?

Log in

No account? Create an account
The Art of Religion [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
World Religion Discussion

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

(no subject) [Jun. 10th, 2005|10:27 am]
World Religion Discussion

bandarug
A friend of mine was discussing this with me the other day. Thought it was quite interesting:

He was saying that one of his favourite authors writes frequently in her books that people have life themes to perfect when they enter the world. (She believes in reincarnation, but it isn't necessary to believe in that to follow along) 45 themes are listed by her (which are listed here too)

It's suggested that people have two themes...

A bit of clarification: your first theme is is your most powerful trait... the one that drives you. The author he was talking about has humanitarian as her first theme. This means she is driven to help people in any way she can. The second theme is one you must overcome. The author's second theme is loner. This means she tends to want to avoid people (more or less....not in a hermit kind of way) So she must overcome her loner tendancies in order to allow her humanitarian qualities to take hold.

Anyways, thought it was interesting enough to share. If I find out the author, I'll let you know :) Maybe people want to post what their themes are? I'm still working on mine...

themesCollapse )
linkpost comment

(no subject) [Nov. 10th, 2004|07:12 pm]
World Religion Discussion

gunslinger33
[mood |tiredtired]
[music |Radiohead-Treefingers]

lust and covetousnessCollapse )
linkpost comment

reading list [Sep. 29th, 2004|01:31 am]
World Religion Discussion

gunslinger33
I have been doing a bit of study on comparative religion. Here is my reading list:

Dake's Annotated Reference Bible(KJV) - Christianity
God's Plan for Man, Finis Dake - Christianity
Bhagavad Gita: A New Translation, Stephen Mitchell - Hinduism
Buddhism: Plain and Simple, Steve Hagen - Buddhism
The Qu'ran, English Translation, Allamah Nooruddin - Islam
link4 comments|post comment

Guyot Marchand: Danse Macabre [Aug. 27th, 2004|08:12 am]
World Religion Discussion
jevine
It is Guyot Marchand, a publisher, who preserves Jean Gerson's poem, and imprints of the frescos accompanying it. The danse macabre of the cemetery of the church of the Innocent is saved from total disappearance. The mass graves and the ossuary are demolished 1554 to make room for a wide avenue. The cemetery itself disappears in 1780 when it is determined that the health problems of some residents of the district can be traced to soil tainted by decomposition. All the bones are moved by night and deposited over a three years period in the catacombs underneath the city of Paris. What remains for posterity are the Parisian macabre dance images printed using blocks of wood thoroughly notched to allow the reprinting of the images and text.

http://www.angelfire.com/tx4/tapholov/dansemacabre2.htm

(page in French and English)
link2 comments|post comment

(no subject) [Aug. 26th, 2004|11:27 am]
World Religion Discussion

bandarug
[mood |sadsad]









You, Labourer who in care and pain
Have lived your whole life
Must die, that is certain...
You should be happy to die,
For it frees you from great care...
To which the Labourer replies;
Many long for death
Not I! Come wind or rain,
I'd rather be back in the vineyard again.
     - The Guyot verses

link1 comment|post comment

AH!! Eureka! [Aug. 26th, 2004|03:14 am]
World Religion Discussion
jevine

So, this came from a conversation with the lovely Ravnos, who has more beautiful hair then most women I know.  I was telling him about my arguing email attempts to find reference in lit. or on the net to a claim made by Dr. Glenn Kimball on Coast to Coast a.m. last year.  The show was all geared towards Christmas and Christians traditions, where they come from, how it has evolved.  He mentioned that Jesus age of 40 was changed by the church related to Alexander the Great being 33, and they couldnt' allow that the son of God was older than Alexander.  So, over the course of 5 emails, the guy dodged and misread and refused to point to any information, other than the name 'Dionysus Ignatius', which is the equivalent of 'Raul Gonzalez'.  So, in my conversation with Ravnos, he said 'WAIT!'  You mean Dionysus Exiguus!!  And I said 'I do?  Oh...  of course, yes.  Yes I do.  who's that?' 

Well, here we go - Don't read this in one sitting. Your synapses will hurt.

http://cura.free.fr/xx/17sepp1.html

 

Thoughts?  Comments? Coffee?
 

 

 

linkpost comment

Is there an inevitable polatiry to the universe? [Aug. 25th, 2004|12:08 am]
World Religion Discussion

bandarug
[mood |sleepysleepy]
[music |does the music set the mood, or does the mood set the music?]

People often tell me that everything happens for a reason. And this is well and good, except for the fact that when something bad happens, they refuse to see any good in it. I'm not only talking spiritually, but mentally and physically as well.

I'm going to clear up a few things before I start here. 1) I do not think that you need to believe in god for you to believe that their is a guided path for yourself, and 2) I don't necessarily believe that their is a guided path for yourself, however, it is an idea that floats around out there. Ok, with that being said, I will continue.

I do agree that every decision you make takes you on a different path than the other. Kind of like a tree and it's branches, and depending on what path you take, you will live a certain way, or for a certain amount of time. However, it is very difficult for people to accept that what they have done in the past has affected how they are living now, or that what they do now migth affect the way they are living in the future. I know that it is very easy to say to yourself "Ok, if I eat 3 bags of chips in 1 sitting I'm going to feel gross tomorrow morning", but what happens on the larger scale?

So, we've already established that every decision we make takes us on a learning journey. The only problem is, how do you cope with the fact that once you realize there is a hurdle, that you have to get over it the best you can so that you can reap the benefits of the path you have taken. A lot of the times people will say "if only I'd make the other decision, I wouldn't be in this mess right now", but would you be in a greater mess? Question #1: Is there something guiding us along that has already made our minds up for us, or do we decide and set our destiny as we go?

Ok, moving on a little bit. If we do decided that there is something out their guiding us along, how do we come to terms with not blaming others for what is happening? I think it is all too often that people placee blame or shame on others to avoid coming to terms with the fact that we sometimes need to place ourselves in situations that help us look within for our peacec and serenity... because unfortunately, it's sometimes very unlikely to find it outside. When everywhere around you outside is chaotic and misinterpretted, how can you find it within yourself to say "hey, this is where I came from, this is where I'm going, and nothing around me is going to stop me"? It's very difficult... without first believing that regardless what decision you make, something has already decided it for you. Unless of course, you answered no to questions #1. In which case, I present you with question #2: where do you go in life if you're not guided by something?

In a strict regime in life, (a prison for example) where everything is set out for you like a day planner, it's very simply to know what to do and where to go. However, for the rest of the world who is not governed by a strict regime, where do we know where to turn? How is it that we can make decision in the present that we think might affect the future, but not know how? It's the classic "chicken or egg" syndrome.

Do we make decision that affect the final product, or does the "pre-destined" final product pursuade the decisions?

So, in short, everything is up in the air. Whether you believe in one religion and not the other, or one way of thinking and not the other, it all comes to what you believe for yourself. There is no one answer, but our own answer; and our own answer is only followed by more questions.

So, my final question. Question #3: How the hell does anyone get through life without a complete mental breakdown. I already feel lost and overwhelmed at 21, I can't imagine how much worse it gets as I get older! :)
link4 comments|post comment

(no subject) [Aug. 14th, 2004|07:56 am]
World Religion Discussion

bandarug
Why don't baptists have mass? What do they do instead?
link3 comments|post comment

I Bombard you with Christian Ideology in Artform [Aug. 12th, 2004|03:38 pm]
World Religion Discussion

bandarug
Ok... Take a good look at this and tell me what you see:
GiottiCollapse )

Ok... from what I can tell of this painting, there are a couple major things going on.

1. St Franciss (the guy with the halo) Has decided he's going to spread the word of his lord, and despite the fact that he was born of rich blood, he has taken a life of poverty and so on. So, here he is in his barefeet, while his not to holy friend (guy without the halo) watches him teach birds. *guy without the halo has sandals, so obviously is not as religiously inclined as he*

2. Guy without the halo looks very much like a nun, but this is not confirmed anywhere.

3. St. Francis has decided that he is going to spread the word of his lord *as I have mentioned*. However, he finds it increasingly difficult to find people to listen to him. So, he resorts to birds. The look on concentration on his face implies that he's not going to rest until the birds known what there is to know.

4. The birds are to then go and spread the word given by St. Francis to the rest of the world. much like Jesus and his Apostles. Jesus can't talk to everyone at once, so he educates some of his friends and they bear some of the weight for him.

5. St. Francis' hands: 1) one hand is open, palm up, implying that he is receiving something, it's an open and trusting gesture. 2) The other hand has three fingers extended while the pinkie is tucked neatly away. This is the sign most preist use when making the cross - sign of the trinity.

6. The background is monochromatic, thus trying not to draw attention from the real issue going on here. As well, his hands are silhouetted in black - The only thing I can think of for this is that again, he was trying to draw attention to the scene.

7. The birds are completely trtusting of him. They are at ease and they are even touching his robe, which implies that they are in a trance by St. Francis' words - as most birds are very scared and will not come this close to any human.

This is what I see in this painting... however, I'm sure it's subject to interpretation, as is most art. So, feel free to elaborate or disagree.
link3 comments|post comment

Word of God vs. Word of Man [Aug. 11th, 2004|01:29 pm]
World Religion Discussion
jevine
I'm posting this under Art of Religion as I think it falls under Religious Practice, of which currently there are many very bad artists. Also because there needs to start being something on here besides my banter with Bandarug - not that that shouldn't continue!!!

I was just listening to the BBC on the way home from lunch, and unfortunatley didn't catch the names of the inverviewed or the name of the show, but the comments I heard set off an entire dialogue in my head about religion.

The overall conversation was about whether or not homosexuality was good for the 'flock', and one interview believed it was, one interviewer beliefved that scripture spoke against it.

The interviewer opposed said, 'God ultimately wants what's best for his people. And I don't believe that this the best lifestyle for God's people, the church has an obligation to say no.'

Let me calm a bit.



Now.

First off, I need to say this just so it's not an issue in the discussion, homosexuality does not equal pedofilia. It might be tempting to make that the core of the discussion, but it's not where I wish to take it. That can be discussed elsewhere, and if it's to be fair, only if it's a discussion of pedofilia in totum, as there are plenty of hetero-pederos out there.

Secondly, looking at any number of historical/current event topics and books, I'd have to say that God does not really want what's best for It's people. God seems to continually throw things in people's lives that seem either unfair, unjust, or even flat out wrong, possibly a tad 'E-vil'. So... what could God possibly want or expect for It's people, this being the case?

It seems that what God wants is for people to experience all these things, and do the best they personally can to deal with them, and come through them with dignity, honour, and an unscathed love for life in this universe, for those that do us wrong in hopes that we will one day accept each other as the brothers and sisters we are. Basically, to deal with things in the best way we can. Time Bandits said it best - boy: "Why do you allow bad things to happen to good people?" God "I think it has something to do with Free Will."

From the many homosexuals that I have known, and the few relationships that I have had (which were heterosexual), I have to say, that for people who are respectful, loving, intelligent, and homosexually active, this might in fact be the best for them. Why? Comparing the homosexual relationships (of others) I know to the heterosexual relationships I know, (of others and of myself), I'd say the weight of respectability falls heavily in homosexual's favor.

I've known far too many cheaters, thievers, liers, and frankly people who are not honest with themselves about what they want, to believe that their "God-sanctioned heterosexual relationship" has ANYTHING whatsoever to do with a belief in God or a love of life. These relationships are based on loneliness, on desperation, and on lying to the partner and the self (not to say all heterosexual relationships, but what seems like a majority of the ones I've been involved in as a friend to the parties or a parner myself). Whereas, on the other hand, the homosexual relationships that come to mind (of people I know) are respectful, loving, and not sexually derogatory - in fact, far less sexually explicit than comments I'll make on a day to day basis.

This isn't to say that there isn't a lot of lascivious activity in the homosexual community. But have you been to ANY bar lately? Or in a simple public environment, watching eyes? And clothes, and body language? Lascivious behavior was not invented by homosexuals. And if it was, it had willing counterparts in the hetero community. Any look at our Greek and Latin 'forefathers' shows this (of several hundred years ago). But that's another discussion.

So, what this leads me to believe, is that people like the gentleman in favor of a non-homosexual house of God, are not trying listen to what God is saying. They are trying to listen to what their own beliefs say in regards to keeping people happy in their discrimination of 'us vs. them'. The problem is, if at the outset you are for making rules and laws that keep people at odds, then how are we ever to learn to live together on this planet? Homosexuality in my opinion is pretty low on the scale of divisive subjects, but if people can't get over themselves, realize that homosexuality is real, a fact, not going anywhere, and that THAT'S OK, then how are we ever going to tackle things like Religious/Governmental/Environmental disunity?

I find it interesting that there are a large number of Homosexual Christians, Homosexual Republicans, Homosexual Democrats, Homosexual educators. Is this bad, or indicative of the world 'going to Hell in a handbasket'?

Ultimately, I have to say no. I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with being Christian, Republican, Democrat, or an educator.
link6 comments|post comment

navigation
[ viewing | most recent entries ]
[ go | earlier ]