VonNoble

Thx edcrain...I know this....but OFTEN need to be reminded of it. Your timing in posting it was perfect timing for me. Happy to see your face once again...I rather miss the Forum when I am away...I appreciate your welcome back. von

Bravo! Bravo! Bravo! von

Emalpaiz, Not only do I agree with your observations. I was amused as can be with the wording re: Genesis. Good one. (not only correct but also cleverly worded) von

Hello Diego_008, Since credential presentation seems to be jaunting along in this thread. I will oblige but it is highly unusual. Too, all of the precision and sparing has certainly sidetracked the original purpose of your post. Also unusual, but it is your thread so I'll just loop things back to the point of origin. Like you - I have a college degree plus a bit more. Like you - I have studied three languages beyond my native tongue. I do not claim mastery in any of them - but certainly I get by when pressed to do so - in all of them. I appreciate learning and listening. I find darn near every person I have ever met teaches me something. I also did okay with book learning as well. I graduated with a boatload of honors from college and have been offered additional educational opportunities by way of scholarships. I declined that opportunity. But they sure made me feel good offering it! Early on - I was a slow reader. I was a very poor student until the fifth grade. When I finally got glasses. Gee, what a difference that made in my life. Once I got the knack of reading - well books are always stacked around me. Like people, most books have taught me much. To the point of your topic at hand - I have attempted to read the Qur'an on two separate occasions. I have a copy sitting on my desk a the moment. I studied once with a classmate while earning my first undergraduate degree. I studied it the second time on my own. I HAVE read the book in that I turned the pages and understood the words. I did not however understand the meaning in proper context. Therefore, I have no perspective to offer. Which is interesting in a fashion. Almost always after one or two tries I can glean some conclusions. I admit I really didn't "get" the book at all. I have decided to put it aside and try again at a later date. I am sure there is much wisdom in it. I see followers of that faith with holy and consistent devotion. I find those who live the faith to consistent in behavior with devotees of other religions. They share many admirable traits. They are often assets to their community at large. I also see some who claim to be followers that don't seem to get the message any better than I did. It was easier for me to "get" the Christian bible....I don't ascribe to it as a guide for life but I at least feel as if I could discuss it reasonably (not sure that would imply logically in the context of your postings) - but certainly I could step up in the area of reasonable. I will confess I have never taken a logic course. I have never taken a philosophy course. And after reading through the pages of the thread to this point - it would seem my observations might not have value without that foundation in this thread in spite of education. In addition to formal education I have learned a great deal from others. Not necessarily as educated as myself but by golly they were as intelligent, (often more so) ...and they were insightful and experienced. They often possessed talents I lack. I am grateful to them for helping me to see more clearly. Children are often very good teachers. In life, I have found justice at times is not fair. I have found wisdom often comes without proof. I have found people respond emotionally (often correctly) on impulse and kindness and love at least as often as they win with logic and facts. I am quite certain in life being right is NOT enough. repeat: Being right is NOT enough. Certainly, no one need agree with any of that. My successes in life are decent in number. My blessings without measure. My gratitude is pretty much a second skin. My greatest evidence of success is contentment and gratitude. I am sure in time, in the pages of the Qur'an I will also find nuggets to assist me to improve. I suspect strongly it is not the book that might be lacking. I suspect it is my own readiness level that is at fault. I find I tend to "get things" when I am ready. I might be willing...and certainly I am able to master a passable grasp of the language - but perhaps I am simply not in the right place to be fully ready. Learning can be like that. It is my understanding from all faiths that God (not man) awards faith in God's time. Humans are not able to give that gift. When I am ready - I will understand more and better Thank you for allowing all of us to participate. I might suggest if you are interested in more than a conversational exchange you note that on the original post. There are some powerfully learned people in this Forum and they too might enjoy a formal debate. There is a long-standing assumption that unless noted at the outset - anyone is welcome to participate. We sort of take people "as is" in this forum. We are fairly proud of our inclusion of all. Over the many years I have visited this site - it seems the vast majority of people posting offer what they can to the best of their ability, take what they can that helps them.....and always - most offer kindness. BY FAR they offer kindness. Forgiveness too. Giving of their best self is pretty much a staple. Again, welcome. Thanks for allowing us to learn from you. von

Jonathan HB Lobl, All any of us can do is speak for our own self. Thank you for your posting. It seems to me you DO have all the answers you need. You do your best. What more can any of us do? You accept that mistakes will happen - for all of us - as that is the nature of our existence. We are forever learning. We accept that learning curve is part of life and growth and we let the missteps go and move on. You can't get to second base with your foot firmly planted on first base. Seems to me you have a winning formula for dealing with questions and continuing to seek answers that work for you. Bravo. von

Dan56, Your example is clear and understandable. I thank you for it. Too, I would note that one need not take up arms to do battle. Resistance exists without violence too. A few years ago, I met a woman (Ruby)then in her 80s who battled Hitler's evil daily She never carried a weapon. She was tortured after capture. She risked it all. But never ever would consider violence in response to violence as a viable option. She would argue convincingly that the intel she provided about the realities of life under Nazi occupation helped to defeat him as much as any bullets fired. (Incidentally I was astounded that this petite, frail woman I met in a nursing home had done so much to resist evil.) Courage is not always a burly, brute force package Hitler is not the only person who wanted to eliminate Jews. The violent tendencies to eliminate Jews did not go away with the demise of the man and his army. The evil of it - is - still VERY active today in the world. And it is being met often (and defeated OFTEN) with non-violent means. Not every battle is a world war. Not every enemy is group. I saw a trailer for a recent movie depicted a true story of a pacifist in battle. He resisted evil ON the battlefield without the benefit of a way to defend himself agains bullets. There is often MORE THAN ONE right way to a solution. Ruby offered resistance. The soldier in the movie offered resistance. They did not, however - do so with violence. Each of us has the right and duty to battle evil. Failure to load guns and throw punches does not imply failure to battle. There are other weapons. They are also effective. Soldiers from both camps (weapons & force ...as well as those who opt to fight sans violence) - - both types doing battle - - will die. Both will die. Each has to face that death in accordance with his/her moral beliefs. They are then, therefore, essentially comrades in battle opting to use different weapons. Von

Enemies are essentially teachers. You can block a punch without throwing one in return. All life is of equal value. We are all sometimes are forgetful of that. It is no less true. We start dying with our first breath of life. How we live is more important; THAT we live is less important. There are FAR worse things than death in life Disease, gunshot, car accident, thrill seeking.... never waking up from a nap.....death will happen. Harming as few as possible is the prudent course. Harming any intentionally harms you (often more than it harms them.) You cannot give kindness without receiving it. You cannot easily undo the self-inflicted damage to you - - when you intentionally hurt another (physically, emotionally, financially, mentally) - YOU suffer as much or more - each and every time. von

How and why or even why not perhaps not required to DO ....whatever it is we do in life. They are ultimately not what drives us. Do the questions (and/or answers) really matter? Perhaps we most often act without understanding in our daily existence. (if yes - it explains a great deal) We want is often the impetus. We frequently respond beyond or in spite of reason. Maybe. von

There are some things old people miss as they age. It seems most of my peers are lamenting the loss of civility. They blame cyber space for much of that. They also gripe about unreasonableness having become the norm. I have been giving this some thought. Initially I disagreed and tried applying some understanding to the world now and why it has become speed over quality in communications. They might just have a point in there somewhere. Have we made the world smaller with these many ways to converse across the globe...but in the process...have we widened the gap in understanding (one another) because of how we communicate? Or any other variation you want to add to the conversation Von

There is some risk announcing to the world "you are clergy" - no matter what the title of your choice. People will, often, comment upon that decision (some favorably, some incredulously, and a few perhaps negatively.) What makes it worth the risk? Ego. Belief in a message. Hoping to make a difference. Shock value. Some on this Forum over the years liken their decision to painting a target on themselves. Others never reveal they have been ordained. Others go out in the world and proclaim it loudly. What's your story. Why did you take step to be ordained? (motivation) And the action you invested following step one? And the reaction to that action? And what's happening currently or planned for the future? von

I have often agreed with those who say the more they know - the more they realize how much they don't know. Disappointment seems to occur most often when I, myself, had unrealistic expectations. Others are less likely to fail if I assign less rigidity to the outcomes I expect. Often others are not so much dishonest as the fault is in me when we communicate. Often I do not listen fully. Often I rush ahead without waiting to allow them to fully explain. I am an Olympian at jumping to conclusions. Taking time to fully digest what is said before responding is much more effective. Skepticism begins with my own ability to fully integrate the information to the best of my ability every time. Some days I just screw up, forget, am inattentive, impatient, I don't ask enough questions, I don't process critically, I am too lazy to push myself to think in more than one comfortable rut that I favor....so I am not sure that in large part, it is my own input causing faulty and frustrating output. von

Still alive and active here too. Thanks for taking attendance I always somehow was comforted when they called my name in school. Someone knows you are there and you momentarily matter. von

Services? Hmm. I suppose most people on this Forum perform the service of kindness daily. More specifically, our church provides the standard services of most churches (weddings, funerals, memorial services, hospital visitations, prison visitations, home visits and such.) Additionally, we have been involved in a wide array of community outreach programs (disaster relief, shelter assistance, food pantry, literacy, financial support to those in need etc.) it is like most churches - limited only by the time, talent and treasure shared of our congregation. Von

Certainly a house church works as effectively as any other form of church. Many people have noted a church is not really a building at all. Of course there is an obvious pause to note that it is the quality of the group not the quantity of the group that matters. It is a very affordable way to start a spiritual community. We started on a deck in the back yard and simply kept growing. Von

Well I gotta stand and applaud that answer ! Next thought on that though - as that solitary Tom-Cat or in this case Jon-cat - - - do you reach out to others when you are able to do so? If you did, you were by some definition ministering to others, yes? If someone saw that and followed your example - would you not then be leading others? von So if I were to join the one and only church of Fred Frump (being the founder and sole member) - and were therefor God, what is my purpose for existence? At any point that I interact with another being (be that a different God or a mere mortal) is there any obligation upon me to care for or about the existence of anything or anyone else? thx von

So the purpose of clergy is largely one of administrative duties ? Often i think that would parallel traditional duties for many clergy as things like weddings are largely record keeping and witnessing. Yes they get to stand up and be in the front for the photo shoot in today's version things but really - the VOWS to GOD are offered by the bride and groom - the role of clergy is largely to witness and record the event for the church and for the state. In the case of funerals there is a "speech" offered to the congregation collectively and certainly a capacity that goes beyond administrative so I see a divergence between the two there. I am curious (and applaud) the involvement of the family unit in having responsibility for a large impact upon the children re: the spiritual formation the children. With the clergy being largely clerical....who is the final authority when spiritual questions arise in the community? If a child of your family marries a child of a family with a similar and yet not quite the same point of view - - - the newly married couple want to formulate a tradition for their new family but find a sticking point between what "he knows" and what "she believes" - how would they resolve that spiritual question? Both families share common views....but not the same view. How would the new couple reconcile what is or is not "proper" in the world of the spiritual for the next generation? Do they just divide the family (first born follows my system, second born follows your system) or is there some codification upon which the larger community agrees? Does the role of clergy ever include writing down the governance of spiritual practices for the community? If not -then I am not sure you have more than a bunch of family religions...but not a community/congregation. If the family has the larger portion of "ministerial duties" for this "religion" where does the moral guidance for each member of the family originate? Is there a written guideline for what mom's do and what dad's do? Are there rules for the obligations of the kids or suggestions of how to teach a child to be moral? How is right and wrong determined? Are there formal prayers? Are those voiced by everyone? Is there time for private meditation? And in all of that - who is driving the spiritual train in the home? Just trying to understand how it works. von

Thanks for the welcome greeting. I had to go do a bit of quick checking to catch up (orthopraxy being a new word to me) ....also the term Germanic Heathen. All good for me to go and learn some new things. So I thank you. I can more fully appreciate your POV that the tolerance to incoming other religions, ended up causing a crack in the armor, as it were, to the closed cohesive group before that exposure arrived. As is often the case when a closed society experiences integration. Your point is taken. Re: the POV that the clergy's authority being derived by acclaim or by consent of the congregation/tribe/community - I would agree that is usually the case. One can be anointed, ordained or titled, maybe even elected to be the leader - but you can only lead or govern if the followers -- in fact, follow the lead. Coercion may be applied - but is not indefinitely successful. (over-throws, self destruction, implosion and revolution are a few of the eventual outcomes of unwanted leadership) To that end it seems the path of the assented clergy in your faith has a commonality (granted unique to that one congregation) but a commonality nonetheless to others (actually not that different than the current closed society of the Amish in which each small community adopts its own variation of the faith and elects/chooses their own elders) - there is a loose tie between them but enough variation that each has a slightly different identity. They too resist infiltration and while blending - stand apart from the larger societies in which they reside world-wide. They are not just located in Ohio, PA and Iowa these days. Thanks for the lesson along the way in this thread, Stormbringer. It seems as if you do have a solitary minister in terms of ONE and only one clergy figure for each unique congregation (to the extent those terms convey the loose conceptualization to which the rest of us can grasp it) von

mark 34, you as well - I am always happy to see your postings and know you have remained steady and true on your path - Namaste, von

Stormbringer, Hello....I am most curious about your belief system. Certainly I appreciate learning new things so if you would assist me, please.... You note; " in my belief system there can be no such thing" - to what specifically were you referring? The idea of "ministers" per se; "ministering to another"; time spent in in introspection or silence with one's self; or was it all of those things - that do not exist on your chosen path. Obviously you are tolerant of others (kudos to you for that) - so your path is one that allows for tolerance thereby recognizing that others and other ways exist. I won't assume that permits you to interact with them or does it? Sorry I haven't been around the Forum to much of late so I am just catching up. von

I would agree with you - each of us has an individual choice of response. Most spiritual paths (if we can allow that term) - most would include service to others - some would qualify that service. Service only when you yourself are in balance and do so with proper intentions. Rather like strapping on your own oxygen mask before attempting to assist another. It seems to me - the most significant contributions I have ever made in service were in situations that were a) one on one b) at times I least expected it c) when there was no real thought or effort required of me (it happened naturally and spontaneously eh...sorry about the edit thing - I don't know how I managed to "go live" with the post as I am a dunderhead with technology - nonetheless, it seems the biggest impact to me and by me - were not done with a large group effort but rather one on one. Okay, I'm done editing now. von

Hello Hermes Mercurius, Are the two identities mention mutually exclusive, I wonder? Does not each minister face or find the "sacred silence inside him(her)self? A role as leader of a congregation does not free one of the interest or obligation to seek truth within oneself. It may, perhaps, force one to draw to and from the inside even more to remain centered. Perhaps ( I was going to make a pun about drawing from an inside straight) (or insight straight) but opted not to make that the point of it as I think you raised a serious and worthwhile question that deserves a serious answer. Thanks for the question to ponder. von

Is it a given that those who are more conservative will be drawn closer and closer to a fundamentalist end of a religious spectrum? And conversely that those who are least structured in general terms of their lifestyle will be opposed to organized religion all together? If either of those were even partially true - then how much of a role would "faith" factor into one's choice of (or rejection of ) religious affiliation? If neither of those is true - why is there a pervasive connection in the media presentation of "fundamentalists" (of any religion) as conservative and atheists as perpetual liberal extremists? Von

I did. I looked at the link and found it to be salient and balanced and I thank you much for including it. Von

As would I..... ....there has not been a stampede to share that joke....which is interesting to me in a big way. Von

Is humor a weapon? Von