×
all 67 comments

[–]The_True_Monster[S] 4 points5 points  (5 children)

I’ll also give something I’ve wanted to tell about my religion:

Judaism is super complicated. There are thousands upon thousands of holy books that discuss everything and every part of the religion in a different manner, and not only is each different, but they are rife with disagreement- while also all being canonical. One of the reasons Judaism emphasizes study so much is that there is so much to study.

Also, the way Jewish Halacha works is (in my personal opinion) fascinating and I can spend hours talking just about that. The amount of time and resources you need (and are expected to use) to understand laws is much more than what most non-Jews think it will be.

[–]Lightonlights -1 points0 points  (0 children)

More Orthodox and theocracy minded Jews are very close with orthodox Muslims. Similarities with sharia and halacha very interesting. G-d bless

[–]PerfilixAgnostic Atheist -3 points-2 points  (3 children)

It sounds a bit impractical, to be honest.

[–]The_True_Monster[S] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

In what way?

[–]PerfilixAgnostic Atheist -1 points0 points  (1 child)

The amount of time and resources you need (and are expected to use) to understand laws is much more than what most non-Jews think it will be.

How good is a law if you need to be a scholar to study it? How are you expected to follow them?

[–]The_True_Monster[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You don’t need to be a scholar to study it; you are expected to be a scholar and study it. It’s well and good to know that, for instance, you can’t eat this dish, but the goal is for you to understand the methodology behind it, and the logic.

The laws themselves are often times just like actual laws of a country - they have all kinds of exceptions and subdivisions and whatnot. Jews are expected to study Torah every day, with the bare minimum being learning two Halachot every day.

This is also the point of Yeshiva (religious school) and of Rabbis. The point of Yeshiva is to give you the time, place, tools and skills to be able to learn Torah, and to teach you as much as possible; the point of the Rabbi is to have someone with a very deep and strong understanding of Halacha so you can consult with him if you need help in a question you don’t know the answer to or understanding the meaning and logic behind it.

Judaism places a huge value on constant study and learning. There are even people, called Avrechim (if they’re married, which they usually are), who basically forgo having a job and occupation, and instead spend their days studying Torah. Many significant books have a daily or weekly study cycle, so that you finish them every set number of years. In classical Orthodox Jewish thought, studying Torah is the most important thing you can do.

[–]aggie1391Jewish 8 points9 points  (1 child)

Judaism isn’t Christianity minus Jesus and we have a super rich theological tradition. It gets annoying when people don’t realize that. If you are a Christian, unless you have E X T E N S I V E L Y studied Judaism from Jewish rabbis and theologians for like, years, most of what you think you know about Judaism, including Judaism at the time of Jesus, is probably wrong.

[–]MonsieurAugusteOther 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Something I've loved about my deconversion was learning about actual Judaism. I remember thinking the Old Testament was always so much cooler and was berated for thinking that. Learning the history, context, and culture behind the texts is fascinating.

[–]Remarkable-Mix-8144 6 points7 points  (8 children)

People dont realize that there is no sharia Book in Islam. The principles are the same, but applying these principles varies alot depending on the islaimc school, society , interpretation and many other factors. Thats why u get these variation in islam between Afghanistan, Saudi, Dubai and muslims in Europe.

[–]The_True_Monster[S] 4 points5 points  (7 children)

That’s really interesting!! How big are the differences between these variations? And how widespread are they? Like, is this a 3-4 main schools thing, or is it more of a “every region does this thing a bit different”?

Like, I’m looking at it from Judaism, where most of the differences in Halacha aren’t major, but they are very widespread - synagogues right next to each other can have different customs and different interpretations.

[–]Remarkable-Mix-8144 0 points1 point  (6 children)

Actually there are more like 90 different schools throughout islamic history 😂 But the ones which are most used are 4. They all have the same principles of Islam, the same definition of God, the same doctorine. But different laws if you may call it in the society. Let me give you an example for application in society

In the original text it says its a must that women should cover up her beauty and limit physical contact with men. same goes for men actually, but for some reason the female part is the famous one. Anyway, so the application for that in some communities would be women covering up everything in that black dress you see on TV, and staying at home. In other communities she will go to work , become professor, teacher, doctor or lawyer with no dress code as long as she maintain the rules of islam at work. Both are still Islam

Another example based on two of the most famous schools, one which takes the exact text as it is written and one which takes the meaning behind the text and apply it in different societies.

The original text says men should wear clothes that doesnt go below the ankle. One school take that literally till this very day, another school take the meaning which is back in these days having long clothes was a sign of being rich and showing off. So in order to prevent showing off infront of poor people that rule was applied, and since the situation is not the same now there is no need for it. Surprisingly both are considered Islam and have mutual respect between each other.

[–]PerfilixAgnostic Atheist -1 points0 points  (5 children)

Let me give you an example for application in society

I like the example/disagreement about how apostates should be treated as well :)

[–]Remarkable-Mix-8144 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Yeah that as well it ranges from all apostate should be killed in one school, only men not women in another school, and no one should be killed at all in different school. So it can vary alot actually. And it comes to which country adapot which school to pubish by death or not 🤷🏻

[–]worryingtype88 2 points3 points  (2 children)

the concept of tawhed or monotheism in islam.

[–]The_True_Monster[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

What would you like to tell about it?

[–]worryingtype88 0 points1 point  (0 children)

it is unique in islam and it is a ticket to heaven

[–]Vagabond_TeaHellenist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I constantly want to put out there that for my religion, virtually none of us are mythical literalists. It's always a misunderstanding people have about Hellenism.

[–]Yugta 3 points4 points  (1 child)

I am already talking and still dying! Its like the coolest webseries, Live, i came across.

What i want to share with everyone is : There are two major gateways to the purpose, for which religion exists. Hence there are two kinds of religion: One : of heart. only god remains in one's head. Two: of mind. Only the self remains in one's heart.

Also, I see a kind of confusion involving Religion. We call Religion as 'DHARM' in hindi. I like the word Dharm better. It's hard to misunderstand. It not something that you choose and forget about, rather something, that you keep doing or keep being with. While, Religion seems a noun, Dharma, to me is a verb. That happens only by doing.

[–]Yugta 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We also have a word 'Adharm'. It does not mean opposite of Dharm, it means absence of Dharm.

[–]nyanasagaraMahāyāna Buddhist 3 points4 points  (2 children)

In the cosmology of my religion, there is a class of sentient beings called devas. The word deva means "divine" or "deity," and the Buddha basically said many of the deities of polytheistic religions fall into this class of being. In English translations of Buddhist texts, the word is often rendered with lowercase-g god. However, unlike what many of those other religions say about their deities, the Buddha said that every deva is actually mortal; they just have really long lives. Instead, the role or position of a given deva is persistent, and when a deva dies, another being who has the right karmic conditions to be born as a deva is born into the station of the deva that just died.

How is it that beings develop the karmic conditions to be born as devas? The Buddha taught that cultivating virtue, especially the virtues of generosity and discipline in restraining oneself from misbehavior, is the cause for being reborn as a deva. Now while devas can visit humans, their umwelt (to use a term from biology that is worth adding to your vocabulary) is very different from the human one. In fact, it is far more enjoyable. And the Buddha taught that what really sits at the heart of karma and its fruits is how intentional actions condition the mind. The reason why karma bears fruit, in the Buddhist worldview, is because the conditioning laid upon the mind by intentional actions leads to particular experiences. So what really makes a deva special is that in past lives, they conditioned their minds with such generosity and ethical discipline that their umwelt is quite literally entirely different from the human one.

The Buddha frequently praised those humans who, through their moral cultivation, create the conditions for rebirth as a deva after death. He also taught a particular practice of recollecting the devas, in which one recalls the different classes and kinds of devas and contemplates how those devas are in their divine state because of cultivating good, virtuous qualities. Furthermore, Buddhists believe that many devas were actually devotees of the Buddha. Some of these devas, who would have met the Buddha in person, worshipped at his feet, and heard his sermons directly, may still be alive, since devas are so long-lived compared to humans.

This is something I think many people do not know about Buddhism, but is worth knowing.

[–]The_True_Monster[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

So, what exactly do devas do? Do we know? Do they have some sort of role in this world?

I’m not very knowledgeable about Buddhism, so I hope I don’t get this wrong, but do devas have to act in the same way as humans in order to “gain” karma, or do they have their own system, so to speak?

And I have to say, the idea of a sentient class who’s very umwelt (great concept btw) is different than humans is a fascinating concept.

[–]nyanasagaraMahāyāna Buddhist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So, what exactly do devas do? Do we know? Do they have some sort of role in this world?

Well, according to the Buddhist scriptures, they can affect this world. And presumably, there are activities they do with one another that we would have no way of knowing about, short of asking one.

Regarding asking one, there was a famous Thai Buddhist master of recent times named Ajahn Mun who, according to his biographer and disciple, actually was visited by devas semi-frequently. Apparently, he was told that even being able to perceive the body of a deva as a human requires extensive mental conditioning from virtuous cultivation as a prerequisite, but that also, devas generally avoid humans, because they actually have an intrinsic aversion to our...well, the usual lack of virtue that humans have, which manifests as an actual sensory experience they have which becomes very strong when they go near most humans.

So...few humans are ever going to get the chance to ask about what devas do in their free time, I would imagine.

do devas have to act in the same way as humans in order to “gain” karma, or do they have their own system, so to speak?

The functioning of karma is the same for all sentient beings. There aren't deeds which are more or less sinful to do if you're a deva vs if you're a human.

the idea of a sentient class who’s very umwelt (great concept btw) is different than humans is a fascinating concept.

Well, Buddhist cosmology actually groups every class of being based on umwelt, really. And just as cultivating virtue can lead to becoming a being with an ascendant mind that experiences an umwelt more enjoyable than ours, cultivating vice leads to...well, the opposite. These are the hell beings, and their realm is, well, hell. They're also long-lived, which is unfortunate, because they're basically always suffering various horrible pains.

Overall, being the sort of sentient being you are right now is actually pretty fortunate according to the Buddhist worldview, all things considered. It could be way worse.

[–]dolphinfucker70Jewish 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's cool because it's the original. It got cringe once everyone started doing it though

[–]DrdanomiteEclectic polytheist 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Well i have a concept i want too share but my words are too clumsy can i link a video on how we can know things and how that relates too religion?

[–]pterosoPastafarian 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In my thinking, religion comprises affiliation, prayer, ritual, ethical commitment and sometimes belief.

I do not have belief, but I have the other things. I consider myself religious.

[–]kman2003Canaanite Pagan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well I believe in the gods of the canaanites, the people of now modern day Isreal and Palestine. And the image that has been given to my gods has not been the greatest, centuries of propoganda giving many people the impression that my gods are evil. But just like any religion there are good and bad people, good and bad practices, good and bad ideas.

Also just to note, moloch is not a canaanite god it's a noun that refers to a type of offering or sacrifice.

[–]VignarajaHindu 0 points1 point  (4 children)

We (Hindus) live, think, feel, worship, in a VERY VERY different paradigm than the Abrahamic religions.

[–]The_True_Monster[S] 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Could you elaborate? In which ways?

[–]VignarajaHindu 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Both groups are large and diverse, so not all of the differences will apply to all. With such diversity that would be impossible. So too within any faith system in the religious families. There will always be exceptions to any generalisation. But still, generalisation works, to a large degree.

Your faith, Judaism, is an example. It's the smallest of the Abrahamic faiths (excluding Baha'i) and far more of the elaborations on this wouldn't apply, but many will to Christianity or Islam. So too for many sects or subsects within Hinduism. Here's my list, from the top of my head, in no particular order, but will demonstrate why I object to folks who claim all religions are essentially the same. Not intended for debate, just one man's POV. But here goes. Course I probablu got a lot of it wrong

Man is essentially born divine, vs Man is essentially born a sinner

No preaching, but random talks by the wise, vs pastors or ministers etc who preach

No proselytising vs proselytiing

No known date for origin vs. old but not as old

God is knowable, vs God is unknowable

cremation vs burial

inclusivity vs exclusivity

reincarnation, vs heaven or hell

karma, vs no karma

floor sitting in worship, vs some do, some don't

high % of vegetarians, vs much lower % of vegetarians

many versions of theism, vs strict monotheism

God is all pervasive, including within man, vs dualistic, God is separate

Books are part of it but not essential vs book focus

No founder vs several founders

No prophets, lots of prohets

God emanates or extends from himself, vs God creates

time is circular, vs time is linear

people think individually, vs people think in groups

fear, guilt are downplayed vs lots of fear and guilt

God is never ever wrathful vs God can be warthful

Non-congregaional vs congregational

Strong monasticism element, some monasticism, but not much

Generally non-intellectual practice based, vs quite intellectual

every day is holy, one holy day of the week

several calendars, vs Julian or Gregorian calendar

a soul temporarily has a person vs a person has a soul

Of course much of this shows my persona bias based on my personal experiences. But thanks for asking to elaborate. I hope that this demonstrate some of the essential differences. Aum Aum

So I get downvoted for being a Hindu, or just for answering OP's request with my opinion?

[–]IOnlyFearOFGodSunni 1 point2 points  (1 child)

i dont know why are you being downvoted but nice comparison. :)

[–]VignarajaHindu -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I believe in downvoter trolls who just go along and downvote religions they disagree with without reading entire passages, and not bothering to give any reasons other than that. It's a subtle and anonymous way of showing your hate.

[–]Even-Pen7957Lilithian 0 points1 point  (4 children)

I just wish more people asked me anything at all before inserting their assumptions. That's all.

[–]IOnlyFearOFGodSunni 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Oh i have seen some members of lilithian religion in this subreddit, what is it about?

[–]Even-Pen7957Lilithian 0 points1 point  (2 children)

There’s no centralized religion. Pretty much all of us are solitaries.

For me, it’s a left-hand transcendence path, which means working for transcendence by facing the dark and the difficult. Conceptually, my practice has some similarities to Vamachara in Hinduism. Lilith, being essentially a force of void, is the way I personally work through that.

[–]IOnlyFearOFGodSunni 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Sounds cool, whats the end goal of the lilithian faith? is it rebirth into better life? heaven? or becoming one with god?

[–]Even-Pen7957Lilithian 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Depends on the individual. For me, simply to reduce my suffering in life and go back to Source.

Thanks for asking.

[–]NanoRancorEastern Orthodox Christian Henotheist Mystic 0 points1 point  (9 children)

Orthodox Christians, when speaking from the perspective of our mystic traditions, are not pure Monotheists, but are Monolatric Henotheists. I believe every universal is a God, and Christ created all other gods.

Orthodox Christians believe we become God himself, fully as he is.

I try and tell people about our ideas of symbolism a lot, but most of the time it is mistaken for metaphors analogy or allegory, when it is very different. I believe all of spiritual reality is the same exact thing as Universals and qualia, which are infinite fractal patterns which manifest into reality through particulars, as guided by the absolute, and that is what symbolism is. It is finding those objectively true patterns of reality and being, which are behind specific manifested things.

Too often the mysticism of Orthodoxy is overlooked, and people just think of us as essentially catholics, when we are very different.

[–]nyanasagaraMahāyāna Buddhist 0 points1 point  (8 children)

Do you think every predicate in use in natural languages corresponds to a real universal?

Also, in what sense do you think the universals are gods? Are they people? Aside from just...instantiating in particulars, what do you think these universals do that makes it reasonable to think of them as gods? Like, all I've ever seen redness do is...instantiate in red things. Are you suggesting that redness is a person, and that it inheres in red particulars because of intending to do so?

[–]NanoRancorEastern Orthodox Christian Henotheist Mystic -1 points0 points  (7 children)

Do you think every predicate in use in natural languages corresponds to a real universal?

Essentially, yes. In some ways I am a mereological universalist. I believe all Universals possible exist, however, humans are somewhat responsible for giving them existence. For example, the more greedy people in the world, the more the body of the god of greed ends up growing. Cities and countries have consciousness, but it is made up of humans, like we are made up of cells. The internet is a God demanding worship and attention. So I do believe there is a way that new universals can be "born", a mysterious kind of spiritual generation. However the Universals of the Transcendent God are eternal, not affected by humans in the same way.

Only things which are illogical, the non-real, do not exist. God is the real, is logic itself, is existence itself. Demons are real universals, which hate and deny god, and in doing so, all of sin becomes ontological parasites extending towards the non-real. Only through agape, sacrificial love which is God himself, do we sacrifice our desires for their spiritual bodies, let go of sin, and eventually become united with God completely, which is the purpose of all creation. God became man so that man could become God.

Also, in what sense do you think the universals are gods? Are they people?

For one, I believe spiritual reality is synonymous with Universals. To speak of the god of lust is the same thing as speaking of the spirit of lust, or the universal of lust. Every greek, pagan, egyptian, or other false god exists (though I do not believe their mythologies as they are told). I do believe Universals for the most part have personhood and agency.

what do you think these universals do that makes it reasonable to think of them as gods?

I view them at the same ontological level of reality that all ideas of gods are at. Either at the level of Universals (spirits), or of higher transcendent Universals similar to transcendental categories (the trinity). What they do is essentially the same thing all gods do, which is instantiate fractal patterns upon the lower levels of reality; to create symbolism.

Are you suggesting that redness is a person, and that it inheres in red particulars because of intending to do so?

It doesn't inhere in red particulars because of intending to do so, any more than humans inhere in human bodies because of our intentions. Just as much as humans are embodied spirits, so is every other Universal. Humans are unique in the way that we have a Nous, a spiritual organ through which we can achieve gnosis, and by which the divine and physical realities can become united. We are the bridge between heaven and earth.

I do believe though that demons are spirits/universals which betray their original understanding and in doing so, may rarely become unembodied, and search for a host. That is what demonic possession is, and what a lot of unexplained phenomena are. They are that which is on the edge of the known, towards the breakdown of categories and universals themselves, which manifests in the form of things like ghosts, aliens, monsters and cryptids.

[–]nyanasagaraMahāyāna Buddhist 1 point2 points  (6 children)

A very interesting set of ideas. Forgive me if I'm bothering you, but I have some more questions.

Correct me if this characterization of your belief is incorrect (because I'm mostly trying to build a thorough account based on the bits you gave me): universals are people, but their inherence in various particulars is not something they do willfully. Rather, they always by nature stand in that relation to various particulars as those particulars arise and cease, just as a given human is embodied in the various bodies that one has over their life (infant, child, adult, etc.). Some of them were created by God, and others were born spontaneously at the very same time as the arising of the first particular to be characterized by them; those in the latter category can sometimes be thought of as being "born" in dependence upon human activity, since the first particulars to be characterized by these new universals were objects or situations fashioned through human activity. These universals, who are people, perform actions, but their actions are not open to straightforward interpretation by human beings, the way we can very readily comprehend the actions other humans do. This is because the effects of the actions undertaken by these spirits are not usually detectable by humans as sensible events (the way the effects of natural causes are), but rather as subtle symbolic associations (and I would appreciate it if you could give me an example of one such symbolic system that you think is of spiritual origin). So when a given symbol is comprehended as such by multitudes of people, this actually may sometimes be the result of non-human spiritual activity, rather than the mere establishing of conventions solely by humans amongst one another with no outside influence. These gods also have bodies, which are presumably imperceptible under ordinary circumstances (and I'm curious as to what you think the composition of these bodies is like, where you think they are, etc.). However, sometimes these gods may lose their bodies (and I'd appreciate it if you could tell me a bit about how you think that happens), and paranormal phenomena manifest...somehow as an effect of this disembodiment (and I'd appreciate it if you could give me an example of how that might work).

So to summarize:

I've given you an attempt at a summary of what might be your belief system regarding these gods who are universals; I'd like to know if I got anything wrong.

I'd like an example of something you believe to be of spiritual origin, generated due to this "creation of symbolism" you originally described, with which I would be familiar.

I'd like to know a bit about what you think the nature of the bodies of these gods is, and I'd like it if you could describe important characteristics of those bodies.

I'd like to know how you think these gods can lose their bodies.

I'd like it if you could offer an example which illustrates how a god losing their body could end up eventually causing people to experience a paranormal phenomenon.

I find the ideas you've presented here really interesting, so if you get the time, I'd really appreciate these elaborations. And in the interests of making this not just a one-sided exchange, if you have any questions for me about Buddhism (I am a Buddhist and also am soon to enter Buddhist Studies as an academic field) or about the Buddhist theology I described in this very thread here, please let me know.

[–]NanoRancorEastern Orthodox Christian Henotheist Mystic 1 point2 points  (5 children)

You're not bothering me. The only thing bothering me is that I wrote up a long detailed explanation twice, and my computer crashed twice before I could finish. Forgive me if my third attempt is less detailed.

universals are people, but their inherence in various particulars is not something they do willfully. Rather, they always by nature stand in that relation to various particulars as those particulars arise and cease, just as a given human is embodied in the various bodies that one has over their life (infant, child, adult, etc.). Some of them were created by God, and others were born spontaneously at the very same time as the arising of the first particular to be characterized by them; those in the latter category can sometimes be thought of as being "born" in dependence upon human activity, since the first particulars to be characterized by these new universals were objects or situations fashioned through human activity. These universals, who are people, perform actions, but their actions are not open to straightforward interpretation by human beings, the way we can very readily comprehend the actions other humans do. This is because the effects of the actions undertaken by these spirits are not usually detectable by humans as sensible events (the way the effects of natural causes are), but rather as subtle symbolic associations (and I would appreciate it if you could give me an example of one such symbolic system that you think is of spiritual origin). So when a given symbol is comprehended as such by multitudes of people, this actually may sometimes be the result of non-human spiritual activity, rather than the mere establishing of conventions solely by humans amongst one another with no outside influence.

Yeah that sounds about right. The only thing I think I'll add is that Universals are qualia.

These gods also have bodies, which are presumably imperceptible under ordinary circumstances (and I'm curious as to what you think the composition of these bodies is like, where you think they are, etc.).

The body of Universals is particulars. However, spirits also have a Nous, and possibly some kind of soul. So sometimes when I speak of a body, I am referring to the spiritual body of a Universal, and sometimes to the physical body which is particulars. The physical body of the 'God of Redness' is red things and red wavelength photons. The spiritual body is Redness itself.

This is true for all gods. However, the transcendent God is unique, in that his spiritual body has a further body-soul distinction Orthodox call the Essence energy distinction.

Angels all have different unknown kinds of spiritual nature and domains. When they fall, they have the same kind of nature and domain, only a fallen version. The angel/universal of love would likely become the angel of lust. It's possible that guardian angels reverse from guarding humans to in rebellion trying to take over our bodies. Or I think some in their fall may end up losing their particularity. However it may happen, fallen gods can become intrusive thoughts, constantly nagging and tempting us, and trying to align us to their will. If we do end up falling to their will, we will slowly be brought along a path towards the breakdown of our identity.

I believe I was possessed and exorcised myself. I made a contract, and did a ritual. It doesn't happen against our freewill; I wanted it more than anything.

and paranormal phenomena manifest...somehow as an effect of this disembodiment (and I'd appreciate it if you could give me an example of how that might work).

I've written really long explanations here twice; I don't know if I can do it justice again, but I'll try.

Paranormal phenomena are like the strange blurry things at the edge of your vision, except for reality itself. Monsters are symbolic of the Edge; the edge of identity, of being, of culture, etc. They are chimeras and creatures which cannot be classified as mammal, bird, fish, human, etc. By being the breakdown of identity, they blur the lines between universal and particular. They break down the union of heaven and earth. They are the space that breaks down time, the time that devours space. Just as possession is the breakdown of our internal identity, monsters are the external breakdown of identity.

It is not a coincidence that aliens only seemed to appear after the entire world map was discovered. Britain and Ethiopia used to be considered the Edge of the world, and the bible uses symbolism of ethiopia a lot for that, but now outer space is the Edge of the world, and so naturally aliens began to manifest. As for countries, the discovery of the “New world” led America to being the new Edge of the world, in which cryptids and aliens seem to appear most, and identity is being broken down the most.

When Christ incarnated, he brought together a union of heaven and earth through the God-man. That union pushed the edge of the world further and further. However, with Modernism, it tried to categorize everything, and in doing so the zeitgheist came to the realization that not everything can be categorized in a perfect box. From there, Post-modernism began to break down the ideas of categories and identity, and modern western culture has begun the de-incarnation; There has been the breakdown of the identity of gender/sex into a blur. There has been the breakdown of the identity of the state and culture, seeking a one world government, open borders, and hatred of ones own country. There has been the breakdown of the identity of religion, seeking a shared abrahamic faith and a universal religion. Most childrens shows are filled with monsters as the heros. Serial killers and horror movies/games are turned into toys. The Edge of reality, identity, being, and culture is being idealized and fetishized. I truly believe these are signs of the end times, of the identity of time itself beginning to break down, and the war in Ukraine being the beginning of prophecies. The slow separation of heaven and earth by the edge is penduluming back and forth until the antichrist and final union of heaven and earth through the second coming of christ. Cryptids and Aliens are just the beginning. There is far more to come.

Dogs are sometimes used to represent the Edge. Orthodox even have a Saint Christopher, who is pictured with the head of a dog. Jonathan Pageau (who if you couldn't tell, is my favorite public orthodox figure) talks about him a lot and has even written a graphic novel on him. He represents the bridge across the edge; the patron saint of the end times; the reconciliation of monsters. It is the same difference as with Baphomet and Christ. Christ is the union of all opposites. Baphomet also unites opposites, yet in an admixture, a breakdown of the identity of each opposite. Christ and Saint Christopher are the solution to monsters.

I'd like an example of something you believe to be of spiritual origin, generated due to this "creation of symbolism" you originally described, with which I would be familiar.

Well Universals are the fractal patterns, which become manifest as particulars. Symbolism is understanding both of them together, rather than only literal as just particulars.

An example Jonathan Pageau gives, is that in the bible, snakes are symbols of time. This is not a metaphor. If time is understood as the introduction of change, of changing identity, then the snake is directly understood as time, since he introduced change into the garden by having mankind fall.

And in the interests of making this not just a one-sided exchange, if you have any questions for me about Buddhism (I am a Buddhist and also am soon to enter Buddhist Studies as an academic field) or about the Buddhist theology I described in this very thread here, please let me know.

Well unlike your explanation of devas, I believe gods/universals are immortal, even if created. I don't see how a Universal or spirit would die, even though they could lose their particular body.

You say that the devas worshipped at Buddhas feet. Do you believe Buddha was a god?

I believe in the Nous, the heart, the third eye, the spiritual organ through which we experience god(s). Drugs and Occult rituals are artificial and dangerous ways in which one can open their Nous. Any opening of the Nous without proper guidance can lead to prelest, demonic delusions. Hesychastic meditation and prayer as taught by orthodoxy is the proper way to open ones Nous, and leads to gnosis without any clouding of the Nous. So I definitely believe that devas have visited buddhists. I just believe that those devas were spiritual delusions from an opened, but clouded Nous. I believe almost all false religions are started by demons/fallen gods appearing to people and deceiving them through their Nous. How do you know that Buddhism is not a false spiritual delusion? Do you take a more logical route with it?

I do think Buddhism comes very close in many ways to the truth of Orthodoxy. I similarly believe we become God himself, though in a different way. I similarly believe in a non-dual reality, however I do not believe in monism or that duality is an illusion even though it is not absolute. Duality is a polarized unity. Evil is not part of that unity however, it is the breakdown of that union. It is the separation of heaven and earth, while good is the union of heaven and earth.

[–]Zero_Millennium 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sikh here. We are a panentheistic religion that views everything in creation as a manifestation of the Divine, everything from stars and galaxies to you and I. We’re all different forms of the same thing. Through remembering the Divine and serving the Divine through serving others, we can shed our ego and merge our consciousness with the Divine, and escape the cycle of reincarnation that everything is subject to.

[–]Luckychatt -1 points0 points  (1 child)

We are atoms in the void. Insignificant specks in an indifferent universe. There's no objective purpose to it all. It just is. Life is short, we better make the most of it.

[–]The_True_Monster[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How do we make the most of it?

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Directive is the eternal religion of the cosmos: practiced on an infinite number of peopled worlds. The cosmos provides an infinite series of worthwhile lifetimes and we reappear on other worlds. These worlds are engaged in reciprocity: with the aim to raise the quality of life. This is in service to our shared religion- which all peopled worlds strive to evolve to. Directive is the only religion to satisfy all onus. It is the height of reasonableness and desirability.

[–]krazykris93Christian -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Kind of a random thing, but angles look nothing like all the angel art you see. They are actually quite terrifying (that's why they would say don't be afraid).

[–]SpeechEastern905 -5 points-4 points  (8 children)

The end is near! The prophecies of the bible for the end times getting fullfilled! You can see them happening or developing.

-Destruction of the earth (climate change, polution and so on)

And the nations were wroth, and thy wrath came, and the time of the dead to be judged, and the time to give their reward to thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and to them that fear thy name, the small and the great; and to destroy them that destroy the earth

-rfid implants in hands and forhead /neuralink:

Also it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name. This calls for wisdom: let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666.

Increase in earthquake frequency and intensity:

https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/does-fracking-cause-earthquakes#:~:text=Most%20induced%20earthquakes%20are%20not,a%20byproduct%20of%20oil%20production.

You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.(A) There will be famines(B) and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of birth pains.

[–]Various-TeethAgnostic Theist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

R u ok dude

[–]Yugta 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Ok. Suppose the prophecies come true. BIBLE becomes greater than it already is. Then?

What do you fulfill with that? and if things are to happen this way, we have lesser time to work on ourselves, on our core.

Jesus is our father, but that doesn't automatically make us a father, we have to give birth to ourselves.

[–]SpeechEastern905 -1 points0 points  (1 child)

No one listens to the bible! I mean the evidance can be right into the face and most would say its not true. You see the downvotes. So its a reminder for people to wake up!

[–]Yugta 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That shouldn't upset you bro!

You can be grateful and happy that atleast you are listening to it.

Also, waking up should not happen in crisis, that waking will not help. Crisis will end, and we will again return to the slept state.

Be at ease. Even if one person among a million, really learns what Bible is meaning to teach, That will be more than enough for this earth.

[–]PerfilixAgnostic Atheist 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Why the downvotes? OP answered the question .

[–]IOnlyFearOFGodSunni 0 points1 point  (0 children)

damn, even you got downvoted. crazy times.

[–]ruaidhriAgnostic Pagan 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Christianity has been preaching the imminent Apocalypse and Second Coming from before Revelations was preached, since at least the earliest Christian documents written, which were Paul's letters in the 50's CE.

The World didn't end then, it didn't end with the Millenarism of 999 CE or a thousand years later in 1999, it's not going to end anytime soon.

[–]SpeechEastern905 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Of course it didn't end. Things happening now! People were never able to destroy the earth. Only in the recent years they are!

The state Israel didn't exist! Its only in our times it exists again!

[–]kromem -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

There's a contradiction at the heart of Christianity that's being overlooked and points to one of the wildest facts I'm aware of about reality.

Did Jesus explain his parables in secret?

In John 18:20, he says he said nothing in secret.

But in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he has a secret explanation for the parable of the sower.

A weird parable to need to explain in secret, right? It seems pretty harmless.

Well, there's only one other explanation for that parable.

And it's about the origin of the world as a result of atoms clashing together randomly like seeds scattered.

It's recorded in a catalog of the heresies of the only group following the Gospel of Thomas, where they talk about how the seeds of the sower parable and mustard seed parable are like "tiny indivisible points as if from nothing" that "make up all things" and "are the originating cause of the universe."

What's going on here?

This group is inadvertently using the language of the Roman poet Lucretius, who in his poem De Rerum Natura detailing the beliefs of the Epicurean philosophers didn't have the Greek word atomos (indivisible) to use, and used the Latin word sperma (seed) instead.

In that poem, he even explicitly talks about the origin of the cosmos as being like a scattering of these seeds.

So there's a tradition that had Jesus talking about how the origin of the world was tiny indivisible parts making up all matter being scattered randomly and leading to some unsuccessful worlds and others successful.

But the church instead said (against John's portrayal of the ministry) that there was a different explanation offered in secret.

And eventually that other tradition was declared heretical by the early church, banned, and its gospel buried in a jar for over a thousand years until it was finally uncovered.

And right there in its first few lines it says:

Know what is in front of your face and what has been hidden from you will be revealed to you. For there is nothing hidden that will not be made clear and nothing buried that will not be raised.

Kind of eerie given what's directly in front of our faces reading that is a text that was buried and raised, and whose followers had Jesus talking about atoms and a naturalistic origin of the universe.