Customer Discussions > Religion forum

Disorganized Religion is the Way to Go


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 117 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Nov 10, 2012 5:47:56 PM PST
Organized religion doesn't seem to be working so well for us.
I'm thinking disorganized religion is the way to go.
That is all.
Carry on then.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 5:49:01 PM PST
'probabilist says:
Chaotic religion, then?

,.-)

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 6:00:50 PM PST
All depends on what religion and how it is organized.

"If religion be the cause of disunity, then irreligion is surely to be preferred." - Abdu'l-Baha

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 8:34:00 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 10, 2012 8:34:36 PM PST
"Chaotic religion, then?"

Well, Prob, this is an interesting and very serious question with many possible ramifications and interpretations attached to it. And stuff.

Indeed, your question leads to many other questions, and seems Socratic in nature.

One question that occurs to me is this: Is there a difference between "chaotic" and "disorganized?" Let us look, for a moment, at the definitions given for these two words -

chaotic - "In a state of complete confusion and disorder."
disorganized - "Not properly planned and controlled."

I submit that it is possible to be disorganized without being chaotic. I believe - nay, I know - having lived it - that it is possible to go through life without plans and controls, but not be in the least confused about it. I have found it possible to be unplanned, and at the same time have a kind of disorganized order. Take my desk, for instance - I have piles. They would not appear to be organized in any way - and yet, within these disorganized piles there is a kind of order. I know where everything is, and I can find it.

I believe a disorganized religion might, likewise, have a sort of spontaneous order to it without having any controls or actual planning.

And no, I have no idea what I'm talking about, really. But I think I used some words that were kind of cool and that's got to count for something.

Popellina

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 8:36:06 PM PST
Here for the Music -

Yes. I think you are right about this.

Posted on Nov 10, 2012 8:43:15 PM PST
There is one common thread between organized religion, and unorganized spiritualism... it is all bullcrap, all lies. The point is to make "you" feel important in some way.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 8:51:38 PM PST
Says who?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 10:56:04 PM PST
'probabilist says:
,.-)

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 10:59:30 PM PST
Eric Pyle says:
Time for my latest screed. It might be best just to scroll on down to the next post.

Let's assume for the moment that the material world exists independent of us. It's out there, doing whatever it does. It operates according to "natural law," which is a horrible misleading term, since "law" implies a legislator. Better to say "necessity."

If we work hard we can understand the patterns of the necessity, and even make use of them. Thank God for the scientific method.

Nonetheless, the scientific method is not people's standard operating system. Humans aren't that reasonable. The method is like a lovely suit of clothes we put on to meet with others, to work together, to make a comfortable and stable society. When we're naked, though, all bets are off.

The world that works through necessity is visible to us, but only indirectly. We perceive the world through metaphor, and through filters of desire, ideology, and a hundred other humanizing factors. Like it or not, we will never be rid of these. If we were rid of them, we would no longer be human.

This means that we operate within the world of necessity, wearing our phenomenal worlds like a kind of personal sub-environment. The ways in which our phenomenal worlds interact with "outside" can be very complicated and unscientific. It is a lie for people to say that we can be and should be always reasonable. Scratch a person who says that, and you'll find an ideologue just beneath the surface.

In the phenomenal world, it is possible to think two different things at once. You may be blissfully happy and suicidal at the same moment. You may hate and love the same thing. You may long for something and despise yourself the moment you get it. You may know perfectly well that something is true, and yet behave as if you don't. Try to stamp out this unreasonable behavior and it will sneak up from behind and bite you harder. (See Freud: "the return of the repressed") And I'll go against one of the atheist articles of faith that I often see on this forum: I think it *is* possible to hate God even though you don't believe in him. Not that any of *you* would do that.

Religion deals with the same sorts of symbols, metaphors, and systems that people in their phenomenological worlds use. It provides a sort of organizational system that is disorganized, but in the same disorganized way that people are disorganized. The Bible may mean two things at once, just as people do. This is a good thing. That is why it's a great book.

The Great Code: The Bible and Literature

Because religion deals with the human, phenomenal world, it must also be chaotic in the same way that people are. People who try to make the tenets of religion operate in the same way as the world of necessity are making a category error, whether they are believers or non-believers.

Now somebody's going to yell at me: "Oh, religion does bad things! They're teaching creationism in science class." Well, make them stop. They're idiots. Or you'll say: "People kill each other over religion." That's true. They kill each other over money even more, but you're not going to get rid of money, either. And you're never going to change the way the human mind works.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 11:09:23 PM PST
'probabilist says:
Thought-provoking post. Thanks, Eric.

'prob

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 11:15:55 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 10, 2012 11:17:29 PM PST
Accountants would have a problem with disorganized religion: the difficulty of tracing donations would leave a situation ripe for thieves.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 11:21:03 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 10, 2012 11:21:29 PM PST
'probabilist says:
Turbulent religion, perhaps?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 11:23:00 PM PST
Yes, doomed to fail. Its accountants would all go on strike.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 7:15:30 AM PST
Eric Pyle, that is one of THE BEST POSTS I have ever read on this forum! If we do a Humoristian Chronicles II, I'm using this one, for sure!!

Your closing paragraph is beautiful in its simplicity and logic, and responding to the logic of illogic.

"Now somebody's going to yell at me: 'Oh, religion does bad things! They're teaching creationism in science class.' Well, make them stop. They're idiots. Or you'll say: 'People kill each other over religion.' That's true. They kill each other over money even more, but you're not going to get rid of money, either. And you're never going to change the way the human mind works."

Yes, people do bad things in the name of religion. Yes, people kill and use religion as their excuse for it. But it's the people who are doing these things, not their religion. I love your analogy about money, too - and if we carry that analogy further, we might also say that just as people do bad things over religion, and people do bad things over money - people also do good things in the name of religion, and good things with their money. It's not a person's beliefs or religion or money that determines if I want to hang out with 'em - it's what they do with their beliefs or religion or money that draws me to them, or makes me run away as fast as my feet will carry me.

(If I'm honest - which I sometimes am - this is the one thought that most grabbed my attention: "The method is like a lovely suit of clothes we put on to meet with others, to work together, to make a comfortable and stable society. When we're naked, though, all bets are off.")

Wonderful post, Eric. Really wonderful.
Karen

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 7:15:52 AM PST
This is a good point, Clarissa. Thank you.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 7:50:59 AM PST
Thanks, Karen. Your original post is a good one - spirited and fun. Clarissa

Posted on Nov 11, 2012 7:43:30 PM PST
Tolstoy had the right idea, among others:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_anarchism

That works for other religions too.

"To want to impose an imaginary state of government on others by violence is not only a vulgar superstition, but even a criminal work. Understand that this work, far from assuring the well-being of humanity is only a lie, a more or less unconscious hypocrisy, camouflaging the lowest passions we posses." ~ Leo Tolstoy

"Jesus was an anarchist savior. That's what the Gospels tell us." ~ Ivan Illich

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 8:28:06 PM PST
Religious anarchy! I really like the idea of that!

The thing is - I really, really don't like people trying to organize me. I hate meetings - really hate them. I do not like being bossed around or ordered about. I find myself resisting and getting all cranky as soon as someone starts trying to corral me or tell me how I should think or believe or feel about things.

But I do feel a connection to what I call "God" - the power of Love and Truth - and I don't mind at all following where Love and Truth lead me.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 9:25:05 PM PST
Thank you, Clarissa!

Posted on Nov 11, 2012 10:33:18 PM PST
Davyd says:
Karen,

Still in love with you, but seriously ... looking around this world I don't see anything BUT disorganized religion. OK, maybe the Scientologists are an exception, but only one. Really? You think religion is organized? Really? Really. REALLY!

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 10:37:13 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 11, 2012 10:43:13 PM PST
Organized religion doesn't seem to be working so well for us.
==============================
Works well for me.

God has once stated "mine house is a house of order."

It is very nice to attend a LDS congregation anywhere in the world and find the same gospel of Jesus Christ.
You can find LDS under the definition of "organized" in the dictionary. ;-)

I read an article today which said something about a Methodist church back east that had, had a change in their "pastor" and within a year the bank put a for sale sign up on the church building. The new leader was so different from what the congregation expected, that they all left the church. They describe him as being "baptist" like.

The bank foreclosing and putting up a for sale sign cannot happen to an LDS chapel. In more ways then one.

Brother Niv

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 10:47:38 PM PST
How opinions do vary, Karen. I love meetings, especially long ones. Clarissa

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 11:04:25 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 11, 2012 11:09:45 PM PST
Clarissa's post:
I love meetings, especially long ones.
===============================
how about 3hrs? ;-)

LDS have a 3hr block of 3 meetings, Sacrament meeting which last 1:10, Prayers, Hymns, Announcements, Sacrament, two youth speakers, two adult speakers, a special musical by choir or talent from congregation.
The we break (:10) for classes :40min. Adult Sunday school classes, age appropriate youth classes.
Then a break (:10) for Priesthood and Relief Society (:40), Gender focused classes.

Before the mid 1970's these meetings were all separate on Sunday and required traveling back and forth to attended, total time then was 4 hrs. The energy crisis of the mid 70's cause a consolidation of meetings into one 3hr stretch.

Edit: I just noted where you are from... are you aware? http://www.templemormonparis.org/informations-sur-le-temple-de-paris/

Brother Niv

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 11:16:57 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 11, 2012 11:37:43 PM PST
I can appreciate the LDS congregation would feel great involvement by having that long amount of time.
..........

Sermons

I regret that sermons are very short now in most cases. Apparently, they used to last for a considerable time, and, if composed properly, would have been very inspiring and provided a talking point for the families at the meal table later on.

Does the LDS have long sermons - an hour or so?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 11, 2012 11:40:01 PM PST
Does the LDS have long sermons - an hour or so?
=============================
Our main meeting is called Sacremnt meeting, consisting of 10-15 minutes opening prayer, hymn, announcements and congregational business. 15-20 minutes for sacrament (communion).
Then there are usually two youth speakers who talk (sermons) for 2-4 minutes each.
Then two adult speakers who talk 12-15 minutes each. We usually have between the two adult speakers a musical number by the choir or solo talent. The last few minutes for closing hymn and prayer.
As every member gets a chance to speak over the course of the year, we experience varied talent in delivery of the talks.

After Sacrament meeting we break for class, where an instructor guides the class in gospel discussion, reading of scripture and discussing their meaning.

After classes we break into gender (those above age 12) focused training, men learn of their (priesthood) duties/responsibilities, and woman of theirs.

Brother Niv
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Religion forum
Participants:  17
Total posts:  117
Initial post:  Nov 10, 2012
Latest post:  May 15, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

Search Customer Discussions