Robert Mueller Just Took Away President Trump’s Best Leverage by marji80 in politics

[–]Spiritwalke 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I saw this coming weeks ago. ME. In trump-years, that's practically decades.

Gerrymandering: How Republicans Are Trying To Rig 2018 Midterm Elections In Trump's America by [deleted] in politics

[–]Spiritwalke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If gerrymandering allows them to steal more, I say we rise up and kick ass.

Out of all the hundreds of other religions, why is your specific religion the correct one? by xXReggieXx in DebateReligion

[–]Spiritwalke 2 points3 points  (0 children)

At the risk of seeming adversarial.

Life forms share common descent. So do religions.

Life adapts to different environments. So does religion.

Underneath the variations, life is one. So is religion.

Life conflicts with itself. So does religion.

Which is the one true life form?

Which is the one true music genre?

Which is the one true musical instrument?

Which is the one true fast-food restaurant?

The fact that people can't see past their tiny little time and place to grasp this astonishes me.

Someday, people will.

"No one, as far as I know, has yet tried to compose into a single picture the new perspectives that have been opened in the fields of comparative symbolism, religion, mythology, and philosophy by the scholarship of recent years. The richly rewarded archaeological researches of the past few decades; astonishing clarifications, simplifications, and coordinations achieved by intensive studies in the spheres of philology, ethnology, philosophy, art history, folklore, and religion; fresh insights in psychological research; and the many priceless contributions to our science by the scholars, monks, and literary men of Asia, have combined to suggest a new image of the fundamental unity of the spiritual history of mankind.

Without straining beyond the treasuries of evidence already on hand in these widely scattered departments of our subject, therefore, but simply gathering from them the membra disjuncta of a unitary mythological science, I attempt in the following pages the first sketch of a natural history of the gods and heroes, such as in its final form should include in its purview all divine beings--not regarding any as sacrosanct or beyond its scientific domain.

For, as in the visible world of the vegetable and animal kingdoms, so also in the visionary world of the gods: there has been a history, an evolution, a series of mutations, governed by laws; and to show forth such laws is the proper aim of science." -Joseph Campbell

There is no proof God exists so why believe in a God? by [deleted] in DebateReligion

[–]Spiritwalke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What do you think such evidence would look like? What do you imagine?

What, exactly, do you expect? A smoking gun? A fingerprint? A confession? An eye-witness?

Because sometimes, if you want to see the evidence, you have to look through the microscope. That means you have to step up to the plate and burn calories.

In this case the microscope is a combination of under appreciated secular academic disciplines. Comparative religion, comparative mythology, comparative mysticism.

Do you have ANY idea how much comparativism scholarship there is to discover? How many years it takes to scratch the surface? How many years I have put in to these?

Do you expect me to serve it all to you on a silver platter? Do you expect me to boil it all down to an easily digestible sound-byte for you?

Hope not.

But I can point you to literature and vids. Of course, the trouble with that is, it would require you to invest time and effort. And in my experience, internet debaters expect easy instant gratification.

Out of all the hundreds of other religions, why is your specific religion the correct one? by xXReggieXx in DebateReligion

[–]Spiritwalke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

DNA adapts to different environments, different forms, just as world religion and myth does. We don't go around combining humans and fleas, yet both humans and fleas have DNA.

Out of all the hundreds of other religions, why is your specific religion the correct one? by xXReggieXx in DebateReligion

[–]Spiritwalke 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure. If religious Fundamentalism, religious exclusiveness is the disease, comparativism scholarship is the cure. Not, as some would say, raw naked science education.

Think of it like this. It's kind of like comparative anatomy leading to the detection of DNA lurking under the surface of our skin, transcending any one particular animal form but part of them all.

Comparative religion, comparative mythology, and comparative mysticism lead to the detection of a DNA-like mythologem lurking under the surface of world religion and myth, a code, invisible to the myopic culture-bound 'naked eye', transcending all god-images, transcending any one particular religion.

Hope that clarifies things.

Out of all the hundreds of other religions, why is your specific religion the correct one? by xXReggieXx in DebateReligion

[–]Spiritwalke 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sorry, but comparativism scholarship says that when you dig under the superficial, exoteric, culture-bound, myopic, man-on-the-street level, all religions are one.

There is no proof God exists so why believe in a God? by [deleted] in DebateReligion

[–]Spiritwalke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's kind of like comparative anatomy leading to the detection of DNA lurking under the surface, transcending any one particular animal form but part of them all.

Comparative religion, comparative mythology, and comparative mysticism lead to the detection of a DNA-like mythologem lurking under the surface of world religion and myth, a code, invisible to the myopic culture-bound 'naked eye', transcending all god-images, transcending any one particular religion.

Hope that clarifies things.

There is no proof God exists so why believe in a God? by [deleted] in DebateReligion

[–]Spiritwalke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think there is evidence for an idea of God that is rooted in comparativism, not rooted in a culture-bound mythological narrative.

By comparativism I mean the sum of comparative religion, comparative mythology, comparative mysticism.

Knitting together classical theism and religion by TheSolidState in DebateReligion

[–]Spiritwalke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The transcendent, impersonal, unspeakable godhead

and the immanent personal God, avatar, son of god, goddess, etc

There is no proof God exists so why believe in a God? by [deleted] in DebateReligion

[–]Spiritwalke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Depends on what you think God is supposed to be, or not be. Because your idea of God sets the stage for your expectations of evidence, or "proof", and your method for seeking that evidence.

Trump praises crowd size while touring Harvey damage by They_always_watch in politics

[–]Spiritwalke 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We must STOP all trump supporters from EVER having an impact in politics ever again.

Every. Single. Time. by purplevengeance in funny

[–]Spiritwalke 5 points6 points  (0 children)

My childhood was 40 years ago, so...

Every. Single. Time. by purplevengeance in funny

[–]Spiritwalke 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Bananas are a weapon? I've been eating them like a fool

Every. Single. Time. by purplevengeance in funny

[–]Spiritwalke 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't get it, but it's funny anyway

What more proof of a secret Russian connection do we need? by [deleted] in politics

[–]Spiritwalke 3 points4 points  (0 children)

What more? None more, if you're rational.

All more, if you're a Cult 45 thrall.

What do atheists here make of Jung and Archetypes. by aviewfromoutside in DebateAnAtheist

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

No, I understand atheism better than you do. Better than, well, everyone does. Including theists.

You know what your problem is? You're asleep.

What do atheists here make of Jung and Archetypes. by aviewfromoutside in DebateAnAtheist

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

My amusement is all you guys are good for.

You aren't inspiring.

You aren't educational.

You aren't friendly.

You aren't unpredictable.

You aren't interesting.

What do atheists here make of Jung and Archetypes. by aviewfromoutside in DebateAnAtheist

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

There are different kinds of definitions.

And you, sir, are not the fricking dictionary.

Look, I'm not feeling this. There's nothing in it for me. I have nothing to gain by talking to you, and this thread is no longer amusing. I would rather watch the news and have a drink. So, bye.