Posts by casualtiger2

briskhound2 said:And that's just i'm to old stuff—stuff even the little kids sitting on the tree branches already know... 🙂>

Look, I get it, it's an old joke. But my son watched the fourth one and just goes, "A freaking atomic bomb couldn't touch this guy..."—so that's what stuck in my head.
At this point, it's not even about whether Spider-Man or Superman is tougher, it's more like... 😍

Did you know Bruce Willis actually turned down the chance to star in Titanic?
They ended up going with DiCaprio in the end.
Why do you think that was?

Linda Kelly51 said:Yes, that is exactly my point.

When a teenage girl falls in love, that is spirituality. When a priest leads a mass, it isn't.
Wholeness is what matters—when the entire being is engaged, especially the emotional aspect. That is how it penetrates deep down to the soul; otherwise, everything remains superficial.

Everything done in so-called spiritual groups—meditations, prayers, attempts to contact God, and the like—is nothing more than empty straw. It's just a standard ego trip.

Granted, I generalized a bit in my last post, so I'm not saying it's *always* like that.

Sure, a priest could be genuinely spiritual and a mass could be a real spiritual act—just like a teenager's crush might just be a hormonal rollercoaster.

The issue isn't meditation, prayer, or even people gathering to seek the divine (as long as it isn't turned into some rigid, formal Doctrine). The problem is what an individual actually *does* with those experiences.

The root of quasi-spirituality? It’s basically just ego structures and laziness.

The first part—ego—is why people convince themselves they’re "spiritual" just because they belong to a specific religion or group, believe in certain supernatural phenomena or gods, perform various rituals (religious, magical, whatever), or hold a specific worldview—be it philosophical, religious, magical, or New Age. Doesn't matter which.
The second factor, laziness, stops anyone from actually testing those delusions and making contact with the deeper layers of being—which, honestly, is the only way to get any real transformation or true spirituality.

Of course, there are variations. Some people are delusional and super active about it, while others are less delusional but just plain lazy (I’d definitely put myself in the second camp 😍).
Almost everyone is, more or less, prone to this kind of "delusion," which makes us all pretty much quasi-spiritual.

Here’s what Patanjali says about this whole "delusional" thing:
II, 3
Ignorance, unjustified attachment to personality, surrender to passions, unjustified aversion, and craving for life represent—most importantly, the primary ways they show up—the obstacles.

II, 4
Ignorance is the field where all other (obstacles) manifest—whether they’re dormant, weakened, suppressed, or fully active.

II, 5
Mistaking what is transient, impure, painful, and devoid of self-awareness for what is eternal, pure, pleasant, and self-aware—that is the ignorance we're talking about.

frozengull2 said:John;
Quincy:

I don't really get these Christian values. Maybe write a bit about them.

They're right there in the song by St. Francis.
Every time I read it, it just hits me differently... reminds me of those moods I find myself in sometimes.
It makes me feel this crazy connection to him.

CANTICLE OF THE CREATURES
St. Francis of Assisi

Most High, almighty, good Lord,
to you alone belong all praise, glory, honor,
and every blessing.
It belongs to you alone,
while no human being is worthy enough
even to mention your holy name.

Be praised, my Lord,
with all your creatures,
especially with brother Sun:
from him we receive the day,
warming us with his light.
He is beautiful and full of bright splendor,
a reflection, Most High, of your divine radiance.

Praise and bless
my Lord,
give thanks to him, serve him all,
in great humility.

Be praised, my Lord,
by our brother Moon and sister Stars.
You have scattered them, so bright, dear, and beautiful,
across your sky.

Be praised, my Lord,
by our brother Wind,
by the Air, the Cloud, and the clear skies,
and by all your weather,
that sustains your creatures.

Be praised, my Lord,
by our sister Water,
she is useful, humble, precious, and pure.

Be praised, my Lord,
by our brother Fire, which lights up our dark night.
He is beautiful and pleasant, powerful and strong.

Be praised, my Lord,
by our sister and mother Earth.
She feeds us and carries us, bringing forth sweet fruits,
colorful flowers, and herbs.

Be praised, my Lord,
by those who forgive out of your love
and bear the hardships of life with joy;
blessed are those who endure all things with peace,
for you will crown them with an eternal crown.

Be praised, my Lord,
by our sister bodily death,
which no mortal can escape.
Woe to those who die in mortal sin;
but blessed are those you find according to your holy will,
for a second death will not harm them.

How much are you actually able to understand/"feel" this, John?
Does it even make sense to you?

Quincy:

So how do you think you'll be saved if you don't believe and don't belong to the one true—the Orthodox Church?

My heritage is Catholic.
That doesn't make Orthodoxy any less valid (or vice versa).
Apparently, sticking to your own spiritual roots is considered a flaw on this subforum.

I wonder what kind of person I'd have to be to be accepted or "verified"?
Something impersonal and "free-spirited"?
What kind of kid is this guy, anyway? Can someone explain it to me...!?
Just so I can finally see where I'm going wrong.

Honestly, I don't see how anyone actually gets anything out of that poetry.
It looks like the guy was pure of heart and actually stumbled into something mystical—which isn't surprising. We know plenty of famous mystics, whether they were Christian, Muslim, or Hindu, who had a hard time being understood by the mainstream religious establishment. They often ended up making theological compromises just to keep their heads on their shoulders or because they were pressured by the people around them.
Seriously, what does that even have to do with Christian values?
Are we talking about values that differ from Buddhist, Islamic, or—God forbid—atheist ones? Or even worse... New Age stuff?
Zachary Cook2:

I come from a Catholic background. This doesn't take anything away from the credibility of Orthodox Christianity—or vice versa.

They don't like you. They claim you're heading down the wrong path—and honestly, vice versa. A good chunk of that comes down to the way the Vatican is structured.
And you could also try guessing what the average Muslim actually thinks—not those spiritualists, just the everyday majority.
Zachary Cook2:

It looks like having any kind of unique spiritual perspective is considered a major flaw on this subforum. I wonder what he’d actually have to do to get approved—or even just verified. Impersonal and "spiritually free"? Please. Who even is this kid, if anyone can actually explain...? Let's see—where exactly am I getting this wrong?

Christianity isn't some native thing that just popped up in the North America.
This is just some new nonsense imported straight from the Middle East.
It’s been a while—but hey, it finally made it in.

Why would anyone even bother validating your spiritual expression?
Especially here on this forum?
I honestly think spiritual expression should be universal—nothing dogmatic, nothing stuffy. Just... alive.
You’re probably just tripping because you want this to be true—so you rationalize it after the fact. You're trying to convince yourself that Christianity is somehow the most "correct," original, or moral religion out there, but it's really just an emotional reach.
It looks like you’re pinning that same blame on the Catholic Church and its hierarchy, too.
You’re just giving it all away to everyone else.

Aside from just believing in him, there isn't a single shred of evidence—or even a logical reason—to suggest otherwise.
P.S.
You didn't answer—so, what's actually the difference between Brandon Sanderson and those former Popes you mentioned?

frozengull2 said:You're totally misreading what I wrote.

I'm not out here campaigning to ban anything; I'm just pointing out how hypocritical people are being toward Christian values.

What part of that isn't clear?

What does the Orthodox Church have to do with me?
Where did you even get that idea?

Btw;
it seems like my age is this constant, ongoing dilemma on this subforum!?
Let's just solve this little "mystery" once and for all.
Common sense tells you that the whole "how old is she" thing is ancient history when it comes to me.
Why?
I've been on this forum since 2009.
If I was 17 back then (and you gave me a username that basically screams my age), I’d be at least 3 or 4 years older now.

I'm still struggling to wrap my head around these Christian values you're talking about.
Care to actually explain them?

What does the Orthodox Church have to do with me?

Well, how exactly do you plan on being saved if you don't believe in—and belong to—the one true church, the Orthodox Church?

PS
Bonus question—how is Castaneda different from some of those previous popes?

@frozengull2
You’re still stuck on how some junk website can have anything to do with spirituality—or fake spirituality—and all the misery it causes.
I really hope you realize that Castaneda makes up about 0.00001% of North America.
Still, that 17th point is starting to pique my interest.

Petition: ban heavy metal and eat religion.
There’s only one holy, redeeming church—the Orthodox Church.

Jacob Cooper5 said:Well, thank God your nonsense actually makes sense for once.
Do I really have to start asking you basic questions again just to get you to settle down?

So, what was the author getting at here?

Do I really have to keep asking you basic questions just to get you to chill out?

What do you mean "keep"? It’s not like we’ve ever actually talked.
Go ahead, try asking one of those simple questions—let's see if they actually work as a sedative.

rowdytiger34 said:Just one word: drugs.

Being obsessed with Castaneda is basically just being hooked on pills, mushrooms, or Peyote.

Some people just can't stand living in this reality we've been handed. Unfortunately for them, their own brains force their hand, making them reach for something extra to cope. Honestly, they should probably include a disclaimer when publishing Castaneda; his books are nothing more than propaganda for using hallucinogens to "expand consciousness." In that headspace, you might actually start thinking angels are sitting on your head.

I bet Castaneda's fanboys find Christian values annoying because they teach that everyone carries their own cross—you can't just toss it aside by swallowing whatever substance comes your way.

Personally, his first two books—Don Juan teachings and separate reality—where he pushes the whole mushroom thing, were pretty dull to me. (Later on, it seemed like he was just trying to shake up Castaneda's established worldview).
The Path to Ihtlan, moca circle, second moca circle... all the way to the Art of Dreaming—those were interesting enough as fiction (with an occasional psychological idea worth testing out), but lately, his last few have been so forced and obviously made up that I just couldn't get through them.
I haven't dug much into his actual life—I think what Chery wrote is spot on—and honestly, it feels weird to see people attempting some kind of "self-help" based on his books. 🤷

northernowl11 said:Who actually claimed that the core essence is Christian? Or maybe it’s Buddhist, or Islamic... you finish the thought. Is it possible for the essence to be anything else? Whose?

Quincy:

Some Muslims argue that those terrorists who kill in Allah's name aren't actually true believers at all. It’s all a lost cause, really. Everything churches and believers have done up to this point? None of it represents true faith or actual doctrine.

Of course they aren't. There’s this claim floating around that Al-Qaeda draws inspiration from the Bhagavad Gita. But what do you really think? Does the text itself incite violence? Or is the real issue just the twisted nature of the human mind—the kind of mind that burns people at the stake, impales them, or flies planes into skyscrapers, all in the name of God?

Quincy:

In essence, you’re just retrofitting ancient teachings to fit modern ethical standards rather than the other way around. You take whatever our current understanding of human potential and perfection happens to be, and then claim it was part of the faith all along. It’s a convenient way to cherry-pick the good stuff while conveniently overlooking the atrocities written right there in the Bible or the Quran—not to mention the actual crimes committed by believers and their "divine" institutions throughout history. So, some people slap a label on it like Christianity, others call it Islam, and some go with Hinduism—all to describe these fundamental human values and ideals. But isn't it true that those principles mostly just come down to being raised with a decent moral compass at home? Even in atheist households, doesn't the core of it all really just stem from how you were taught to act? All that negativity, all those failures? That’s not part of your doctrine. Those aren't "true believers." No, it’s always someone else—because in that mindset, hell is always inhabited by everyone else. I honestly don't understand how anyone can fall for this—how you can try to dress up and polish something that simply cannot be beautified. Chirp.

Look, you aren't actually talking to me here. You're addressing a religious dogmatist, and I’ll be the first to admit there are plenty of those around.

As far as I'm concerned, there is no "us" versus "them," at least not in the way you’re framing it. I see you and me on the same side of this, and frankly, it’s a shame you don't see it that way too.

Quincy:

This isn't about whether God exists or what His nature might be. This is about flawed, outdated, and at times, borderline violent doctrines—and the actual impact that following them has on people's lives.

Ultimately, responsibility lies with the individual. This is my response to Fyodor—if your intentions are pure, or if your soul remains untainted, you will naturally recognize what is divine, or whatever the atheists choose to call that higher power, within any teaching. The path to enlightenment is about overcoming the ego, not feeding it.

In a way, Castaneda managed to crack open certain doors that many find incredibly compelling, yet he ultimately fell right into the ego's own trap.

At the end of the day, one really ought to follow. Learning that actually nourishes his higher consciousness....rather than just anyone. A person. Why bother trying to become Castaneda, or even Christ himself? A person's greatness isn't derived from their name or their individual identity. True significance lies in the message they carry and the integrity with which they deliver it. After all, a life should simply be a reflection of the truths being preached.

In that sense, you don't really exist either.
Only humanity exists.

Like I said—it’s all just a matter of perspective. Both sides hold weight.

Once again, from my point of view, Christians don't have a monopoly on true spirituality, nor are all other paths inherently misguided attempts at it.

I agree.

You held a monopoly on the truth for far too long, which is why you think you're the ones qualified to judge it for everyone else. Well, you aren't.

Who exactly is this "we"?
🙂

We all know there is only one who sees everything and is actually capable of passing judgment. 😉

I bring it up mostly for the sake of conversation flow—and historical justice, really (I can't forgive Brun and the rest of them). 😍
I usually don't bother replying to people on these forums with hardly any posts—they’re often just burner accounts—and I'll admit I haven't been following your posting history closely. So, it's entirely possible we actually *are* on the same "side" (but there are always enough other people out there who "get" what I'm saying).

nimblewolf11 👍

Anthony Hayes2 said:Here is how I see it. In Jesus's time, plenty of people were preaching similar messages. Critics of Christianity always point to Marduk or pagan spring renewal rituals, and so on. What was actually unique about Christianity that allowed it to triumph over its contemporaries? Some quality that resonated with the masses. That doesn't necessarily mean it was "the best," just that it satisfied a large group—providing enough substance for them to find a part of themselves within it, while they filled in the rest to complete the collective body of the faith. New Age lacks such a cohesive body. It’s just a mishmash of incompatible beliefs held together by a shared resistance to Western cultural mainstream and a suitability for commerce. From this, I conclude that the New Age isn't built on a spiritual foundation, but a commercial one. It was manufactured by a capitalist society born from the technological and industrial revolutions. A commercial base required a spirituality that could be more easily marketed, tailored to its own needs rather than following the template of Christianity. Today, the spiritual foundation of the West isn't original Christianity anymore; even that has been forced to adapt to the new market-driven mainstream. And that mainstream is best described as...

Freemasonry. Just another layer of the old shadows.

Freemasonry isn't actually a mass movement. It's just tight-knit cliques and elites playing games. What even is it? For some, it’s pure Satanism—an obsession with power and wealth masquerading as liberalism. It feels like a form of occultism rooted in pre-Christian beliefs, a mainstream branch that split from Christianity much like Christianity once split from Judaism. To the masses, this Masonic establishment churns out New Age movements—a pagan mishmash that works because people are too simple-minded to grasp anything deeper, making them easy to manipulate. Sure, there's quality in New Age thought, but finding it requires serious people. Christianity holds more weight because it still has dedicated people—priests, at least—guiding the public toward being better. New Age circles are mostly just manipulators selling themselves as spiritual leaders.

It isn't just about most innovations being moronic. It’s about "human capital." A mass religion finds it easier to recruit high-quality people to spread its message. People talk about the crisis in the Catholic Church lately—how nobody wants to be a priest anymore. But a mass religion also has a built-in skeptical body that rejects insane ideas. Take the flagellants, for instance. They practiced self-flagellation until they bled, yet eventually, society tossed that "innovation" aside as madness. Or imagine if someone in the Catholic Church suggested cannibalism to honor Jesus's sacrifice; even in parts of Latin America, people might accept almost anything, including literal crucifixion. Christianity went through an early era of truly deranged innovations. There were times when people would actually hack off limbs or genitals because they thought it was what the Bible commanded to avoid sin. Just throwing them around. Ridiculous.

I see another issue here. In the tech or service sectors, bad innovations get rejected by the market almost immediately if they fail to meet basic needs. People move on quickly. But a flawed innovation in spirituality might not be discarded for fifty years—plenty of time to waste an entire lifetime on nonsense. There's a high risk of squandering your life on a delusion or someone’s ego trip. And frankly, spiritual direction matters more than whether you drive a car with rounded or angular bodywork.

The problem with New Path is this obsession with mass appeal and trying to force its way into the mainstream. You can't have "mass genius." It isn't for everyone; it's for the exceptional few. From a market perspective, not everyone can be an entrepreneur—that's maybe 2% of the population—and of that 2%, only 5% actually build something meaningful. Entrepreneurship can't be the mainstream industry itself, though it serves as the engine that feeds it.

New Path cannot be mainstream, nor can it be mass-market. If it remained esoteric, it would be fine; it would simply be the pursuit of exceptional individuals. Trying to push New Path onto the masses feels like nothing more than Masonic manipulation.

Look, I can point out a few issues with your take:
- You’re leaning a little too hard into conspiracy territory (all that talk about "Masonic manipulation" 😲)
- Maybe Christianity didn't win because its teachings were superior or more truthful, but because it functioned perfectly as the official state religion of the Roman Empire—and honestly, that tie between politics and faith is still incredibly strong today. That gave it a massive material advantage and power over everyone else right out of the gate.
- The biggest contribution of the New Age movement is actually freeing people from the need to blindly follow religious authorities. It shifts the center of gravity back to the individual—which, of course, those who want to stay close to God view as a major flaw or "egocentrism."
- Plus, you seem to think the serious side of New Age stuff is all about experimentation and seeking self-knowledge. But that’s true of almost all religions at their inception, before they become institutionalized, rigid, and start grabbing for power over the public.
- As for the downsides of the New Age—sure, they exist, but they have direct parallels in established religions. And if anything, the old-school institutions have much more influence and a higher potential for causing actual harm.
- The "shady business" aspect isn't exclusive to the New Age; look at the history of organized religion—church wealth, tithes, selling indulgences which led to the Reformation, basically psychological trading where it's "you give us your faith, and we give you heaven/forgiveness/or even just bread..."
- The New Age isn't necessarily something weird or crazy—often it’s just a fresh perspective on ancient questions and answers (even Christians say you shouldn't put "new wine into old wineskins" 😍)
- Even if it just managed to dismantle one part of those rigid belief systems, the New Age is fine—maybe even the start of a better world.

PS

Transcendental Meditation is a blend of several different traditions, making it a new practice in itself. One issue is that it requires more time than saying the Rosary or attending Mass, so it becomes incompatible with a job and a "normal life."

That’s just not true—at least not from my own experience or the experience of plenty of other meditators I know (both TM and otherwise). Of course, there will always be people (your typical "mama's boys") who love to ditch their responsibilities for "spirituality" and "meditation," but that’s a different conversation entirely.

northernowl11 said:You probably misread the intent—which happens when people cling blindly to dogma.
A personal legend is actually quite credible, contrary to what you think.
Instead of just blending into the crowd and following the herd, everyone should try to find their own "life story."
Basically, figure out who you are, look at where you're standing in this world, and live according to your deepest needs based on that reality.
That's what a "personal legend" is, and there's nothing wrong with it.

Sure, someone might see it as an egocentric trip, but there’s no real difference between that and New Age stuff, Christianity, Islam, or Hinduism.
Christianity isn't any more "authentic" (whatever that implies) than a person's drive to explore, understand, or follow other paths.

PS
I honestly wonder how someone smart and sensitive can get behind teachings—full of violent, outdated elements—and an institution that has historically caused so much harm.

You probably misread the intent—which happens when people cling blindly to dogma.
A personal legend is actually quite credible, contrary to what you think.
Instead of just blending into the crowd and following the herd, everyone should try to find their own "life story."
Basically, figure out who you are, look at where you're standing in this world, and live according to your deepest needs based on that reality.
That's what a "personal legend" is, and there's nothing wrong with it.

Sure, someone might see it as an egocentric trip, but there’s no real difference between that and New Age stuff, Christianity, Islam, or Hinduism.
Christianity isn't any more "authentic" (whatever that implies) than a person's drive to explore, understand, or follow other paths.

PS
I honestly wonder how someone smart and sensitive can get behind teachings—full of violent, outdated elements—and an institution that has historically caused so much harm.
I find myself asking the same thing: how can someone truly spiritual fail to recognize the essence of Christian doctrine? How can an intelligent, empathetic person get lost in semantics, mistaking the abuse of teachings for the teachings themselves, instead of resonating with the universal messages that lie at their very core?

Can one be authentic enough that belonging to a community (or a "flock," if you prefer the derogatory term used here) doesn't compromise their individuality? It’s a double-edged sword, isn't it? Even when a person physically distances themselves from the group, they remain a part of it. In that sense, there is no such thing as a solitary legend. Any individual "achievement"—spiritual or material—is ultimately the result of centuries, or even millennia, of collective human effort and insight.

Then again, everyone follows their own path, and every path serves its purpose in the end. A Christian might wander into the detours of "quasi-spirituality" just like anyone else.

We are all searching for Glass City, but perhaps we need to travel to India or to Lourdes to realize that it resides within us, and always has. But then again, what can you do? 🙂
I find myself asking the same thing: how can someone truly spiritual fail to recognize the essence of Christian doctrine? How can an intelligent, empathetic person get lost in semantics, mistaking the abuse of teachings for the teachings themselves, instead of resonating with the universal messages that lie at their very core?

Can one be authentic enough that belonging to a community (or a "flock," if you prefer the derogatory term used here) doesn't compromise their individuality? It’s a double-edged sword, isn't it? Even when a person physically distances themselves from the group, they remain a part of it. In that sense, there is no such thing as a solitary legend. Any individual "achievement"—spiritual or material—is ultimately the result of centuries, or even millennia, of collective human effort and insight.

Then again, everyone follows their own path, and every path serves its purpose in the end. A Christian might wander into the detours of "quasi-spirituality" just like anyone else.

We are all searching for Glass City, but perhaps we need to travel to India or to Lourdes to realize that it resides within us, and always has. But then again, what can you do? 🙂
The "problem" is that the core itself isn't inherently Christian.
Some Muslims tell me—and they're right—that those terrorists killing in Allah's name aren't actually true believers.
And honestly, it’s all a wash. Everything churches and believers have done up to this point—none of it represents true faith, and none of it is the actual doctrine.
Let’s be real—you’re basically just retrofitting old teachings to fit modern ethical standards. You take whatever happens to align with today's idea of a decent person—that elusive "ideal human"—and act like your faith invented those values in the first place. It's convenient, really. But you conveniently gloss over the absolute horrors actually written in the Bible or the Quran—all those atrocities committed by believers and their so-called "divine" institutions.
So, some people slap a "Christianity" label on it, others go with Islam, then there's Hinduism—all used to dress up basic human values and ideals. But honestly? You get those same principles just by having decent parenting at home—and yeah, even in atheist households.
And all that bad stuff? That isn’t actually part of your teachings—it’s just what you pin on everyone else. Real believers don't act like that. It’s always "the others" who are at fault—as if hell is always reserved for someone else.
I honestly don't get how you all can be so easily fooled—trying to sugarcoat things that just aren't meant to be pretty.
Whatever.
PS
Look, this isn't even about whether God exists or what His personality is like—that’s not the point. We're talking about outdated, misguided, and frankly, borderline violent doctrines—and more importantly, the actual damage they do to people who follow them.

Is there anyone out there actually authentic enough that belonging to a group—or a "herd," if we’re being cynical—doesn't kill their individuality? You know, like "sink or swim," right? Even when you physically walk away from the crowd, you’re still part of it. It's just how it works.

Look, I don't mean this any way that's offensive.
I wasn't talking about humanity in general—I was being specific about Christians. And look, it’s right there in your own scriptures and the sermons from your leaders: terms like "the good shepherd" and "the flock" are your own internal shorthand. It's similar to how Muslims love to boast about being "slaves of Allah"—I'm just using your own terminology, specifically as a counterweight to the idea of a "personal legend."

In that sense, personal legends don't really exist. Any "achievement"—spiritual, material, whatever—is just the end result of centuries, maybe even millennia, of collective human effort and insight.

In that sense, you don't really exist either—not even close.
It’s just humanity. That’s all there is.

Look, everyone’s on their own journey—and honestly, they all lead somewhere. Even a Christian might wander off into some "quasi-spiritual" rabbit hole every now and then. It happens to the best of us.

Look, I’ll say it again—in my book, Christians don't own a monopoly on true spirituality, and that doesn't mean any other path is automatically some kind of "fake" spiritual detour.
You guys held onto the monopoly on truth for way too long—it’s made you think you're some kind of ultimate authority on what's real for everyone else. Newsflash: you're not.

Anthony Hayes2 said:You probably misread the intent—which happens when people cling blindly to dogma.
A personal legend is actually quite credible, contrary to what you think.
Instead of just blending into the crowd and following the herd, everyone should try to find their own "life story."
Basically, figure out who you are, look at where you're standing in this world, and live according to your deepest needs based on that reality.
That's what a "personal legend" is, and there's nothing wrong with it.

Sure, someone might see it as an egocentric trip, but there’s no real difference between that and New Age stuff, Christianity, Islam, or Hinduism.
Christianity isn't any more "authentic" (whatever that implies) than a person's drive to explore, understand, or follow other paths.

PS
I honestly wonder how someone smart and sensitive can get behind teachings—full of violent, outdated elements—and an institution that has historically caused so much harm.

You probably misread the intent—which happens when people cling blindly to dogma.
A personal legend is actually quite credible, contrary to what you think.
Instead of just blending into the crowd and following the herd, everyone should try to find their own "life story."
Basically, figure out who you are, look at where you're standing in this world, and live according to your deepest needs based on that reality.
That's what a "personal legend" is, and there's nothing wrong with it.

Sure, someone might see it as an egocentric trip, but there’s no real difference between that and New Age stuff, Christianity, Islam, or Hinduism.
Christianity isn't any more "authentic" (whatever that implies) than a person's drive to explore, understand, or follow other paths.

PS
I honestly wonder how someone smart and sensitive can get behind teachings—full of violent, outdated elements—and an institution that has historically caused so much harm.
People were asked why they vote for Party X when they've been stealing for a decade. They just say, "The old guard is already fat; the newcomers still need to get rich."😉

Old religions have had their dark eras, but over time they've become diluted or rigid. There is no longer a need to spread truth through fire and sword, though it still happens—look at Islamic fundamentalism or the "crusades" for oil in the Middle East.

"New Paths" still have to face the sharp turns, steep cliffs, and dark alleys where you might get mugged for a few bucks. Sometimes exploring uncharted territory is a mistake; sticking to proven patterns is safer. You should experiment, sure, but know the risks. During the hippie movement, chasing new paths via drugs was common in subcultures, only for people to later discover the consequences—liver failure, brain damage, death.

Regarding the "personal legend," if you know people, 99% of the time it's just an ego trip. That 1% that is actually worth something is rare. Is it worth valuing 99% of foolish innovations just because of that 1%? It’s like small Silicon Valley startups. Only 1% become massive successes; the rest fail. No bank is going to hand a startup a million-dollar loan just so they can "play around."🤣
People were asked why they vote for Party X when they've been stealing for a decade. They just say, "The old guard is already fat; the newcomers still need to get rich."😉

Old religions have had their dark eras, but over time they've become diluted or rigid. There is no longer a need to spread truth through fire and sword, though it still happens—look at Islamic fundamentalism or the "crusades" for oil in the Middle East.

"New Paths" still have to face the sharp turns, steep cliffs, and dark alleys where you might get mugged for a few bucks. Sometimes exploring uncharted territory is a mistake; sticking to proven patterns is safer. You should experiment, sure, but know the risks. During the hippie movement, chasing new paths via drugs was common in subcultures, only for people to later discover the consequences—liver failure, brain damage, death.

Regarding the "personal legend," if you know people, 99% of the time it's just an ego trip. That 1% that is actually worth something is rare. Is it worth valuing 99% of foolish innovations just because of that 1%? It’s like small Silicon Valley startups. Only 1% become massive successes; the rest fail. No bank is going to hand a startup a million-dollar loan just so they can "play around."🤣
What you're saying sounds logical. At first glance, anyway.

But looking closer, it could go like this:
- Why is pursuing a "personal legend" (seeking and expressing one's deepest needs) considered an "ego trip," while being part of a "herd legend" isn't?
- Why do you assume other paths consist of "99% moronic innovations"? (Are you equating all non-institutional spirituality—or even just non-traditional Christian spirituality—with drug use?)
- Does this imply we have to accept that all political parties are destined to be corrupt?
etc.

Essentially, it comes down to how intelligent, sensitive, decisive, and mature a person is to walk their own spiritual path (which doesn't necessarily have to be "innovative"—you don't need to reinvent the wheel or find new holes in a flowerpot—but it does need to be authentic, or rather, a lived life experiment).
Since very few people are actually like that, it almost doesn't matter whether the majority follows a "personal" or a "herd" legend. In a way, you're right—the "herd legend" offers more security (though, as you noted, it carries a higher risk of organized violence, and not just physical kind).

wearyowl29 said:What’s wrong with finding your own personal legend?

frozengull2 said:wearyowl29;

What's missing from a personal legend?

Credibility.

It’s just more of that new-age nonsense that sounds incredibly deep or heartwarming on paper... but it doesn't actually mean a damn thing.

Most of the time, it just knocks the legs out from under people who are already leaning into that pathetic, self-centered kind of auto-hypnosis.

Why do you even ask?

You probably misread the intent—which happens when people cling blindly to dogma.
A personal legend is actually quite credible, contrary to what you think.
Instead of just blending into the crowd and following the herd, everyone should try to find their own "life story."
Basically, figure out who you are, look at where you're standing in this world, and live according to your deepest needs based on that reality.
That's what a "personal legend" is, and there's nothing wrong with it.

Sure, someone might see it as an egocentric trip, but there’s no real difference between that and New Age stuff, Christianity, Islam, or Hinduism.
Christianity isn't any more "authentic" (whatever that implies) than a person's drive to explore, understand, or follow other paths.

PS
I honestly wonder how someone smart and sensitive can get behind teachings—full of violent, outdated elements—and an institution that has historically caused so much harm.

Jason Clark7
This post is my direct response to the one below—it’s the exact same situation Brenda Cook4 already pointed out.

Golden Boy Jason Clark7 said:I get it. This guy is claiming the Moon shrunk recently—give or take. He says those cracks could be hundreds of millions of years old, or maybe they’re much younger. Honestly, he doesn't actually know when it happened—and how could he? The Moon isn't exactly talking to us.

It’s pretty crucial that the hadith describing this event actually has some scientific backing—you know, some sort of foundation. Scientists have apparently discovered a massive rift on the Moon that could have been caused by it splitting apart. Whether you buy into that or not is entirely up to you—honestly, I don't lose any sleep over it.

It’s pretty obvious that some Muslims—in this case, Golden Boy—think that "the beauty of Islam" includes the scientific nature of the Quran. So, by that logic, my post isn't off-topic at all.
Look, regarding your little insinuation that I’m making fun of Islam—that just isn't the case. Unless, of course, you actually think that what Tarik—your own brother in faith—is doing is a mockery of reason. If we can even agree on that. To back me up, here’s another Muslim weighing in on the exact same topic:

Shady Jason Clark7 said:It makes zero sense, man. We're dealing with a straight-up liar. He’s pulling the exact same stunts you see from that lunatic, Miroljub Petrović—same garbage, just wearing a different hat.

Harun Jahja—his real name is Adnan, by the way—was supposedly a Christian before he "converted." As a convert, he basically had a front-row seat to spread all sorts of nonsense under the guise of Islam—stuff that isn't even part of the faith, let alone actually going against it.

His biggest trick? He just swipes footage from famous science documentaries—think Discovery Channel specials on marine life, stratospheric flight, the solar system, or even the properties of water—strips out the original narration, and overlays some text about the "wonders of Islam" onto the raw video. It’s incredibly shady, especially since he’s completely ignoring any actual scientific principles.

Take his half-baked, fanatic crusade against evolution and Charles Darwin—acting like he’s doing it all "in the name of Islam." It honestly makes Muslims look backwards and uninformed, which is ridiculous considering how much they actually contributed to evolutionary thought. I mean, you've got guys like al-Jahiz (the real deal: Abu Uthman Amr ibn Bahr al-Kinani al-Fuqaimi al-Basri) and later Ibn Khaldun (Abu Zaid 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Muhamed ibn Khaldun al-Hadrami)—these massive scientific minds who were writing about evolutionary concepts centuries before Darwin even showed up. Darwin actually came across their work through Beacon. By engaging in this pseudo-scientific nonsense, Harun Jahja is basically dragging us back over a thousand years—way further back than when our actual great scholars were living. My most serious recommendation? Don't take anything coming from him seriously. At all.

What Americans in the Muslim community need right now is actual, rigorous scientific education—the kind you get from legitimate authorities, real textbooks, and accredited institutions. We don't need more half-baked info from those random internet gurus operating entirely outside the community framework—people with zero academic credentials, no degrees, and absolutely no qualifications to be lecturing anyone on science.

What charlatans like Harun Jahja and Miroljub Petrović are pulling is exactly like me—someone without a single day of medical school under my belt—suddenly deciding I’m a surgeon and having patients actually show up at my door. Honestly, how successful do you think I'd be? And what are their chances of surviving my scalpel? Just so we're clear—that's about the same chance any Muslim has of actually learning anything from that idiot.

That’s all I’ve got. Sorry if I rambled—it just hits me hard when young people, actually looking for the truth, fall for these spiritual grifters and end up just tearing themselves down. Peace.

frozengull2 said:Man, sorry you feel that way.

I get the vibe that you just can't stand Christianity—like, any time I mention it in a good light, it totally rubs you the wrong way.

Whatever the reason is, it really sucks that it's like that.

It feels like because I've taken a positive stance on Christianity, I've somehow become the black sheep of the spiritual crowd.
Suddenly I'm "less spiritual" or whatever.

Such a shame... I actually thought you were a cool guy.

Feelings can be pretty damn deceptive sometimes.
If your definition of Christianity is just blind faith in a single narrative—believing in some bloodthirsty deity who suddenly decided to pivot into being a saint—then sure. You’re talking about centuries of religiously fueled wars, the Inquisition, pure exclusion, and that suffocating dogmatic fanaticism that basically acts as a leash on the human spirit. Then there's the Church itself, always chasing power, and its leaders who preach high moral ground while doing things they should honestly be facing criminal charges for—except they get a free pass because the organization protects them, and politicians are way too easy to buy when they're hungry for votes.
So you're right—I can't stand Christianity.

If you define Christianity by those rare few—the ones you find in pretty much any religion or self-help system anyway—who actually managed to enrich their own lives and everyone around them through faith (or even despite it)... if we're talking about that eternal human ideal of kindness, love, and consciousness... then sure. If you mean people who embody an impeccable morality that fosters life, integrity, and good upbringing—people who just happen to be Christian—then I get your point. Even if you look at the revised, modern, liberal version of Christianity that the current Popes are trying to live out—and honestly, compared to their predecessors, these newer guys seem almost "saintly," though arguably more due to the influence of secular humanism than traditional doctrine—it's a different conversation.
You've got it wrong—I actually love Christianity.

I called out your first sentence because, logically speaking, it’s just nonsense—it's like claiming if you haven't tasted a strawberry, you can't possibly know what fruit is.
Of course you're going to dig up some theological loophole to argue that Christianity holds the top spot—kind of like how Muslims keep insisting, as ridiculously as they do, that everyone, even Adam and Eve, was actually Muslim. But honestly? That kind of stuff just doesn't fly with me.

I didn't say a single word about your spirituality—and honestly, I don't have any intention of starting now.
Aside from what you're saying—I don't actually know you, and I have zero interest in walking around with any preconceived notions about who you are.
I might actually end up giving you a compliment in my next post—don't get used to it.
Even though you're a Christian. 😍

(No content provided to rewrite.)
You can definitely have some deep, meaningful conversations about Christianity if you stick to the spirituality side of things—I actually tried starting a thread on "Christian spirituality" once, but it went nowhere. Not sure if that’s because people lack that spiritual spark or if there's some other reason, but either way, the response was pretty much zero. Just a heads-up: if you come in here trying to push church dogma, you're going to hit a wall. There are plenty of other forums out there specifically for that kind of thing.

frozengull2 said:I’m writing this because I’m honestly just fed up with the blatant propaganda being shoved down our throats under the guise of "Christian values";
"The roots of faith, history built on the foundations of people like this..."

Sure, the topic shifted over to religion, but what was left hanging in the air—the stuff nobody wants to address—was that massive stench of hypocrisy and double standards trailing behind it.

It’s that classic New Age vibe where someone tries to lecture everyone else on morality while they’re busy sweeping their own skeletons deep into the closet back home.

I think it’s totally unfair, and we really need to have a real conversation about this.
The whole thing is basically the root cause for why so many people end up obsessed with all this spiritual nonsense.

To make my point, I’m going to bring up Carlos Castaneda, who is pretty much the poster child for this New Age garbage.

What really got under my skin is how the person who started this thread is clearly totally obsessed with him.

Okay.

Look, I haven't said anything until now because, hey, everyone’s entitled to their little obsessions, right?
But after reading her post, I just can't stay quiet anymore—I have to put this into some actual perspective;

And that perspective is this: she’s all about throwing "criticism" at Christianity (like, "Oh, let me show you how wrong you are"), yet she goes completely silent when it comes to the things she’s actually obsessed with.

Why is that?

Even the birds on the wire know that Castaneda was nothing but a con artist and a total fake who manipulated his followers straight into ruin.
And when I say ruin, I mean literal death.
These aren't just my random opinions; these are facts based on what people who actually spent years with him have testified to.

I’ve attached some links to an incredible BBC documentary on the subject (it's a seriously objective look at his life and his lies, featuring all those firsthand accounts I mentioned).
Once you watch it, you'll see what a complete circus and total mystification the whole Castaneda thing actually is.
He was just some ordinary, manipulative old man surrounded by New Age fanatics—mostly lonely, emotionally lost people—some of whom ended up meeting incredibly tragic ends.

It’s going to be interesting to watch this train wreck unfold;
People swinging a sledgehammer at traditional values, while simultaneously trying to dodge or make excuses for their own provenly fake obsessions.
Ugh, so frustrating!
Pay close attention to the woman named Alexander Nury at the start of the second clip.
Believe it or not, this woman claims she came directly from the astral plane to meet Castaneda!?
She didn't grow up in the real world; she supposedly just "appeared" a few years ago. At least, that's what he wrote in his book "dream art."
She’s supposed to be that "Blue Tracker" character he writes about... but in reality, she was just a 19-year-old waitress that the world-famous Carlos (who every fanatic wanted to meet) easily seduced at a restaurant in California.
After she took her own life, the police determined it was just a tragic case involving a girl named Dolly Parton... a girl with a rough background and parents, a messed-up childhood, who was naive and way too young to fall into Castaneda's web of lies.
Can you even believe that!?

The film basically rips the mask off Carlos's face and gives SilentWarrior a chance to clear up any doubts about whether there's any hypocrisy involved by just accepting what's shown.

It also paints a true picture of the man that so many people base their entire belief systems on.

And the worst part? People who are blinded by this stuff actually try to lecture others on "what's right and what's wrong."

I know I might be coming off a bit harsh, but sometimes you just have to slam your fist on the table and give someone a reality check.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCqYr...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FrB5...feature=relmfu

ps.
I absolutely cannot stand transparent propaganda and two-faced behavior.

Look, if some Popes were acting like idiots or straight-up criminals—which, let's be real, they were—what does that actually have to do with "undermining Christian values"?

frozengull2 said:Look, if you don't actually get it—I mean, if you don't feel it deep down in your gut—then you don't understand any religion at all. It’s like trying to explain the taste of a cheeseburger to someone who's never eaten one. You can read all the manuals you want, but without that internal spark, it's just empty noise.
Man, you wouldn't believe how many of those tech bros are hanging around your neck of the woods these days. It's getting ridiculous.
All they ever do is insist on looking at everything through this "personal spirituality" lens. It’s such a joke. Honestly, most of the time it’s just some phantom construct—basically just people projecting their own weird desires and obsessions onto the world. It always boils down to the same thing: useless rationalization and just straight-up propaganda used to smear anything they don't understand. Typical.
Exactly.
It’s like they can’t see anything unless it’s bad news. Seriously. They just cherry-pick whatever garbage fits their narrative, ignoring everything else. All they ever do is hunt for the one little thing that looks messy just so they can tear it down. It's exhausting, honestly.
This isn't right. Honestly, it's just wrong.
The second you start acting like that, you clearly haven't got a clue what spirituality actually is.
There is no third option. Period.
But...!!?
That is literally so true.
Black and white.
It’s black or white. No gray area. Period.
Honestly, I don't get why people try to draw this line between spirituality and religion. Like, what's even the point? You can't just split them apart like they're two different things living in separate houses. It’s all connected, man. People love to act like being "spiritual" means you've moved past the whole organized religion thing, but that feels so fake to me. It’s like trying to say you love music but you don't care about rhythm—it doesn't make sense. Everything's tied together.
That’s just our local way of doing things.
Honestly, at the end of the day, it’s all just spiritual movements. That's pretty much it. Everything else is just noise.
It’s honestly such a joke when people start calling everything that makes them feel good "spirituality," but then immediately pivot to labeling anything that actually challenges them as "religion." Like, sorry if my worldview doesn't fit into your cozy little bubble? It's a total cop-out. They throw everything into the "religion" bucket the second it gets uncomfortable—whether it's just having a different perspective on life or feeling a pull toward something deeper than their own ego. It's all just a way to dodge the hard stuff. People love cherry-picking terms just to stay in their comfort zone, and frankly, it's exhausting to watch.

So, I’ve been deep-diving into the lives of all these Christian saints lately, and honestly? It’s kind of a trip. It actually inspired me more than I expected. Plus, whenever I run into actual Christians out in the world, I can't help but notice they seem way more grounded and spiritually mature than that whole other crowd calling themselves "spiritual." You know the type—all vibes and no substance. It’s like there’s a massive gap between people who actually live their faith and everyone else just floating around looking for a shortcut.

So, seriously though... is there actually any spiritual path or religion left out there that isn't completely buried under piles of dust and endless controversy? Like, does anything exist that hasn't been dragged through the mud by now?
Honestly, you can take anything and turn it into something evil. You can demonize just about any person or thing if you try hard enough, dragging their name through the mud and acting like they're straight out of a horror movie. People will make you out to be the villain just for existing. It’s exhausting, really.
Only if they actually feel like it.
Pick any one you want—whatever floats your boat—and I'll turn them into pure propaganda "sludge."

So, what you're actually trying to say is that my spiritual vibe—you know, this whole mashup I've got going with the Indian influences and whatever else—is somehow "better" than traditional Christian values? Is that really where we're headed here?

What are you even basing that on? Seriously.

So, is this supposed to be a blueprint for a life well-lived?

Hmm...

I’m getting the vibe that your whole "dark chocolate" thing is just some kind of metaphorical wink, right?

Honestly, it wouldn't hurt if you actually tapped into your potential once in a while and got down to brass tacks.
If you're actually about that grind, you'll eventually find that "click."
It’s just a matter of time.

Personally, I'd suggest going with the white chocolate instead.

Some of your posts have been pretty vague, sure, but this? This is just pure nonsense—not that I’m even going to bother dissecting your whole argument here.
Your typical New Ageer

the end

Haha... Don't sweat it—they're gonna cut it off from the other side anyway, and it'll be hot... 😁😂

Oh really? Look, dealing with people like you, even God would probably lose His cool at some point... 🙂 You’ve probably felt that firsthand... :mig

I think there are atheists out there who just PRETEND to be uneducated... ☕

Don't worry, I'm way more stable than all you atheists who just vent your nightmares through rage and despair...

Look, not even the greatest theologians could hold a conversation with you lot—since you clearly know everything better than everyone else. Honestly, it's enough reason for me not to waste any brainpower on people like you... Besides, the way you treat anyone living differently is just obnoxious. All I can say is you have no clue what you're talking about... Since, you know, according to you, what we believe is based on a book, while everything you say is based on your version of "LOGIC"—which makes zero sense to anyone except those of you spouting empty nonsense...

Sorry, no, anything I say to people like this is just a waste of breath...

I'm done with this thread... goodbye beauties...!

etc

PS
What a masochist I am.
Mod, please don't delete this thread (maybe it'll serve as a lesson for some of your colleagues).

continued...

Luke, man, that is solid advice...!

Signed, sealed, delivered...............!

Haha... You guys are a riot... People from the Middle Ages would have absolutely loved you...!

Honestly, I don't know if there's anyone more clueless than you, or more of a troll than this whole group combined...!

Look, my arguments are built on actual facts—whereas yours seem to be based on whatever the biggest idiots on the internet said when they had nothing better to do...!

So, you're hiding your answer behind a link to some forum where everyone just pretends to be smart?

Couldn't you find any better, actual evidence to support what you believe?

...And yeah, your logic is pretty weak... I wouldn't bet on it myself... So when you finally realize it, you might want to lean on God rather than such hollow reasoning... 😂

...
Listen, buddy, your actions and your words belong to you—it's all just cobwebs that aren't sticking to me... You can all try to throw these useless comments at someone else, but I’m just going to laugh, because you guys are honestly pathetic—deep down, you're just jealous, which leads to fear, bitterness, immorality, and plenty of other nonsense... But I'm not going to blame you or do anything about it...

A person eventually faces the consequences of everything they do...

All you do comes back to you...!

If you actually used logic like you claim to, you'd see exactly what I'm getting at here... 😉

goodbye...

Clearly, logic isn't really your thing—just like you said... 😉 goodbye...!

Heh, look, buddy—I’m no big shot, and you’re definitely not some legendary figure either... And honestly? People like you could never get under my skin—not that you could ever pull yourselves out of your own mess to begin with... 😉 You’d have to feed me enough deep-dish pizza to sink a ship before you could even attempt to sway me, because there’s just nothing left to convince...

Just like you’ve felt your mother’s touch, I’ve felt the touch of God! Look, you’ll never wrap your head around it, but hey—I’m not asking you to. Just take a breath and calm down... 🙂