Ah!!! What you are describing is a fundamental difference between Western and Eastern thought. What you are describing, deviates from the “Nature of Reality” as described by the Greek Philosphers and which forms the foundation of western thought.
Also, what you said there is very profound and is the same as Nasadiya Sukta, from the RigVeda, about 1500BC. (Nasadiya Sukta - Wikipedia). There are several interpretentions, my interpretation is the same as your statement. The Matrix, btw, in Hindu philosophy is Maya.
Are you sure about that ? From what I have read, there are many who believe that a lot of Bible stories are stolen from Zoroastrianism. I am not an expert, but the stories in both religions are extremely similar and Zoroastrianism was around a lot before Jesus.
In fact, one of the Magi who came to welcome Baby Jesus was a Zoroastrian. Saint Melchior ( Patron Saint of Travelers )
This seems to be pretty common. I also grew up as a very devout Mormon and then went through the process of learning how to actually question the validity of a religion.
Mormonism is a very concrete, literal religion with specific answers to damn near everything. As an example, there is a detailed account, the First Vision, of when Joseph Smith first encountered God. Unbelievably detailed
The problem is that the evolution of doctrine can be documented and stories such as the First Vision were significantly changed to match later doctrine.
After studying all of that, there just wasn’t a way to go back to any religion.
Interestingly, a high percentage of former Mormons do become atheists.
Another problem I have is that the religions completely reflect the culture they are developed in. Western religions have western ideals. Eastern religions have eastern ideals. That just indicates to me that the ideas are reacted in the culture rather than having a supernatural origin.
Well, sure. I didn’t mean to denigrate Zoroastrianism (or any other religion) at all. I just meant that members of different Christian denominations about, say, apostolic succession, each seeing the other’s point of view, recognizing that, for example, some Protestant criticisms of Catholic doctrine might have some validity, or at least have come from a place of shared belief, while discussing specific points of doctrine with a Zoroastrian might well be more difficult – there’ far less common ground.
But I really don’t know anything about Zoroastrianism. I just threw it in there as an example of a religion about which I don’t know anything.
This part confuses me too. What exactly is a “Western Religion” ? Is Animism of the Gauls a western religion ? Is Druidism of the Celts a western religion ? Is the religion of the Romani - western ?
Is Islam Western ? Jewism ? Geographically both originates very close to Christianity.
Does Western Religion means only Christianity (even though Christianity itself is Middle Eastern in origin) ?
I was speaking about what some Christians think of Hinduism, not vice versa. Hinduism is wildly eclectic, and famously tolerant, historically anyway.
Also, that Caspar person is entirely mythological. The Gospel of Luke, our only source for this, doesn’t say anything about the ethnicity of the magi – or their names, or their number. All of that is traditional accretion to the Infancy Narrative. The most educated guess is that Luke meant for them to be Zoroastrian Persians. For one thing, Mesopotamia is a hop and skip away compared to India, a place of which Luke probably knew almost nothing.
Yes, learning which are your own thoughts and which are not is a big part of the process of hearing God speaking to you. For me, it’s easiest to tell when I have thoughts telling me to take a very good & kind action which I have absolutely no desire to do. In fact I am very, very sure I don’t want to do it.
They call that a conscience. I have it too, and I’m an atheist.
What’s more likely, that we have it because we’re descended from apes who lived in communal bands (where being an a-hole could endanger the group), or the thinking, speaking creator of the universe is telling you that you shouldn’t do something?
Yes, we all have one and I also experience that but that’s not what I’m referring to. This is something which actively goes against what I want to do and often times I’m terrified to do it. I know myself and know I’m not actually that nice. This is not an idea coming from inside me or from my will.
Again, you’re describing a conscience. You’re attributing it to an outside voice, but that doesn’t mean it is, in fact, from outside.
Also, being nice doesn’t mean you don’t have not-nice impulses. Being nice is how you actually act. If it’s a struggle, and you have to listen to your conscience, to do good things, but you actually do them, then you are actually nice.
I do not think there is any one objectively correct viewpoint, but I am an atheist because there is no reason to believe that any kind of god exists. The evidence that believers put forth very roughly falls into two categories: Faith and intelligent design.
Faith means they believe it just because they believe it. They just feel a god in their hearts. Modern psychology has discovered brain processes that leave a person feeling as though they have had a religious experience, so a person’s subjective experience is not evidence for gods. People also hallucinate when they have sleep paralysis but that isn’t proof of ghosts.
Second, people say, “But look at the world and all the beauty in it. How could all of this exist with a god to create it?” The problem with this line of reasoning is that, OK, then who designed god? Eventually the answer ends up as something like, “God is something that is so far beyond us that we can never hope to completely understand it.” This just kicks the can down the road. There are things about the universe as we know it that are so far beyond us that we may never understand it. Let’s just leave it at that rather than inventing a god so we feel comforted in the false belief that we know more than we really do.
There have been tons of religions in the history of humans for possibly tens of thousands of years, and everyone felt their religion was the one true religion. How can anyone say, “Yes, we have finally arrived at the answer, my religion is now the one true religion.” Notably, most people have the same religion as their parents. That does not indicate that people are researching the available information and coming to the most reasonable conclusion. They are just believing whatever they were taught to believe as children, and conforming to cultural norms.
There is inherent Western (Greek ) logic built into this question. It makes a presumption, that the viewpoint can either be correct or incorrect. Nothing wrong with that, since it keeps things simple.
In terms of Indian philosophy/logic (and maybe other eastern philosophies), the viewpoint may be : correct and not incorrect, correct but maybe incorrect, correct and incorrect, neither correct nor incorrect, …There is no one answer, each answer is equally correct or incorrect, …
