Martial Arts & Religion

[GeneChing]

I thought this news bit might generate some discussion. ;)

A new type of martial arts for the BVI – Christian Gung-Fu (http://www.bvinews.com/default.asp?sourceid=&smenu=198&twindow=&mad=&sdetail=4230&wpage=1&skeyword=&sidate=&ccat=&ccatm=&restate=&restatus=&reoption=&retype=&repmin=&repmax=&rebed=&rebath=&subname=&pform=&sc=1924&hn=bvinews&he=.com)
Paul On The Ball Hewlett 21.JAN.08
In the wake of rising crime in the BVI a new martial arts school has opened with the specific focus of taking crime off the streets and teaching the youngsters to redirect their efforts to something more productive and disciplined.

With this in mind, third degree Black Belt Sifu (Sensei) Gath Hewlett, who has been involved in martial arts for over 25 years and has practiced a number of different styles in the art, has created a new style of martial arts called God’s Christian Gung-Fu Academy (GCGA).

Many will remember Sifu Hewlett as the person who led the way forward for Purple Dragon after Sensei Albert Andrews and his wife departed for the US. Sifu stayed at the helm for over five years, but increasingly, like Bruce Lee, had a burning desire to carry martial arts to new heights in the BVI.

The school, GCGA, has practice three days a week, Monday and Wednesday from 7:30-9:00 p.m. at Body Images located by Botanic Station (by Happy Lion Restaurant - next to Social Development Building) and Saturdays from 3 to 5:30pm in the Sea Cow’s Bay Community Centre yard.

In an interview, Sifu Hewlett first gave me his background in martial arts.

“I have been seriously involved in martial arts ever since I know myself really. As a boy I would practice on my brother but from about the age of 20 I began studying first Judo in Tortola under Sensei Graham from England and then for four years in Canada. I then took up Taekwondo under Professor Dong Ja Yang while at Howard University. Finally I moved onto Don-Jitsu Ryu (a hybrid form of Jiu-Jitsu) under Sensei Albert Andrews of Professor Don Jacob of Purple Dragon for the last 10 years or so, until leaving the organization last year, not long after my wife’s passing.”

I next asked Sifu Hewlett to give some background on the philosophy of the new school. “This school is a conglomeration of many styles. It is an eclectic representation of Chinese Gung-Fu, using mainly the principles of Wing Chun and Hop Gar (monkey) Kung Fu, but also introducing elements of Brazilian Capoera as well as other hard styles (like Shotokan Karate and Taekwondo). The unique combination of styles makes for a unique representation and appearance, as it boasts completely unique forms and self-defense techniques, apart from the Chi-Kung exercises taken directly from Shaolin practices (obtained through research and learned from personal experience directly from practitioners of the art). It is a perfect combination of hard and soft styles,” he said.

Sifu Hewlett also explained what makes this new style unique and more effective than any other. “The philosophy of the school also makes it unique, as it is based solely on Christian principles, not Buddhism, Zen, Taoism or any other Eastern religion. The forms, affirmations, declarations and philosophy are all delicately interwoven to enable the practitioner to attain a highly developed sense of spiritual awareness of God, as he/she practices the movements and progresses through the levels. The journey becomes a highly personalized one and a struggle with self as the main opponent and the Evil One (and our bad habits) as our only enemy,” he said.

Sifu Hewlett next outlined his first five-year goal for the new school. “Over the next five years, I intend to open the school to be available for younger members, two, create some adult members who will rank at the black belt or instructor level, three, open new branches first within the BVI and then throughout the Caribbean and world, four, represent the BVI (either myself or one of my students or both) at an international competition or event so as to enhance the BVI’s tourism industry, and five, contribute to the education of the BVI community in a way that benefits people across all walks of life and age groups,” he explained.

The uniform which is orange also has a special significance. “The uniform was designed to emulate the Shaolin monks in China and also be comfortable and easy to mass produce. The orange colour is one which is chosen by the monks because of its positive energy, without being too loud. One will stand out but can yet be humble. I liked these reasons but chose the colour mainly to emulate the monks. The idea of associating with peaceful warriors, rather than the assassin-type warrior of the ninja (who dress in black) was deliberate. We want the same level skill as the ninja, without the association of being ‘killers’. In fact, we would rather be known as healers and protectors rather than mere fighters. The fighting art is just another road to perfection of self.

He finally spoke of his personal vision for GCGA. “My personal goal is create as many ‘friends’ or ‘healers’ as I can who will come to this level with me, so that we can enjoy and pass on the joys and lessons of getting closer to God to other healing friends. We shall witness to the world the power of Christ through this beautiful art of Gung-Fu. We shall perform seemingly impossible feats in Christ’s name. We shall draw many souls to God and save many from the Enemy’s snares of doom and destruction,” he said.

Sifu Hewlett will hold his first grading this coming Saturday at the Multi Purpose Sports Complex in Road Town opposite the Althea Scatliffe Primary School. For more information contact Sifu Hewlett on 540-1643 or email: timdarx@yahoo.com

[Shaolin Wookie]

It's typical Christian arrogance: a cultural art from another country just isn't complete unless it conforms to the religious ideals of the West.

They use it as a vehicle, as a kind of candy for children, in order to proseltyze to the masses. I love the fact that he's going to perform miracles.

It's like the kung-fu nuts of the Cultural Revolution.

Question: is this any more acceptable than Chung Moo Quan?

Note: Capoeria, Karate, Monkey kung-fu (Cross-training....LOLOL!!!!)....they're rooted in so-called "pagan" traditions. Capoeira is, traditionally, a rogue art of street hoods; monkey kung-fu has roots in Chinese myth.

Why don't they just create a fighting sytle based on Christian principles? Basically, you're a rag doll, and you just keep turning your cheek. It's a boring kata to watch, but it teaches you just what to do in the face of conflict.

There's a sword form (for the ensiferous C[hristian]MA's), but it only aims at lopping off ears. I can't figure out why.

Watch out for my Doubting Thomas style! It's known for it's finger strikes.......my St. Paul style is rooted in the horse stance, but for some reason you have to fall over when you're performing it.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Nothing is more Christian than kicking someone in the face.
:D

[monkeyfoot]

I cant wait to see the double crosses in action :D

[sanjuro_ronin]

I like the "no buddhist" thing AND the orange uniforms emulate the shaolin monks :cool:

[Shaolindynasty]

I'm confused. :confused:

Since when does the study of judo TKD and JJ qualify you to teach wing chun and Hop Ga?

Also, if he is so opposed to buddhism why is his uniform designed to emulate a buddhist robe?

This guy sounds lke a bull**** artist trying to use Christianity to market himself

[doug maverick]

Hop Gar (monkey) Kung Fu,

didn't know hop gar was monkey kung fu.

[doug maverick]

“The uniform was designed to emulate the Shaolin monks in China and also be comfortable and easy to mass produce. The orange colour is one which is chosen by the monks because of its positive energy, without being too loud. One will stand out but can yet be humble. I liked these reasons but chose the colour mainly to emulate the monks. The idea of associating with peaceful warriors, rather than the assassin-type warrior of the ninja (who dress in black) was deliberate. We want the same level skill as the ninja, without the association of being ‘killers’. In fact, we would rather be known as healers and protectors rather than mere fighters. The fighting art is just another road to perfection of self.

idk what to say about this one

[Shaolindynasty]

This guy is so far off it almost made my head explode.

[Shaolin Wookie]

Have the Virgin Islanders learned nothing?

I hope it's a covert ninja assassin gang.

BVI till I die, sucka!

[jdhowland]

"GOD'S Christian Gung Fu"!!

That beats my grandmasters. Although he didn't specify which god...

[Golden Spider]

Jesus; saving people with violence. The Conversion continues!

[MasterKiller]

The man in action:

http://www.upperroomvc.org/pages.php?action=news&id=33

[jdhowland]

The man in action:

http://www.upperroomvc.org/pages.php?action=news&id=33

I prefer the Bouncy Tiger. That should be the name of a system: Shaking Crane and Bouncy Tiger.

[diego]

I thought this news bit might generate some discussion. ;)

um isn't all the animal and element style meditations too pagan for jesus....

[doug maverick]

um isn't all the animal and element style meditations too pagan for jesus....

actually no there not. you have allot of Christian kung fu masters, both western and Chinese(met quite a few xing yi teacher's who were Christians in Taiwan and even a few here in new york) while the animal styles can be considered shamanic it all depends on the way you practice really.

[SifuChow]

I'm confused. :confused:

Since when does the study of judo TKD and JJ qualify you to teach wing chun and Hop Ga?

Also, if he is so opposed to buddhism why is his uniform designed to emulate a buddhist robe?

This guy sounds lke a bull**** artist trying to use Christianity to market himself

I have nothing against Christian Kung Fu, especially since one of the most active schools in my area is the Christian Wushu Fellowship, a Kung Fu school with a pretty impressive group of students.

I do find it odd that someone studied Judo, TKD and JJ and believes they can create their own Kung Fu style. Not only do they create their own Chinese style out of their training in non-Chinese styles, they also claim that their style is the best: "Sifu Hewlett also explained what makes this new style unique and more effective than any other"....interesting.

My opinion is if this person really is a Sifu, he would have discussed his training in Kung Fu, not the other styles. If he really knows as many styles as he claims to incorporate into his style, he is probably not an expert in any of them and at best probably knows the basics of these styles. If he is a real martial artist he would have some respect for other styles instead of just claiming that his "chop suey" style is the best.

[cjurakpt]

didn't know hop gar was monkey kung fu.

it's a clever ruse to fool...SATAN!!!

[Drake]

This is less about christianity and more about a McDojo concept. It's easier to sucker in christians if they think it's jesus-oriented.

[htowndragon]

so...how the hell does he know hop gar period?

[CFT]

so...how the hell does he know hop gar period?He can't if he describes it as monkey kung fu.

[ngokfei]

This guy is weird

But its no different then Shaolin Temple teaching martial Arts. It goes against the basic principles of buddhism.

Yeah, he says he learned everything else but Kung Fu and now is a Kung Fu teacher:confused:

Christianity as it is practiced does fall into the catagory of being a "Pagan Religion".

Its more akin to internal versus external. If its external/not christianity then it is considered Pagan.

Hell the image everybody uses to represent Jesus is actually taken from the likeness of Zeus.:D

[Drake]

Except that Zeus would seriously whoop Jesus' ass in a fight.

[BruceSteveRoy]

http://i.thefairest.info/funniest_thumbs/C7LT7i.jpeg

[GeneChing]

I just skimmed the Christian Wushu Fellowship website (http://www.christian.wushu.com/). Interesting.

ngokfei - the practice of martial arts only goes against the basic principles of Buddhism if your intention is misguided. Of course, if you're fixated on some of the sutras the forbid monks touching weapons, you could make an argument focusing on that particular instance, but it would be a mistake to do so. Every longstanding religion has developed contradictory interpretations and they all preach peace to some degree. The same is essentially true for Taoism and Christianity. At least Islam is more honest that way.

[tattooedmonk]

This is less about christianity and more about a McDojo concept. It's easier to sucker in christians if they think it's jesus-oriented.

I have to agree that it is easier to sucker Christians if it is Jesus oriented.I have to add that there is nothing wrong with religion on the whole, however, it is the extremists and the misguided that make religion look bad.

[tattooedmonk]

This guy is weird

But its no different then Shaolin Temple teaching martial Arts. It goes against the basic principles of buddhism.

Yeah, he says he learned everything else but Kung Fu and now is a Kung Fu teacher:confused:

This guy is weird for sure.
If Martial arts training goes against basic buddhist principles, how do you think it is that Shaolin came to practice it??

KUNGFU??Depends on what your definition of Kung Fu is.

[tattooedmonk]

I just skimmed the Christian Wushu Fellowship website (http://www.christian.wushu.com/). Interesting.

ngokfei - the practice of martial arts only goes against the basic principles of Buddhism if your intention is misguided. Of course, if you're fixated on some of the sutras the forbid monks touching weapons, you could make an argument focusing on that particular instance, but it would be a mistake to do so. Every longstanding religion has developed contradictory interpretations and they all preach peace to some degree. The same is essentially true for Taoism and Christianity. At least Islam is more honest that way.Gene, I like the way you see things.

[tattooedmonk]

um isn't all the animal and element style meditations too pagan for jesus....This is a very good point. This is a topic for a whole new thread. I have had many discussions about this.

[tattooedmonk]

actually no there not. you have allot of Christian kung fu masters, both western and Chinese(met quite a few xing yi teacher's who were Christians in Taiwan and even a few here in new york) while the animal styles can be considered shamanic it all depends on the way you practice really.Converts???

[tattooedmonk]

so...how the hell does he know hop gar? period.Fixed it for ya. :D

[diego]

This is a very good point. This is a topic for a whole new thread. I have had many discussions about this.
this christian cat was all into me showing him some gung fu...we start talking about how i like bhudda and all the prophets in general...he like jesus...i'm like yeah bhudda was before jesus he did some good...he like jesus...i'm like yeah all the religions is just god speaking differant languages...he like jesus:rolleyes::mad:

i got to the point where it's just like dude you wack all about jesus condescending others...i be like bhudda he like jesus is all what else is there....um mad history before jesus was born....all you need is jesus...

basically i got to the point i was like jesus is gay suck him off *****...no disrespect to ****sexuals i'm an 80's baby grew up on rambo and **** that's just how i talk:)

told him you wack talking all about jesus is the best when islam peeps and bhuddists hindu etc have helped more people than you have talking all about how much you like jesus and he rubs your balls....i'm was like how many people have you helped ****er! **** jesus

now i love talking about what is GOD i can't stand the toy closedmindedness of born again retards....i went to sunday school i know all about jesus...cuz i research every religion so i know about lighting up the darkness...

[sanjuro_ronin]

this christian cat was all into me showing him some gung fu...we start talking about how i like bhudda and all the prophets in general...he like jesus...i'm like yeah bhudda was before jesus he did some good...he like jesus...i'm like yeah all the religions is just god speaking differant languages...he like jesus:rolleyes::mad:

i got to the point where it's just like dude you wack all about jesus condescending others...i be like bhudda he like jesus is all what else is there....um mad history before jesus was born....all you need is jesus...

basically i got to the point i was like jesus is gay suck him off *****...no disrespect to ****sexuals i'm an 80's baby grew up on rambo and **** that's just how i talk:)

told him you wack talking all about jesus is the best when islam peeps and bhuddists hindu etc have helped more people than you have talking all about how much you like jesus and he rubs your balls....i'm was like how many people have you helped ****er! **** jesus

now i love talking about what is GOD i can't stand the toy closedmindedness of born again retards....i went to sunday school i know all about jesus...cuz i research every religion so i know about lighting up the darkness...

and on that note:

[diego]

and on that note:

THROWS ZIPPO IN THE AIR and shouts HipHopHooray:p

[cjurakpt]

and on that note:

THROWS ZIPPO IN THE AIR and shouts HipHopHooray:p

no, I think you were supposed to shout, "Puh-RAYZ-ah J-EE-ahzus!!!"

[diego]

no, I think you were supposed to shout, "Puh-RAYZ-ah J-EE-ahzus!!!"

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=4TtiiwItCEU

[ngokfei]

Gene,

Your right in this case because we are talking about "Chinese" Buddhism which in many places diverts from the Source - India. To talk about Shaolin's take on Buddhism is unique to themselves only, and something to discuss for another day.:D

You can take anything and make it fit what you are doing. Take the Constitution, the Bible/Tora/Koran.

Trying to write something down clearly that can not be interpreted in another way. This is why lawyers are so rich:p

[GeneChing]

How about Jewish TKD?
Judaism and martial arts: compatible for life (http://www.jewishdayton.org/page.html?ArticleID=165740)
By Rabbi David Burstein and Steve Markman, Special To The Dayton Jewish Observer

Recent visitors to the Boonshoft Center for Jewish Culture and Education have noticed dozens of adults and children dressed in white martial arts uniforms and sporting a rainbow of different colored belts to participate in tae kwon do classes. Tae kwon do is a Korean martial art. The name literally means "the way of the hand and foot."

As with most martial arts, it started as a military fighting technique. Today, more than 170 million people in more than 182 countries study tae kwon do, most often for fitness and sport.

While martial arts can be practiced only for sport, fitness, or self-defense, the serious student soon learns that a deeper, almost spiritual level, also exists.

Is this consistent with Jewish beliefs? Absolutely. Over the centuries, martial art practitioners developed warrior codes to bond themselves to each other and to the people they pledged their lives to protect.

These codes all revolved around ideals such as courage, honesty, courtesy, compassion, honor, modesty, sincerity, and loyalty to one’s country, family, and friends.

Over the years that we’ve studied martial arts, we’ve seen that martial arts and Jewish beliefs are not only similar, but very compatible.

In both, there is a keen sense of lineage and heritage. Honoring our ancestors and where we have come from is integral to Judaism.

We consistently recall and remember our ancestors and their lessons in our prayer service and with the recitation of the Torah cycle.

As Jews, we trace our ancestry to Abraham and feel that we all are part of his family. The Jewish faith has developed and diversified since Abraham passed his belief of a single God to his descendants.

While we all practice different levels of observance, we celebrate this common heritage and share a common language.

Similarly, martial arts evolved over the last several thousand years as practitioners refined and passed their skills and beliefs from generation to generation, often in secret.

Masters trained new masters and techniques became more precise, focused, and deadly. But a similar sense of heritage and family exists among serious practitioners of martial arts, their students, and their masters.

Judaism is about study, practice, and discipline. What rabbi doesn’t encourage his or her congregation to come for regular study?

While Judaism has its own dogma, the rabbinic and lay interpretations are all over the map. Two Jews will always have at least three opinions. That’s why we study together, discuss, debate and argue, but always walk away with the feeling we’ve learned and helped each other to learn.

Similarly, martial arts require continued study, practice and discipline. The physical aspects have to be repeated over and over under the watchful eyes of instructors and through individual practice.

A new technique may take thousands of repetitions. The serious student also learns the warrior code — the way of the warrior — and how it applies in peace as well as war.

Most people initially think that martial arts are all about fighting. This is not quite true. Yes, they’re about defending oneself and others. But they’re also about not having to fight by developing the confidence to know one can defeat an attacker if necessary.

One of our favorite lines comes from the movie The Karate Kid: "Fighting not good. Somebody always get hurt. But if you have to fight, win!"

With the warrior code in mind, the trained martial artist detests hurting or killing an opponent, but if forced to fight, he or she will fight to win. Martial arts are about preserving life.

Jewish belief puts the saving of life above all else. Jews have lots of rules. Most of us don’t follow all of them, but enough of them to make us feel Jewish.

However, virtually all rules can be violated if needed to save a life. It can be breaking kashrut (kosher laws), or driving or turning on an electrical device on Shabbat.

It also can be killing someone intent on taking another’s life, if that is the only way to stop the attack.

In Judaism, the thoughts we glean from the morning sermon or the evening class don’t end there. We take those thoughts with us and use them to improve ourselves and help others.

We put those thoughts into actions. We call them mitzvot (commandments).

Some Jews believe that doing mitzvot will help bring Moshiach (the Messiah), some are committed to helping others, and some feel it’s just the right thing to do.

The warrior code in martial arts, in part, is about helping others. In past times, martial artists were pledged to help and defend the common people.

This set them apart, placing them in a special position of respect by their countrymen. While martial artists today will rush to help a person being threatened, they also will help in other situations wherever possible.

Many martial art schools require each student to perform random acts of kindness.

These can be helping parents, helping friends or helping a stranger, without being asked. Mitzvot, if you like.

Martial arts did not arise only in the east. Many non-Asian countries around the world developed their own martial arts, including Israel.

Two Israeli martial arts taught worldwide are krav maga and haganah. These were developed by the Israeli military and were designed to teach critical fighting skills quickly to new soldiers.

Another Israeli martial art called abir was developed by Yehoshua Sofer, a Chasidic Jew and seventh-degree black belt.

Sofer trained in traditional Korean martial arts and Torah, and melded the two into a martial art based on biblical philosophy and history.

Abir focuses around 12 groupings of techniques, not surprisingly, one for each tribe. Abir is taught only in Israel at this time.

One last thought: martial arts beliefs never mention God, at most, a requirement to be religious.

Some medieval codes required knights to be religious, but didn’t mention any specific religion.

While we can profess a love for God, the real test of that love is how we live our lives.

We see Judaism as a religion that requires responsibility from its followers.

There is no deathbed forgiveness. A life lived with honor ultimately will end with honor, even for those who choose not to follow a religion or even believe in God.

These may be very Jewish thoughts, but they are also martial arts thoughts.

There is a place for faith in both Judaism and martial arts.

We as martial artists believe in our masters and trust in the skills they’ve taught us. We have faith in the inherent goodness and responsibility of our teachers.

There are many martial arts and many religions in the world. We realize that neither the religion nor the martial art that we’ve chosen is the only path for all people.

We share our stories and profess faith for God through discipline and action. We also realize that within Judaism and society there are many paths that are valid and honorable.

We respect these paths as we would our own.

Rabbi David Burstein, assistant rabbi at Temple Beth Or, holds black belts in two different martial arts. Steve Markman, a fifth-degree black belt, teaches tae kwon do at the Boonshoft CJCE. He is also commander of Jewish War Veterans Post 587.

[GeneChing]

I'm retitling this thread from the original Christian Gung-Fu to Martial Arts & Religion. We got off to an odd start with this - too specific - but I think it's a great thread for more discussion.

Last update - 13:09 04/02/2008
Kosher karate (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/950757.html)
By Ariel Rubinsky

"When I pray my kavana (intent) and my concentration are above average, because I train in tora dojo," says Ari Fuld, a resident of Efrat in the West Bank, a third dan in the unique martial art form known in the United States as the "Jewish karate."

Tora dojo is a method that combines "hard," sharp Japanese karate with "soft" Chinese martial arts, which focus on inner strength and flowing movement. This method encourages advanced students to study and experience other methods; each student who reaches the level of black belt receives a reading list of recommended Chinese texts. Moreover, there are no competitions. Practitioners, both religiously observant and secular, end each training session with chi kong (Chinese meditation).

At a time when the trend in martial arts is forgoing the spiritual aspect in favor of the most effective fighting techniques, tora dojo, which started within the American Jewish community, stands out. Through the rank of black belt, tora dojo is not very different from any other type of Japanese karate; training concentrates mostly on techniques from the Japanese shotokan method. However, after that point, students begin learning various types of kung fu, including pa kwa and white crane, as well as tai chi and other Chinese methods.
Advertisement
"Tora dojo is essentially a school of general martial arts. It enables personal development in the wide world of the martial arts," says Yali Rothenberg, 34, who has been practicing tora dojo for 18 years. "We aren't trying to prove which school is better or more effective - in the end, it all depends on the fighter, not the school. The focus is on learning and development."

"This is a Jewish discipline in the familial, traditional sense," adds Fuld, noting that three of his four children train. "After all, Judaism is about traditional learning and teaching, because something important is lost or eradicated with every change. This is also the case in the Chinese-Japanese world, and this is how we train, with much respect for the method."

Training with Gaydamak

Tora dojo began in the 1960s at Yeshiva University in New York, when professor Harvey Sober, a martial arts expert, concluded that yeshiva students needed karate training to strengthen their backs. The method's name is a play on words: "Tora" sounds like Torah but also means "tiger" in Japanese; dojo is a center for martial arts. The discipline received its kashrut certificate from the community and its rabbis.

It was imported to Israel in the early 1980s. There are now several clubs in the Jerusalem area and the center of the country. Disciples include Arcadi Gaydamak, who has frequent private lessons at his Caesarea home, led by his close adviser Gidi Marinovsky, a senior teacher of the method.

In the United States the system is taught at Jewish educational and cultural centers, including synagogues, and therefore the vast majority of the practitioners are Jews, many of them religiously observant. In Israel, many of the instructors have English-language accents, and many of the students wear skullcaps.

"This isn't a religious discipline, but it respects tradition, be it Jewish, Chinese or something else. Therefore, religious people feel more comfortable with us," says Arthur Gribetz, the chief trainer in Jerusalem and head of the school in Israel. He does not wear a skullcap, and considers himself Conservative.

"Openness is necessary for learning, and when you hear somebody religious explaining that during meditation he connects to a kind of higher power, it helps you to open yourself to the other," says Rothenberg, who is secular.

Gribetz notes that the founder of the system, Sober, was well-versed in Eastern philosophies and ideas. "Sober compared and contrasted Eastern and Jewish meditation, especially kabbala. He lectures about this at annual seminars in Israel," he says.

Fuld adds: "I am religious, and when I was studying at a yeshiva I was told that I have to pray with kavana but no rabbi told me how. I found I could connect to kavana through tora dojo, especially the meditation and guided imaging. After all, all prayer is a kind of meditation or trance."

Fuld says he once turned to "a great rabbi," and asked whether he was "transgressing boundaries." He says the rabbi told him, "Of course not. That is how prayer is supposed to be; the individual should be seeing himself as though he is standing before the Shekhinah," God's presence on earth.

Why is it so important that a karate student meditate?

"Because without this, the movement is technical and lacks content, and this is palpable at the higher levels. If the inner feeling isn't there, something is missing," says Fuld.

For Rothenberg, meditation is the most essential part of martial arts. "What distinguishes martial arts from other sports is the profundity, the inward contemplation," he says. "A good fighter is always aware of himself and his surroundings, because the victor is the one who adapts most quickly to changes. Therefore he has to be alert to his emotions and his opponent's emotions in order to read the opponent's moves and react accordingly - not in terms of thought, because there is no time for that, but rather movement. Meditation affords the tools for this, the concentration, the inner awareness and the awareness of the opponent's smallest nuances."

Rothenberg, who works at the Finance Ministry, says a fighter can take in everything the opponent does. "Not to clash with him head on, but rather to connect to him, to understand him. And this is good for all interactions, be it in fraught negotiations or a within a relationship or the family."

As for the lack of competitions, Gribetz explains, "If you want to win in competition, you have to neglect other things. Therefore, we feel that a discipline with competitions loses its principles and gradually disconnects from tradition."

Fuld adds that the school has more sublime aims than winning competitions. "Tora dojo includes hard physical work and it is also effective as self defense, but the aim is inner progress, progress as a human being, to neutralize the ego," he says.

[RAB]

That's a good idea because you can't separate Chinese culture from Chinese kung fu. This guy was just creating another commercial niche for Americans.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I really have no issues with religion being taught in a MA, though it makes little sense to me from a "fighters" view point.
As long as it is upfront and not "concealed".

[Lucas]

effective than any other


This is all I need to read to send my BS meter soaring.

[David Jamieson]

you do have to ask yourself, is the martial arts merely a veil to teach religion or the other way round?

they don't really have any sort of mutualness with the exception of healthy exercise.

learning to harm others is contradictory to virtually all religions barring satanism.
It is however not contradictory to aspects of buddhism where the destruction of evil is as real as your own inability to stop it because you were not trained to do so.

[Lucas]

you do have to ask yourself, is the martial arts merely a veil to teach religion or the other way round?

they don't really have any sort of mutualness with the exception of healthy exercise.

learning to harm others is contradictory to virtually all religions barring satanism.
It is however not contradictory to aspects of buddhism where the destruction of evil is as real as your own inability to stop it because you were not trained to do so.

I will be opening my new school next week. The Satanic Gongfu Institute.

Come and learn how to hurt people from the guys who really love it!

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

Yeah.. let's put the HARM back in "harmony"..

Be well..

[SPJ]

Satan usually uses good things in life including desire of wisdom to lure people away from GOD.

the serpent lured Eve and Adam to eat the apples from the wisdom tree.

a lot temptations of beauty, wealth, power etc etc

we harm ourself by answering all our needs and wants in an excessive way

and lose the way of the dao, the way of the truth,--

:D;):eek:

[David Jamieson]

Satan usually uses good things in life including desire of wisdom to lure people away from GOD.

the serpent lured Eve and Adam to eat the apples from the wisdom tree.

a lot temptations of beauty, wealth, power etc etc

we harm ourself by answering all our needs and wants in an excessive way

and lose the way of the dao, the way of the truth,--

:D;):eek:

hmmmn. an interesting mash up of taoism and old testament stuff.

having said that, we are all satan and we are all god by the very nature of our existence to deny one over the other is to deny wholeness and to remain incomplete. That, to me is the lesson of the tao, but then, I'm just a guy and frankly I don't go much for people in pulpits telling me what's good and what's not good for me.

Right and wrong don't need no books to define what they are. simply the deeds and the doers of same are all that are required. The rest is plainly observable in my opinion. Lest ye wish not to see and all that. :-)

[Dim Wit Mak]

Nothing is more Christian than kicking someone in the face.
:D

Careful now, Chuck N. lurks on this forum.:)

[doug maverick]

Converts???

don't under stand that to much. but my sifu basically grew up in the church, his granfather was a minister.

[RAB]

Right and wrong don't need no books to define what they are. simply the deeds and the doers of same are all that are required. The rest is plainly observable in my opinion. Lest ye wish not to see and all that. :-)

Sound like marriage.

[jacksawild]

The revised ten commandments:

1. I am the LORD thy GOD and am much harder than thou and thou shall take no other GOD before ME. For I am a jealous GOD and I will open up a can of whoopass on your sorry behind.
2. Thou shalt not make thyself an idol except for training purposes.
3. Thou shalt not take MY name in vein... say "Bruce Lee" instead.
4. Observe the sabbath, but still practice your forms... OR I will strike thee down with great vengeance and furious anger.
5. Honour thy Father, Mother and Sifu.
6. Thou shalt not murder... except in self defence or no-one is looking.
7. Thou shalt not commit adultery for thy wife is harder than thou.
8. Thou shalt not steal secret techniques.
9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour unless thy neighbour says you threw the first punch.
10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house or wife... if you covet his brother then I don't want to know and for "Bruce Lee's" sake don't tell Paul who'll go bat**** nuts.




learning to harm others is contradictory to virtually all religions barring satanism.

Satanism is about hedonism not doing evil.

DISCLAIMER: I am not a satanist.

This guy is weird for sure.
If Martial arts training goes against basic buddhist principles, how do you think it is that Shaolin came to practice it??

KUNGFU??Depends on what your definition of Kung Fu is.
Circumstances. They came to practice it as a way of stopping their bodies from wasting away. The bohdidharma saw thier bodies wasting from excessive meditation and taught them yogic techniques which eventually became martial to combat external attacks. Buddhism doesn't prohibit self-defence after all.

Kung-Fu simply means 'aquired skill'.

I'm sure you knew all that and they were just throw away comments but hey... I like the sound of my own voice. *shrug*

[David Jamieson]

The revised ten commandments:


Satanism is about hedonism not doing evil.

Satan, in the Judeao-Christian-Islamic view is the embodiment of evil.
To be a true satanist is to aspire to the ideal of satan, which is to embody satan.

same as the true Christian will try and embody christ.

The christian will help the child while the satanist will rape the child.
the christian will shelter the man and the satanist would leave him to the elements


there are many who claim to be Christian, but are not, same as satanists. Hedonism, is sinful, but hardly satanic. Jesus hung with all the robbers and the hookers at the drinking holes himself. he had to, it was they who need the most help.

True Satanism is beyond mere hedonism.

[Lucas]

The satanist may rape the child, or they may sacrafice the child, or they might just ignore the child...but not all satanists like to rape children....he would likely do that which serves him best and gives him the most pleasure. Which could even include caring for the child. Depending. Also remember satanists are very selfish and will do what ever suits them most.

oh, im not satanic.

[SanHeChuan]

the serpent lured Eve and Adam to eat the apples from the wisdom tree.

who really lied in that situation.

But the serpent said to the woman, "You will not die. 5For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."

True

And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, "You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; 17but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die."

Lie, they didn't die that day.

[David Jamieson]

The satanist may rape the child, or they may sacrafice the child, or they might just ignore the child...but not all satanists like to rape children....he would likely do that which serves him best and gives him the most pleasure. Which could even include caring for the child. Depending. Also remember satanists are very selfish and will do what ever suits them most.

oh, im not satanic.

everyone is selfish and driven by self interest. It is in our nature. we are born lazy and filled with desire and we learn to do good deeds, we learn to work and strive for a better live. We learn these constructs because self interest and mutual survival are bound together like yin and yang.

True satanism is not the goth dress up nonsense of Anton LeVay and his ridiculous bible and publicity stunts.

True satanism is not "Naturism"

Most people who profess to be satanists are not. Like Christians or Buddhists or take your pick. Practicing a faith is more than a bum in a seat on a saturday or sunday, or knees on a mat throughout the week. Deeds are what defines all of these.

You do not want to see the real satanist, you don't want to be near, you want to avoid.

[kwaichang]

There were 2 main trees in the Garden of Eden, the tree of the Knowledge of good and evil and the tree of Life, In Revelation the Tree of Life returns as Jesus. It wasnt until the eating of the forbidden fruit that the 2 were cast out of Eden. They werent cast out because of the tree but for disobedience. They were forewarned. Until that time there was no time, or disease, the world was perfect. Under the protection of God. I have read the remarks of those on this thread and I feel you guys should stick to discussing something you "seem' to know like Martial arts. KC

[David Jamieson]

There were 2 main trees in the Garden of Eden, the tree of the Knowledge of good and evil and the tree of Life, In Revelation the Tree of Life returns as Jesus. It wasnt until the eating of the forbidden fruit that the 2 were cast out of Eden. They werent cast out because of the tree but for disobedience. They were forewarned. Until that time there was no time, or disease, the world was perfect. Under the protection of God. I have read the remarks of those on this thread and I feel you guys should stick to discussing something you "seem' to know like Martial arts. KC

Why would you say something like that when virtually all the written material in all religious documents are subject to constant interpretation and in fact across sects of the same religion are given to having entirely different meanings.
For instance, in your example from genesis, this is interpreted as:

Man began to eat a particular food that started his brain to grow, a neo cortex formed above his primal brain and abstract thought began to occur, reason, and finally...language. And with that, there was leaving eden.

Remember, in the beginning there was the word, and the word was god. This is often interpreted as word=language

also, consider that without language or the ability to communicate abstract concepts and ideas, none of us would be here communicating with each other.

[SanHeChuan]

There were 2 main trees in the Garden of Eden, the tree of the Knowledge of good and evil and the tree of Life, In Revelation the Tree of Life returns as Jesus. It wasnt until the eating of the forbidden fruit that the 2 were cast out of Eden. They werent cast out because of the tree but for disobedience. They were forewarned. Until that time there was no time, or disease, the world was perfect. Under the protection of God. I have read the remarks of those on this thread and I feel you guys should stick to discussing something you "seem' to know like Martial arts. KC

Forewarned? He said they would die that day, not get booted from eden. Liar!:mad: :p

If you maintain that GOD is Omnipotent then nothing happens that isn't what God wants. Satan then (or in this case the serpent) is just another tool that God uses to get what he wants. If Satan is Evil and he works at the behest of God, then wouldn't that make God evil as well.

If GOD created "man" to have free will then He would have to engineer a situation in which "man" could exercise that free will, Hence the tree of Knowledge. "Man's" ejection from Eden was not a punishment but the plan, If we had stayed in Eden immortal and perfectly obedient then we wouldn't be any better than angles.

It's just a story to explain why life is so hard if God is so Good.

Why do Christians insist on vilifying those things that drive the best changes. Like "Judas" if not for Judas, and the Jews, and the Romans Jesus would not have died for "man's" sins and we would all still be doomed to hell no matter what we did. And yet Judas is the bad guy, if not for him there would be no Christian religion. AND no heaven for you.

[kwaichang]

God also says if you are not of me then I do not know you and therefore you are not known bygod. Also die you will as up to that time death was not known. Truth is not open to interpretation. KC Who among you are Biblical scholars?? Non I would bet by your current statements.

[SanHeChuan]

Yeah well when are you going to start making valid points. Truth is Truth is not an argument, a biblical scholar should be able to do better than that. Not all biblical scholars actually believe in the bible.

I'm scholar enough to know that the tale of Jesus is based on older stories that are allegorical about the movement of the stars in the sky. If the stories of Jesus was told by other names before the actual time of Jesus like with Horus, Mithras, Krishna etc... then Jesus didn't actually live in the time you think.

I know that there are only four sources outside the bible that mention Jesus, one is a known fake and the other three only refer to the 'anointed one' and do not name Jesus.

But maybe the devil planted those stories along with dinosaur bones.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Lie, they didn't die that day.

They lost not only their "innocence" (which died), but they lost their immortality.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Why would you say something like that when virtually all the written material in all religious documents are subject to constant interpretation and in fact across sects of the same religion are given to having entirely different meanings.
For instance, in your example from genesis, this is interpreted as:

Man began to eat a particular food that started his brain to grow, a neo cortex formed above his primal brain and abstract thought began to occur, reason, and finally...language. And with that, there was leaving eden.

Remember, in the beginning there was the word, and the word was god. This is often interpreted as word=language

also, consider that without language or the ability to communicate abstract concepts and ideas, none of us would be here communicating with each other.

The "word" has also been interpreted as His "all powerful name" and as Jesus.

That is the beauty and th curse of the Bible, it is subject to interpretation and like all things subject to interpretation, it is subject to pre-disposed views of who is interpreting it at any given time.

[jacksawild]

Satan, in the Judeao-Christian-Islamic view is the embodiment of evil.
To be a true satanist is to aspire to the ideal of satan, which is to embody satan.

same as the true Christian will try and embody christ.

The christian will help the child while the satanist will rape the child.
the christian will shelter the man and the satanist would leave him to the elements


there are many who claim to be Christian, but are not, same as satanists. Hedonism, is sinful, but hardly satanic. Jesus hung with all the robbers and the hookers at the drinking holes himself. he had to, it was they who need the most help.

True Satanism is beyond mere hedonism.

Sorry, yeah I was talking about Mr. Lavey's satanism. Though I'm not aware that the 'true' satanism of which you speak actually exists outside of hollywood as any worshipper of Lucifer would be required to believe in God as well and defy Him.

It is interesting to note that it is only Christianity in which Satan is an enemy of God. In Islam he is a jinn, an intelligent being with free-will (unlike the angels) created from smokeless fire. His only enemy is mankind as he refused to bow down to Adam because he thought him inferior having been created from mud. God puts off his punishment until judgment day to allow him to tempt mankind.

In traditional Judaism he is rather friendly with God (see the book of Job) and as a creation of God cannot be evil for that would take away from God's perfection. He does not create evil but points it out to God, he is the divine courts chief prosecutor and only has power when evil is commited. In fact, the Book of Isaiah, Job, Ecclesiastes, and Deuteronomy all have passages in which God is credited for exercising sovereign control over both good and evil.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Sorry, yeah I was talking about Mr. Lavey's satanism. Though I'm not aware that the 'true' satanism of which you speak actually exists outside of hollywood as any worshipper of Lucifer would be required to believe in God as well and defy Him.

It is interesting to note that it is only Christianity in which Satan is an enemy of God. In Islam he is a jinn, an intelligent being with free-will (unlike the angels) created from smokeless fire. His only enemy is mankind as he refused to bow down to Adam because he thought him inferior having been created from mud. God puts off his punishment until judgment day to allow him to tempt mankind.

In traditional Judaism he is rather friendly with God (see the book of Job) and as a creation of God cannot be evil for that would take away from God's perfection. He does not create evil but points it out to God, he is the divine courts chief prosecutor and only has power when evil is commited. In fact, the Book of Isaiah, Job, Ecclesiastes, and Deuteronomy all have passages in which God is credited for exercising sovereign control over both good and evil.

Interesting interpretation.

[kwaichang]

People will interpret things acording to their level of growth. The Bible also mentions to be wary of Man and his supposed knowledge that he finds vanity in. Truth is the base from which all interpretation springs. But until one reaches the source they are only supposing. KC

[Shaolin Wookie]

I'm an atheist but I actually like the Bible. Genesis is like a poor man's Vedas; some of the intermediary stories from Judges are like stories from the Three Kingdoms, and the parables of the Old Testament are rich with symbolism. I'm just not that big on the fanatical New Testament stuff, with the convert or die for all eternity BS of the Pauline hornswagglers that turn literary criticism into a universal categorical imperative.

Give me talking snakes, vengeful deities, and burning bushes anyday. I just wish they'd cut out that salvation and redemption crap. The Bible would have been much better if Jesus had talked to the fish instead of multiplying them, walked out on the water, and done battle with the great sea serpent of Babylon to reclaim the "snake-bound" wishing staff of Moses. Who knows, I might have remained a believer.....

[Lucas]

religions that dont have a healthy dose of good ol mythos to back them up are just boring anyhow.

[Shaolin Wookie]

It's the problem with Scientology, Christianity, and Mormonism--they actually believe the fables they tell.

[Lucas]

But what about the Heathens? Think they believe in the old gods for real?

[Shaolin Wookie]

Satan usually uses good things in life including desire of wisdom to lure people away from GOD.

the serpent lured Eve and Adam to eat the apples from the wisdom tree.

a lot temptations of beauty, wealth, power etc etc

we harm ourself by answering all our needs and wants in an excessive way

and lose the way of the dao, the way of the truth,--

:D;):eek:

There's actually a gnostic tradition that the Demiurge (an imperfect creator) created the earth and mankind, and thus was fallible and allowed for error. He represented an old patriarchal order of godhead, and Satan was actually Sophia--Wisdom, a female serpent. She came to Eden to free Adam and Eve and to open their minds to stir them to battle against the old patriarchal order of gods, represented by the Creator.

I like that version much better.

[golden arhat]

why does anyone care if god exists or not ?


surely if people just focused on being better people instead of pontificating on who is right or wrong everything would turn out fine wouldnt it ?

[Shaolin Wookie]

why does anyone care if god exists or not ?


surely if people just focused on being better people instead of pontificating on who is right or wrong everything would turn out fine wouldnt it ?

Yup. Otherwise, we're just some dudes that show up to a fight based on internet squabbles and debate an ear grind ad infinitum to see who's the better man.....LOL.....

[David Jamieson]

why does anyone care if god exists or not ?


surely if people just focused on being better people instead of pontificating on who is right or wrong everything would turn out fine wouldnt it ?

pontificating on who is right or wrong about anything religious or otherwise has nothing to do whether or not god exists.

what is the guideline for being a better person in the society you live in but rule of law which sprang from religious tenet.

If you look back on our relatively short time line of existence, many of us are all too distracted by our own folly as opposed to actually thinking or acting on the state of being that we are in.

less than 5000 years is NOTHING. Man is so incredibly hubris filled in his wayward journey forward.

It is important. All is mind, and that's why it is important. Nothing of manifest material of man exists without mind first. To just amble forward in ignorance without asking the questions is even more folly in my opinion.

[Shaolin Wookie]

what is the guideline for being a better person in the society you live in but rule of law which sprang from religious tenet.



Not true. Religious guidelines aren't the source of "guidelines for being a better person". For centuries it was common for a thirty-five year old man to marry a fourteen year old girl, and be praised for it. Casanova chronicles, amongst his many women, liasons with twelve year old girls--liaisons that the parents of said children viewed with candor. Due to changes in government control and regulation, the changing family demographic, and the equality clauses of the democratic ideal, it is now unthinkable for such pairings to take place....thank god (I'm being ironic). Religion takes credit for what Democracy brings about. Being a better person means being a socially responsible person. Do you think it's coincidental that Christianity has tied itself to monarchies, and now Democracy? Get in the sheets with the people in power and take credit for social reform--thus saith the lord.

[kwaichang]

Well SW I really feel sorry for you you have nothing to believe in. So how do you suppose the universe came to be ??? Big bang I bet ha what a joke. KC

[Shaolin Wookie]

Well SW I really feel sorry for you you have nothing to believe in. So how do you suppose the universe came to be ??? Big bang I bet ha what a joke. KC

I don't have to "believe in" a reformist Jew in some random period in time as being the "key to all existence, and the almighty arbiter in cosmic Fate, keeper of Heaven and Earth, and weilder of the flaming sword of vengeance!" in order to "believe in" the potential of the human race, the value of life and social order, kindness to strangers, love and happiness, and the bond between man and nature as the all-unifying bond to the cosmos. Big Bang? Eh....who cares.......

I am an organic being composed of a trillion organic beings. I am the will that is impossible to realize without red blood cells, white blood cells, neurons, platelets, hemoglobin, bacteria, organs, tissue--in all, I'm the sum of a trillion little parts, the unifying conscious faculty of organic will. But my will is only the governing power of a trillion individual wills, natural order, and chemical/organic processes on atomic/subatomic levels. Now, how can I possibly be so vain as to think that I'm a bonafide Kosmokrator?

Surely you don't think the original Shaolin monks were a bunch of misled, unhappy heathens with nothing to believe in?

[golden arhat]

Well SW I really feel sorry for you you have nothing to believe in. So how do you suppose the universe came to be ??? Big bang I bet ha what a joke. KC

maybe he just doesnt rush to put his faith in some sky daddy like you seem to


i personally believe in a greater presence, but only as a concept

not in any religious sense

something created me ? so i have to praise them?
i didnt ask to be created my mother gave birth to me, i dont pray to her.


i think all religions based on a god(s) telling people what to do are systems of making people submit to someones will, nothing more.

[Lucas]

I don't have to "believe in" a reformist Jew in some random period in time as being the "key to all existence, and the almighty arbiter in cosmic Fate, keeper of Heaven and Earth, and weilder of the flaming sword of vengeance!" in order to "believe in" the potential of the human race, the value of life and social order, kindness to strangers, love and happiness, and the bond between man and nature as the all-unifying bond to the cosmos. Big Bang? Eh....who cares.......

I am an organic being composed of a trillion organic beings. I am the will that is impossible to realize without red blood cells, white blood cells, neurons, platelets, hemoglobin, bacteria, organs, tissue--in all, I'm the sum of a trillion little parts, the unifying conscious faculty of organic will. But my will is only the governing power of a trillion individual wills, natural order, and chemical/organic processes on atomic/subatomic levels. Now, how can I possibly be so vain as to think that I'm a bonafide Kosmokrator?

Surely you don't think the original Shaolin monks were a bunch of misled, unhappy heathens with nothing to believe in?

Dont get on the Heathens case now. Shaolin monks couldnt possibly been mean of the Heather, they were too far east :p

Heathenism is coming back you know. Long live ODIN!

[kwaichang]

What I believe I have yet to post . The humanistic views preached by you guys are so shallow I cant help but laugh " a trillion wills" or was it three I forget. KC

[Shaolin Wookie]

Yes, well I'm not convinced that an eternity in flames is really that unpleasant if I don't have a central nervous system and nerve endings to relay messages of pain and torture up and down my spinal cord. But that's just me.

What I was describing for you was the commonality of life in its myriad forms, the equality of life not based on the pride of species, and the valuation of all life and all suffering, because we are all basically the same material as a worm, as a bacterium, as an elephant, as a chimpanzee. Valuing life is not the same as "believing in" Christ. They are, and always will be separate.

I would question the value you place on "humanism" because if a humanist thinks we all should treat each other well and as equals, and help out a brother in need, regardless of his religious orientation, I think that beats out the "convert and feed at the hand of Christ or suffer your hardships" mentality espoused by many religious organizations. When Mother Theresa traveled the world, she did so in a humanist capacity in service of a relgiious organization.

Good people are good people. No religion has a monopoly on meaning and service to humanity. There were good people before Christ, and I dare say people better than him long after.

[Shaolin Wookie]

What I believe I have yet to post . The humanistic views preached by you guys are so shallow I cant help but laugh " a trillion wills" or was it three I forget. KC

It's okay, your laughter is a product of your brain's assessment of information and the emotional response it attaches to such assessments. These are dependent on the firing of your neurons, which also control the responses that cause your face to curl up into a smile, utilizing muscles, and stimulate the air to burst from your lungs in customary "laughing" fashion. There are many wills in your laughter.

[sanjuro_ronin]

This is why religion and MA go so well together, people in both thing they have the "real" religion/MA.

[David Jamieson]

sw- yes true.

the original laws were of the godhead (god-gods).
The priesthood ran almost everything in times of yore and if rule of law did not spring from religious tenet, then why the separation of church and state?

they were at one time mutual. the split in the big time line of things is actually quite recent.

almost every culture on the planet had a priesthood who held th e law of god(s) supreme over the rules they themselves had or behaviours they had. they would even revise laws they made if disaster came. Say a village was burned, well, many interpret that as gods wrath.

even today people do this. in America! really. :)

[jacksawild]

Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.
Siddhartha Gautama a.k.a The Buddha

[Lucas]

straight up.

[Shaolin Wookie]

Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.

I'm calling BS on this statement, because common sense is anything but common, and there are a lot of idiots out there whose reason is flawed.....and their perception of reality and truth is dependent on their close-minded, ethnocentric, sexist, bigoted, cultural monism.

Common sense, by its "commonality", is not a privatized affair. It involves "public" matters, "public" concerns, and democratic rationality.

[tattooedmonk]

Do not believe something because everyone says it or believes it or because it is tradition , believe it only if you find it to be useful and true.

[Lucas]

Regardless of how it goes, we all know it wasnt meant for idiots and morons ;)

I for one can take either statement to heart, as I do value my own senses to be adequate...

[Shaolin Wookie]

Regardless of how it goes, we all know it wasnt meant for idiots and morons ;)

I for one can take either statement to heart, as I do value my own senses to be adequate...

Yeah, but we could put that statement into the mouth of George W. Bush and it'd take on a whole new meaning, right?;)

[NJM]

It is interesting to note that it is only Christianity in which Satan is an enemy of God.

Sa-tan is subordinate to God in Christianity as well, this was merely warped by the RCC.

Big bang I bet ha what a joke.

Stop before you give a whole group of people a bad name.

[jacksawild]

I'm calling BS on this statement, because common sense is anything but common, and there are a lot of idiots out there whose reason is flawed.....and their perception of reality and truth is dependent on their close-minded, ethnocentric, sexist, bigoted, cultural monism.

Common sense, by its "commonality", is not a privatized affair. It involves "public" matters, "public" concerns, and democratic rationality.
Yeah, but we could put that statement into the mouth of George W. Bush and it'd take on a whole new meaning, right?;)

I think that we have to accept that each of us has a perception of reality which is real to us. By the same token I think we could all be considered idiots whose reason is flawed based on our own biases, realtively speaking of course. I think it was Voltaire who said "I may not agree with what you have to say but I will defend to the death your right to say it".

Do not believe something because everyone says it or believes it or because it is tradition , believe it only if you find it to be useful and true.

There are many differing translations getting at the same meaning all giving the sense of similar intent.

Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumoured by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.

My understanding of it is that it is a warning against literal dogmatism. If you take these words, or indeed any words, too literally and view them as immutable law then you have missed the point of intent behind them. Which leads on to my next point.

Sa-tan is subordinate to God in Christianity as well, this was merely warped by the RCC.


Isn't it funny how the same teachings can be interpreted in such vastly different ways and over time the divide becomes so ingrained that it becomes dangerous and all sides begin to view their interpretation as more important than the intended good meant by the words, i.e Love one another. Perhaps there was a reason that Christ didn't write any books.

[Shaolin Wookie]

Perhaps there was a reason that Christ didn't write any books.

Not to get ****ty, but considering the availability of literacy to the impoverished Jews repressed under Roman colonization and the fact that Christ surrounded himself with a tax-collector, a doctor, a fisherman who could write, and Mark (I don't think we ever get his profession, do we?), the probability is that Christ couldn't read or write. We don't see him reading; we have a peripatetic rabbi who argued extempore and debated orally. Personally, the idea that a fisherman could read and write is to me kind of ridiculous, so I chalk his gospel up to spurious origins, amongst other reasons. There's a reason that it's an ex-Roman soldier who wrote the larger portion of the New Testament. And, there's likely a reason we don't have Hebrew gospels, but rather later Greek "translations". There is a strong likelihood that the gospels were the sublimation of an oral Christian culture. Chrisitianity never looks good on paper; its success has always relied on the spoken word.;)

[David Jamieson]

The statement from buddha is often misinterpreted to support a lazy mind.

as in: "what's that? believe nothing? ok! I won't "...


when in fact, what it means is "do your due diligence, investigate, and do the work to set the foundation for belief if there is a question of belief being raised."

or "don't participate in blind faith because it exhibits and nurtures a lazy mind".

[jacksawild]

Not to get ****ty, but considering the availability of literacy to the impoverished Jews repressed under Roman colonization and the fact that Christ surrounded himself with a tax-collector, a doctor, a fisherman who could write, and Mark (I don't think we ever get his profession, do we?), the probability is that Christ couldn't read or write. We don't see him reading; we have a peripatetic rabbi who argued extempore and debated orally. Personally, the idea that a fisherman could read and write is to me kind of ridiculous, so I chalk his gospel up to spurious origins, amongst other reasons. There's a reason that it's an ex-Roman soldier who wrote the larger portion of the New Testament. And, there's likely a reason we don't have Hebrew gospels, but rather later Greek "translations". There is a strong likelihood that the gospels were the sublimation of an oral Christian culture. Chrisitianity never looks good on paper; its success has always relied on the spoken word.;)

good point... well made.

Unless that is that you believe JC to be ManGod. Then he'd have known everything.

[kwaichang]

Christ was not a fisherman he was the son of a Carpenter on earth and God in Heaven he was literate as it was the custom for Jewish children to learn the Torah well anyway as usual SW got it wrong and the NT was written partially up to 100 years after the death of Christ and compiled much later as the Bible. by King James Ie: King James version. Some of the letters to the Corinthians were written earlier. KC
Let me ask this if a man believes strongly enough and was an eye witness to Christ and his word do you think he would be Flayed or Crucified upside down or Stonned to death???

[David Jamieson]

good point... well made.

Unless that is that you believe JC to be ManGod. Then he'd have known everything.

Yeshua Bar Joseph, being a rabbi would know how to read and how to write and how to articulate in multiple languages. he spoke with his country in Aramaic and he spoke to those who occupied his country in their tongue which was Latin.

If we say he was a historical figure, which is difficult actually, believe it or not, then we have to take it for granted that he was literate.

However, I think it needs to be understood that many of the writings about Jesus were edited and redacted out of the canonical texts of what is the bible now.

Not to mention the huge errors in translation from Hebrew to Greek to Latin to English, which would make the king james bible the least reliable one of them all.

For instance, where King James says that he was born of a virgin, the original hebrew merely says "young girl",As in "he was born of a young girl".

YOu see how this small error has caused such a huge error down the road.

It is also worthy of note that the feverishly faithful are the least scholarly about religion. No matter what it is. Education has this thing about developing a critical mind which in turn really tests faith in an individual.

Not saying we are scholars here, or even theologians, but I am guessing that one or two of us has some religious studies under our belts. I would also say that one or two of us are coming at the debate from a position of knowing only that which is dogmatically imposed upon us or indoctrinated within us. Cest La Vie. :)

[kwaichang]

Yes born of a young girl or Virgin as if she werent she would have been a prostitute and or Stoned to death and considering the Jewish faith and customs the latter would be more likely. Unless she were protected by some devine intervention. Heck all we have is given by God and his son Jesus who is God in human form. KC

[jacksawild]

The term rabbi is used toward Jesus as a sign of respect, it means teacher in this context. If he were chinese maybe he'd have been called sifu. He certainly wasn't part of the Jewish priest class as is evidenced by the whole Caiphus debacle. i.e How dare a common man come to our holy city and preach his dangerous ideas... let's get the Romans to kill him.

Not wishing to speak for SW but I don't think he was saying that Christ's profession was a fisherman he was talking about the 'alleged' gospel writers.

Then it all becomes murky depending on how you think the gospels came about; the most popular theory is the two-source theory. Matthew, Luke and John come from one source and Mark form a different source. The gospel of Mark is the most Pauline and there are errors of geography when it talks about the holy lands suggesting it was written by someone who never visited there.

[golden arhat]

Christ was not a fisherman he was the son of a Carpenter on earth and God in Heaven he was literate as it was the custom for Jewish children to learn the Torah well anyway as usual SW got it wrong and the NT was written partially up to 100 years after the death of Christ and compiled much later as the Bible. by King James Ie: King James version. Some of the letters to the Corinthians were written earlier. KC
Let me ask this if a man believes strongly enough and was an eye witness to Christ and his word do you think he would be Flayed or Crucified upside down or Stonned to death???

the king james bible was not written by king james stupid

it was written by shakespeare

[golden arhat]

Heck all we have is given by God and his son Jesus who is God in human form. KC

ummmm i'm pretty sure thats not the truth

but enjoy delusion anyway

[sanjuro_ronin]

Not to mention the huge errors in translation from Hebrew to Greek to Latin to English, which would make the king james bible the least reliable one of them all.

Its a interesting one, the new testament that is, if we look into the translating part.
First off, we don't know who wrote them, not for certainty and we don't know who translated them either.
We do know that Jesus and his muchachos were hebrew that spoke aramaic and, if they were educated (most weren't), spoke and wrote classical greek.
We kind of have to assume that the original writings were classical greek being translated from spoken aramaic (ouch!) and then eventually translated into Latin or perhaps into "modern greek" and then into latin, then into German if I remember correctly and then into english.
Now, if that isn't a headache and a half, one has to remember that the vast majority of translators don't do literal translations, they do what they think a given sentence/paragraph means.

[kwaichang]

Arhat Stupid is as stupid does and you just did it I did not say King James wrote the bible he did however bring togethor the scholars to decide what would be in the Bible STUPID KC

[kwaichang]

The King James Version
James desired to secure a reconciliation between the throne and the Anglican church on the one hand, and the puritans on the other. Therefore he called the Hampton Court Conference in January of 1604 "for the hearing, and for the determining, things pretended to be amiss in the church" inviting Anglican bishops, clergymen, and professors, along with four Puritan divines, to consider the complaints of the Puritans. None of the Puritan demands were met but one. The Puritan president of Corpus Christi College, John Reynolds, "moved his Majesty, that there might be a new translation of the Bible, because those which were allowed in the reigns of Henry the eighth, and Edward the sixth, were corrupt and not answerable to the truth of the Original."

James replied that he:

"Could never yet see a Bible well translated in English; but I think that, of all, that of Geneva is the worst. I wish some special pains were taken for an uniform translation, which should be done by the best learned men in both Universities, then reviewed by the Bishops, presented to the Privy Council, lastly ratified by the Royal authority, to be read in the whole Church, and none other."

The resolution states in in part::

"That a translation be made of the whole Bible, as consonant as can be to the original Hebrew and Greek; and this to be set out and printed, without any marginal notes, and only to be used in all churches of England in time of divine service."

Gee no mention of shakespeare KC:D

[David Jamieson]

The term rabbi is used toward Jesus as a sign of respect, it means teacher in this context. If he were chinese maybe he'd have been called sifu. He certainly wasn't part of the Jewish priest class as is evidenced by the whole Caiphus debacle. i.e How dare a common man come to our holy city and preach his dangerous ideas... let's get the Romans to kill him.

Not wishing to speak for SW but I don't think he was saying that Christ's profession was a fisherman he was talking about the 'alleged' gospel writers.

Then it all becomes murky depending on how you think the gospels came about; the most popular theory is the two-source theory. Matthew, Luke and John come from one source and Mark form a different source. The gospel of Mark is the most Pauline and there are errors of geography when it talks about the holy lands suggesting it was written by someone who never visited there.

sorry you are wrong. He was considered a Rabbi. Not just a teacher. He was a jew and he was a rabbi in the jewish faith and he preached the Torah along with his radical taunts of the pharisees who he saw as a problem for the people.

Caiphus was a pharisee. the pharisees were a power base, but were not the whole of the jewish preisthood.

and "young girl" is only that. Virgin is a different word and if it were a virgin birth, it would have distinctly said so.

It is this type of redaction and repression that has in fact made everything so difficult to source. When people keep dead ending on the whole deification of jesus, they fill in the blanks with their fear and anger and denial.

If jesus were only a man like the rest of us, or like buddha or mohammed or moses or any other messenger of god, then that would not shake the truth of his teachings one iota.

it is foolishness and heirarchical thinking that makes people want to be one up from other people to feel better about themselves. This is why fun****etalists come across as stubborn and ignorant. Not because of what they believe, but because of why they believe it.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Going back to the MA, I have noticed that many MA systems are based on, or have in their history, divine revelation.
Aikido being the most recent/notable.
The Tenshin Shoden katori Shinto ryu is another example.

[NJM]

For instance, where King James says that he was born of a virgin, the original hebrew merely says "young girl",As in "he was born of a young girl".
While I don't find this implausible, I was under the impression we had no record of the gospels earlier than the greek version.

[David Jamieson]

Going back to the MA, I have noticed that many MA systems are based on, or have in their history, divine revelation.
Aikido being the most recent/notable.
The Tenshin Shoden katori Shinto ryu is another example.


the starting point of almost every tradition can in one perspective be attributed to divine interference, revelation, etc.

It's the beginning afterall and what a wonderous thing that is!

[sanjuro_ronin]

While I don't find this implausible, I was under the impression we had no record of the gospels earlier than the greek version.

The oldest one, if I recall, was about 70 years AD and it was in classical greek.

[sanjuro_ronin]

the starting point of almost every tradition can in one perspective be attributed to divine interference, revelation, etc.

It's the beginning afterall and what a wonderous thing that is!

Actually, over the weekend I saw a cheesy movie called Gabriel, about the Arc-Angel Gabriel sent to take out the "fallen ones" in a city that represented
purgatory" and Gabriel knew MA, including knife work and gun work.
Divine inspiration indeed !!

[jacksawild]

sorry you are wrong. He was considered a Rabbi. Not just a teacher. He was a jew and he was a rabbi in the jewish faith and he preached the Torah along with his radical taunts of the pharisees who he saw as a problem for the people.


Respectfully, I disagree. The modern meaning of rabbi and the meaning from that time is subtly different.

From wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbi#Historical_overview

The governments of the kingdoms of Israel and the Judah were based on a system of Jewish kings, prophets, the legal authority of the court of the Sanhedrin and the ritual authority of priesthood. Members of the Sanhedrin all had to receive their semicha ("ordination" derived in an uninterrupted line of transmission from Moses) yet they were more frequently referred to as judges (dayanim) akin to the Shoftim or "Judges" as in the Book of Judges, rather than rabbis.

All of the above personalities would have been expected and assumed to be steeped in the wisdom of the Torah and the commandments, which would have made them - in modern language - “rabbis”. This is illustrated by an important two thousand year old teaching in Ethics of the Fathers (Pirkei Avot) of the Mishnah which cites King David by saying:

He who learns from his fellowman a single chapter, a single halakha, a single verse, a single Torah statement, or even a single letter, must treat him with honor. For so we find with David King of Israel, who learned nothing from Ahitophel except two things, yet called him his teacher (in Hebrew: rabbo meaning ‘his rabbi’), his guide, his intimate, as it is said: 'You are a man of my measure, my guide, my intimate' (Psalms 55:14). One can derive from this the following: If David King of Israel who learned nothing from Ahitophel except for two things, called him his teacher (i.e. rabbo -- his "rabbi"), his guide, his intimate, one who learns from his fellowman a single chapter, a single halakha, a single verse, a single statement, or even a single letter, how much more must he treat him with honor. And honor is due only for Torah, as it is said: 'The wise shall inherit honor' (Proverbs 3:35), 'and the perfect shall inherit good' (Proverbs 28:10). And only Torah is truly good, as it is said: 'I have given you a good teaching, do not forsake My Torah' (Psalms 128:2). (Ethics of the Fathers 6:3) With the destruction of the two Temples in Jerusalem, the end of the Jewish monarchy, and the decline of the dual instititutions of prophets and the priesthood, the focus of scholarly and spiritual leadership within the Jewish people shifted to the sages of the Men of the Great Assembly (Anshe Knesset HaGedolah). This assembly was composed by the earliest "rabbis" as we know them for the last two thousand years, in large part because they began the formulation and explication of what became known as Judaism's "Oral Law (Torah SheBe'al Peh). This was eventually encoded and codified within the Mishnah and Talmud and subsequent rabbinical scholarship, producing what is known as Rabbinic Judaism.

[David Jamieson]

Wiki is definitely not a reliable source for things theological. In fact, I would rank it in scholastic value on the subject, somewhere around the value of this thread. lol.

If Yeshua Bar Joseph was not part of the priesthood, how is it that after he had his mitzvah he was allowed to debate and argue with the rabbinical group of his temple? If he was an average grunt, this would not be so.

be careful where you try to diminish. A rabbi is whole and apart from a regular teacher both in the here and now and then.

[NJM]

The oldest one, if I recall, was about 70 years AD and it was in classical greek.

Then how can we know what "the original hebrew" text translated as if we don't have the original hebrew (if there was such a thing) of the gospels?

[jacksawild]

Wiki is definitely not a reliable source for things theological. In fact, I would rank it in scholastic value on the subject, somewhere around the value of this thread. lol.

If Yeshua Bar Joseph was not part of the priesthood, how is it that after he had his mitzvah he was allowed to debate and argue with the rabbinical group of his temple? If he was an average grunt, this would not be so.

be careful where you try to diminish. A rabbi is whole and apart from a regular teacher both in the here and now and then.

Mark 6:
1: And he went out from thence, and came into his own country; and his disciples follow him.
2: And when the sabbath day was come, he began to teach in the synagogue: and many hearing him were astonished, saying, From whence hath this man these things? and what wisdom is this which is given unto him, that even such mighty works are wrought by his hands?
3: Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.

Wiki is an excellent resource for finding that which is already known but as a sole source of research it has it's flaws.

If Jesus were an official rabbi he would have been under the jurisdiction of the temple and it would have been the temple officials who punished him for claiming to be God. The term rabbi in the time of Jesus did not necessarily refer to a specific office or occupation. That would be true only after the Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed (70 AD). Rather, it was a word meaning great one or my master which was applied to many kinds of people in everyday speech. It clearly was used as a term of respect for ones teacher as well even though the formal position of rabbi would come later. In one sense then, calling Jesus Rabbi is an anachronism. In another sense the use of this term for him by the people of his day is a measure of their great respect for him as a person and as a teacher and not just a reference to the activity of teaching he was engaged in.

The more you know....

[sanjuro_ronin]

Then how can we know what "the original hebrew" text translated as if we don't have the original hebrew (if there was such a thing) of the gospels?

That is the question, isn't it?

[NJM]

That is the question, isn't it?

The question is, how can someone on these forums claim to know what the original hebrew said?

[sanjuro_ronin]

The question is, how can someone on these forums claim to know what the original hebrew said?

You weren't told about our time machine?

[Scott R. Brown]

I am not interested in getting into the middle of this argument. Most of the comments here are terribly ill-informed.

The Old Testament was written in Hebrew. Some of the New Testament was written in Greek and some in Aramaic. It is known what the original Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic texts meant, or what the extant copies that are used to translate the Bible meant, because many of these manuscripts actually exist and the meaning of ancient Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic words are known.

There are individuals that spend their lives researching and studying these things. One of my buddy's father is a Hebrew and Aramaic scholar and has helped to translate the Bible into many different languages around the world. It is actually quite fascinating how they determine what the words and phrases actually meant and as with all things there are debates and disagreements as well.

[Scott R. Brown]

If anyone is actually interested in learning what the actual texts say it is possible to get a copy of the Bible with numbered notes that correspond to a compendium of Greek and Hebrew words in a lexicon called Strong's Concordance.

It is also possible to get a direct word for word translation of the original Greek and Hebrew texts separately or along side a modern translation, not to mention the innumerable commentaries that are available.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I am not interested in getting into the middle of this argument. Most of the comments here are terribly ill-informed.

The Old Testament was written in Hebrew. Some of the New Testament was written in Greek and some in Aramaic. It is known what the original Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic texts meant, or what the extant copies that are used to translate the Bible meant, because many of these manuscripts actually exist and the meaning of ancient Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic words are known.

There are individuals that spend their lives researching and studying these things. One of my buddy's father is a Hebrew and Aramaic scholar and has helped to translate the Bible into many different languages around the world. It is actually quite fascinating how they determine what the words and phrases actually meant and as with all things there are debates and disagreements as well.

You are quite correct, the Vatican library has quite a few.

If anyone is actually interested in learning what the actual texts say it is possible to get a copy of the Bible with numbered notes that correspond to a compendium of Greek and Hebrew words in a lexicon called Strong's Concordance.

It is also possible to get a direct word for word translation of the original Greek and Hebrew texts separately or along side a modern translation, not to mention the innumerable commentaries that are available.

I have the trilingual bible and it is very interesting to say the least.
The old testament being in Hebrew and english and the New in Greek and English
Side by side ( m ore or less).

[Scott R. Brown]

I strongly recommend STRONG's Concordance if you are interested in what the words actually meant. The King James version has a lot of inaccuracies. The more modern translations of the Bible are much more accurate and many of them come with historical information to add context to the passages.

[Scott R. Brown]

For example in Greek there are three different words that are translated in the Bible as Love.

Agape = Unconditional/Spiritual Love
Eros = Erotic Love
Philia = Brotherly Love

If one is reading a passage it is important to understand which Greek word was used in order to fully understand what the passage is meant to teach.

[Lucas]

That must be why all the ladies be sayin: "dayum lucas I got me the Eros bad for you"

it all makes sense now...

[NJM]

For example in Greek there are three different words that are translated in the Bible as Love.

Agape = Unconditional/Spiritual Love
Eros = Erotic Love
Philia = Brotherly Love

If one is reading a passage it is important to understand which Greek word was used in order to fully understand what the passage is meant to teach.

Four, weren't there?

[Scott R. Brown]

Actually. there are at least 5, but as I recall there are only 3 used in the New Testament. If I am remembering incorrectly I would be interested to know in what passages the other ones may be found.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I strongly recommend STRONG's Concordance if you are interested in what the words actually meant. The King James version has a lot of inaccuracies. The more modern translations of the Bible are much more accurate and many of them come with historical information to add context to the passages.

I will look that up, thank you.
The trilingual one is almost a literal translation form one language to another, sometimes not making grammatic sense for obvious reasons, I have actuallied looked up the hebrew characters (for example) and they are consistent through out the book.

[NJM]

What's your opinion of Young's Literal Translation?

[sanjuro_ronin]

It is not without its faults.
Even in literal translations, the translator has, naturally, biases and still has to pick which of the various meanings any given term means.

[jacksawild]

What's your opinion of Young's Literal Translation?

It's hilarious.

[NJM]

It's hilarious.
How so? Or are you just riding the trolly?

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

It's interesting how folks end up debating so passionately about Christianity.. not so much about other religions.. it seems more like they are searching for validity or consensus, even when playing "devi'ls advocate".. the lifetimes devoted to translating and correlating data to arrive at the same conclusion, we just don't know.. there's so much conflicting "evidence", all of it hearsay, that it wouldn't even be heard as a legal arguement in a civil case..

Just choose your rbeliefs, and get on with living them..

Be well..

[sanjuro_ronin]

Greetings..

It's interesting how folks end up debating so passionately about Christianity.. not so much about other religions.. it seems more like they are searching for validity or consensus, even when playing "devi'ls advocate".. the lifetimes devoted to translating and correlating data to arrive at the same conclusion, we just don't know.. there's so much conflicting "evidence", all of it hearsay, that it wouldn't even be heard as a legal arguement in a civil case..

Just choose your rbeliefs, and get on with living them..

Be well..

LOL, my muslim, jewish and buddhist friends would beg to differ.
You should see those guys go at it !
:eek:

[David Jamieson]

Choosing your beliefs and getting on living with them has some inherent problems.

especially when those beliefs entail going out and spreading the word and making converts. lol.

so, Christians spread through evangelism and by telling people that there's is the only true and one way and that all other ways are an abomination of sorts. well, you can see the problem that would cause with Muslims and Jews.

Muslims believe there is only one god and that god is their god, Allah and if you do not follow the ways of the laws of Allah, then you are an infidel and are not one of the flock.

Jews believe they are the chosen ones and everyone else is a gentile. They also believe there is only one god and that god is theirs and it it the god who cannot be named, but for the sake of clarity, we shall call their god Yaweh, who is supposedly the father of the god who is part of the trinity within Christianity.

Buddhists don't have a god, although religious Buddhist attach Hindu deities to their world view and worship. they chant, pray and burn incense like catholics do, but focus on lesser gods when chanting and praying. Unless they are other types of Buddhists who do not do th dharma/sangha meeting thing and instead just choose to live their lives.

there are Hindus who have a very complex cosmology and it is easy to get lost in all the little tiny compartmentalized piece of it.

Hare Krishna's are sort fo a wing of Hinduism, like buddhism is it's child.

taoists seem to prefer hermit retreats, continue with their somewhat strange practices while hidden away from society in caves on mountain tops. fools on hills in the eyes of many. Taoism has made contributions of the highest level to herbalism and body knowledge though as has Hinduism.

Confucians don't really practice religion so much as they adhere to the tenets of Kung fu-tze. filial piety, ethics and morals rule their daily lives like an iron fist. life is regimented and not without meaning. very pragmatic approach to living. It's possible that Kung fu-tze was a scotsman in a former life. :p

So, except for the hare krishnas, there are your big 7 religions. take from them what you will.

[sanjuro_ronin]

The of course, withing each major religion are its off-shots or divisions or "reforms".
Oi Vey !!
What a head ache !
In the end religion and MA have one major issue that is the bane of all arguments and that they both have in common - LINEAGE !!
:D

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

The point is this.. if converting is the call of your religion, go ahead.. if another belief-system rejects the conversion, move on.. "asked and answered", no harm, no foul.. if your religion sees others as infidels, so be it.. celebrate your own beliefs, leave others to theirs.. "Live and let live".. It is when we become so self-righteous that we insist that others believe what we do, that conflict emerges..

The great potential for humanity has been largely compromised by religious and ideological conflicts.. beneficial cooperation through tolerance is, logically, a more appropriate path than ideological conflicts.. the resources wasted by world governments to control aggression or to control others would very likely negate any reasoning for "control"..

The direction of this thread is indicative of the issue.. while we debate subtle differences or glaring contradictions of beliefs, we set the stage for divisive interaction.. we lose sight of humanity's tangible potential in favor of intangible ideologies..

Be well..

[David Jamieson]

Greetings..

The point is this.. if converting is the call of your religion, go ahead.. if another belief-system rejects the conversion, move on.. "asked and answered", no harm, no foul.. if your religion sees others as infidels, so be it.. celebrate your own beliefs, leave others to theirs.. "Live and let live".. It is when we become so self-righteous that we insist that others believe what we do, that conflict emerges..

The great potential for humanity has been largely compromised by religious and ideological conflicts.. beneficial cooperation through tolerance is, logically, a more appropriate path than ideological conflicts.. the resources wasted by world governments to control aggression or to control others would very likely negate any reasoning for "control"..

The direction of this thread is indicative of the issue.. while we debate subtle differences or glaring contradictions of beliefs, we set the stage for divisive interaction.. we lose sight of humanity's tangible potential in favor of intangible ideologies..

Be well..

Bob-

Human survival is dependent on conflict. It is a constant in history and it does many things for us as a species. These things are mechanisms of fulfillment in my view.

we war, we intermingle, we spread disease and death amongst ourselves so that only the strongest of us will rise to the top and maintain the whole.

In a very ultimate sense of course. Not in a day to day sense.

war culls us and forces us forward in our thinking and technology. Through our hate and killing, we actually wind up improved and progressing.

I don't think people like to discuss the positive aspects of killing off humans, butr there are positives.

I think this is perhaps why so many who see the world in black and white terms also see the ends justified by the means.

it is not in our nature to just let go of a thing. We are incessant in our need to stand above. It is not in our nature to let the unknown just be.

If we were to all become mushroom sitters and ponderers, our entire species would be lost to lack of progress, lack of diversity.

the tree that doesn't bend in the winds, doesn't grow.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

Hi David: I largely agree with your assessment.. but, i sense that there are plenty of natural reasons for humanity to resort to conflict without resorting to contrived ideolgies.. famine, over-population of a region, resource hoarding.. Still, though, i am inclined to believe that the human animal hasn't evolved sufficiently to rely on its informed understanding of the processes to release its dependency on conflict to shape its future.. i believe it can be done, though..
so that only the strongest of us will rise to the top and maintain the whole.
Ultimately, "survival of the fittest" leaves one man (or woman) standing.. the challenge is self-perpetuating destruction..
the tree that doesn't bend in the winds, doesn't grow.
That "bending" is tolerance..

Be well..

[David Jamieson]

Greetings..

Hi David: I largely agree with your assessment.. but, i sense that there are plenty of natural reasons for humanity to resort to conflict without resorting to contrived ideolgies.. famine, over-population of a region, resource hoarding.. Still, though, i am inclined to believe that the human animal hasn't evolved sufficiently to rely on its informed understanding of the processes to release its dependency on conflict to shape its future.. i believe it can be done, though..

Ultimately, "survival of the fittest" leaves one man (or woman) standing.. the challenge is self-perpetuating destruction..

That "bending" is tolerance..

Be well..


or bending can be just the way it is that we have to accept in order to continue growing. we have to bend. Tolerance is moot, we must accept and even if we don't we bend, or we die. :)

Your first point speaks to the starkness of the reality of existence.

when there is plenty enough, we don't think much about survival.
when we have no ways and means, we can steal or beg or depend on charity.
when there is nothing for anyone, we will kill and eat each other.

to prevent being eaten, one must eat first!

logic will always boil down to boiling down humans.

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

logic will always boil down to boiling down humans.
Respectfully, i disagree.. in that scenario, the food supply will exhaust itself.. working as a group humanity can better mitigate almost any situation.. sure, you can devise many scenarios where the option is eat or be eaten, but.. that option can almost always be mitigated by group cooperation.. with the exception of cases of extreme isolation or extreme circumstances, or issues of conceptual malfunctions, humans will opt for something more preferable than that..

I think the "survival of the fittest" line of reasoning is more appropriately applied to the group interactions.. where the fittest is determined by those better able to co-exist.. those seeking domination set themselves up as targets for aliances of the groups they would dominate..

Early in human history, the alpha males would hoard the females.. the excluded males formed aliances and set the stage the current system of marriage, a redistribution of "wealth".. an example of the fittest being controlled by the aliances..

Be well..

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

Ooh, ooh.. i remembered what i forgot in the last post..

Tolerance is moot, we must accept and even if we don't we bend, or we die.
Accepting something we don't agree with.. is called tolerance.. even if it is under threat of termination.. Intolerance is evidenced by martyrs and such, those that would sacrifice their existence to make an example of their intolerance..

Be well..

[Scott R. Brown]

The history of early man and Anthropological studies demonstrate that Bob's view is actually the accurate since his comm