ForumGarden

If there was a perfect religion that was created what do you think it should be? Think of the best qualities and aspects of religions you know and write them here.

My first thoughts are:

Teaches how to create inner peace.

Teaches tolerance.

Teaches unity.

All Religions should be banned. Supertitious junk food.

Add to perfect religion list:

It doesn't offend the Captain

koan wrote: If there was a perfect religion that was created what do you think it should be? Think of the best qualities and aspects of religions you know and write them here.

My first thoughts are:

Teaches how to create inner peace.

Teaches tolerance.

Teaches unity.


1. “Peace I leave with you; My peace I give to you; not as the world give, do I give to you. Let no your heart be troubled, nor let it be fearful.” Jesus.

2. “Now accept the one who is weak in faith, but not for the purpose of passing judgment on his opinions…..” Paul

3. “And opening his mouth, Peter said, “ I most certainly understand now that God is not one to show partiality, but in every nation the man who fears him and does what is right is welcome to Him.”

I think I know the perfect religion, it only needs to be practiced.

I don't know what to do for the Captian.

Clint.

If a current religion was "perfect" then it would be universally accepted so it does not currently exist.

Capt and Sagan.

This is a philosophical discussion and your responses are not reasonable. If you are atheist then add what you like about your belief system.

capt_buzzard wrote: All Religions should be banned. Supertitious junk food.


Supertitious Junk Food: Jesus Fish Sticks (e-bay) Brand

Tammy Baker- Fat Free Cookies

Nun Time - Pigs In A Blanket

sagan wrote: Hmm... how about - "atheists do what they believe is right because it is right, not because of the threat of eternal punishment from some god". Is that reasonable? :wah:


That is a very good point. :yh_clap

There should be no fear incorporated into the religion or reasons to follow the religion. It would not be fear based or enforced.

Atheists have a clear point of thinking, they eliminate all the bull that goes with SAnta, tooth time & the bunny!

koan wrote: Clint.

If a current religion was "perfect" then it would be universally accepted so it does not currently exist.

Capt and Sagan.

This is a philosophical discussion and your responses are not reasonable. If you are atheist then add what you like about your belief system.


I never said it was practiced perfectly. The only way to get a perfect religion is to remove people from it, so maybe that should be the next thing on your list…..no people. :-3

A perfect religion is about all the irregular, "imperfect people" who need direction, who seek it with the heading "religion." They believe and follow because it is the right thing to do, when really, they are just lonely and don't know any better? Its all NICE, it is in the EYE of the Beholder, whether they can see or not! The leader determines the followers, its all the same, just variations?

This is a subject that interests me, my mother is a minister and has studied with many of the most popular religions. The thing that strikes me is that it is religion that seperates people. They become groups of people. Baptists believe things that can't be accepted by Seventh Day Adventists or that is wrong according to Jehovah's Witnesses. Mormons have their own book, and so on. To me, a perfect religion would not profess to know everything or rule out things. I guess this falls under tolerence, but I guess what I'm saying is that the religion should not divide everyone but somehow encompass everyone. Every religion could get together and make a list of what is agreed upon by all first, then explore the differences with an open mind :-6

rachelg...BINGO, religion is more believeable if there are a few less? One God, that would be a better world. When religion became a money making business, life changed---forever. You know it. :-6

koan wrote: If there was a perfect religion that was created what do you think it should be? Think of the best qualities and aspects of religions you know and write them here.



My first thoughts are:



Teaches how to create inner peace.



Teaches tolerance.



Teaches unity.
There are non religious organizations that promote the above, like, "Secular Humanism" www.secularhumanism.org

Lon wrote: There are non religious organizations that promote the above, like, "Secular Humanism" www.secularhumanism.org
Secular Humanism is a religion in that it is a cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion, much like atheism. I cringe when someone refers to me as “religious”. Call me devoted to God, a Messianic Jew, a Christian or something that recognizes that I’m not just part of a group that includes Secular Humanism, Atheism or some other godless religious group.

Clint wrote: Secular Humanism is a religion in that it is a cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion, much like atheism. I cringe when someone refers to me as “religious”. Call me devoted to God, a Messianic Jew, a Christian or something that recognizes that I’m not just part of a group that includes Secular Humanism, Atheism or some other godless religious group.
According to the dictionary definition of religion, it's a bit of a stretch to call "Secular Humanism" a religion, don't you think?

Clint wrote: Secular Humanism is a religion in that it is a cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion, much like atheism. I cringe when someone refers to me as “religious”. Call me devoted to God, a Messianic Jew, a Christian or something that recognizes that I’m not just part of a group that includes Secular Humanism, Atheism or some other godless religious group.


Clint

When I said tolerance would be part of the perfect religion, you claimed your religion had it all. Yet look at the last sentence you wrote here :yh_shame

What's really spooky about religion is that, a group of us could get together over a scotch (or beer) and hammer out the basics of a new religion in a few hours. As off the wall as our new religion might be, we, as the new wave SILVER TONGUED DEVILS, could go forth and gather converts. People are just dying to follow and very few wish to lead. Yeah verily.

posted by Lon

According to the dictionary definition of religion, it's a bit of a stretch to call "Secular Humanism" a religion, don't you think?


Depends which way you use the word

Oxford English dictionary definition.

religion // n.

1 the belief in a superhuman controlling power, esp. in a personal God or gods entitled to obedience and worship.

2 the expression of this in worship.

3 a particular system of faith and worship.

4 life under monastic vows (the way of religion).

5 a thing that one is devoted to (football is their religion).



The things is the established faith based religons christianity, islam etc all agree about the main thing i.e. the believe in an overbeing-god call it what you will. They kill each other over the detail of how to worship and given half a chance shove their own system of worship down everybody's throat.

Once you believe in god the rest is detail, does it matter and is it worth fight ing over?

Lon wrote: What's really spooky about religion is that, a group of us could get together over a scotch (or beer) and hammer out the basics of a new religion in a few hours. As off the wall as our new religion might be, we, as the new wave SILVER TONGUED DEVILS, could go forth and gather converts. People are just dying to follow and very few wish to lead. Yeah verily.
So...you just said it. Secular Humanism is a religion. A bunch of people got together and created it and now the "silver tongued" rebels are out gathering converts as fast as they can.

How about we all worship the cosmic comedian? The basic premise is that life is a joke but we don't know the punchline.

But then we could have one sect that believes the way to paradise is with one liners, like I told my wife black underwear turned me on and she didn't wash my Y fronts for a month. The shaggy dog story sect can have very long services. The surrealist comedy sect can have long sermons that nobody understands but nobody will admit to not understanding. The Monty Pythons worship a prophet called Brian who may or nmay not be the son of the great comedian. The sketch writers can have weekend reatreats and The satrirists can take the **** out of everybody else. Fighting about the different religons would never happen because that's not really very funny. But if people insist on fighting then they have to do it with tomatoes and the uniforms are clown suits. I'd better go before the Spanish Inquisition gets me. :-1

sagan wrote: Hmm... how about - "atheists do what they believe is right because it is right, not because of the threat of eternal punishment from some god". Is that reasonable? :wah:


Hey, you guy's I never said that I was an Atheist :driving:

Clint wrote: So...you just said it. Secular Humanism is a religion. A bunch of people got together and created it and now the "silver tongued" rebels are out gathering converts as fast as they can.
You like to twist things a bit don't you Clint? It's apparent that you really have not read anyting about "Secular Humanism" Secular Humanists do not evangelize and could care less about gathering converts. I have no problem with your beliefs, you apparently have a problem with my non beliefs & the non beliefs of others. Granted, some Atheists (Madlyn Murray O'Hair) can be pretty obnoxious and hateful, but like some Christians, they come in all shapes and sizes.

Lon wrote: You like to twist things a bit don't you Clint? It's apparent that you really have not read anyting about "Secular Humanism" Secular Humanists do not evangelize and could care less about gathering converts. I have no problem with your beliefs, you apparently have a problem with my non beliefs & the non beliefs of others. Granted, some Atheists (Madlyn Murray O'Hair) can be pretty obnoxious and hateful, but like some Christians, they come in all shapes and sizes. Good point LON.

gmc wrote: How about we all worship the cosmic comedian? The basic premise is that life is a joke but we don't know the punchline.

But then we could have one sect that believes the way to paradise is with one liners, like I told my wife black underwear turned me on and she didn't wash my Y fronts for a month. The shaggy dog story sect can have very long services. The surrealist comedy sect can have long sermons that nobody understands but nobody will admit to not understanding. The Monty Pythons worship a prophet called Brian who may or nmay not be the son of the great comedian. The sketch writers can have weekend reatreats and The satrirists can take the **** out of everybody else. Fighting about the different religons would never happen because that's not really very funny. But if people insist on fighting then they have to do it with tomatoes and the uniforms are clown suits. I'd better go before the Spanish Inquisition gets me. :-1


:yh_laugh :yh_rotfl :yh_hugs

I love it! Humour should definately be incorporated.



Clint

you are showing much animosity here. This is not meant to be a battle between beliefs it is meant to be a merging of them. You are making me sad.

koan wrote: :yh_laugh :yh_rotfl :yh_hugs

I love it! Humour should definately be incorporated.



Clint

you are showing much animosity here. This is not meant to be a battle between beliefs it is meant to be a merging of them. You are making me sad.


You are Blessed :-6 Koan

koan wrote: Clint

When I said tolerance would be part of the perfect religion, you claimed your religion had it all. Yet look at the last sentence you wrote here :yh_shame
I did say that the teachings I aspire to are perfect. I didn’t say I was perfect.

I get a little unraveled when people take the liberty of calling me “religious” for what I believe but won’t accept that following their beliefs makes them religious.

If I say I’m an atheist, spend a lot of time trying to prove I’m right and have the need to let everyone know what I believe, I’m religious about my belief. You can call it unbelief if you wish but it is the belief that there isn’t a God. I find it hard to accept that Atheists and Secular Humanists don’t want believers to leave what they believe in favor of Atheism or Secular Humanism. If they didn’t have the desire to convert people why make the effort to present “benefits” of what they believe? If the issue is Church and State, then it should be discussed under that heading rather than to attempt to dissuade people of faith.

I admit without reservation or shame that I’m at peace with what I believe. My life has been much better as a committed believer than it was as an uncommitted agnostic. I do want other people to enjoy what I enjoy.

I don’t think it’s wrong if I try to shine a light on those who want people to believe what they believe but won’t admit it.

There is a big difference between “acceptance” and “tolerance”. Paul taught that we should accept those weak in faith and not pass judgment on them for what we perceive as weakness. He didn’t say we should accept and embrace what they believe if it is counter to what we believe God has shown us to be true.

Clint wrote: I did say that the teachings I aspire to are perfect. I didn’t say I was perfect.

I get a little unraveled when people take the liberty of calling me “religious” for what I believe but won’t accept that following their beliefs makes them religious.

If I say I’m an atheist, spend a lot of time trying to prove I’m right and have the need to let everyone know what I believe, I’m religious about my belief. You can call it unbelief if you wish but it is the belief that there isn’t a God. I find it hard to accept that Atheists and Secular Humanists don’t want believers to leave what they believe in favor of Atheism or Secular Humanism. If they didn’t have the desire to convert people why make the effort to present “benefits” of what they believe? If the issue is Church and State, then it should be discussed under that heading rather than to attempt to dissuade people of faith.

I admit without reservation or shame that I’m at peace with what I believe. My life has been much better as a committed believer than it was as an uncommitted agnostic. I do want other people to enjoy what I enjoy.

I don’t think it’s wrong if I try to shine a light on those who want people to believe what they believe but won’t admit it.

There is a big difference between “acceptance” and “tolerance”. Paul taught that we should accept those weak in faith and not pass judgment on them for what we perceive as weakness. He didn’t say we should accept and embrace what they believe if it is counter to what we believe God has shown us to be true.NO MAN is an Island by Thomas Merton. :-6

koan wrote: :yh_laugh :yh_rotfl :yh_hugs

I love it! Humour should definately be incorporated.



Clint

you are showing much animosity here. This is not meant to be a battle between beliefs it is meant to be a merging of them. You are making me sad.
Capt,

I sure didn’t want to make you sad. Maybe I’m reacting too strongly. I’ll give it some thought.

Clint wrote: Capt,

I sure didn’t want to make you sad. Maybe I’m reacting too strongly. I’ll give it some thought.


I don't know how I messed up my reply. Koan, I don't want to make you sad either.

koan wrote: Add to perfect religion list:

It doesn't offend the Captain I was a little bold here. Sorry Koan.

Clint wrote: I did say that the teachings I aspire to are perfect. I didn’t say I was perfect.



I get a little unraveled when people take the liberty of calling me “religious” for what I believe but won’t accept that following their beliefs makes them religious.



If I say I’m an atheist, spend a lot of time trying to prove I’m right and have the need to let everyone know what I believe, I’m religious about my belief. You can call it unbelief if you wish but it is the belief that there isn’t a God. I find it hard to accept that Atheists and Secular Humanists don’t want believers to leave what they believe in favor of Atheism or Secular Humanism. If they didn’t have the desire to convert people why make the effort to present “benefits” of what they believe? If the issue is Church and State, then it should be discussed under that heading rather than to attempt to dissuade people of faith.



I admit without reservation or shame that I’m at peace with what I believe. My life has been much better as a committed believer than it was as an uncommitted agnostic. I do want other people to enjoy what I enjoy.



I don’t think it’s wrong if I try to shine a light on those who want people to believe what they believe but won’t admit it.



There is a big difference between “acceptance” and “tolerance”. Paul taught that we should accept those weak in faith and not pass judgment on them for what we perceive as weakness. He didn’t say we should accept and embrace what they believe if it is counter to what we believe God has shown us to be true.
"Unraveled?" More like overly defensive of your beliefs Clint.



I have gone back and read the posts and I don't see anyone admitting to being an Athesist or Secular Humanist. Further, I don't see anone attempting to disuade anyone from what they believe.



I am truly happy that you are at peace with what you believe. I too am at peace with what I believe as well as what I do not believe and don't care if you enjoy what I enjoy. You may love turnips, but don't tell me they are good for me or that I will like them.

All roads lead to God whatever your beliefs may be. :-6

Lon wrote: "Unraveled?" More like overly defensive of your beliefs Clint.



I have gone back and read the posts and I don't see anyone admitting to being an Athesist or Secular Humanist. Further, I don't see anone attempting to disuade anyone from what they believe.



I am truly happy that you are at peace with what you believe. I too am at peace with what I believe as well as what I do not believe and don't care if you enjoy what I enjoy. You may love turnips, but don't tell me they are good for me or that I will like them.


Hmmm...I'm overly defensive? Interesting.

Clint wrote: Capt,

I sure didn’t want to make you sad. Maybe I’m reacting too strongly. I’ll give it some thought.
I’ve thought about it.

I was just expressing my opinion. I’ve seen some of those protesting to what I said defending themselves when they were doing the same thing. If the discussion has to be void of emotion and so careful no one gets their feathers ruffled then no one will gain a thing. I had my feathers ruffled and I felt like I needed to defend what I said. If that never happens then I’ll never know if what I say is defensible. I don’t like making people “sad” but people have made me sad here and I have taken that as a sign that I have something to learn.

My error was in not being able to express myself in a more diplomatic way. I will continue to work on that.

Clint wrote: I’ve thought about it.

I was just expressing my opinion. I’ve seen some of those protesting to what I said defending themselves when they were doing the same thing. If the discussion has to be void of emotion and so careful no one gets their feathers ruffled then no one will gain a thing. I had my feathers ruffled and I felt like I needed to defend what I said. If that never happens then I’ll never know if what I say is defensible. I don’t like making people “sad” but people have made me sad here and I have taken that as a sign that I have something to learn.

My error was in not being able to express myself in a more diplomatic way. I will continue to work on that. Oh Please don't let it get you this way bud, we all searching for It. As I said many times before-I'm against these institutional religions. I'm not against one seeking a God in the spiritual sense.

capt_buzzard wrote: Oh Please don't let it get you this way bud, we all searching for It. As I said many times before-I'm against these institutional religions. I'm not against one seeking a God in the spiritual sense.
I have a problem with institutional religion as well. Except the one I’m a part of right now.

Captain, I don’t know why, but you could jab me in the eye with a sharp stick and I would figure you meant well by it. Others……………….

Clint wrote: 1. “Peace I leave with you; My peace I give to you; not as the world give, do I give to you. Let no your heart be troubled, nor let it be fearful.” Jesus.

2. “Now accept the one who is weak in faith, but not for the purpose of passing judgment on his opinions…..” Paul

3. “And opening his mouth, Peter said, “ I most certainly understand now that God is not one to show partiality, but in every nation the man who fears him and does what is right is welcome to Him.”



I think I know the perfect religion, it only needs to be practiced.



I don't know what to do for the Captian. :)That just sounds to me like a message from a Muslim,speaking about Muhammad



Allah will be pleased

PEIguy wrote: I think Rachelg's comment that religion seperates people was on the money...to a large degree it does.



I grew up in the Catholic church in the 50's and 60's. Heck...I was even an Altar boy.



By the time I was a teen, the nuns would have liked to see me excommunicated. They insisted, Catholic was the only true religion and path to god and all others would go to hell. There was only one family of protestant children in my school and the nuns insisted that my playing with these children was a sure path to hell.



I didn't win any brownie points when I insisted Adam and Eve were symbolic of man and women and not the indiciduals all people were created from. There were many other disagreements, including my insistance that women should be equals in the church.

'

About the time I was about 15, I had a strange experience. To call it anything but a vision, would not explain it, but it is difficult to put the experience into words.



The best I can explain it was that I saw myself or a spiritual me floating through microscopic space seeing basic elements of matter from a perspective where they looked more like galaxies and solar systems. Then they came together and I saw they formed my body. My perspective shifted so that I saw stars and planets and then went further away, so they became galixies and finally, formed a visible universe.



Receeding further away yet, I saw that our universe was but one of billions, and had the feeling that all that is forms what I percieved as a god.



From this I began to conceive that all that is, whether life or inanimate, is all connected in a form of a cosmic conciousness, for lack of a better description.



If all is connected, it can explain much that is thought of as spiritual.



This form of thinking required me to view all people as being part of me in some way, which required me to become empathetic and understanding of others.



This has defined my life and belief system and forced me to leave an organized religion that tried to destroy my beliefs.



I do know that I feel a comfort in my beliefs. It doesnt require me to tear down the beliefs of others. I may debate certain theological givens from a philosophical perspective. In that respect, I have often pointed out how parts of the bible were selectively destroyed during the reign of Constantine the Great, who was also called at times, Constantine the Pagan, around the year 300.



Even some of our Holidays are based on Paganism. Christmas was selected to represent the Birth of Christ, but the day it was celebrated was a pagan holiday. Constantine was attempting to reunite a country being torn apart by 2 factions, one which supported paganism, while the other was Christian.



So there you have it...what is my religion? It is one of my own making fashioned from a thought, dream or vision...Good one PEIguy

LT flora wrote: How is CAnada?
in what relation to this thread please?

capt_buzzard wrote: That just sounds to me like a message from a Muslim,speaking about Muhammad



Allah will be pleased


Allah might be pleased. The quotes you refer to were written long before Mohamed (600 years), so he may have plagiarized a little.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001468.html

koan wrote: If there was a perfect religion that was created what do you think it should be? COLOR]People could never create a perfect religion for themselves, because people are imperfect. If there were a perfect religion, who would accept it or even recognize it when they saw it? People create imperfect religions to please their imperfect tastes in religion. If a perfect religion came into the world, there would be big trouble. The imperfect religious leaders would consider the Leader of the perfect religion to be a threat, and kill Him. The few remaining followers of the perfect religion would find the perfect religion very difficult to hold onto in an imperfect world, because they would have to maintain kind and loving thoughts and actions, like their Leader, while most people would treat them with anger or indifference. The leaders of the imperfect religions, unable to force them to conform or convert them, would persecute the followers of the perfect religion, just as they did their Leader. The difficulty of following a perfect religion in an imperfect world, and the persecution in various places would have a sifting effect on the followers of the perfect religion. They would either wash out and give up, or they would become stronger.

No religion can make imperfect people perfect. A perfect religion would connect imperfect people to the God who can make them perfect. Since we are all imperfect by nature, we wouldn’t want to have anything to do with that. So our will, our desires would have to change. But a perfect God would never make imperfect people perfect, or change them against their will. To follow the perfect religion, one would have to deeply desire to be perfect, and if they did not naturally desire to be perfect, they would have to deeply desire their desires to be changed- They would have to give the perfect God the permission to perfect them. They would have to make a full surrender to the perfect God and trust Him completely, like a sedated patient allows a surgeon to cut them open. The perfect religion would be full of imperfect people wishing to be made perfect. Meanwhile their imperfections would bring a bad reputation to the perfect religion- which would make the perfect religion even harder to find.

The process of becoming perfect could not be accomplished all at once, because the imperfect person would only be able to be made perfect as they surrendered different parts of their life. A person being perfected could never see themselves as perfect, because they would become proud, and all their progress toward perfection would be lost. But the more perfect a person would become, the more humble and accepting and loving of others they would become, in spite of the difficulties and imcompatibilities. In every relationship, someone has to be the one who puts up with the meanness and inconsideration of the other. The follower of the perfect religion would be the patient and longsuffering one taking all the meanness of the world and returning only kindness, the one making all the sacrifices to keep the relationship going. There would be a thin line between that and becoming a doormat. It would require supernatural, spiritual power to be infused into the follower to give them the strength to endure and the wisdom to know how not to.

There is no religion on earth that does this (although there are some that make it easier), but there is a God who does, who is available to anyone in any religion, or none at all, if they will believe and seek Him.

telaquapacky wrote: People could never create a perfect religion for themselves, because people are imperfect. If there were a perfect religion, who would accept it or even recognize it when they saw it? People create imperfect religions to please their imperfect tastes in religion. If a perfect religion came into the world, there would be big trouble. The imperfect religious leaders would consider the Leader of the perfect religion to be a threat, and kill Him. The few remaining followers of the perfect religion would find the perfect religion very difficult to hold onto in an imperfect world, because they would have to maintain kind and loving thoughts and actions, like their Leader, while most people would treat them with anger or indifference. The leaders of the imperfect religions, unable to force them to conform or convert them, would persecute the followers of the perfect religion, just as they did their Leader. The difficulty of following a perfect religion in an imperfect world, and the persecution in various places would have a sifting effect on the followers of the perfect religion. They would either wash out and give up, or they would become stronger.



No religion can make imperfect people perfect. A perfect religion would connect imperfect people to the God who can make them perfect. Since we are all imperfect by nature, we wouldn’t want to have anything to do with that. So our will, our desires would have to change. But a perfect God would never make imperfect people perfect, or change them against their will. To follow the perfect religion, one would have to deeply desire to be perfect, and if they did not naturally desire to be perfect, they would have to deeply desire their desires to be changed- They would have to give the perfect God the permission to perfect them. They would have to make a full surrender to the perfect God and trust Him completely, like a sedated patient allows a surgeon to cut them open. The perfect religion would be full of imperfect people wishing to be made perfect. Meanwhile their imperfections would bring a bad reputation to the perfect religion- which would make the perfect religion even harder to find.



The process of becoming perfect could not be accomplished all at once, because the imperfect person would only be able to be made perfect as they surrendered different parts of their life. A person being perfected could never see themselves as perfect, because they would become proud, and all their progress toward perfection would be lost. But the more perfect a person would become, the more humble and accepting and loving of others they would become, in spite of the difficulties and imcompatibilities. In every relationship, someone has to be the one who puts up with the meanness and inconsideration of the other. The follower of the perfect religion would be the patient and longsuffering one taking all the meanness of the world and returning only kindness, the one making all the sacrifices to keep the relationship going. There would be a thin line between that and becoming a doormat. It would require supernatural, spiritual power to be infused into the follower to give them the strength to endure and the wisdom to know how not to.



There is no religion on earth that does this (although there are some that make it easier), but there is a God who does, who is available to anyone in any religion, or none at all, if they will believe and seek Him.
Who, and what, defines perfect?

I'm goin to start a Church of God. Yes folks. And I'll be it. Look at the United States and Britain, how many different churches are all claiming to be the true road to God. And I don't see any poor preachers or ministers and cardinal's going about in sack cloth. This God business pays very very handsome indeed. The Church of God according to Buzzard. No, I don't think that will do, but I'm thinking on it;)

Telaquapacky :-6

I'm so glad you are back. I missed you for a while. You and your eloquent posts.

The attempt to be perfect is one of the great flaws of humanity. You mention pride and there is a wonderful Tibetan Buddhist book on how religion is used to feed pride. I believe that the perfect religion would not teach the attempt to be perfect. I think instead that it would praise the imperfection of humanity and our valiant struggle to overcome it but teach to see the beauty in the way of our errors. To seek perfection can only feed the ego, you are right.

Lon,

as a continuation of my response to Telaquapacky...In Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance (which is actually about neither) there is a great deal written about Quality and the author's search to define it. It drives him insane. It is something which is sensed and felt but cannot be explained. So, also, is perfection. It is the feeling and the result of the existence of perfection that provides proof of its existence. The sense of perfection is not something that can be sought. It is something that must be felt when all is quiet and there is no struggle for anything but to Be.

koan wrote: Telaquapacky :-6

I'm so glad you are back. I missed you for a while. You and your eloquent posts. You are only too kind. My posts are sometimes more like a giant pumpkin that gets soft and moldy and sort of collapses in the rain.

I read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. Great analogy- I am truly quite insane!

One of my greatest religious inspirations was seeing a flick called "Meetings With Remarkable Men." It was about Gurdjieff's journey of finding for himself the perfect religion. What was interesting was that each of his traveling companions and the men he encountered had found what was perfect for them. I see perfection not as a destination but as a journey.koan wrote: The attempt to be perfect is one of the great flaws of humanityI would substitute the word "flaws" with a flasher that alternates with the words, "adventures" and "misadventures."

capt_buzzard wrote: I'm goin to start a Church of God. Yes folks. And I'll be it. There you go! I met David Koresh. Try to do a better job of it than he did. He may have had the perfect religion- though it was not so perfect for the ones that signed their wives and all their money over to him.Lon wrote: Who, and what defines perfect?Certainly not me!