What is the higher principle in religion - I guess there are three options

Service to humanity is greater than service to god
Service to god is greater than service to humanity
Service to god and service to humanity are the same phenomena

Those who serve God serve the greater interests of their fellow humna beings.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

What is the higher principle in religion - I guess there are three options

Service to humanity is greater than service to god
Service to god is greater than service to humanity
Service to god and service to humanity are the same phenomenait should be written "what should be the higher principles of religion."
then there would be only one answer, Service to humanity by far outways service to a god.
Those who serve God serve the greater interests of their fellow human beings.

All Praise The Ancient Of Daysdo they really, you could of fooled me.

I think the original intent is that service to God and service to humanity should be the same, but history tells us that the meaning of "service to God" is easily perverted.

Service to God must come first. To serve humanity properly one must first have the selfless love that comes only from God. As a servant of God, one serves humanity spontaneously out of love for fellow humans, iin which you might find whom Christ called "the least of these," like mother Teresa found, in a person who can be Christ to you.

One also obeys the laws of God first, then the laws of men who are in authority. man's law must not conflict with God's divine law, but must be in accord with it. it is better to die rather than to disobey divine law in preference to human law.

Mother Teresa was a scam artist, who raised money for the Vatican, but gave little back to the people she was supposed to be helping.

What is the higher principle in religion - I guess there are three options

Service to humanity is greater than service to god
Service to god is greater than service to humanity
Service to god and service to humanity are the same phenomena

Service to humanity is higher than service to God, since nobody can tell if there is a God, and even less what kind of service 'he' wants from us.
Speaking of which, what do you consider service to humanity?

If we are all Gods children, and so Gods family, then it is by service to this family of God, that we may serve God directly.
However, such is not service to God. Service to God would be a personal matter between yourself and God, and the type and range of things which people are called apon to do is greatly varied and endless. From the crazed artist, to the autistic piano player, to the store manager, and short order cook.

we all have our lot in life... but it may NOT be what we are called to do.

If you know in your heart that you were meant to do something other than what you are doing.. then go and do it.

but be careful, for the dark side will motivate you into self service.... such as vanity and ego trips...

you were all meant to serve God, and you know what you SHOULD be doing.

NOW GO AND DO IT.

-MT

Light,

What is the higher principle in religion - I guess there are three options

Service to humanity is greater than service to god
Service to god is greater than service to humanity
Service to god and service to humanity are the same phenomenaThere are no high principles in religion. Religion has no redeeming qualities at any level.

Adherents follow a religion through pure selfishness. There can be no altruistic religionists. The ultimate goal of every religionist is to survive death and live a dream-like perfect life in paradise forever. The absolute utopian con-trick ever devised by man and there are billions of gullible victims who have fallen for it.

Whether they additionally believe they are serving their imaginary deity or serving mankind is irrelevant; they will do whatever their cult has devised as a set of rules that they imagine will allow them to cheat death.

The secular humanist OTOH will do the right thing because it is the right thing and not for the imaginary delusional reward of supernatural immortality.

it could be argued by helping fellow man you are helping God's creation, thus giving his creation respect, and serving God's will.

What is gods will?

Light,

There are no high principles in religion. Religion has no redeeming qualities at any level. .

Yep, kindness, peacefulness, truthfulness, magnanimity, cleanliness etc etc have absolutely no redeeming qualities

Adherents follow a religion through pure selfishness. There can be no altruistic religionists. .
Erm ... then why do a majority of all charitable institutions have a theological foundation???

The ultimate goal of every religionist is to survive death and live a dream-like perfect life in paradise forever. .

How is that dream different from the atheist?
Check out
http://www.sastradana.com/html/video/lifeisshortWM.htm

The absolute utopian con-trick ever devised by man and there are billions of gullible victims who have fallen for it.

In the mean time get a mortgage, drink coca cola and be happy :D

Actually it is interesting that you of all people have hit on the point why I started this thread, namely if there is an aspect of religion which surpasses mundane altruism, since altruism is sometimes defined as a mundane expansion of selfishness, similar to what you elaborate on.

What is the higher principle in religion - I guess there are three options

Service to humanity is greater than service to god
Service to god is greater than service to humanity
Service to god and service to humanity are the same phenomena

If 'serve' has definition of 'do things for", then this question cannot be answered by muslims. Muslims don't serve God. Muslims supposed to get blessed by God (pray, worship, ask for help, and thank); and all those only could be achieved by serving their life for the prosperity of It's creation.
Human is the caliph (leader) of the world. The world was here for all human prosperity, than human should act upon that premise.

Yep, kindness, peacefulness, truthfulness, magnanimity, cleanliness etc etc have absolutely no redeeming qualities

Good point. Non-religious people do not know what these are.

Erm ... then why do a majority of all charitable institutions have a theological foundation???

About the same reason the majority of all wars have a theological foundation. Besides, don't secular countries give more to charity? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I read it somewhere.

Service to humanity is higher than service to God, since nobody can tell if there is a God, and even less what kind of service 'he' wants from us.
Speaking of which, what do you consider service to humanity?

Nobody can tell? Seems to be similar phenomena going on in all places of worship - if they can't tell why are they performing similar practices?

What kind of service he wants?
Well this is a slightly more difficult question to answer since god's will is revealed according to the surrender and purity of the practioner, thus there appears to be a variety of responses to doing what god wants - and of course one can do whatever one concocts and write that off as divine inspiration, so general principle seems to be not to do whatever one wants but to cultivate a mood of sensitivity to what god desires, which is why most religious practioners perceive themselves as a servant of god, as opposed to being god.

Service to humanity would be the general channels of altruism - charity, etc

Good point. Non-religious people do not know what these are.



About the same reason the majority of all wars have a theological foundation. Besides, don't secular countries give more to charity? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I read it somewhere.

Secular countries generally operate out of a welfare system and they also tend to be comparatively more opulent, which says more about policies of economic development than charity

The secular humanist OTOH will do the right thing because it is the right thing and not for the imaginary delusional reward of supernatural immortality.
Well then, what then is the real-world non-delusional reward for the secular humanist? Also, what is the guiding principal that tells the secular humanist what the 'right thing' is?

Well then, what then is the real-world non-delusional reward for the secular humanist? Also, what is the guiding principal that tells the secular humanist what the 'right thing' is?

Himself.
An Atheist loves himself and his fellow man instead of a god. An Atheist accepts that heaven is something for which we should work now – here on earth – for all men together to enjoy.
An Atheist accepts that he can get no help through prayer, but that he must find in himself the inner conviction and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it and to enjoy it.
An Atheist accepts that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help to a life of fulfillment." mary murray-o'hare


The enlightenment of athiesm is that...

* There is no heavenly father.
Humankind must protect the orphans and foundlings, or they will not be protected.

* There is no god to answer prayer.
Man must hear and help man.

* There is no hell.
We have no vindictive god or devil to fear or imitate.

* There is no atonement or salvation by faith.
We must face the consequences of our acts.

* There is no beneficent or malevolent intent in nature.
Life is a struggle against preventable and unpreventable evils. The cooperation of humankind is the only hope of the world.

* There is no chance after death to "do our bit."
We must do it now or never.

* There is no divine guardian of truth, goodness, beauty, and liberty.
These are attributes of humankind. We must defend them or they will perish from the earth.

http://www.atheists.org/visitors.center/because.html

The superior man serves no one but himself. In serving himself, his natural qualities of virtue provide service to others, via the benefit which arises out of his actions. Thus neither service to humanity nor God is warranted.

Himself.
An Atheist loves himself and his fellow man instead of a god. An Atheist accepts that heaven is something for which we should work now – here on earth – for all men together to enjoy.
An Atheist accepts that he can get no help through prayer, but that he must find in himself the inner conviction and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it and to enjoy it.
An Atheist accepts that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help to a life of fulfillment." mary murray-o'hare


The enlightenment of atheism is that...

* There is no heavenly father.
Humankind must protect the orphans and foundlings, or they will not be protected.

* There is no god to answer prayer.
Man must hear and help man.

* There is no hell.
We have no vindictive god or devil to fear or imitate.

* There is no atonement or salvation by faith.
We must face the consequences of our acts.

* There is no beneficent or malevolent intent in nature.
Life is a struggle against preventable and unpreventable evils. The cooperation of humankind is the only hope of the world.

* There is no chance after death to "do our bit."
We must do it now or never.

* There is no divine guardian of truth, goodness, beauty, and liberty.
These are attributes of humankind. We must defend them or they will perish from the earth.

Not to offend you (as I'm sure this will), but that actually sounds like quite a religious attitude. Not superstitious, mind you, but certainly religious. It actually sounds like something of a practical religion built around self-reliance and removal of the spiritual crutch which traditional religion often becomes. It's actually quite beautiful, but in a realistic rather than poetic fashion.

The only thing that Secular Humanism (since that seems to be the major belief system of most Atheists, at least around here) lacks in comparison to older religions is some form of mysticism, i.e. a recognition of that which is beyond the individual's ability to directly comprehend (I suppose that's an acceptable definition of mysticism, for me anyhow). A sense of genuine awe and reverence for the world, although it seems to be found in some Secular Humanists. It's simply not built into the philosophy. Perhaps that is what separates a philosophy from a religion? Mysticism.

I know that many of the ardent Secular Humanists around here will decry my description of their belief system as a religion, but hold your criticism for just a moment. It is my sincere belief that religion is merely the formalized practice of a particular philosophy, with a sense of the mystical, a sense of wonder at things unknown. You may say that the Secular Humanist delights in discovering and unveiling the unknown, but of course so does the traditional Religionist. The difference is esotericism. Secular Humanists seem to want everyone to know of their discoveries, and traditional Religionists keep their insights to themselves, passing them on to a select few.

The thing that Secular Humanistic Atheists use to differentiate themselves from traditional Religionists is mythology. As I have said before (and it has been largely ignored) myths are not there to explain the natural world, I think, but rather to provide a context for living to the common man. But there seems to also be a deeper purpose, that in the absence of a standard system of acquiring knowledge (science, perhaps?) there needs to be some kind of outlet for the curious, for those who question their beliefs and wish to know.

As someone here once said (I think it was baumgarten), that is what splits the religious. Those who accept the myth at face value, who go no further with it and who live their life according to it, and those who seek to learn more, to question their faith and know the secrets of the world they live in. It seems to me that mythology serves this double purpose (as an almost unconscious cultural mechanism), both to provide a context for those who will accept and move on with their lives, and those who will delve endlessly into whatever intellectual outlet they can find. Myths are obviously incredibly deep. They can be interpreted in a myriad of fashions, from morality tales, to examples of the behavior of people (often exaggerated, of course, for dramatic effect), or simply for poetry. I've said this before, and I'll say it again, mythology is meant to be used by the individual for their own internal growth, in whatever way is necessary for that particular mind.

It is a mental tool. It shapes your thinking, your views on the world, not directly (for the intellectual) but by implication. You imply certain things about your life, about the people and events which make it up, and about the common experiences which you share with others, while recognizing your uniquity. There is no inherent truth or falsehood to these notions. I'm a firmly pragmatic thinker (at least I try to be), and so I don't care about any kind of misty notion of "truth". What works, works. Traditional religion has worked for the entire length of man's existence as an animal apart from all the others. Religion is part of what separates us from the rest of the organisms on this planet, and it will continue to do so. You can't escape it. It's everywhere, it's hardwired into everyone's brain. It's an intrinsic part of what it is to be human. It's form may change dramatically, it may be used in different ways, but it will always be here.

Secular Humanists think that they are eliminating religion by "enlightening" the world. Well, that is a very religious aspiration.

What is the higher principle in religion - I guess there are three options

Service to humanity is greater than service to god
Service to god is greater than service to humanity
Service to god and service to humanity are the same phenomena

You’re supposed to find a balance between them. (1 & 2)

All the Prophets and Saints used to isolate themselves in order to contemplate and worship, once they had reached a certain level they were commanded to live amongst their people, listen to them and take on their burdens.

The Prophet Muhammad said that one who lives in isolation, worshipping all day and night can never reach the level of the person who worships moderately but lives amongst the people, helps them with their problems and brings them comfort.

Allahu Akbar.

The superior man serves no one but himself. In serving himself, his natural qualities of virtue provide service to others, via the benefit which arises out of his actions. Thus neither service to humanity nor God is warranted.


Sounds like a good recipe for social chaos - how do you approach conflict resolution with such an outlook?

You’re supposed to find a balance between them. (1 & 2)

All the Prophets and Saints used to isolate themselves in order to contemplate and worship, once they had reached a certain level they were commanded to live amongst their people, listen to them and take on their burdens.

The Prophet Muhammad said that one who lives in isolation, worshipping all day and night can never reach the level of the person who worships moderately but lives amongst the people, helps them with their problems and brings them comfort.

Allahu Akbar.

Then one could argue that there is no point in worshipping god since one's time would be better spent in humanitarian endeavours

Also one could argue that god is not great because one is required to help him re-establish order in a world besieged by problems

Then one could argue that there is no point in worshipping god since one's time would be better spent in humanitarian endeavours there's hope for you yet.

The problem with this thread is debating 'serve'.

The commendment from Jesus was love God and your neighbour (i.e. everyone else) as yourself.

It is the love that is primary. If you truly love someone, you want to serve them. You may serve them of course for many different (and less honourable) motives. In the parable of the Prodigal Son, it was the son who did not go off who was the real villain, because he served his father out of duty and then complained about it. The other son wasted his money and lived recklessly but finally came to his senses and returned home. Despite 'screwing up' quite badly he understood that he had made some bad mistaks but the other one was a self righteous hypocrite who was probably jealous of his brother's adventures. So service alone is not the requirement.

This is the direct message in 1 John 4 (Message Version):

The person who refuses to love doesn't know the first thing about God, because God is love—so you can't know him if you don't love. This is how God showed his love for us: God sent his only Son into the world so we might live through him. This is the kind of love we are talking about—not that we once upon a time loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as a sacrifice to clear away our sins and the damage they've done to our relationship with God.
11-12My dear, dear friends, if God loved us like this, we certainly ought to love each other. No one has seen God, ever. But if we love one another, God dwells deeply within us, and his love becomes complete in us—perfect love!

.......................


20-21If anyone boasts, "I love God," and goes right on hating his brother or sister, thinking nothing of it, he is a liar. If he won't love the person he can see, how can he love the God he can't see? The command we have from Christ is blunt: Loving God includes loving people. You've got to love both.


regards,



Gordon.

there's hope for you yet.


Just pointing out the flaws of that perspective - if you want to counter it by establishing your views you are welcome - other wise we are left to ping pong our benedictions back and forth - the moment one thinks it is inappropriate to discuss philosophy in regard to religion is the moment one is inappropriate.

What is the higher principle in religion - I guess there are three options

Service to humanity is greater than service to god
Service to god is greater than service to humanity
Service to god and service to humanity are the same phenomena


Your question does not make sense. Service to humanity is service to God.

Your question does not make sense. Service to humanity is service to God.

Then one can argue that your statement does not make sense since what would be the difference between a charitable atheist and a charitable theist (in other words your statement seems to suggest that god is a non-entity)

. Service to God would be a personal matter between yourself and God, and the type and range of things which people are called apon to do is greatly varied and endless. From the crazed artist, to the autistic piano player, to the store manager, and short order cook.

Hmmm...From the lunatic who walks in to a church and shoots people and comits suitside, from the midless idiot who shoot abortion doctors, cause they are killing life, from the ones who tie a bomb on their bodies and blow themselves up in public. Now wouldn't you say that these people are also serving god in their own personal way?

click (http://www.disasternews.net/news/news.php?articleid=2583)

click (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,186110,00.html)

click (http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_viol.htm)

Check links are all these idiots also serving their god?


*Hill, a one-time Presbyterian minister, has said God led him to shoot Dr. John Britton, 69, and his driver, James Barrett, 74, as they arrived at a Pensacola abortion clinic in July 1994.*click (http://www.rickross.com/reference/a-abortion/a-abortion22.html)


Godless

Godless

So I guess now you have to examine the nature of sacrifice -


BG 4.32 All these different types of sacrifice are approved by the Vedas, and all of them are born of different types of work. Knowing them as such, you will become liberated.

First you see if the sacrifice is approved by scripture - whether one is applying scripture properly to time place and circumstance can be checked whether it is conducive to liberation or not



BG 4.33: O chastiser of the enemy, the sacrifice performed in knowledge is better than the mere sacrifice of material possessions. After all, O son of Pṛthā, all sacrifices of work culminate in transcendental knowledge.

Sacrifice should also culminate in developing knowledge of god andone's relationship with him

BG 4.34: Just try to learn the truth by approaching a spiritual master. Inquire from him submissively and render service unto him. The self-realized souls can impart knowledge unto you because they have seen the truth.

Independant whimsy doesn't seem to be advocated

BG 4.35: Having obtained real knowledge from a self-realized soul, you will never fall again into such illusion, for by this knowledge you will see that all living beings are but part of the Supreme, or, in other words, that they are Mine.

And whether one is stabilized on such a platform of liberation can be qualified by one having the vision that all living entities are seperated parts of god (god is independantand distinct from the living entity of course - but all living entities owe their source to to god) - if a person is killing people in the name of religion it, it tends to indicate exactly that - they are actually killing people for some other reason, but are doing it in the name of religion

Gordon

The problem with this thread is debating 'serve'.

The commendment from Jesus was love God and your neighbour (i.e. everyone else) as yourself.

It is the love that is primary. If you truly love someone, you want to serve them.
agreed

You may serve them of course for many different (and less honourable) motives. In the parable of the Prodigal Son, it was the son who did not go off who was the real villain, because he served his father out of duty and then complained about it. The other son wasted his money and lived recklessly but finally came to his senses and returned home. Despite 'screwing up' quite badly he understood that he had made some bad mistaks but the other one was a self righteous hypocrite who was probably jealous of his brother's adventures. So service alone is not the requirement.

But the questionis whether one should serve (and hence love) humanity primarily or god primarily

This is the direct message in 1 John 4 (Message Version):

The person who refuses to love doesn't know the first thing about God, because God is love—so you can't know him if you don't love. This is how God showed his love for us: God sent his only Son into the world so we might live through him. This is the kind of love we are talking about—not that we once upon a time loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as a sacrifice to clear away our sins and the damage they've done to our relationship with God.


11-12My dear, dear friends, if God loved us like this, we certainly ought to love each other. No one has seen God, ever. But if we love one another, God dwells deeply within us, and his love becomes complete in us—perfect love!

.......................

There is a quote from the gita

BG 6.30: For one who sees Me everywhere and sees everything in Me, I am never lost, nor is he ever lost to Me.

The idea is that the premise for proper love is love for god first and foremost
its the platform of proper knowledge

BG 4.35: Having obtained real knowledge from a self-realized soul, you will never fall again into such illusion, for by this knowledge you will see that all living beings are but part of the Supreme, or, in other words, that they are Mine.


20-21If anyone boasts, "I love God," and goes right on hating his brother or sister, thinking nothing of it, he is a liar. If he won't love the person he can see, how can he love the God he can't see? The command we have from Christ is blunt: Loving God includes loving people. You've got to love both.


regards,



Gordon.

Actually I formed this thread as an oblique reference to whether in circumstances of dire material problems one should put aside whatever spiritual agenda one may have and focus on solving the material problems or whether the source of solving material problems (ie problems with humanity) is best addressed by looking atthe spiritualproblems (the problems humaity has with god)

What do you think?

What is the higher principle in religion - I guess there are three options

Service to humanity is greater than service to god
Service to god is greater than service to humanity
Service to god and service to humanity are the same phenomena

IN RELIGION service to god is greater , than anything else ......

OUTSIDE RELIGION service to humanity is greater , than anything else .....

Then again, humans are for real and god only exists in the fantasy of religious people - as Lord Insane just said about the souls in your other thread !!!!!

Have a nice day LightG .... :cool:

IN RELIGION service to god is greater , than anything else ......

OUTSIDE RELIGION service to humanity is greater , than anything else .....

Then again, humans are for real and god only exists in the fantasy of religious people - as Lord Insane just said about the souls in your other thread !!!!!

Have a nice day LightG .... :cool:

lol - In the absence of premises are you looking for a battle of wills instead of debate of ideas?

How do you expect me to reply?

me - "Is not!!"
you - "Is to!!"
me - "Is not!!"
you - "Is to!!"
me - "Is not!!"
you - "Is to!!"
me - "Is not!!"
you - "Is to!!"
me - "Is not!!"
you - "Is to!!"
...................etc etc

:rolleyes: