Yea i don't understand that i looked at it before i asked.
well, from what i gather, its mostly based on a pantheistic view that 'god' = the universe = everything. So in that mind set, we are all a part of 'god'.
An example of this mentality is - "You are this universe experiencing itself, very briefly, as a human." Eckhart Tolle
I do a lot of slating of religions I see has harmful, but I have no ill view of this belief structure, nor that of the Buddhists. They are harmless, not least because they have no doctrine that demands anything but only suggests peace as a way of life.
That said, on my personal view, I don't think the fact that they are harmless makes them any more right.
Hm Nope just another label that got thrown at me i cannot seem to agree with that and i find that religion isn't harmful if the person is a good person and knows right's from wrongs and uses them correctly in knowing this. So i don't think anythings bad i think the people believing something can be bad. But some religions no matter what are bad depending on the religion. But i don't know about me :) i just go my own ways i have no "Place i fit" Agnostic is really the best thing to say for me so i would assume.
I'd agree with the principle of that. People can be bad no matter what they believe. But good people can and be really evil in the name of religion, through miss understanding or manipulation. I think that these religions, with supreme beings and books of commands are not evil in them selves. But people can very easily use them to justify evil deeds and manipulation to get others to do some awful stuff to.
In the end, we could debate this for a month, I have seen the evil done in the name of 'god'. I think there is far more negative effects from many of the main stream religions than positives. I understand the opposing view to this, but cant see me ever agreeing with it.
That said, I would never take someone right to identify themselves as religious, and if they are good people, I will see them as good. You can be agnostic, atheist, Christian, new age, Muslim any thing else in any mixture, it doesn't matter to me. All I care about is that the person is good. That they don't just believe what people say or what they want them to do just because they believe the same thing. And they definitely shouldn't expect everyone to agree with their beliefs.
I've long since said that religious people would be great if it wasn't for organised religion. And to be honest, that's where I think it falls down. people join these organisations, then the organisations start doing really awful things and people are surprised they get labelled as if they may be doing them to?
I've already said way to much, I think we'd have to agree to dis agree on the religions not being bad, I've seen way to much, but maybe that's just where I'm from.
No i think you got a very good point going there i don't fully agree but in some ways i still do agree. Organized religion i am taking a guess its a group of people and i would have to say i never liked anything to do with religion in groups. I am not a new age though i asked the question because i have been pointed to that being a "Possibility once" but its not me. I gotta ask am i correct on the meaning behind organized religion?
I think i just like exploring religion, And yes it does seem like we will agree to disagree on some parts but i think i agree more then disagree :)
oh yea, it came across as a curiosity of something someone else tried to label you so don't worry about that.
I would call 'organised religion' any group based on a belief structure that's big enough to have leaders. To be hones't I think its the leaders that are the problem. 'faith' is fine, until you put it in a person, or a book for that matter, that came from a person to.
New Age is a broad term. It encompasses a lot of dipsy-doodle mystical thinking and cynical repackaging of ideas borrowed from Buddhism, Taoism, and other Eastern religions. It's common for them to promote belief in subjective truth. "You have your truth and I have mine." New Age Christianity really bends over backwards to be loose and nonspecific when it comes to doctrine. Why drive anyone away from the donation plate?
What do you mean by "I believe in energy"?
"new age" is the whole "energy woo"... no offense, but there is no scientific evidence for it (despite the actual meaning of the term is being misused), just like there is none for any god(s). Here's a great podcast examining the topic: