Is spirituality evolving?

Baphomet said:Nooo..... they're the ones carrying us along.

Hmm... I think you missed my point there... let's just move on. 😁

Look, I’m not saying she’s lacking anything, but it’s pretty hard to explain the whole concept of an oar or a gas engine to a drifter.

It's no harder than trying to explain to you that drifters don't need any of those things in the first place. 😁
I mean, have you ever actually seen one of them using an oar or running on diesel? Because I certainly haven't. 😁

Curiosity is what keeps me moving.
Without goals or illusions, a person is left with nothing but self-destruction.

Well, I'm just as curious as anyone else, seeing where the current takes me... 😁
We all live within illusions, whether we like it or not. And as for goals, everyone sets their own... though it seems like most people just end up chasing goals that someone else laid out for them. It feels like the majority fall into that trap. 😉
Besides, I have plenty of little goals every single day. Like, right now, my goal is getting to the bathroom, then maybe grabbing a coffee downtown... but the beauty of it is that I can change my mind three times on the way there and decide to grab a pastry instead, skipping the coffee entirely. 😁
You wouldn't get that. You wouldn't even realize you actually wanted the pastry because your "goal" was the coffee, and you don't allow for deviations. 🙂
I'm free, and you aren't. Ugh! 🙂
Should I tell you who really needs to be worried about self-destruction? 🙂

P.S. You still haven't told me what spirituality actually is, or who decides how far someone has progressed on that path. 😁

Mr. Peach said:Hmm... I think you missed my point entirely. Let us move on. 😁

I am moving forward while you are just drifting aimlessly. 😁

Mr. Peach said:...but the beauty of it all is that one can change their mind three times before reaching the city and end up eating pastries without ever even seeing a cup of coffee. 😁

Good grief... such feminine fickleness.

Mr. Peach said:You simply cannot grasp this; you wouldn't even realize if you actually wanted the pastries, because the objective was the coffee, and there is no room for deviation. 🙂

If I want coffee, I go to get coffee. It is that simple. You didn't actually want coffee, because you changed your mind so rapidly, which merely proves you have no idea what you want. The distinction lies here: I know precisely what I desire, whereas you are merely wondering if you might feel like having coffee, and thus you ponder which of us is truly free...🙂

Mr. Peach said:P.S. You failed to explain what spirituality is and who, or what, determines the degree of spiritual development. 😁

And how is that possible? How could I not have explained it?
I stated quite clearly that attempting to explain such things to a drifter is a futile exercise.

ljetopisac said:It’s an interesting question. I'll share my take on it...

Spirituality is, first and foremost, a way of life. It implies understanding the relationship between God and humanity. The theory regarding that specific connection? That's strictly theology.
🙄

I can't get behind that theory. There are entire religions and spiritual paths that don't put God or a deity at the center—take Buddhism, for instance.
Does that mean, according to those following theocentric religions, that Buddhists or Taoists aren't spiritual beings?
I’m not looking to start a fight over dogma, but I don't think we all need God to grow spiritually or as human beings.
Right?

Ryan Wilson2 said:I’m moving forward while you’re just drifting. 😁

Look, if I want coffee, I go get coffee. It’s that simple. You didn't actually "want" coffee because you changed your mind so fast—that just shows you don't really know what you want. The difference is that I know I want a cup, whereas you're still debating whether you might feel like having one, and then you start overthinking which one of us is actually more free...🙂

Honestly, you two are talking about the exact same thing using two different languages. (I feel like I've already told you this!)

One person might call an Uber, while someone else takes the subway; some people prefer to float along, others prefer to swim hard. The point is that both people should enjoy the ride and reach their destination.
I truly don't see why this is even a debate. 😛

P.S. You two are honestly adorable. 😍 🙂

Joseph Davis5 said:I can't get behind that theory. There are plenty of religions and spiritual paths out there that don't center on God or a deity—take Buddhism, for example.
Does that mean, according to those who follow theocentric faiths, that Buddhists or Taoists aren't considered spiritual beings?
I’m not looking to start an argument based on religious dogma, but I honestly don't think we all need God to grow spiritually or as human beings.
Don't you agree?

I mean, look at how much is out there now—spiritual paths, religions... you name it, it exists!
You've got spiritual atheists, secular pagans, Catholic occultists... it's a massive spectrum.

There are even people who perform rituals and basically worship chemical elements. No, I'm serious, and I'm not twisting the facts.
But hey, that's their right.

Honestly, my eyes hurt sometimes from reading about how foolish people can be (not this forum, mind you, but others) and how they claim to crave "freedom" while actually just narrowing their own perspective.

But again, that's their choice.

Everyone is going to find God and spirituality somewhere—whether it's through religion, ethics, philosophy, specific rituals, science, watching ants, chopping wood, or whatever else... certain archetypes (there I go again with the 😳 ) are just hardwired into us... and

Personally, I don't believe in atheists. 🙂

God exists; people just see Him through different lenses and call Him by different names.

Solaris said:.
But that's their right.

...how people are foolish (not this forum, a different one), driven by this craving for "freedom" that actually just narrows their perspective more and more.
But even that is their right.

In what way are people 'narrowing their perspective'?

Joseph Davis5 said:What exactly do people mean when they say they're 'limiting their perspective'?

Take this, for example: people claim to be "free thinkers"—and hey, I’m sure that’s how they see themselves—but then they turn around and tell everyone else to stay away from faith because it’s supposedly "restrictive." They basically equate spirituality with rigid dogma.
They end up limiting their own capacity for belief by reducing everything down to just a set of rules.
Instead of actually digging into the roots of their traditions, they just brush them off after a superficial glance. Then, they just swap one religion for another, treating the new one with the same shallow understanding. Honestly, they don't even know what they're looking for; they're just using "philosophical freedom" as an excuse to wander aimlessly.

People actually sleep, you know...

...and mutter in their sleep 😉

Solaris said:Take people who claim to be free thinkers—though I doubt they actually are. They tell others to just follow faith blindly because they view it as a limitation, essentially tying it directly to dogma.
They limit their own perception of faith by reducing it to nothing more than a set of rigid dogmas.
Instead of digging into the actual roots of their religions, they toss them aside after only a superficial glance. Then, they simply swap one religion for another, treating the new one with the same lack of depth. In short, they have no idea what they’re looking for, yet they hide behind the guise of philosophical freedom and individual liberty.

Solaris! You’re talking about those who claim to reject dogma only to fall straight into a different version of it. That happens, of course, when there’s a blind belief in the very doctrines you're mentioning, without any critical examination of how they actually play out in practice. We really need to distinguish dogma from teaching. Teaching is what you refer to as the "roots"—the core essence. Dogma is just a superficial layer of rules and prejudices lacking any true understanding of that core. You mentioned people rejecting "their religion," but which religion are we talking about? Surely you don't believe that everyone in America is forced to be Catholic or Christian just because they were born here, without any right to choose or question it. I hope you don't think that; I follow your posts, and such a stance would surprise me. I agree with you that people use the excuse of "freedom" to justify all sorts of nonsense, but we shouldn't generalize. We can't dismiss the sincere seekers—those who, despite being different from us, are genuinely searching and, more importantly, building values that benefit society as a whole.

magic_tree said:People actually sleep...

...and mumble in their sleep. 😉

Magic Johnson!
Spot on. I just hope you actually grasp the point instead of just copying and pasting.😉

Solaris said:Some people are going to call an Uber, while others take the bus; some prefer to just float along, and others want to swim laps. The only thing that matters is that everyone enjoys the ride and reaches their destination.
I honestly don't see what there is to debate here... 😛

What do you mean "how can there be"? Baffy won't even let me just drift... he wants to install a motor or at least hand me some oars! (Probably for milking purposes, though I have no idea what else they'd be good for.) 😱😁
Anyway, yesterday I didn't end up grabbing coffee or dessert after all... I just grabbed a pizza instead. 🙂
Actually, we're looking at the goal differently. Baffy’s goal is strictly defined, whereas mine—if it even exists—can change in a heartbeat. 😁
With Baffy and his military discipline, I probably look pretty ridiculous and unserious to him... 😁
But life isn't run like a military operation, or am I wrong? Things happen constantly, and it's all up to how people deal with them.
Some people need a solid foundation—religion, discipline, set goals, a master plan... but others don't have that; they just go with the flow. They just float. 🙂

Hehe, Baffy, what would you do if you fell out of your perfectly planned, fully equipped boat and started sinking? Maybe you'd grab onto the first float you saw... those things aren't as useless as they look. 😁🙂

Jack Harris3 said:How can you possibly say that isn't the case? Baffy isn't exactly letting me just drift aimlessly through the void; instead, they seem hell-bent on installing an engine or, at the very least, forcing some oars upon me! (Though, if you ask me, they’re probably only intended for shearing—I haven't the slightest clue what else they'd expect me to use them for.) 😱

Good grief... I am honestly relieved you didn't decide to say that to my face after a few beers. If you had, we would have been in serious trouble. Those few sentences of yours are nothing short of a treasure trove—a veritable goldmine of hidden, subversive messages reminiscent of the most radical political propaganda. 😁

Jack Harris3 said:With Baffy’s relentless military discipline, I likely come across as nothing more than a fool—utterly trivial and lacking any shred of seriousness. 😁

I believe I ought to be more circumspect regarding my future correspondence. It seems I have already cultivated a reputation as some sort of neo-Nazi, satanic, black-clad, child-eating, blood-stained new agitator. Is that really how I am perceived? 😈
And here I am, just another sheep following the herd.

Jack Harris3 said:Some individuals require a rigid foundation to function—be it through religion, strict discipline, or meticulously crafted goals and plans. They need that structure to feel secure. Others, however, lack such anchors entirely, choosing instead to simply drift and adapt to whatever life throws their way. As Plutarch once observed, there is a fundamental divide between those who seek stability and those who embrace the flow.

Let’s be perfectly clear about this... if we are discussing goals and strategic plans, those are nothing more than loose frameworks within which I operate. They are not set in stone. Everything can be overhauled by tomorrow morning, and I will adapt instantly. That, quite simply, is the bedrock of an efficient life philosophy. To resist change is to invite nothing but stagnation and eventual death.
I find myself entirely unable to predict what this coming day might hold for me.

Drifters don't even possess a fundamental sense of purpose; they simply drift through existence. They lack direction, merely reacting to whatever passing whim or temporary trend happens to blow their way. They adapt to every fleeting distraction that crosses their path, moving aimlessly from one moment to the next. However, let me be clear: if I were to sit down and truly get to know you, I am certain I would be able to convince you that you are anything but a drifter. 😁

Jack Harris3 said:Listen here, Baffy, what exactly would your plan be if you suddenly found yourself tumbling out of that meticulously planned and perfectly equipped boat of yours only to begin sinking? What then? Would you simply attempt to cling to the first floating debris you happened to encounter? Perhaps you might try to grab onto a life raft—and don't go assuming they are as useless as you seem to believe they are. 😁🙂

Well, if we are looking at this from a broader perspective, they aren't entirely without merit.
If I found myself adrift, my strategy would be quite methodical. I would swim until I reached a buoy, cling to it to catch my breath and regain my strength, and then proceed to the next buoy. I would continue this repetitive, disciplined process, moving from one point to the next, until I finally reached my ultimate destination. 🙂

Solaris said:1. Everyone eventually finds God and spirituality within something,

2. I don't believe atheists actually exist. 🙂

3. God exists, but people perceive Him through various lenses of life and call Him by different names.

Personally, I can't view theistic beings as anything more than mental constructs. No matter how you visualize God, it feels like a massive self-deception. Even the fact that we default to masculine pronouns suggests a fundamental falsehood. To me, every organized theology is essentially a lie.

That doesn't mean we can't discuss divinity, but we shouldn't approach it from a standpoint of dogma—which is exactly what points 1 and 3 represent! Instead, we should speak from our own personal experiences (which are, of course, impossible to fully communicate) or through a deep intellectual contemplation of the Whole.

I see no reason why spirituality must be tethered to the concept of "God." In fact, it feels quite unfair to non-theists (like Buddhists or followers of the Tao) to frame it that way, especially in an American context where the "Christian" God is often treated as the default assumption.🙂

Largo said:Solaris! You're talking about people who claim to reject dogma, yet they just end up falling right back into it. Of course, that happens when you have blind faith in the very doctrines you're discussing without actually questioning the real-world results.
Exactly! That’s my point—people think they're becoming "spiritual," but they're really just swapping one mask for another. That's where it all goes wrong.

You mentioned people rejecting "their religion," but which religion are we even talking about here?
It’s basically this: take a few specific cases... essentially, Person A grows up in Religion X. It serves them okay for a while, even if they don't fully grasp it (the traditionalist type). Then, they see the outward style of Religion Y and decide to switch, but they only adopt the superficial aesthetics. The end result? It's the exact same powder, just under a different 😉 name.
You surely don't think everyone in America is forced to be Catholic or Christian just because they were born here, without any right to choose or question things, do you? 😲 Of course not! In fact, I fight against blind dogmatism and being forced into boxes. Meta once even branded me a Satanist 🙄 😁
I hope you don't mean that, because I follow your posts and I'd be genuinely shocked to hear such a stance from you. I agree with you that people often use "freedom" as an excuse for total nonsense, but we still have to be careful not to generalize. We shouldn't dismiss those who, despite being different from us, are sincere seekers and, most importantly, people building values that actually benefit society.

Look, I think I already said it's perfectly fine if people are looking for spirituality, God, atoms, or whatever else resonates with them. 🙂

swiftcobra15 said:1. Personally, I don't view theists as rational beings. No matter how you try to picture God, it’s just one massive self-deception. Even the fact that we use masculine pronouns points to how much of a lie it all is. Every theology is essentially a giant fabrication.

2. That doesn't mean we can't discuss divinity, but we shouldn't do it through the lens of dogma (which is exactly what points 1 and 3 are!). Instead, we should speak from personal experience—which is inherently private—or through a logical contemplation of the Whole.

3. I see zero reason to tether spirituality to the concept of "God." In any case, it's pretty unfair to non-theists (like Buddhists or Taoists), especially in our neck of the woods where everyone just assumes we're talking about the "Christian" God.🙂

Hey, Atlantic Ocean, I think you missed my point entirely. 😉

Let me try to rephrase.

Whether you call it God, goddess, space, Eris, ##**, or Tao, whatever YOU want to call it... it exists.

Different people perceive This in different ways, and they express that through their mindset and how they live their lives.

I am NOT talking about standard old-school theism or atheism here, and I'm certainly not crazy enough to think ##** is some male entity. 🙄

Your points 2 and 3 actually capture exactly what I was trying to get at. 😉 🙂

Et jardin, how's it going?

Absolute usurpers... hijacking the thread like that. :P

Hold on a second. I’m having a bit of a hard time even wrapping my head around what’s actually happening with all these floaters, gallows, and motor gliders (I’m assuming that’s what the economic zone is going to look like), but from what I can gather, Ryan Wilson2 operates on the philosophy that a solid engine saves your neck, whereas Mr. Pes prefers more of a... "go with the flow" vibe.

Oh, please... there is only one life philosophy worth a damn here...

Be the Ball. Be. The. Ball. 🙂

Perhaps I should clarify my point. As the poet once said, "A heavy word can crush me," and another warned, "Watch every word you speak, for it may be your last."😉

The word "God" is deeply tainted by negative connotations.
Hundreds of millions have been slaughtered in the name of God; countless genocides have been committed in His name; entire cultures have been wiped out from the ground up in His name.
So, how can you even utter (or write) that word without feeling a sense of dread?😕

The term "God" is inextricably linked to organized religion (the church) and theology (organized falsehood). Does it actually have anything to do with true spirituality?
In my view, organized religion is nothing more than a dumping ground—or perhaps a graveyard—for spirituality. Therefore, one could conclude they exist in a state of opposition.

While I don't believe theism and spirituality are necessarily linked, one might argue that the level of true spirituality in a society is actually proportional to its number of atheists.
To me, an "atheist" is simply someone unaffiliated—someone who refuses to join any clique, gang, or religious organization. Atheism is always a specific response to the current state of a particular culture.

An atheist is a seeker—someone who knows they haven't found the truth yet. Their most defining trait is their independence; they feel no need to join a flock. By this definition, "state atheism" (like what we saw in old communist regimes) is a sham. It’s worth noting that its spiritual "father" was Joseph Stalin, who, ironically, had studied theology.

It could also be put this way:
One who seeks the truth understands that they do not possess it, and that realization is the beginning of wisdom.
Anyone who believes they have already found it halts their own spiritual growth and becomes a fossil. 🙂

I honestly don't think there is such a thing as an absolute truth.
You’re spot on regarding your point about God, too. That’s actually why I tend to steer clear of using that specific word—to me, it just carries these heavy, negative connotations that don't quite fit.
The Americans really nailed it with this one, though—using the word "divine" captures exactly what I'm trying to get at much more effectively than simply saying "God."

As far as I see it, an atheist is someone who doesn't believe in any deity whatsoever. What you're describing sounds more like what we'd call an agnostic.

I get what you're saying, but don't blame me if people end up dragging God's name through the mud

Like I said before, I could stick to my own terms and my own way of speaking, but then nobody would have a clue what I'm talking about.

Honestly, I think the real issue here is language—and how we define things.

When I talk about God, I’m referring to something far beyond this world—the Tao, the Final Existence. I'm not talking about those petty little human demigods you guys obsess over, the ones people have fought endless wars over.

Sure, you’re right—the biggest stumbling block is definitely how everyone carries their own personal dictionary around in their heads. But it isn't *just* about semantics. When people toss around the word "God," they're implicitly describing an entity—some kind of being that, if you were to strip away all those divine attributes we assign to it, ends up looking remarkably human, if you catch my drift.

What I'm really curious about, though, is why people—if they already have a concept like Apple in mind—still insist on using the term "God"? And look, you aren't the only one doing this; I've run into plenty of folks who say "God" only to reveal they mean something the word doesn't actually encompass. Is it just a leftover habit from how we were raised? Or is it a subconscious need to be understood in a society where "exotic" concepts like Apple are still relatively rare?