New age

[CHRISTINE77]

Good Evening Christine. Good to hear from you again. Actually, cannibalism is a common ecological interaction in the animal kingdom and has been recorded for more than 1500 species.

Thank you,
Gary

Good afternoon Gary,

Actually I guess you are right. Often male animals eat the new born babies.

But for modern humans it is quite taboo, except in cases of extreme starvation. Even then, I think I’d rather starve. However, among the savages, I guess it was quite common, even religious in some cases. Ugh. I’m glad I’m a Catholic.

 

[Gary_Sheldrake]

Good afternoon Gary,

Actually I guess you are right. Often male animals eat the new born babies.

But for modern humans it is quite taboo, except in cases of extreme starvation. Even then, I think I’d rather starve. However, among the savages, I guess it was quite common, even religious in some cases. Ugh. I’m glad I’m a Catholic.

Good Evening Christine: I have never really studied cannibalism much, however, I could see how it could be seen as a religious practice. As for savages, I have been a businessman for many years, and find it hard to distinguish between one kind of savage and another to be very honest. My personal opinion is that we just have a different sort of savagery here in what we refer to as civilized society.

Thank you,
Gary

 

[Gary_Sheldrake]

I agree completely. “New Agers” are all over the place. Before I came back to Catholicism, I was kind of a New Ager, experimenting with Tarot cards, Astrology and a little bit of Eastern philosophy. Many “New Agers” became quasi-Buddhists or Hindus, practicing yoga and becoming vegans. The thing about the New Age movement is that is is a real mish-mash of ideas and practices. I also think it is almost like Gnosticism, in that people are trying to earn their ways into some type of “salvation” like karma or reincarnation or nirvannah. But it’s hard to really define what the “New Age” movement really is. Unitarian Universalists are definitely New Agers!

I guess we are all trying to earn our way into something or another. I am a Catholic and many Catholics I know think they are earning their way to heaven rather than heaven being a state of being that we attain. But over time I have come to feel that it’s best to just work on being where we’re at, because that’s the only place we’re ever actually going to be. But we spend very little time doing that. Instead we replay the past and anticipate the future all day or think in abstracts. Every Monday I get on the elevator at work and ask people how they’re doing. Everyone always says “okay for a Monday.” On Tuesdays they say that "tomorrow is hump day, on Thursday they say “tomorrow is finally Friday” and all day Friday they talk about what they will do Saturday. On Sunday they start to dread Monday again. In our minds we’re never where we’re at, and the problem with that is where we’re at is the only place we’re ever going to actually “be.”

Thank you,
Gary

 

[suko]

But over time I have come to feel that it’s best to just work on being where we’re at, because that’s the only place we’re ever actually going to be. On Sunday they start to dread Monday again. In our minds we’re never where we’re at, and the problem with that is where we’re at is the only place we’re ever going to actually “be.”

What u said here kinda reminded me of the Scripture passage of Matthew 6: 34
*
“Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Let the day’s own trouble be sufficient for the day."*

 

[Gary_Sheldrake]

What u said here kinda reminded me of the Scripture passage of Matthew 6: 34
*
“Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Let the day’s own trouble be sufficient for the day."*

Absolutely Suko. I agree.

Thank you,
Gary

 

[CHRISTINE77]

I guess we are all trying to earn our way into something or another. I am a Catholic and many Catholics I know think they are earning their way to heaven rather than heaven being a state of being that we attain. But over time I have come to feel that it’s best to just work on being where we’re at, because that’s the only place we’re ever actually going to be. But we spend very little time doing that. Instead we replay the past and anticipate the future all day or think in abstracts. Every Monday I get on the elevator at work and ask people how they’re doing. Everyone always says “okay for a Monday.” On Tuesdays they say that "tomorrow is hump day, on Thursday they say “tomorrow is finally Friday” and all day Friday they talk about what they will do Saturday. On Sunday they start to dread Monday again. In our minds we’re never where we’re at, and the problem with that is where we’re at is the only place we’re ever going to actually “be.”

Thank you,
Gary

Yes and I don’t really think we can “earn” anything. Everything is by the grace of God. God giveth and God taketh away. You are right about the future though. We should stay present in the moment and thank God for every minute of it.

 

[Gary_Sheldrake]

The New Agers I have known were really a mixed bag. I will only speak about my impressions when I spoke to them about their beliefs. It was a bit like trying to nail down water. I am not trying to speak to all forms of New Age nor all New Agers, but perhaps there are others with similar experiences.

My NA friends, who were mostly single or divorced women with no children and at least one bad relationship under their belts, seemed to pluck different ideas from different religions and adopted them into their own religion. They grabbed yoga, because it’s exercise, but the deeper meanings were just glossed over. They snatched up reincarnation, because they loved the idea of coming back again, but they rejected all other aspects of Hinduism, such as a caste system. They spoke often about karma when someone angered or upset them, but had no concept of it’s full meaning. They quoted the Golden Rule, but rejected the Old Testament. Some even embraced the love of neighbor that Jesus spoke about, but rejected all notions of sin, including His mercy and grace. In the end, they were left with no religion at all. Only happy thoughts about life and death, which last about as long as a Facebook meme. Overall, I was left with the impression that they were like non-committal Unitarian Universalists, but they referred to themselves as Wiccan or Pagans, or some other term. I have never heard anyone actually call themselves a New Ager. I don’t think their beliefs would fall under the definition of Wiccan or Pagan.

Good Morning Lutheran Farmer: I am very familiar with Eastern religions as well as Catholicism. I am trying to be a bit more honest with myself these days, and insofar as I am able to reason, the difference between the people you mentioned who are all over the place and the people who belong to a religion with heavily defined dogmas is that the people who belong to the latter are just further out on a particular limb. In truth, we are all trying to be connected with something that gives us a sense of belonging and purpose. It follows that we create some pretty elaborate ideas about things, or we accept some elaborate ideas that have already been worked out by someone else, and from there we try to find a place for ourselves within the framework we have either devised or accepted.

But I think the place for ourselves turns out to be whatever place we happen to be, and the purpose is just experience. No definition is really needed, and most of what we make it out to be starts to look a little odd as time passes anyway. For instance you mentioned the Old Testament. It looks a bit queer to a 21st century human to think that all of humanity sprang up from two people who lived maybe 6,000 years ago (if you trace the lineages in the Old Testament back to Adam and Eve they would have lived about 6,000 years ago), and we know that modern humans have been around for at least 70,000 years. We also know that there is a finite amount of water on the earth and if you pulled it all up into the sky and dropped it back on the earth, it would simply fill all the places that had been filled before you did that, so there goes the great flood. Except we know there were many localized events like that thousands of years ago, but none of them were global. We also know that it isn’t right to stone a disobedient child to death or to sell our daughters into slavery, but the laws in the Old Testament call for this on no uncertain terms . There are so many things in the Old Testament that seem a bit at odds with practical knowledge, so is it really something that requires or even merits defense? Because in truth, most of us have already rejected much of it without even knowing it. Anyone who believes the Old Testament with any degree of fidelity and followed it closely enough would be out committing felonies. The point is that all of us are living on mixed bags so long as we look for something other than ourselves and the people around us to give it all a sense of context and meaning. If Jesus is the vine and we are the branches, then we should simply be happy to know that we are all connected, and perhaps if we started acting that way, we would begin to find some real meaning, purpose and contentment.

Thank you,
Gary

 

[ProudUU]

I agree completely. “New Agers” are all over the place. Before I came back to Catholicism, I was kind of a New Ager, experimenting with Tarot cards, Astrology and a little bit of Eastern philosophy. Many “New Agers” became quasi-Buddhists or Hindus, practicing yoga and becoming vegans. The thing about the New Age movement is that is is a real mish-mash of ideas and practices. I also think it is almost like Gnosticism, in that people are trying to earn their ways into some type of “salvation” like karma or reincarnation or nirvannah. But it’s hard to really define what the “New Age” movement really is. Unitarian Universalists are definitely New Agers!

Some UUs are New Agers, that’s for sure. But you can’t make the blanket statement that we’re “definitely New Agers” … because it’s hard to make a blanket statement about UUs when it comes to (almost) anything.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Some UUs are New Agers, that’s for sure. But you can’t make the blanket statement that we’re “definitely New Agers” … because it’s hard to make a blanket statement about UUs when it comes to (almost) anything.

Well there may be a few who aren’t, but generally they are. How about you, are you an New Ager?

 

[ProudUU]

Well there may be a few who aren’t, but generally they are. How about you, are you an New Ager?

I suppose that depends on your definition of a “New Ager”.

I think tarot and astrology are total bs, if that helps. As does nearly every UU I’ve ever met … though I do know a UU who fancies herself an animal communicator.

 

[Gary_Sheldrake]

I suppose that depends on your definition of a “New Ager”.

I think tarot and astrology are total bs, if that helps. As does nearly every UU I’ve ever met … though I do know a UU who fancies herself an animal communicator.

Good Afternoon ProudUU: I often wonder about things like tarot cards, because I am a bit intrigued about how we tend to play tricks on ourselves. In the case of cards, I think we are playing a double trick. Specifically, I think that at a deep level we are much more “tapped in” than we think, and when people use such things as cards, they are simply projecting a perceived power onto the cards (which in and of themselves have no power), but in the process of perceiving that there is some power or ability, the belief somehow acts as an accelerator for an ability to unlock capabilities we already had lying dormant under the surface. It’s never the cards or the divining rods. We’re making it all happen. The problem is that we have to believe in something first, without “fessing up” to the fact that we only need to believe in ourselves.

Animal communication is a rather interesting subject, because we don’t really understand much about it. Most animals have much more highly developed right sides of their brains than we do. They communicate with us in ways that we are unaware of, because we have forgone the ability to use the right or intuitive side very much in favor of the left, or cognitive side. There have been lots of experiments that have been peer reviewed and published on the ability of animals to know what their owners are thinking. The most interesting was a parrot with a 1,500 word vocabulary who could tell researchers what was being shown to her owner on flashcards in another room sealed off from one another. So, while animals are not communicating on the intellectual level that we have restricted ourselves to, they do seem to be communicating with us in telepathic ways that we are largely unaware of. We do it too, but to a lesser extent, but we don’t usually notice it when we do it. There are experiments on this that anyone can participate in, and the outcomes are cause for some reflection, I think.

Thank you,
Gary

 

[mkoopman]

Good Afternoon ProudUU: I often wonder about things like tarot cards, because I am a bit intrigued about how we tend to play tricks on ourselves. In the case of cards, I think we are playing a double trick. Specifically, I think that at a deep level we are much more “tapped in” than we think, and when people use such things as cards, they are simply projecting a perceived power onto the cards (which in and of themselves have no power), but in the process of perceiving that there is some power or ability, the belief somehow acts as an accelerator for an ability to unlock capabilities we already had lying dormant under the surface. It’s never the cards or the divining rods. We’re making it all happen. The problem is that we have to believe in something first, without “fessing up” to the fact that we only need to believe in ourselves.

Animal communication is a rather interesting subject, because we don’t really understand much about it. Most animals have much more highly developed right sides of their brains than we do. They communicate with us in ways that we are unaware of, because we have forgone the ability to use the right or intuitive side very much in favor of the left, or cognitive side. There have been lots of experiments that have been peer reviewed and published on the ability of animals to know what their owners are thinking. The most interesting was a parrot with a 1,500 word vocabulary who could tell researchers what was being shown to her owner on flashcards in another room sealed off from one another. So, while animals are not communicating on the intellectual level that we have restricted ourselves to, they do seem to be communicating with us in telepathic ways that we are largely unaware of. We do it too, but to a lesser extent, but we don’t usually notice it when we do it. There are experiments on this that anyone can participate in, and the outcomes are cause for some reflection, I think.

Thank you,
Gary

I used to believe in telepathetic animal rights but then I needed a new pair of waterproof boots so I showboated and joined the club. Do you see your reflections in the mirror?

---

Pavlov was wrong and Skinner was inside out. For whom the box tolens.

 

[Gary_Sheldrake]

I used to believe in telepathetic animal rights but then I needed a new pair of waterproof boots so I showboated and joined the club. Do you see your reflections in the mirror?

---

Pavlov was wrong and Skinner was inside out. For whom the box tolens.

I see my reflection in all things.

Thank you,
Gary

 

[ProudUU]

Good Afternoon ProudUU: I often wonder about things like tarot cards, because I am a bit intrigued about how we tend to play tricks on ourselves. In the case of cards, I think we are playing a double trick. Specifically, I think that at a deep level we are much more “tapped in” than we think, and when people use such things as cards, they are simply projecting a perceived power onto the cards (which in and of themselves have no power), but in the process of perceiving that there is some power or ability, the belief somehow acts as an accelerator for an ability to unlock capabilities we already had lying dormant under the surface. It’s never the cards or the divining rods. We’re making it all happen. The problem is that we have to believe in something first, without “fessing up” to the fact that we only need to believe in ourselves.

Animal communication is a rather interesting subject, because we don’t really understand much about it. Most animals have much more highly developed right sides of their brains than we do. They communicate with us in ways that we are unaware of, because we have forgone the ability to use the right or intuitive side very much in favor of the left, or cognitive side. There have been lots of experiments that have been peer reviewed and published on the ability of animals to know what their owners are thinking. The most interesting was a parrot with a 1,500 word vocabulary who could tell researchers what was being shown to her owner on flashcards in another room sealed off from one another. So, while animals are not communicating on the intellectual level that we have restricted ourselves to, they do seem to be communicating with us in telepathic ways that we are largely unaware of. We do it too, but to a lesser extent, but we don’t usually notice it when we do it. There are experiments on this that anyone can participate in, and the outcomes are cause for some reflection, I think.

Thank you,
Gary

Hmm. OK.

All of that sounds a heck of a lot more “new age-y” than anything I believe.

There is no such thing as true telepathy. Sure, people who really know one another can sometimes “know” what the other is thinking without speaking - my husband and I can do this, for example - but it’s not telepathy. It’s knowing a person well enough to predict their actions/thoughts based on having had enough shared experiences with that person.

As for the parrot story … I’ve heard of that before, and it doesn’t hold up to real scientific scrutiny. I suggest reading a bit more about it. Because telepathy on that scale simply doesn’t exist. Sure, it sounds really neat, but it didn’t actually happen the way that the “believers” present it.

It’s just like cold reading or sleight-of-hand. So-called “psychics” aren’t actually psychic, because no one is psychic. They’ve simply honed the skill of cold reading. Magicians don’t really do magic, because there’s no such thing as magic. I have a cousin who makes a good living as a magician, and I have no idea how he does the tricks that he does - and they’re really good tricks - but he has spent the last 30 years practicing the art of prestidigitation, and he had a natural talent for it from the beginning.

There’s a reason James Randi has never actually had to pay out the money he’s been offering for DECADES.

All that said, I don’t have any problem with people believing in that stuff. That’s up to them.

 

[Pepband_Mom]

Just heard this talk by Constance Cumbey recently.

It deserves to land here, very interesting on new age.

avemariaradio.net/audio_archive/putting-on-the-mind-of-christ-july-6-2014/

Most interesting point I think is the effort of the movement to shift from analytical thinking.

Made me think about Common Core in the US and the purposeful shift of how to think.

I have closely followed Constance Cumbey for many years, listened to her tapes & read her books. Her 2 main points about the NA movement:

1. thou shalt not surely die
2. thou shalt be as gods

This is the same MO the father of lies promoted in the Book of Genesis.

Madame Helena Petrovna Blavatsky & successor Alice K Bailey of the Theosophical Society wrote volumes (automatic writings - from where???) that are being “followed like a recipe”. Saw those in a satanic bookstore by a major university. When I saw the chalices with the snakes, I couldn’t get out of there fast enough.

35,000 yr old entity “Ramtha” as channeled by one JZ Knight out of a ranch in Western Washington is known by locals as the lady with the chandeliers in her horse barn. Shirley McClain & other Hollywood types threw their $ @ her.

Another NA luminary: Matthew Fox, former Dominican priest, sadly after being silenced by the Vatican for a year, kept up with his “panentheism” got the boot out of the Church. In a recent book, Fox still blames Cumbey in part for getting him in trouble.

At one point, Fox, in the 1980’s, was at a major US Cathedral presenting a workshop & invited all those there to join in the "spiral dance’ - what the “witches do when they jump the cauldron”. What does the spiral dance have to do with sins, sacraments & the Trinity?

An acquaintance of mine left a convent when saw nuns get into off the wall mother god stuff. Had no choice but to leave as they were promoted NA rot.

I could go on but NA horribly infected the local Church where I lived. Many responsible are retired or dead but a left a trainwreck of confused & lost souls behind them. I saw people literally shed tears over the denial of RCC truth & practice; the archdiocese was wracked with horrible division amongst clergy & laity, etc. It looked like it was caving in and was almost too much to bear. After many years with new leadership, things have changed & uprighted.

My solace is in the end the lousy gates of hell will not prevail & Christ is the Victor! :heaven:

In regard to not eating meat or for those denom’s that decline alcohol, I find it interesting when important celebrations took place in Bible it’s often with wine (which was created for our joy see Sirach) & eating the fatted Calf!

 

[Gary_Sheldrake]

Hmm. OK.

All of that sounds a heck of a lot more “new age-y” than anything I believe.

There is no such thing as true telepathy. Sure, people who really know one another can sometimes “know” what the other is thinking without speaking - my husband and I can do this, for example - but it’s not telepathy. It’s knowing a person well enough to predict their actions/thoughts based on having had enough shared experiences with that person.

As for the parrot story … I’ve heard of that before, and it doesn’t hold up to real scientific scrutiny. I suggest reading a bit more about it. Because telepathy on that scale simply doesn’t exist. Sure, it sounds really neat, but it didn’t actually happen the way that the “believers” present it.

It’s just like cold reading or sleight-of-hand. So-called “psychics” aren’t actually psychic, because no one is psychic. They’ve simply honed the skill of cold reading. Magicians don’t really do magic, because there’s no such thing as magic. I have a cousin who makes a good living as a magician, and I have no idea how he does the tricks that he does - and they’re really good tricks - but he has spent the last 30 years practicing the art of prestidigitation, and he had a natural talent for it from the beginning.

There’s a reason James Randi has never actually had to pay out the money he’s been offering for DECADES.

All that said, I don’t have any problem with people believing in that stuff. That’s up to them.

Good Afternoon Proud UU: The experiment I was referring to was actually a scientific experiment that was peer reviewed and published. Telepathy is not magic nor is it supernatural. If it happens, then it is natural. Supernatural is just a belief system for what people either discount or don’t understand. Anything that happens is natural, once it is known to happen. It follows that if in fact telepathy happens, it is not supernatural. Likewise, the term “New Age” appears to me be a broad term that middle to older age people use to describe ideas that are outside the existential framework their minds are used to operating in.

Tricks are another thing altogether. Because Simon the Magician mimicked the things Jesus did does not diminish what you and I believe about the things Jesus did, although the things Jesus did were never actually scientifically vetted. There has been a considerable amount of serious work on mental phenomenon such as telepathy and both the US and former soviet defense departments spent large amounts of money on it. The researchers who did the work very much believe in it. Because they have experiential reason to.

Thank you,
Gary

 

[Gary_Sheldrake]

In regard to not eating meat or for those denom’s that decline alcohol, I find it interesting when important celebrations took place in Bible it’s often with wine (which was created for our joy see Sirach) & eating the fatted Calf!

Good Afternoon Pepband Mom: They also sold daughters into slavery, stoned disobedient children, rode donkeys or walked everywhere, barred deformed people from the Temple, declined shellfish, went to public baths, and never mixed fabrics. They also lived on average about half as long as we do now. I fail to see how any given behavior from Biblical times serves as a guide for modern living based simply on the fact that it was done in Biblical times. Can you elucidate on that a bit if you would?

Thank you,
Gary

 

[ProudUU]

Good Afternoon Proud UU: The experiment I was referring to was actually a scientific experiment that was peer reviewed and published. Telepathy is not magic nor is it supernatural. If it happens, then it is natural. Supernatural is just a belief system for what people either discount or don’t understand. Anything that happens is natural, once it is known to happen. It follows that if in fact telepathy happens, it is not supernatural. Likewise, the term “New Age” appears to me be a broad term that middle to older age people use to describe ideas that are outside the existential framework their minds are used to operating in.

Tricks are another thing altogether. Because Simon the Magician mimicked the things Jesus did does not diminish what you and I believe about the things Jesus did, although the things Jesus did were never actually scientifically vetted. There has been a considerable amount of serious work on mental phenomenon such as telepathy and both the US and former soviet defense departments spent large amounts of money on it. The researchers who did the work very much believe in it. Because they have experiential reason to.

Thank you,
Gary

I know of the “experiment”, and I’ve read a lot about it. And it’s bogus. Governments spend lots of money on things that they shouldn’t.

I also don’t believe in heaven, hell, angels, demons, or the divinity of Jesus of Nazareth. And I’d say I’m firmly agnostic as to the existence of a god/goddess/gods/goddesses.

Again, if people want to believe these things, then that’s fine by me. And I mean that.

 

[Gary_Sheldrake]

ProudUU;12184701]I know of the “experiment”, and I’ve read a lot about it. And it’s bogus. Governments spend lots of money on things that they shouldn’t.

Good Evening Proud UU: To simply say that something is bogus of course doesn’t make it bogus. Normally such claims are attended by some reasoning as to how the conclusion was reached. It is a discussion I am prepared to have if you like. I agree with you that governments do spend money on a lot of things they shouldn’t, so your point is well taken.

I also don’t believe in heaven, hell, angels, demons, or the divinity of Jesus of Nazareth. And I’d say I’m firmly agnostic as to the existence of a god/goddess/gods/goddesses.

When you say that you don’t believe in this thing or that, what you are actually saying is that you have a belief system of non-belief. Which is entirely different from being an agnostic, who neither believes or disbelieves.

Again, if people want to believe these things, then that’s fine by me. And I mean that.

It’s fine with me too. I just like to discuss the reasoning behind what people believe or don’t believe and also enjoy sharing my own ideas and reasoning. I have learned a good deal from people on this forum over time.

Thank you,
Gary

 

[CHRISTINE77]

I know of the “experiment”, and I’ve read a lot about it. And it’s bogus. Governments spend lots of money on things that they shouldn’t.

I also don’t believe in heaven, hell, angels, demons, or the divinity of Jesus of Nazareth. And I’d say I’m firmly agnostic as to the existence of a god/goddess/gods/goddesses.

Again, if people want to believe these things, then that’s fine by me. And I mean that.

So would you say that UU’s are the most tolerant religion? That everything’s okay, but you don’t have to believe in it? I would say UU’s are the most “politically correct” religion!