The Spiritual Crisis in America

[á´…eparted]

You can't see it because you don't have it. If you do have it, please explain what it is you have.

Dont have what? You are consistently pointlessly vague.

 

[Justin of Flavia Neapolis]

Dont have what? You are consistently pointlessly vague.

Do you know what the topic of discussion is in this thread?

Are you lost?

 

[ceecee]

ceecee goes to Golden Coral.

Just kidding. I'm sure ceecee goes to Red Lobster and orders seconds.

I'm not the one that needs to post Stefan Molyneux videos to try to win converts to my POV. And I don't eat at buffets at all or chains. I understand that fact may be irritating to a new Christian convert, similar to being a Canadian crank magnet waiting in the same line as Roosh, George Galloway, Mark Dice and David Stewart, except that Stefan is overwhelmingly sad he couldn't vote for Trump. Much like that Canadian chronic masturbator, Gavin McInnis. A good rule of thumb is that if you want people to listen to your thoughts and ideas - it helps when they don't contain any crazy.

 

[Justin of Flavia Neapolis]

I'm not the one that needs to post Stefan Molyneux videos to try to win converts to my POV. And I don't eat at buffets at all or chains. I understand that fact may be irritating to a new Christian convert, similar to being a Canadian crank magnet waiting in the same line as Roosh, George Galloway, Mark Dice and David Stewart, except that Stefan is overwhelmingly sad he couldn't vote for Trump. Much like that Canadian chronic masturbator, Gavin McInnis. A good rule of thumb is that if you want people to listen to your thoughts and ideas - it helps when they don't contain any crazy.

Yes, it offends me very much that you don't eat at Golden Coral.

I posted a Dave Rubin video in which Molyneux is a guest. I suppose Dave Rubin is also tainted? Is Joe Rogan a goner, too?

Thanks for the heads up.

 

[Qlip]

It’s interesting to me, mainly because I see parallels to positive nihilism and Christianity. Both don’t put much stock in or are skeptical of “this world” and where they spilt (IMO) is in where they gather their strength - positive nihilism would say through the self (individual) and Christianity says the self via God. (I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me).

A positive nihilst and a Christian probably or can look on the surface about the same in terms of how they approach life. Ideally, taking initiative to help our fellow humans - being selfless.

A nihilist, who thinks so strongly in terms of there is nothing worth believing in that s/he sees no use for nuances of morality. Well, That breeds an extreme form of selfishness. It’s a sort of selfishness that Christianity, on a broad scale, prevents by belief. (Universalism vs individualism at heart of the matter).

So, Christians would be “threatened” by nihilism. Or see it as ultimately destructive because they see the worst in it and don’t see the benefits of strengthening oneself. Likewise, a nihilist would see Christianity as mind control for the masses because they see the worst in it. See it as something to stamp out individuality but not seeing the humanitarian benefit that spirituality (in the case of this thread, Christianity) can bring.

I guess it’s what...the narcissism of small differences. Forget who said that.

I've actually been on the other side of the fence, the Christian non-nihilist. I had a crisis of faith when I was 15 and had several realizations that did not allow me to continue with being in the denomination I was in, and for probably a decade after that I tried to find my way back into a religion, partially because I feared the specter of nihilism, which to my mind was the loss of moral authority in existence. What I ended up learning since is that whatever it is that defines morality and spirituality doesn't require attachment to a religion, it's something that's part of us, or at least some of us. It was a really interesting experience discovering that, something akin to hanging off the side of a building, deciding to let go, and then finding out that you can fly. The best way to describe it is an act of faith.

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

I've actually been on the other side of the fence, the Christian non-nihilist. I had a crisis of faith when I was 15 and had several realizations that did not allow me to continue with being in the denomination I was in, and for probably a decade after that I tried to find my way back into a religion, partially because I feared the specter of nihilism, which to my mind was the loss of moral authority in existence. What I ended up learning since is that whatever it is that defines morality and spirituality doesn't require attachment to a religion, it's something that's part of us, or at least some of us. It was a really interesting experience discovering that, something akin to hanging off the side of a building, deciding to let go, and then finding out that you can fly. The best way to describe it is an act of faith.

Interesting. We would have a good talk over some drinks, no doubt!

I was raised in a Evangelical household. Straight away, maybe I was 8-9. I recognized that the worst of human behavior didn’t belong to just non-believers. I was living with a sadistic, abusive monster who got in back of a pulpit every Sunday.

I like what you said about “letting go” and that is an act of faith. I had a long hiatus from religion and specifically, the way God was taught to me. God, my father’s teachings, everything was jumbled together in a really disgusting way that I couldn’t separate. After 15 years not invested in figuring it out, I had decided to make a decision. Do I believe or do I not?

I had an epiphany one day that I had to let go of everything - good and bad - built up about God and start over from neutral. I had to search for myself. I wasn’t a child anymore. There was no fear anymore.

What I came away with was a belief - yes - the opposite of you but I cannot help but think our process getting there was similar.

 

[ceecee]

I've actually been on the other side of the fence, the Christian non-nihilist. I had a crisis of faith when I was 15 and had several realizations that did not allow me to continue with being in the denomination I was in, and for probably a decade after that I tried to find my way back into a religion, partially because I feared the specter of nihilism, which to my mind was the loss of moral authority in existence. What I ended up learning since is that whatever it is that defines morality and spirituality doesn't require attachment to a religion, it's something that's part of us, or at least some of us. It was a really interesting experience discovering that, something akin to hanging off the side of a building, deciding to let go, and then finding out that you can fly. The best way to describe it is an act of faith.

I agree. I don't think it's inaccurate to note that this conclusion isn't always welcomed by people unwilling or unable to see beyond religion. That can create problems, depending on the age of the person or other specifics. I came to this conclusion in childhood, you sound like you did the same and it was unwelcome by family and others in my life. But it's never caused a crisis for me, it's comforted me. An act of faith, like you mention, in myself and my own strength.

 

[Coriolis]

I'm the only one presenting any Way. Feel free to detract from The Way and present your own. So far, all you (and anyone else so far) are doing is criticizing without offering anything in return besides the COEXIST philosophy that the Western world is already failing at.

I do not have to detract from someone else's spiritual path in order to present my own. I am not threatened by the fact that not everyone follows the same path as I. I also enjoy learning from the different paths of others, and seeing how there can be very fundamental similarities, while at the same time marked differences. The only thing I am criticising is the claim of exclusivity, and I will criticise it regardless of which path claims it. I have offered my perspective. You are free to disagree with it, but not to discount it as an actual presented perspective.

(My position regarding COEXIST is: It doesn't work at the macro-level)

You will need to explain what you mean by this perspective if you wish a response here. The topic is American spirituality, or lack thereof; not a battle of the religions. (Unless, of course, you wish to amend your OP to turn it into one, but I believe there are already threads for that.)

 

[Lark]

I do not have to detract from someone else's spiritual path in order to present my own. I am not threatened by the fact that not everyone follows the same path as I. I also enjoy learning from the different paths of others, and seeing how there can be very fundamental similarities, while at the same time marked differences. The only thing I am criticising is the claim of exclusivity, and I will criticise it regardless of which path claims it. I have offered my perspective. You are free to disagree with it, but not to discount it as an actual presented perspective.


You will need to explain what you mean by this perspective if you wish a response here. The topic is American spirituality, or lack thereof; not a battle of the religions. (Unless, of course, you wish to amend your OP to turn it into one, but I believe there are already threads for that.)

When you do an equation, and you have your working out, its possible if two people were to do this at the same time that with different working out they may reach close to the same figure but there will only be one correct figure, you know?

Although that said I appreciate, or I think I do, that perhaps you are coming from a very different context, some of the coverage of the recent election in Alabama has reminded me of how different the US evangelical and christian fundamentalist scene is to the rest of the world and how that's probably inadvertently stoking a lot of the opinion that seeks to make all different schools of thought equally valid.

Ultimately I think there can only be a single truth but I also think, especially in relation to incorporeal questions, it is a matter of private conscience, people should live and let live or live and let die and mind their own businesses.

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

I'm the only one presenting any Way. Feel free to detract from The Way and present your own. So far, all you (and anyone else so far) are doing is criticizing without offering anything in return besides the COEXIST philosophy that the Western world is already failing at.

(My position regarding COEXIST is: It doesn't work at the macro-level)

Yeah. It does fail on a macro level because not every one thinks we can co-exist. Duh. You think that's divided on religious choice alone? Or do you think religion is used to sway political power? Maybe a crazy mix of both? I do. So you're saying if only we all were Christians, we'd be all good. (ignoring the fact that Christian dogma is fractured into sub-categories). I would say that statement is not different in saying "we can all coexist" (it's an ideal and if 100% bought into an ideal, shit would be straight) but I don't want to go with false equivalence here because "we can coexist" has tolerance and therefore freedom of religion built into that ideal and what you are advocating, what I think you are advocating - is a theocratic view of 'we must choose ONE truth and go with it'- does not. One ideal speaks to peace (as an ideal) and one to war (as an inevitability). So they are not equal in direction of goal attainment. I don't want to put words in your mouth, so tell me where I'm wrong in my dissection of your message.

 

[Coriolis]

When you do an equation, and you have your working out, its possible if two people were to do this at the same time that with different working out they may reach close to the same figure but there will only be one correct figure, you know?

Although that said I appreciate, or I think I do, that perhaps you are coming from a very different context, some of the coverage of the recent election in Alabama has reminded me of how different the US evangelical and christian fundamentalist scene is to the rest of the world and how that's probably inadvertently stoking a lot of the opinion that seeks to make all different schools of thought equally valid.

Ultimately I think there can only be a single truth but I also think, especially in relation to incorporeal questions, it is a matter of private conscience, people should live and let live or live and let die and mind their own businesses.

Solving equations is an objective business. We should all get the same answer if we start with the same inputs and are asking the same question. Matters of spirituality, by contrast, are highly subjective. You are seriously misinterpeting American fundamentalist Christians if you think they consider all schools of thought equally valid.

There may be a single truth, but if there is, it is much more like the Mona Lisa than Newton's Laws: everyone will see it differently, and find different meaning it it. Actually, it would be worse as at least with works of art there is a tangible object to point to, so we can all agree that, whatever we think of it, what we have before us IS the Mona Lisa, and not Starry Night.

(By the way, if there is a single truth, it lies in those fundamental commonalities shared by all spiritual paths.)

 

[Lark]

Solving equations is an objective business. We should all get the same answer if we start with the same inputs and are asking the same question. Matters of spirituality, by contrast, are highly subjective. You are seriously misinterpeting American fundamentalist Christians if you think they consider all schools of thought equally valid.

No, I meant the opposite.

And in doing so they stoke the thinking that they must be valid. Its the hegelian idea about thesis and antithesis.

There may be a single truth, but if there is, it is much more like the Mona Lisa than Newton's Laws: everyone will see it differently, and find different meaning it it. Actually, it would be worse as at least with works of art there is a tangible object to point to, so we can all agree that, whatever we think of it, what we have before us IS the Mona Lisa, and not Starry Night.

Interesting analogy but a painting remains a painting, you cant for instance claim it is a horse, I think there is more objectivity to the question of religion than subjectivity but then I believe that religion is about understanding and objective cosmic order and not simply a choice or preference for particular lifestyles or worship ideologies if that makes sense.

(By the way, if there is a single truth, it lies in those fundamental commonalities shared by all spiritual paths.)

In some ways I think that's interesting to examine, although in others I think its very mistaken, it would mean that the sectarian or church militant is as valid as not and I am not sure about that, I'm not even talking about western religious traditions, films like Silence which illustrate the buddhist persecution of christianity out of Japan put a not too fine a point upon it.

 

[Justin of Flavia Neapolis]

Yeah. It does fail on a macro level because not every one thinks we can co-exist. Duh. You think that's divided on religious choice alone? Or do you think religion is used to sway political power? Maybe a crazy mix of both? I do.

I use spirituality and cultural beliefs interchangeably, in this instance because I'm speaking from a certain perspective.

Culture:a : the customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial, religious, or social group; also : the characteristic features of everyday existence (such as diversions or a way of life) shared by people in a place or time

popular culture

Southern culture

b : the set of shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices that characterizes an institution or organization

a corporate culture focused on the bottom line

c : the set of values, conventions, or social practices associated with a particular field, activity, or societal characteristic

So you're saying if only we all were Christians, we'd be all good. (ignoring the fact that Christian dogma is fractured into sub-categories).

Culturally, in America, yes. In India, no. In Egypt, no. (the last two have their own cultural religions) You can't have a large population of multiple religions within proximity because they cannot COEXIST: Pivotal Justice Kennedy poses tough questions in gay wedding case (just kidding , no for real though)

Trust in a Time of Increasing Diversity: On the Relationship between Ethnic Heterogeneity and Social Trust in Denmark from 1979 until Today - Dinesen - 2012 - Scandinavian Political Studies - Wiley Online Library
Predicting Cross-National Levels of Social Trust: Global Pattern or Nordic Exceptionalism? | European Sociological Review | Oxford Academic
Ethnic Diversity, Economic and Cultural Contexts, and Social Trust: Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Evidence from European Regions, 2002–2010 | Social Forces | Oxford Academic
The Geography of Ethnic Violence | SpringerLink
School ethnic diversity and White students’ civic attitudes in England - ScienceDirect

Culture is our variety. Thankfully, religious wars account for around 7% of the total wars fought on earth.: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/book/10.1002/9781444338232

I would say that statement is not different in saying "we can all coexist" (it's an ideal and if 100% bought into an ideal, shit would be straight) but I don't want to go with false equivalence here because "we can coexist" has tolerance and therefore freedom of religion built into that ideal and what you are advocating, what I think you are advocating - is a theocratic view of 'we must choose ONE truth and go with it'- does not. One ideal speaks to peace (as an ideal) and one to war (as an inevitability). So they are not equal in direction of goal attainment. I don't want to put words in your mouth, so tell me where I'm wrong in my dissection of your message.

You misunderstood. I don't care which god or no god a people choose to worship. I care most about the culture of this land.

[RANT]
The historic church of Christianity is the Orthodox Church. The Catholics were the original protestants leaving the church in the great schism of 1054 and the protestants came later splitting off from the Catholics.

But, Protestantism is the dominant culture of this land....
[/RANT]

Proverbs 13:11
Wealth gained hastily will dwindle,
but whoever gathers little by little will increase it.



Shirley you empathize:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umayyad_conquest_of_Hispania
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonial_India

And yes, history is fraught with tribal extinctions, and those tribes fought to the bitter end. Look at the Blue tribe of popular culture who are fighting tooth and nail against the onslaught of the Red tribe (politics).

After two nukes, and America holding its hand Japan was able to achieve a peaceful middle in which the defanged, ancient culture is able to live with the agnostic, modern populace. No anti-theism needed.

 

[kyuuei]

"Only if we're all the same will we stop hating each other." Not really an enlightened way to go forward. Sounds like a dangerous recipe for burning people for being different.

 

[Coriolis]

Interesting analogy but a painting remains a painting, you cant for instance claim it is a horse, I think there is more objectivity to the question of religion than subjectivity but then I believe that religion is about understanding and objective cosmic order and not simply a choice or preference for particular lifestyles or worship ideologies if that makes sense.

Sure, but that's like saying that spiritual truth is spiritual truth, not a law of physics or a cake recipe. Lifestyles are not spiritual truths, though one's spirituality certainly can and arguably should inform one's lifestyle. If by "worship ideology" you mean how one chooses to worship - choice of prayers, rituals, music, setting, etc. - same would apply. IME spiritual truth is about the nature of subjective reality, just as, say, the laws of physics are about the nature of objective/physical reality. Lifestyle and liturgy are some of the areas in which we apply spiritual truth, just as we apply the laws of physics in the various engineering disciplines.

In some ways I think that's interesting to examine, although in others I think its very mistaken, it would mean that the sectarian or church militant is as valid as not and I am not sure about that, I'm not even talking about western religious traditions, films like Silence which illustrate the buddhist persecution of christianity out of Japan put a not too fine a point upon it.

I see it as meaning that our very different religious traditions all stem from the same one God/deific being(s). If we humans abuse whatever divine inspiration and insights come to us, we can hardly blame that on God.

 

[Typh0n]

I don't know whether anyone has heard of the traditionalist school.

Traditionalist School - Wikipedia

Their ideas could make for good discussion in the context of this thread. While I agree with them that the existensial crisis in the modern world is caused by a disconnect from traditonal forms of spirituality, perennial wisdom, as they call it, I disagree that one needs to associate with a conventional religion to experience this. I think their (the traditonalist school's) idea that the same perennial wisdom is expressed in varous religions is interesting, I just don't understand why one needs to associate with the religion in its traditional form; because in that case you become concerned not with the content but with the form it takes on. Which is contradictory. Unless, maybe I misunderstand their ideas...I haven't yet studied it much.

 

[LucieCat]

When you do an equation, and you have your working out, its possible if two people were to do this at the same time that with different working out they may reach close to the same figure but there will only be one correct figure, you know? Although that said I appreciate, or I think I do, that perhaps you are coming from a very different context, some of the coverage of the recent election in Alabama has reminded me of how different the US evangelical and christian fundamentalist scene is to the rest of the world and how that's probably inadvertently stoking a lot of the opinion that seeks to make all different schools of thought equally valid. Ultimately I think there can only be a single truth but I also think, especially in relation to incorporeal questions, it is a matter of private conscience, people should live and let live or live and let die and mind their own businesses.

The situation in Alabama does really highlight how blatantly critical evangelical and fundamentalist Christianity can be in the US. Evangelicals' support for Trump is another big example. I've heard some people refer to Trump as a Christ-like figure. Which makes me want to ask, "Which bible did you read?" Because as someone who has read and analyzed scripture both in a religious sense and a secular, academic sense for historical purpose, neither interpretation has given me the idea that Jesus would do a lot of things Trump has done.

I've noticed this hypocrisy for years (from childhood if I think back on it although I really couldn't comprehend it then). It really became apparent when I was about 13/14 and I was the closest I ever was to the religious right. My parents were told that a "faith based education" would be beneficial to my mental health. It really wasn't, but regardless. It helped me see how much hypocrisy is prevalent and how my interpretation of religion was way more flexible, accommodating, and made more sense.
I personally think that whatever the spiritual truth is, the human mind cannot fully comprehend it and we will never know. I also think that religious texts like the Bible are fallable, which is essentially heresy in these circles and has gotten me some really weird looks. How do I know it hasn't been manipulated or edited over the years to serve a political purpose? Also, you can't take some of the timing in the Bible literally either. And people need to stop calling any public figure they disagree with the anti-Christ. The Bible makes it pretty clear that the masses would not be able to know in my interpretation (it's been a long long since I have read Revelation, the historical and cultural parts of the Bible frankly interest me more).
This sort of realization caused me to distance myself from religion. Looking back on it, the tradition my parents follow is much more moderate than that of a lot of people surrounding me growing up. They have realized hypocrisy in and distanced themselves from both Catholicism and Evangelicalism now.

If asked to describe my religious beliefs, I say that I'm not very religious and do not actively participate in religion (around most, lots of people from my past would try to "correct me" for this). However, I follow the teachings of Jesus as I see them because a lot of what he said really resonates with me. So I'm technically a Christian on paper, I just distrust religious institutions and do not want to associate myself in any way shape or form with the politicized version of Christianity. I think that's where most of the hypocrisy shows up very clearly.
When people talk about a "spiritual crisis" I don't think it's for a lack of believers in any one specific system. I think it's for an over abundance of hypocrites that really infest belief systems like I have just discussed.

 

[ceecee]

The situation in Alabama does really highlight how blatantly critical evangelical and fundamentalist Christianity can be in the US. Evangelicals' support for Trump is another big example. I've heard some people refer to Trump as a Christ-like figure. Which makes me want to ask, "Which bible did you read?" Because as someone who has read and analyzed scripture both in a religious sense and a secular, academic sense for historical purpose, neither interpretation has given me the idea that Jesus would do a lot of things Trump has done.

I just remind them that the bible has a lot to say on false idols and idolatry. The old testament minces no words on the subject.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Some of you may have a kneejerk reaction to the url address. This isn't for you.

We Don't Have Just A 'Mental Health Crisis' In America. We Have A Spiritual Crisis. - Red Pill Times

I see this a lot on TypoC. Especially in the section which shall not be named. *cough*Politics*cough*

I disagree. America has moral and financial crisis ... I really don't see some abstract problem such as (spiritual crisis).


In the other words you have destroyed your education systems and you have systematically kept hard science as far as possible from education. However hard science is the foundation of modern manufacture/economy and now you have to import experts or goods through huge trade deficits. As the result of all that you lost economic edge and advantages because various countries managed to catch up or even surpas you. What has created the economic problem and since you never changed and adressed the real problem the country is continuing to go down. Especially since there even isn't the defined will to restructure the society in a way that would fix this, since you resist anything that would impact the whole population. Since good chunk of you thinks that values are the most important things in life, even if those values have questionable empirical background.


Your problem isn't spiritual, as a matter of fact it is very concrete and earthly. (and I don't see the point of running away from that)

 

[Mole]

The situation in Alabama does really highlight how blatantly critical evangelical and fundamentalist Christianity can be in the US. Evangelicals' support for Trump is another big example. I've heard some people refer to Trump as a Christ-like figure. Which makes me want to ask, "Which bible did you read?" Because as someone who has read and analyzed scripture both in a religious sense and a secular, academic sense for historical purpose, neither interpretation has given me the idea that Jesus would do a lot of things Trump has done.

I've noticed this hypocrisy for years (from childhood if I think back on it although I really couldn't comprehend it then). It really became apparent when I was about 13/14 and I was the closest I ever was to the religious right. My parents were told that a "faith based education" would be beneficial to my mental health. It really wasn't, but regardless. It helped me see how much hypocrisy is prevalent and how my interpretation of religion was way more flexible, accommodating, and made more sense.
I personally think that whatever the spiritual truth is, the human mind cannot fully comprehend it and we will never know. I also think that religious texts like the Bible are fallable, which is essentially heresy in these circles and has gotten me some really weird looks. How do I know it hasn't been manipulated or edited over the years to serve a political purpose? Also, you can't take some of the timing in the Bible literally either. And people need to stop calling any public figure they disagree with the anti-Christ. The Bible makes it pretty clear that the masses would not be able to know in my interpretation (it's been a long long since I have read Revelation, the historical and cultural parts of the Bible frankly interest me more).
This sort of realization caused me to distance myself from religion. Looking back on it, the tradition my parents follow is much more moderate than that of a lot of people surrounding me growing up. They have realized hypocrisy in and distanced themselves from both Catholicism and Evangelicalism now.

If asked to describe my religious beliefs, I say that I'm not very religious and do not actively participate in religion (around most, lots of people from my past would try to "correct me" for this). However, I follow the teachings of Jesus as I see them because a lot of what he said really resonates with me. So I'm technically a Christian on paper, I just distrust religious institutions and do not want to associate myself in any way shape or form with the politicized version of Christianity. I think that's where most of the hypocrisy shows up very clearly.
When people talk about a "spiritual crisis" I don't think it's for a lack of believers in any one specific system. I think it's for an over abundance of hypocrites that really infest belief systems like I have just discussed.

Hypocrisy is the homage vice pays to virtue.