psychology vrs spirituality

psychology vrs spirituality

Joined: July 1st, 2008, 11:52 pm

February 2nd, 2011, 6:52 pm #1

but before psychology is spirituality

the spirit is put in a body to give life to the body which is why we can still see the body even after it dies, because the spirit leaves it as it enters it:


Freud said we could never change the ID even if we can change our ego by rearranging the super-ego or conscience:

the ID is the part of the brain that the LIFE FORCE comes through first, the first part of the developed brainstem:

called the primal brain, it only has two centers, FEAR and SEX (reproductive drive) to perpetuate the species


these work together to make sure that persons keep multiplying till they no longer need to:

when would this be?

when their "ID" has overcome the TWO basic primal functions


but this is IMPOSSIBLE WITH MAN


Freud said no man can change his ID and he is right


only God can change the ID, replacing it with the ability to PICK UP GOD instead of this void or emptiness that rules man's deepest self


and it transforms the sex drive to another kind of drive, a drive to LOVE


this is why the ID has to be reconnected to GOD


to completely TRANSFORM the subconscious and lastly conscious mind of man




this is called the rapture, the day of the Lord, the making of MAN

before that, man is more beast or like animals (sensual, five senses) than spiritual (knows as he is known)
every day is a new day to die to the old and live to the newness of life
Quote
Like
Share

Iceman
Iceman

February 3rd, 2011, 5:04 pm #2

Frueds concepts are a theory and based upon HIS personal observations and experience.

Spirituality is a concept based upon an individuals concept and experience

Using a 90 year old concept to delve into the basis of life seems a tad far fetched.
Quote
Share

Joined: May 4th, 2005, 1:31 pm

February 3rd, 2011, 5:28 pm #3

In short. It's all theory. I've brought this up before when I've seen claims that some psychological truth has been "proven".

Nope. Theorized is the best that any psychological "truth" can hope for.

Good to see you around Iceman. How are things? Keeping on the fitness path?

Quote
Like
Share

Yvonne/Zafana
Yvonne/Zafana

February 3rd, 2011, 5:57 pm #4

they speak of things they "read" somewhere

nobody speaks of anything from a subjective view here


THEIR PERSONAL EXPERIENCE based on what they read

true learning is UNDERSTANDING how what you read relates to you

when you just read and keep it all out there.....like Bible stories, scientific theory etc

you really haven't FOUND anything real yet


just a bunch of theories

which only proves that you can read


not that you can GRASP what you read


Quote
Share

Iceman
Iceman

February 4th, 2011, 7:22 am #5

Several of us have reached our inner spirit or true self through life experiences. I may have very different beliefs than others they are none the less just as valid.

Seems you spend a lot of time reading the bible. Try some Tao for a change. As for reading it often gives pause for reflection and understanding otherwise missed and often lost.

Mondo friend. My health improves everyday. I am again healthy by all standards. Thank you for asking.
Quote
Share

Yvonne/Zafana
Yvonne/Zafana

February 4th, 2011, 12:51 pm #6

if one reaches their deepest life experience they understand there is no reason to "read or study" another religion:

my deepest life experience is of God and this helped me to understand all religions, even the one I "believed" before I experienced God:


Quote
Share

Iceman
Iceman

February 4th, 2011, 6:07 pm #7

So you believe no one should ever have a open mind: Just be blinded by ones own belief.

That's one of the faults of religion.

The difficulty with that position is too often some want to impinge their beliefs upon others. Then there are the dominionist who believe if you don't believe as they do, then you are an enemie and doomed.

Then there are us savages that MUST have christianity shoved up our nose, down our throats, and into our rectums in order to accept another dark skinned person as a saviour. That same individual only taught the philosophy my people had some 10,000 years before he was born.

How noble, quaint and self serving to believe only one has ever been able to deliver the message of life.

I think understanding peoples culture and the ideas of others as part of lifes noble journey. Reading expands and extends our boundries and gives us the power to be wiser and more accepting. That is a basis of the message.

Many dictators censored and burned books to prevent expanded thought. And yes! It is often difficult to deal with well balanced and learned people.

Quote
Share

Joined: July 1st, 2008, 11:52 pm

February 4th, 2011, 6:40 pm #8

with an extreemely open mind: my mind is even more open than Mondo's lol

I never asked you to accept anything by mere belief as man understands belief:

God doesn't expect that kind of belief according to the Bible: It even says that God himself authors our faith so we can't even believe unless it is given us to believe ....


mere assent to believe something isn't belief ......


I could discuss this with you but I already have many times but so far who has engaged me in any discussion according to what I say?

the most people are able to do is respond to me based on "their beliefs" about God and Jesus and the Bible, projecting them onto me and then telling me how they don't believe in these things or in what I say according to their own filter of these topics:

communication is difficult because one must first get on the same page, which is called mega-communication, talking about the process of communication before they talk about the content:


in order to really discuss my understanding of God in the way I understand God, you would either have to have the same understanding, which would make us one in soul or understanding

or we would at least have to have the same LANGUAGE, and the same rules about the things discussed:



I can't get to any of these levels with most of the people here even after talking to them more than a decade:



debate is not possible unless each side is heard unfiltered, which is why apologetics is such a difficult discipline because when it comes to God, we all have our filters (ego understanding) till that filter is replaced by true faith above reason


not faith below reason, which isn't faith, but assent to believe something we don't understand yet


every day is a new day to die to the old and live to the newness of life
Quote
Like
Share

Iceman
Iceman

February 5th, 2011, 2:57 am #9

Obviously your beliefs came from somewhere. They weren't just absorbed through osmosis. You also keep quoteing the Bible scriptures so obviously you do study religion. At least the Bible. You've based your beliefs upon a God and Christianity and affirm that as the true faith. And so it is to you.

Why critisize those who question? Why critisize the curosity of others? Why critisize anyone for the desire to learn about any of the great traditions, and the meaning they convey to others. What is wrong in understanding the joy and comfort they provide.

Yes! Mondo has a open mind and a mind that seeks knowledge not from a single source. He seems not to be grounded in belief other than being in spiritual comfort, and enjoining the world in a beneficial manner. He does that just as I do - in learning from experience and others.

There is nothing in writing about my beliefs other than what a few european translators have taken the time to try to interpret. Sadly they label most of it myth. An example of ethnocentricity spouted by religious dogma.

And why do you assume you are more spiritual, or have more knowlege about life and the message than others? Your challenge is in itself a contridiction of the message.

Disagreement is natural - that doesn't mean anyone is right. It's the resistance to ideas that is the failure.

Quote
Share

Yvonne/Zafana
Yvonne/Zafana

February 5th, 2011, 8:38 pm #10

ICEMAN: Obviously your beliefs came from somewhere. They weren't just absorbed through osmosis.

ME: my beliefs came from experience with reality; ever hear of "deep thoughts"? Well these come from deep experiences or they are just theories: If they come from experience, the thoughts follow the experience; if they come from theories, the experience may or may NOT follow.....


ICEMAN: You also keep quoteing the Bible scriptures so obviously you do study religion. At least the Bible. You've based your beliefs upon a God and Christianity and affirm that as the true faith. And so it is to you.



ME: I use the Biblical language to EXPRESS my experience because science hasn't FINE TUNED a language yet for the experience I had, even though it has come close......and will eventually explain it...




ICEMAN: Why critisize those who question? Why critisize the curosity of others? Why critisize anyone for the desire to learn about any of the great traditions, and the meaning they convey to others. What is wrong in understanding the joy and comfort they provide.


ME: there is nothing wrong with curiosity, desire to learn, great traditions......I speak of these all the time.....how they overlap and explain reality to the level that we are able to experience it and still live in the body....


ICEMAN: Yes! Mondo has a open mind and a mind that seeks knowledge not from a single source. He seems not to be grounded in belief other than being in spiritual comfort, and enjoining the world in a beneficial manner. He does that just as I do - in learning from experience and others.


ME: An open mind is great but it isn't enough in the end; The more a scientist finds the truth, the MORE FINE TUNED his mind must become: what begins as "everything goes" in theory, becomes "building billion dollar machines to prove one tiny point of reality": thats fine tuning: you have to know when the open the mind and when to SHUT out the noise that tries to KEEP you from hearing the radio station you found while dialing around....


ICEMAN: There is nothing in writing about my beliefs other than what a few european translators have taken the time to try to interpret. Sadly they label most of it myth. An example of ethnocentricity spouted by religious dogma.


ME: religion is a language that can be interpreted in many ways; for the immature it is in story form; for the developing it is in "meaning" behind the story: for the mature it explains the experience of OUR reality in a language that can be understood on other levels as well:



ICEMAN: And why do you assume you are more spiritual, or have more knowlege about life and the message than others? Your challenge is in itself a contridiction of the message.

ME: I never speak of what others have; they usually tell me what I don't have when I tell them what I have: CHECK it out if you don't believe me: If I tell you what I experienced and instead of telling me what you experienced you tell me what you DONT BELIEVE about my experience, who is really telling you about OTHERS? the person who says they believe or don't believe you.........not the person who is expressing their experience: For instance, if you experienced a trip to the South Pole and tell me about it and I haven't and tell you I don't believe what you experienced, who is being critical? who is being narrow minded? Who is challanging the message?? now if I also went to the south pole and tell you of my EXPERIENCE there and it turns out to be different, then we can say that we are both right; but to tell me that you don't believe what I experienced at the south pole doesn't make me the arguementative critical one at all:



ICEMAN: Disagreement is natural - that doesn't mean anyone is right. It's the resistance to ideas that is the failure.



ME: again........please try to hear me if you can.......or not.....I am not talking about "beliefs", or "ideas", but the experience of what all science is looking for....and I found it while in the body as most religious writers have........
Quote
Share