Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

941–950 of 966 posts

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#941

Post by mbfg »

geoduck14 wrote: post #919
nogridbag wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I had been taught I could simply confess whatever and it would be forgiven I still remember the day at Sunday school when we had to confess. I was a good kid. I had absolutely no idea what to confess. I consulted my Mom who told me to "make something up". And thus my first sin, that I can remember, was lying to the priest.

I'd like to make a suggestion. If you aren't sure if you have anything to confess, then pray. Ask God to reveal any sin to you so you can confess it, pause for a little bit and listen for God. You can also take this time to thank God for things in your life.

How did you differentiate a god talking to you, and you talking to you? What evidence to you have for that? How can others collaborate your story?

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#942

Post by mbfg »

hudon wrote: post #344
hall0ween wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I know, confession is a route for absolution of “sins”. And for some reason this is a power Christian churches give themselves. If it doesn’t result in a form of leverage (moral or otherwise) over it’s practitioners, I’d be surprised. Even more so for children who have yet to establish their own view of the world.

Forgiveness is from God, but can be through a priest, as long as you are contrite. The Church as a body of Christians obviously benefits from contrite brothers and sisters attempting (and yes often failing miserably, but at least attempting) to live in peaceful communion.

Why do you believe that claim? What evidence do you have that it is true?

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#943

Post by mbfg »

xupybd wrote: post #591
criddell wrote: post #568

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never understood what part of the crucifixion was a sacrifice. Jesus is literally a god. He knew he would end up on the cross before he even took on human form. He could have left at any time. He can return any time he wants. And how can his death on the cross be actually considered a death? If he was dead, are we to understand that for those few days there was no god overlooking all of creation? It seems to me…

Jesus was God in flesh. So God the father is separate but connected. ( I'm a little under qualified to describe the exact nature of the Holy Trinity) So God the father has always been looking over creation. After Jesus ascended to heaven the Holy Spirit was sent to help the church in place of Jesus her on earth. Jesus was God in flesh so he purposely limited himself to experience all that we experience, to suffer all…

Have any evidence for these claims? Why do you believe them?

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#944

Post by mbfg »

8note wrote: post #778
cogman10 wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is, frankly, no such thing as a "god hating atheist". Those two notions are incompatible. Consider, for example, how little you (probably) care about fairies. Are you a fairy hating afairist? You may find an Atheist that says something like "If god does exist, it's a dick". but that's not really hating god but rather pointing out the silliness of believing in a supernatural all powerful being that is good which…

I'd consider it the difference between answering this question with "I don't have any" and "I have atheism" "I don't have any" is the one that doesn't care, vs "I am atheist" says you care a whole lot about god. You don't identify as afairist at all. If you do, you're almost certainly a fairy hating afairist

I am an atheist and definitely care a ton about religion. Because what people believe highly influences their actions. A mind that can believe things without good reason or evidence can believe anything. Often these things are nasty, awful things. People then promote these things in government and society, and because they are couched in 'religion' get some sort of exemption from criticism at large. Is there anything you COULDN'T believe based on faith? If i do not need to provide evidence, is there anything i couldn't deeply hold and promote, that is offensive and problematic to a society? If i don't need to provide evidence, how can you question me when my supreme being has told me that men are better than woman, that people of my religion are better than others, that cis people are better than lgbtq+ people. That white people are better than people of color. It's my supreme being, i don't have to prove him to you. "It's true for me", and you need to respect me for it.

That is just wrong.

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#945

Post by mbfg »

hudon wrote: post #312
sam0x17 wrote: post #233

100% atheism. Was raised some kind of protestant I forget which one, and derived tremendous spiritual and psychological relief when I realized all of that was absolute nonsense at the age of 9. I knew I was gay at the time and wouldn't come out until I was 18 or so, but my life just got a lot easier when I removed religion completely. I also recall discovering increased moral agency -- as a Christian I had been taugh…

For forgiveness, you need to actually be contrite and willing to amend your life. God loves you and wants you to heal but you need to be open to it. Also he is just, so he doesn’t exactly let you do whatever you want as you imply. There are always consequences to our actions. Further, I would argue that without living with God, you are actually freed from responsibility in moral judgements, because of the belief that…

Why would you believe that claim? Have any evidence to provide that it is true?

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#946

Post by marc_io »

betterunix2 wrote: post #211
GreenWatermelon wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a religious person (By western standards) I can't stand any sort of Religious authority. I believe they are what made religions Today incredible superficial. Critical thinking is prohibited in favor of blind belief, and the clergy only recite what they memorized. To me, my Holy Book is the only religious authority, and it's my job to understand it and think about it, however such injection of the mind into religio…

"my Holy Book is the only religious authority" Sounds like idolatry to me -- sounds like you are taking a book, written, edited, and organized by human beings, and equating it with God.

As long as it's “transparent to transcendence,” that's fine. Absolutely everything is this world can be used in this manner. It's all a great mystery anyway.

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#947

Post by michaelsbradley »

The great value we ought to set on Spiritual Things

"I wished," says the Wise Man, "and there was given me sense; I asked it of God, and there came upon me the spirit of wisdom; and I preferred her before thrones and royal sceptres; and I made no account of riches in comparison therewith, nor of precious stones; for all gold in comparison with her is as a little sand, and silver shall be counted as clay before her." (Wisdom 7:7-9). The true wisdom on which we ought to set our eyes is perfection, which consists in union with God by love, according to the saying of the Apostle St. Paul: "Above all I commend to you charity, which is the bond of perfection" (Colossians 3:14), and joins and unites us with God. Now the esteem which Solomon says here he had of wisdom, we ought to have of perfection and of all that makes thereto. In comparison with that, all should appear to us as a little sand, a little clay and ordure, as the same apostle said: "I count all things as ordure and refuse in view of gaining Christ." (Philippians 3:8). This is a main means for gaining perfection: at the rate in which that esteem grows in our hearts, at the same rate will our perfection grow... The reason is, because such as is the value that we set upon a thing, such is the desire that we have of obtaining it: for the will is a blind power and follows what the understanding dictates and proposes to it; and according to the esteem and value that the understanding sets on a thing, so also is the will and desire to obtain it. And as the will is queen, and commands all the other powers and energies of the soul, as well interior as exterior, it follows that according to the will and desire that we have of a thing, will be our contriving and taking means thereto, and our efforts to obtain it. Thus it is very important to have a great esteem and appreciation of spiritual things and of what appertains to our spiritual progress, that so the will and desire of them may be great, and great also our effort to procure and gain them, for in all these things like goes with like.

A dealer in precious stones has need to know and form a right estimate of their value, under pain of being deceived, for in default of such knowledge and such estimate he will exchange and sell a stone of great value for a thing of very little worth. Our trade is in precious stones and pearls. "The kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant seeking precious stones." (cf. Matthew 13:45). We are merchants of the kingdom of heaven: we must know and form a right estimate of the price and value of the merchandise in which we deal, that we be not deceived, changing gold for clay, and heaven for earth, which would be a huge mistake. And so says the prophet Jeremy: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, nor the strong man in his strength, nor the rich man in his riches; but let him that glorieth glory in this, in knowing and understanding me." (cf. Jeremiah 9:23-24). This is the greatest of all treasures, knowing and loving and serving God, and this is the greatest business we can have on hand, or rather, we have no other business than this, for this we were created... this is our end, our terminus and our glory.

– Fr. Rodriguez, Practice of Perfection and Christian Virtues, First Treatise, Chapter 1 (1609; Rickaby's translation 1929)

https://archive.org/details/PPCV-Manresa/page/n27/mode/2up

https://archive.org/details/PPCV-Loyola/page/n23/mode/2up

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#948

Post by advael »

Some kinda non-conformist witchcraft I suppose. I quickly bucked the religion that got forced on me as a child, an easy journey - I'd like to think because abrahamic cosmology is plainly nonsensical, but more realistically I likely fell off because it was quite authoritarian and being told what to do makes me bristle in any context. I would have mostly self-described as an atheist for most of my childhood, and still am from a pure epistemic/cosmological standpoint, but I both started to balk at the hidebound tendency of many people and groups who use that label to trust and privilege established institutional implementations of empirical epistemology more than I think they deserve (And being in academia and following the big cross-disciplinary replication crisis in 2014 contributed in a big way to shifting my thinking more in that direction), and felt a lack of fulfillment in what I think is a pretty close to universal human need for ritual and a diminished vocabulary for explaining intuitions from those circles, so I've become interested in various practices many would consider "magical" or "spiritual" or "pagan" or dismiss as "woo" depending on who they are. I wouldn't call myself religious, I don't really go in for attempts to organize this kind of practice under stuff like "wicca" or "heathenry", but I do rituals for my own psychological purposes that friends in "atheist" circles would probably roll their eyes at, and am more comfortable offering explanations for phenomena (especially related to psychology, metacognition, interpersonal matters, information/decision/game theory, computer science, and linux system administration) that sound/signal/codeswitch more "witchy" than "scientific" than I was previously

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#949

Post by rtchau »

psyc wrote: post #734
bfuller wrote: post #732

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was raised in a fully evangelical tongue speaking, bible thumping, political shilling for george bush church, and I distinctly remember in bible school being made to accepet jesus into my heart as my savior over and over. When I told the teachers I had already accepted him, they would make me do it again. Even at that young age (probably 6-8 years old) I was thinking logically, if accepting jesus as my savior gets…

Fortunately it’s an idempotent operation. I think.

Don’t think too hard… there’s a rate limit. Unlike accepting your lord and saviour, which is unmetered! \o/

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#950

Post by theonething »

lisper wrote: post #935
theonething wrote: post #929

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All he says is that it is the "fact of sin", as if there were only one. There isn't. There are many facts about sin... You really believe that is what Chesterton meant? You think he thought there is only one single fact about the subject of sin? I find your interpretation hard to believe. > Chesterton never says what "the fact of sin" is First, if that is true, then how can you so vehemently deny something (the fac…

> You really believe that is what Chesterton meant? I have no idea what he meant. I do not have ESP, and given that Chesterton is long dead, it probably wouldn't be effective even if I did. All I know is what the text says. > First, if that is true, then how can you so vehemently deny something (the fact of sin) that you claim hasn't even been defined? I deny that there exists a single Fact of Sin that is so privileg…

> I have no idea what he meant. I do not have ESP, and given that Chesterton is long dead, it probably wouldn't be effective even if I did.

An author writes to convey information and meaning. One of the main responsibilities a reader has is to find out what the author meant by his words. [1] I don't think one needs ESP or to interview the author personally to find out the meaning he was trying to convey in his writing.

> All I know is what the text says.

What the text says is what the author says, his meaning.

In this case, you are interpreting "fact of sin" to mean "as if there were only one.". That's quite an uncharitable and illogical interpretation. I don't think Chesterton thought that there exists only one fact about sin. It's common sense that there is more than one fact about such a broad topic as sin.

> the idea that "sin exists" is another one of those phrases that is cunningly designed to make you think that it means something, and that you understand what it means, when in fact it is utter nonsense (because of its ambiguity).

Webster says sin is "an offense against religious or moral law". Since you're not religious, let's go with offense against moral law.

What's moral law? Webster says "a general rule of right living"

So do offenses against rules of right living exist?

A man rapes and murders a person. Was that an offense against right living? I would say so. It was a sin. Rape and murder as well as other sins have been committed throughout history, are currently being committed and will be committed in the future. Sin exists.

> LOL. Can you show me any evidence that there is an afterlife?

I challenged your claim that William Lan Craig is a charlatan and you change the topic?

I don't have time to fully answer your challenges. I'll just leave some references. [2]

> Read Carrier's "Proving History: Bayes's Theorem and the Quest for the Historical Jesus" and then come back and we can talk.

I may just do that. Thanks.

While we're on the subject of evidence, I will leave with these thoughts.

Science is wonderful and is capable of explaining many truths about the universe and has resulted in much good. But it has its limits. It can not speak to questions of morality, the human condition, etc [3]

Obviously, there is a large component of faith involved in Christianity or any religion or spiritual matters. But I always argue that it is the nature of reality that everyone is required to live by faith [4]

[1] Fundamental Factors of Comprehension in Reading (Davis, 1944):

http://www.iapsych.com/wmfhcaarchive/LinkedDocuments/DAVI11....

- Ability to select the appropriate meaning for a word or phrase in the light of its particular contextual setting

- Ability to determine a writer's purpose, intent, and point of view, i.e., to draw inferences about a writer

[2]

https://answersingenesis.org/is-the-bible-true/how-do-we-kno...

https://carm.org/about-jesus/is-there-historical-evidence-of...

https://www.icr.org/

https://www.amazon.com/evidence-that-demands-verdict-life-ch...

[3]

https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/0_0_0/whatisscience_12

"Accepting a scientific worldview needn't require giving up religious faith."

https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/0_0_0/science_religion

[4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29710355

Post reply on HN