Just was on a retreat...

[Manus Domini]

Originally Posted by Chopin

Why don't you give us a lesson, Manus, my boy?

a lesson on..? Retreats? I'm not gonna get further into the stream of religious bickering and get this thread deleted...

Originally Posted by Chopin

Tina,

Come out an apologize to me and the rest of the Boards and I'll consider granting you my blessing to stay on the Boards. Tell the truth and liberate yourself.

Best,
Chopin

Pray, good sir, must you partake in such acts?

This is a thread on retreats. Can you please take you and your ego and inquisition and make another thread about hunting Tina's ghost? Seriously, this has nothing to do with retreats...

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by Manus Domini

B} At least most Americans know that Catholics are Christians. Frankly, your posts advocating that they are not Christians should be taken as jokes.

In my opinion, Catholics are one variety of Christians. However, I was told in no uncertain terms by Kaptain Karl (erstwhile moderator of these forums) that Catholics ≠ Christians. He is Christian, and most certainly American.

I went on a retreat once, a long time ago when I was a teenager. I liked everything there .... except the religious part of it. Ever since, I have gone on several hikes, camping trips, and general retreats from the daily grind. None of these trips had any religious component; all of them were wonderfully invigorating.

[Chopin]

Originally Posted by Manus Domini

a lesson on..? Retreats? I'm not gonna get further into the stream of religious bickering and get this thread deleted...



Pray, good sir, must you partake in such acts?

This is a thread on retreats. Can you please take you and your ego and inquisition and make another thread about hunting Tina's ghost? Seriously, this has nothing to do with retreats...

Manus,

The seeds of this thread's undoing were planted long before I showed up (which is not to say that I condone such actions).

That said, I think it's sad that people feel the need to attack other's beliefs when these beliefs are doing no harm. If you want to go on a retreat and believe that it was a good, healthy experience, you should be able to post about it without this becoming a fight about religion. Sadly, that's what's happening/going to happen here. I'll gladly stop posting to Tina and will say that although I am not Christian and don't believe in the Judeo-Christian God and don't universally subscribe to the beliefs espoused in any religious text, I do think the idea of going on a retreat and getting in touch with a deeper, spiritual side is a wonderful thing.

Best,
Chopin

[Chopin]

Originally Posted by Polaris

In my opinion, Catholics are one variety of Christians. However, I was told in no uncertain terms by Kaptain Karl (erstwhile moderator of these forums) that Catholics ≠ Christians. He is Christian, and most certainly American.

I went on a retreat once, a long time ago when I was a teenager. I liked everything there .... except the religious part of it. Ever since, I have gone on several hikes, camping trips, and general retreats from the daily grind. None of these trips had any religious component; all of them were wonderfully invigorating.

KK has strong opinions. I battled it out with him once and actually discovered he's a well-meaning guy.

[Love Game]

Originally Posted by Polaris

In my opinion, Catholics are one variety of Christians. However, I was told in no uncertain terms by Kaptain Karl (erstwhile moderator of these forums) that Catholics ≠ Christians. He is Christian, and most certainly American.

I went on a retreat once, a long time ago when I was a teenager. I liked everything there .... except the religious part of it. Ever since, I have gone on several hikes, camping trips, and general retreats from the daily grind. None of these trips had any religious component; all of them were wonderfully invigorating.

as you may know, just because someone (for example Kaptain Karl in this particular case) writes something on an internet message board doesnt mean there is any truth in what was written. or perhaps you just misunderstood him.

Catholics are the original Christians. Martin Luther's Protestant Reformation was initiated somewhere in the middle of the 16th century.

youre not alone in disliking religion. atheists and humanists usually don't like it. you mentioned that your nature walks were invigorating, but you didn't say they were spiritually enlightening.

I believe that spiritual enlightenment as it relates to Retreats is the topic of this thread. The OP can correct me if my belief is mistaken.

[max]

Catholics are Christian. There is a grouping of non-Catholic churches that have some way of reading Catholics out of Christianity, but it's not an understanding or interpretation shared by mainline Protestants.

There are many "urban legends" about the Catholic Church (with over a billion members), but many of these are built around the Protestant breakaway and are not historically credible.

Retreats are good, but I think you have to almost do a "pre-retreat" before you go, so you're ready to make one productive. I'm the kind of guy that generally LIKES the idea of stepping off the rat racing and reflecting, but can't get around to actually doing it.

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by Love Game

as you may know, just because someone (for example Kaptain Karl in this particular case) writes something on an internet message board doesnt mean there is any truth in what was written. or perhaps you just misunderstood him.

No, I did not misunderstand him, because I asked for a clarification. And, what he says is up to him. I am merely reporting what I have heard from a practicing Christian. I have no preference, one way or the other, because for me, Catholics and Christians are identical for all practical purposes.

youre not alone in disliking religion.

You misunderstood, and this threatens to make the thread go sour. I meant that I didn't like the "religious component" of the retreat. I didn't mention that I disliked religion. I like some aspects of it, and dislike others.

you mentioned that your nature walks were invigorating, but you didn't say they were spiritually enlightening.

I don't use "spiritually enlightening" lightly because I am uncomfortable about the meaning and usage of the word "spiritual". In particular, I disagree with the way the word has been co-opted by many people to refer only to religious experiences.

I believe that spiritual enlightenment as it relates to Retreats is the topic of this thread. The OP can correct me if my belief is mistaken.

See above. Often, the feeling of spiritual enlightenment could be traced back to stimuli which result in increased levels of dopamine in the brain .

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Polaris

Often, the feeling of spiritual enlightenment could be traced back to stimuli which result in increased levels of dopamine in the brain .

Yes, that is a very likely scientific explanation for intense religious experiences. A Canadian scientist is doing research on stimulating parts of the brain to produce religious ecstasy.

[max]

. . . it's worth pointing out that there are scientific extremists just as there are religious extremists.

[Love Game]

Originally Posted by sureshs

Yes, that is a very likely scientific explanation for intense religious experiences. A Canadian scientist is doing research on stimulating parts of the brain to produce religious ecstasy.

what's the difference between "religious ecstasy" and plain old generic "ecstasy'? ..... sounds as if the "canadian scientist" is researching ways of producing Xtasy ...

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Love Game

what's the difference between "religious ecstasy" and plain old generic "ecstasy'? ..... sounds as if the "canadian scientist" is researching ways of producing Xtasy ...

Not sure ........... just casually watched a TV program on it. His subjects describe what the experience feels like, not him. If they feel it was similar to a religious one, that is what he will note down, unless he is a fraud. Unlike religion, science doesn't distort facts to fit a theory.

But if extreme religious experiences are shown to be merely biological artifacts as some people already suspect, it will open up a whole can of worms.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by max

. . . it's worth pointing out that there are scientific extremists just as there are religious extremists.

No, there are not, unless they indulge in evil deeds using scientific technology. That has little to do with the scientific method.

Two things are not equally bad because one of them may have problems. It doesn't work that way. Galileo was not a scientific extremist for saying the sun does not go around the earth. He was correct, religious extremists were wrong. Both were not equally wrong. One was right, other was wrong. And that has been shown time and time again.

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by max

. . . it's worth pointing out that there are scientific extremists just as there are religious extremists.

By scientific extremists, do you mean people who believe that science can answer everything? If so, I agree with you. Science most certainly cannot answer everything.

If, by scientific extremists, you mean people who use the scientific method for evil things, then I disagree with you. The method is based on making hypothesis, and testing them for truth as rigorously as possible. It is just a way of life, not a license to do bad things.

If, by scientific extremists, you mean people who use the products of science to do evil things, then again I disagree with you. Such people commit their evil deeds based on an ideology that has nothing to do with the scientific method.

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by sureshs

Yes, that is a very likely scientific explanation for intense religious experiences. A Canadian scientist is doing research on stimulating parts of the brain to produce religious ecstasy.

Yes, I've read about this in several popular science books, though I have yet to consult a proper textbook on it. Several experiments have shown increased levels of dopamine (either congenitally or induced) among people who have ecstatic experiences. I may be wrong, but isn't dopamine somehow related to the production of the neurotransmitter anandamide ?

I thought it was a joke when I first read it but the name "anandamide" literally comes from the Sanskrit "ananda" ( = joy, delight, bliss ) !!

[max]

Originally Posted by sureshs

No, there are not, unless they indulge in evil deeds using scientific technology. That has little to do with the scientific method.

Two things are not equally bad because one of them may have problems. It doesn't work that way. Galileo was not a scientific extremist for saying the sun does not go around the earth. He was correct, religious extremists were wrong. Both were not equally wrong. One was right, other was wrong. And that has been shown time and time again.

It's worth it to examine the "is/ought" distinction. suresh if you're really way into science, take a look at the book Cosmos Bios Theos, which contains scientists discussing their religious views. Interesting stuff. And of course the polling shows scientists are more religious than the general public. . . but what do they know?

Speaking seriously, it's really worth looking into.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by max

It's worth it to examine the "is/ought" distinction. suresh if you're really way into science, take a look at the book Cosmos Bios Theos, which contains scientists discussing their religious views. Interesting stuff. And of course the polling shows scientists are more religious than the general public. . . but what do they know?

Speaking seriously, it's really worth looking into.

They are religious in the sense that they are often conservative in their personal life and also are interested in the ultimate nature of reality. They are introspective people, as opposed to party animals (most of the time). I am not a scientist but I am like that too. But I don't extend that to scientific method. Science is the same whether you are a conservative family guy like me or a philanderer like Feynman.

That is the good thing. The bad thing is that there are scientists who are not scientific at all when it comes to fundamental thinking (they are good at what they do, but they refuse to take their scientific spirit further). There are also scientists who discover that they can get more funds and promotions if they give a nod to religion, which makes them much sought after. After a point, scientists are like everyone else - they like money and power, or they convince themselves they need to "compromise" to continue their work.

Let me give you an example. I attend religious services every weekend and there is a professor, of all things, origins of life and molecular biology, at a famed institute here. Two weeks ago, he told a group of children: if you are willing to read about science and experiment with it, what prevents you from believing that everything in the scriptures is literally true? Why do you resist?

I am like, c'mon, you think this is a logical statement? But what will people say? Here is a biology professor who is a fundamentalist, shouldn't he know? No, answer is I am more scientific than he his, because I understand how to think scientifically, while he has stopped after a certain point.

[Love Game]

Originally Posted by sureshs

Not sure ........... just casually watched a TV program on it. His subjects describe what the experience feels like, not him. If they feel it was similar to a religious one, that is what he will note down, unless he is a fraud. Unlike religion, science doesn't distort facts to fit a theory.
But if extreme religious experiences are shown to be merely biological artifacts as some people already suspect, it will open up a whole can of worms.

interesting. but not on topic. that topic is about "biological artifacts" and "extreme religious experiences," which is well outside the scope of the OP's purpose in this thread. one person's psychological reaction to a laboratory stimulus to the brain can be wildly different from another person's psychological reaction to the identical laboratory stimulus to the brain.

The OP is asking in this thread to hear about people's personal, real-life (not laboratory) reactions to any Retreats. I assume that "retreat" in the context of this thread is used in the sense of time taken to reflect or meditate in the company of others who are doing the same.

[sureshs]

Yes that is correct

[ruerooo]

Originally Posted by Love Game

interesting. but not on topic. that topic is about "biological artifacts" and "extreme religious experiences," which is well outside the scope of the OP's purpose in this thread. one person's psychological reaction to a laboratory stimulus to the brain can be wildly different from another person's psychological reaction to the identical laboratory stimulus to the brain.

The OP is asking in this thread to hear about people's personal, real-life (not laboratory) reactions to any Retreats. I assume that "retreat" in the context of this thread is used in the sense of time taken to reflect or meditate in the company of others who are doing the same.

Hey, LG - I am chasing you around TW to ask about something that is also not on topic, LOL.

I've been thinking - since all the top five are playing doubles this tournament, do we need a doubles poll and/or thread?

[Love Game]

Originally Posted by ruerooo

Hey, LG - I am chasing you around TW to ask about something that is also not on topic, LOL.

I've been thinking - since all the top five are playing doubles this tournament, do we need a doubles poll and/or thread?

good idea . there w/b some good ones. i'll dig it out!

wilco, over and out!