Posts by bluemason3

Of course. You see, nobody is stopping you from following those blatant lies peddled by some obscure, perverse Middle Eastern sect—one full of occultism and even cannibalistic undertones. It’s a group responsible for an incredible amount of evil, violence, and the gross abuse of power... 🤷

Forget about some frontier; that’s just how those old-school hardliners handle politics. Personally, I’m leaning more toward the liberals here. 🥳

Paul Rogers94 said:I get that—but I can’t ignore how much that root similarity jumps out at me. Even if it isn't strictly etymological, the connection is undeniable... For me, it points toward the exact same thing that linguists and spiritualists have been circling around for ages.

Etymology and root similarity are essentially the same thing, and there's no connection here. Also, for what it's worth, neither of those things has anything to do with consciousness.

The total number of sounds and combinations we can actually make is limited. It's inevitable that different languages will end up with words that sound alike, even when there's zero connection in their Etymology or meaning.

Trying to find meaning where none exists is just a pattern-seeking human reflex—kind of like seeing faces in the clouds or thinking you see heads in the grass. Making these easy leaps without any solid ground just creates unnecessary mental clutter.

There is no "subjective truth" in this. Facts don't care about our personal opinions.

Paul Rogers94 said:You can't just ignore the etymological overlap here—both Christ and Krishna serve as synonyms for consciousness. They’re both personalists who champion the path of devotion.

I don't think there's an etymological link there. Sounding similar can be pretty deceptive.

Christ comes from the literal Greek translation of the Hebrew/Aramaic term for "anointed one" (Messiah), whereas Krishna is rooted in the word for the color black. The Proto-Indo-European root (construct) is kr̥snós, which is etymologically linked to our own word for black.

The Greek khrī́ō (to smear, to anoint) in the root of Christ is actually more closely related to the Sanskrit ghṛta.

Zachary Cox69 said:Think if you want.
They worship someone who isn't God, chanting "Hare Hare ...." through neighborhoods and streets.
They give up all sorts of foods that God provided for us to eat—not to mention a lot of couples giving up sex.
If those people seem normal to you, then something is definitely off.

Their theology is almost as nonsensical as typical American Christianity, but at least they have great music, good food, and some pretty cute girls.

So, they're definitely the better choice. 😁

Zachary Cox69 said:Knowing something from the inside isn't the same as looking in from the outside. An addict might think drugs are great, too. But I don't need to consume them to understand the consequences.
Some people know a ton about groups like Temple Nation, Jehovah's Witnesses, Hare Krishna, or Scientology, so they're "informed," even if being involved is a bad move. Summoning spirits is dangerous, yet people do it anyway. Magic is the same way—black or white, people still mess with it.

They don't know it from the inside or the outside. From the outside, you have Indologists, psychologists, or sociologists of religion. A Christian theologian, meanwhile, just uses their own warped, dogmatic religious fantasies to project an imaginary idea onto a fantasy projection of some fantastical version of the East.

That isn't an outside perspective; it’s just delusional religious self-deception.

When I tell you that the fact nearly all these texts align with Eastern traditions has nothing to do with reality, I'm stating a factual point regarding history and sociology. It's an external view, not a question of internal religious doctrine.
It is a simple, easily verifiable, and undeniable fact that Buddhists and Hare Krishna followers have incredibly different philosophies (whereas Christianity is very close to traditional Christian thought), and none of them actually represent what these texts call "the Orient." This has nothing to do with being an insider or an outsider. Besides, I'm not even religious anymore, so I don't belong to anything internally.

Also, you're drifting off-topic again. Whether you think someone else's superstitious fairy tale is better or worse than your own doesn't matter here; that's just a subjective value judgment without any basis for proof or refutation.
The real issue is that they are criticizing things they don't understand and making claims that are factually false. Whether that thing is "good" or "bad" is irrelevant to the point.

Your Christian authors are simply ignorant. It's not about whether they are looking from the inside or the outside; it's about a total lack of knowledge on the subject.

lonestag15 said:Honestly, at this point, it feels like Hinduism is basically just a factory for producing psychotic people—it’s like they're just modeling everyone after the ones who are already out of their minds...

So, let's talk about historical accuracy for a second... there’s basically one single sentence—outside of the Bible, obviously—mentioning some guy named Jesus... and even that one line is incredibly vague. Honestly, if we're looking strictly at the evidence, you could pretty much write him off right from the jump...

Alright, let’s get real here—if we’re playing by your rules... imagine if Moses and Jesus were actually walking around among us today. Like, actual flesh-and-blood people. Are they just straight-up psychotic? ...

So, do you see Jesus identifying himself with God as just some massive, grandiose illusion?...

Look, I don’t have any skin in this game and I’ve got zero to gain here—I’m just laying out the plain truth... Since you love hiding behind "logic" so much... if someone votes like a duck, then they're a duck. Simple as that...

Look, if New Age turned out to be harmful, then it’s harmful. It really is that simple... Just a fact...

Not necessarily Hinduism, but ascetic mystical practices in general—regardless of the religion—probably are.

As for historical accuracy... there's literally only one sentence (outside of the Bible) about some guy named Jesus... and it’s incredibly vague. Based on the evidence, we can pretty much write him off right from the start.

But let's be realistic based on your logic. Suppose Moses and Jesus were actual, flesh-and-blood people. Would they be considered psychotic?

And do you see Jesus identifying himself with God as a grandiose delusion?

Again, that doesn't hold water because we aren't talking about real people; we're talking about mythological projections. Diagnosing them makes about as much sense as debating alien sightings. Or potatoes. I can't wrap my head around the idea that these figures are real people when they lack any characteristics of actual human beings.

Look, I have no personal interest or ulterior motive here; I'm just stating what is true. You constantly appeal to logic... well, if it walks like a duck, it's a duck.

Fine. If that's the case, if New Age has proven to be harmful, then it is harmful. That's a fact.

I have no idea what you're getting at. I can't even begin to untangle your train of thought.🤔

How are you determining that New Age is harmful? Everything is harmful to someone in some capacity. Is it more or less harmful compared to something else? By what ratios, what criteria, and what metrics of harm are we using?

lonestag15 said:Spiritual awakenings can definitely have elements that look like a psychotic break...

So, by your logic, Moses and Jesus were just schizophrenics—except maybe Jesus had a particularly intense case of grandiosity?

Do you actually see the difference if someone spends two weeks at an ashram and develops some "Kundalini issue" instead of praying to our Father every night for two weeks and enjoying a peaceful life in the Midwest?

Now do you get why the Church takes such a specific stance on this?

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

It’s pretty pointless to try and judge myths with questionable historical accuracy that way.

The reality behind the Church's position—and most other institutions—is simple: like any other organization, they protect their own interests and undermine everyone else's. Everything else is just a circus act.

Whether you call it worthy or unworthy, I honestly don't see much difference between the symptoms of a "Kundalini disturbance," the accounts found in the hagiography of St. Pia, and a standard psychotic disorder.

Zachary Cox69 said:That's just your opinion. And you’d probably swear on your life that you're 100% right.
But the people actually writing about this aren't just making things up as they go. They know what they're talking about—they've lived that reality. You seem to think you're somehow a hundred times more informed than them. Personally, I know a few people who completely lost their grip after diving into Transcendental Meditation or similar Eastern trends.

It isn't an opinion; it's a fact. Read two books on Hare Krishna (admittedly mediocre literature, but it's basically all you'll find in English regarding that specific Hindu spectrum) or something similar. Then you'll see how their core views align perfectly with Christian ones, opposing impersonalist views just as much as your post does.

I'd bet my life on it, too—mostly because unlike Joseph Ratzinger, I actually know what I'm talking about. 😉

Most people aren't informed at all, and frankly, I am usually far more knowledgeable than the majority. If we're talking credentials (a degree in Buddhist studies + yoga therapy from a medical-yoga institute + years spent in India + decades spent in various "sects"—what exactly are the qualifications of Rak or Blazevic? Or yours?). Rak is a Catholic theologian with zero academic background in Orientalism, Indology, or Eastern religions, no personal experience, and no ties to that culture. He's just like most Catholic "experts" who can only sell their nonsense to the uninformed.

I'm not even disputing that people lose their minds over TM (though it's always hard to tell how much is due to meditation versus pre-existing predispositions or mental health issues that draw them to these practices in the first place), but that has nothing to do with our actual discussion. People lose it in every walk of life; some even become Catholic saints 😁
.

So, go ahead and keep arguing with an armored concrete wall. Even after saying it 500 times and pointing out how completely nonsensical this rambling is, not a single grain of common sense gets through. They just stubbornly keep copy-pasting the same mindless garbage. 🙄

Anyway, here's attempt number 501:

Stop trying to lump all "Eastern spirituality" or "Eastern meditation" together. In India, you have hundreds of different denominations within Hinduism alone, not to mention all the other religions outside of it. Add the rest of Asia to the mix and it’s even more chaotic.

Take the Hare Krishna movement, for example; the famous ones in the West actually hold views nearly identical to Christians on this issue, and they level the exact same criticisms against "Impersonalists."
Not every Eastern practitioner is some Advaita-style impersonalist—especially not the cheap, reductionist version shoved down people's throats via New Age nonsense and a total misunderstanding of anything outside their own little bubble.

And don't even get me started on the vocabulary. It's meaningless. What exactly is the "universal essence of the world"? To dualists like those in the Hare Krishna movement, that means nothing. To Buddhists, it means nothing (since there are no "essences"), so it's probably just some weird interpretation of Advaita.🤔

In short, it's just more nonsense from clueless critics who invent, fantasize, and project their own imaginary ideas onto some abstract, non-existent "East," just so they can feel special about living a lie.

Zachary Cox69 said:That’s a spot-on Marxist diagnosis right there.

And honestly, it could be communism. It's easy for a clever opportunist to hide behind any ideology that happens to be dominating society at the time.

Religion has always been nothing more than a lever used to socially reset a world full of naive people.

Religion and spirituality (which aren't exactly clearly defined anyway) tend to overlap quite a bit. However, on this forum, we maintain the distinction specifically to make room for topics that would otherwise be drowned out by mainstream traditional religions if they were lumped together.

hiddenpuma75 said:Oh, come on, give me a break!

Men commit 78% of suicides.

Men make up 68% of the homeless population.

80% of murder victims are men.

98% of military casualties are men.

92% of workplace injuries involve men.

😁

He could have chosen either himself or the sin, but the myth of sacrifice—using proxies (like animals in the Middle East or burning fields back home in the Midwest)—to transfer and destroy a community's sins is pretty common. It’s an archetypal, even psychological, moment found in many human cultures.

What browser are you running?

Sam Martinez9 said:Of course, from the moment anyone rolls out of bed, they’re thinking about physics, quantum mechanics, cellular biochemistry, hormonal balances, or the chemical makeup of some substance... things like that. Honestly, those are the primary topics of conversation in every local diner across the country.

Only someone who actually cares would ☕

placidorca16 said:This is nothing but pure fiction and a blatant ad hominem attack against her.👎 It’s not that Greta Thunberg is "mentally challenged"—she’s actually far sharper and more capable than most of the people throwing stones at her. Honestly, it just looks like pure jealousy to me.A lot of highly intelligent people have Asperger, and it doesn't actually impact their cognitive abilities.Asperger syndrome is a neurodevelopmental condition that primarily affects how people interact with others and process information. It’s often characterized by intense, focused interests and a tendency toward repetitive behaviors, which can make social cues feel like a foreign language. While it presents certain challenges in navigating typical social settings, many individuals with Asperger find they have unique strengths, such as incredible attention to detail and deep expertise in specific subjects. It isn't about a lack of interest in people, but rather a different way of experiencing the world.It doesn't change her intellect; it only affects how she communicates and processes emotions. All these diagnoses of depression and other labels people throw at Greta Thunberg to undermine her mental capacity just prove they have zero clue how mental illness actually works. They don't have any legitimate arguments to counter her activism, so they resort to low blows because they simply can't compete on the facts.👎 Some people clearly just can't wrap their heads around her messages due to their own mental limitations, but honestly, that's a whole different conversation.😬 Pathetic. Honestly, I don't think it gets any lower than this when it comes to so-called "adults" and "normal" people.🙄

And that’s something new?😲 It’s funny how people react. When "genius" populists like Donald Trump or other world leaders start gaining traction globally, nobody bats an eye. But when we see that same brand of populism being wielded by our local sheriffs and cowgirls here at home, suddenly everyone starts acting like it’s a massive problem. It’s all about who’s driving the bus, I guess.😒 Well, that’s pretty wise and hard to argue with.🙄🥱

Being neurodivergent doesn't mean being stupid. You're putting words in my mouth.

I know more people with Asperger than anyone else; honestly, I’ve spent more than half my life surrounded by folks on the spectrum.My mother, my cousin, a professor from college, and a few acquaintances.Honestly, I don't need anyone explaining their pros and cons to me.

I can be incredibly successful at whatever I focus on, but my metacognition—that big-picture thinking, grasping complex situations, navigating social dynamics, and handling stress—is where I tend to struggle.It's often made much harder by comorbidities, like epilepsy.They’re basically useless in any other context. Great for highly specialized roles, maybe, but terrible leaders. Personally, I’d hire someone with Asperger to be a programmer, but I wouldn't dream of putting them in charge of the department. They all tend to be obsessively focused and incredibly exclusive—sometimes even aggressive fanatics about whatever they fixate on. They can't see past the tip of their own noses.

Cognitive ability isn't just about grinding through specific tasks. Metacognition counts as a cognitive ability, too.

I’ve got a depression diagnosis myself, so I really don't need anyone explaining whether it interferes with things or not. 😉

I think I read somewhere—maybe it was her, maybe her family, or someone close to her—that she’s basically stunted in her development because of everything she's been through. They said she even looks younger than she actually is. Or something like that, anyway. I can't quite recall the exact wording.

Even the brightest 16-year-old can be pretty clueless. Like I said before, the neurological development of the key brain regions responsible for these kinds of questions doesn't actually wrap up until around age 25. It’s just a straightforward biological fact, really—nothing to debate.

It’s pretty much indefensible. The only reason a kid with that many issues would try to lecture experienced adults is by pulling at emotional heartstrings. It isn't about informing anyone or having a serious intellectual debate—that's just not happening.

Sam Martinez9 said:It isn't about me; it’s about you. Your actions carry consequences, and frankly, you shouldn't be looking for someone else to blame when things go south.

This is a genuine leap forward for modern medicine.

I have to be honest—I’ve never personally contributed anything groundbreaking to the fields of medicine or technology. I haven't exactly revolutionized science or engineered the next big tech breakthrough.

At the end of the day, we have to remember that a human being is so much more than just a collection of medical data and high-tech gadgets.

True, you can't ignore the fundamental sciences—the natural ones, obviously. 👍