rules are the way to go.  Whether this separateness is a good thing or not is a hot topic of debate.  Many would say not so good.  Personally I like the fact that we live in a world with haredi Jews and wagon-driving Amish and maybe even a few traditional indigenous tribespeople in various remote corners.  I wouldn't want to be a member of any of these groups but I'm glad they exist; bland multicultural mush isn't nearly as much fun.  (Can I have my amulet now?)

Edited August 7, 2023 by liminal_luke

[Apech]

6 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

Seemingly ridiculous rules serve an important function: they reinforce insularity.  If a person wanted to create a community that kept themselves separate -- with a clear ingroup and a clear outgroup -- lots of rules are the way to go.  Whether this separateness is a good thing or not is a hot topic of debate.  Many would say not so good.  Personally I like the fact that we live in a world with haredi Jews and wagon-driving Amish and maybe even a few traditional indigenous tribespeople in various remote corners.  I wouldn't want to be a member of any of these groups but I'm glad they exist.  (Can I have my amulet now?)

 

Luke ... Luke ... I am shocked and ashamed that you of all people would think that THE AMULET can be earned so cheaply.  I need more.  For instance if you had revealed that when vacuum cleaning your apartment you had actually discovered an indigenous tribe living in a remote corner of your living room - that would have been the kind of exceptional claim which the panel might have considered Amuleting.