Who is publicly promoting OSR?

[atypican]

I have created this discussion forum to discuss how to best promote
the application of open source methodologies to religious belief
systems.


My expression in progress is called Free Press Bible

I am awaiting being joined by others that consider themselves part of
the open source movement.

[The Kernel]

Open Source Religion - interesting concept but it won't work. Why
because Religion doesn't work. The concept of OSR is flawed. Ya
can't just stick the words "Open Source" in front of religion and
think this somehow changes the Concept of Religion.

Religions have followers and the structure of religions around the
world and over time has included the concepts of holy men, shaman,
priests who interpret the religion to the followers. Open Source
Religion will still require that institutionalization of those who
will interpret the religion to those who wish to follow a particular
route. These people are the new age priests that already populate the
internet.

I personally believe that mans original nature is one of peace and in
which case religion is not needed. Over time, we became separated
from this nature and in a vain attempt to collectively and
individually reconnect with that for which we all search - peace - we
invented religion. So for thousands of years we have prayed,
meditated, chanted and tried to dance our way back to Eden but we
continue to become increasingly agitated and restless.

The notion of creating an Open Source site that will serve people by
making religion more accessible is not likely. To think that a single
site could in any way become the authoritative site for OSR is a
fantasy. . . The freakin' internet itself is an open source for
religious alternatives. Yes it is vast and confusing - but to think
that the Founder of a single site could synthesize all this into a
Religious Supermarket is not likely.

One must understand that Religion, for one reason or another, has
centred on God and getting to God through the teachings of the Church
as taught by the clergy. One can argue that this approach has helped
get us to where we are today (on the verge of global melt-down) but is
incapable to ushering in the dawning of a new age. The notion of
religion is flawed - open source or otherwise.

The internet can be used to usher in a new era of of spiritual
enlightenment and growth but not via the emerging concept of OSR.

[atypican]

Religion belongs to the individual. Not the group.

Of course there will be various levels of realization. Considering
this I have removed certain religious sounding words from my own
publication. If I so much as type "sacred" my "secular" allies
scatter. They don't even want to hear that it just means highly
valued, it sounds RELIGIOUS!!!

Religion is IMO misused when used to describe a sect. Religion quite
simply is an individuals belief/value system.
Alternatively I like to think of religion as our ideological/
traditional inheritance as a whole. The valuable and the detrimental.

Religion doesn't work? I can sympathize with that statement, but what
would you suggest be done about it? Refuse to engage it? Refuse to
recognize our role as links connecting the past with the future?

If one is to condemn "religion" than one is to condemn a sect (with
religion understood as you've redefined it (does that prefix mean
again or back there?) ) Condemning a sect is dangerous behavior,
better to critique a specific problem within a sect then to condemn it
outright, Which is known as religious intolerance.

Even better than being a sharp critic of some sect you believe you
know, be a critic of your own belief/value system. Good Christians
should find that angle appropriate.

What is the resistance to just thinking of religions as belief
systems? And why is it so strong?

If you quit thinking of religion in terms of sects, and instead
understood religions to be simply belief/value systems, you just might
notice that everyone, (Regardless of described sect) is at least as
susceptible to really the same sort of profound error as those of any
sect (religious or secular) we might describe.

What about thinking of religion as an evolving phenomenon. Open source
could make religion into something were not so ashamed of :)

[The Kernel]

Had a peek at the Free Press Bible Project. Interesting.
This may sound weird but why did you initiate it?

> Religion belongs to the individual. Not the group.

Agreed, but it doesn't. People typically seek confirmation of their
beliefs by joining communities of similar belief. Alternatively,
communities of people, over time, develop norms or belief structures
that functionally bind people to the group. For "religion" to serve
mankind into the future, it must be uncoupled from being a group or
community function and redefined in terms of an individual function.
We are at a point in time when people are awakening to this prospect.
How to actually facilitate the process will require precision.

>
> Of course there will be various levels of realization. Considering
> this I have removed certain religious sounding words from my own
> publication. If I so much as type "sacred" my "secular" allies
> scatter. They don't even want to hear that it just means highly
> valued, it sounds RELIGIOUS!!!

Even the term "Religion" is extremely charged. Psychologically, I do
not know that it is possible for an individual change their view of
religion from being Group-centered to one where the centre (starting
point) becomes being the Self - not the church, not the priest, not
even God.

>
> Religion is IMO misused when used to describe a sect. Religion quite
> simply is an individuals belief/value system.

Yes, ones religion is very much akin to ones belief system. When
joined together, people with similar belief systems join together to
become known as a sect.

>
> Alternatively I like to think of religion as our ideological/
> traditional inheritance as a whole. The valuable and the detrimental.

Religious belief systems and forms of expression originated, I
believe, as a function of the tribe. Via natural processes such a
population grown and war, tribes became dominated or assimilated into
larger more powerful tribes - city-states, nations, etc; until we are
currently experiencing an enormous clash of cultures that have emerged
in different locations and were born at different points in time.
There are many points of conflict including political (ideological)
and economic. Our focal point is Religion and how to disarm it as a
point of inter-cultural conflict. Simple, show people that each
individual has the capacity for spiritual development through their
own internal resources through a simple framework of understanding and
a modicum of guidance (via freely available internet resources).

>
> Religion doesn't work? I can sympathize with that statement, but what
> would you suggest be done about it? Refuse to engage it? Refuse to
> recognize our role as links connecting the past with the future?

So many now are refusing to engage in any form of religious belief.
This in itself may be feeding a materialistic/consumer oriented view
of life on the planet. The reduction of religion in day-to-day life
is not breeding humility. We are becoming me-centred consumers
searching for immediate gratification. This is a whole other
discussion.

>
> If one is to condemn "religion" than one is to condemn a sect (with
> religion understood as you've redefined it (does that prefix mean
> again or back there?) ) Condemning a sect is dangerous behavior,
> better to critique a specific problem within a sect then to condemn it
> outright, Which is known as religious intolerance.

It is not a matter of condemning religion, it is about How To evolve
people beyond the concept Institutional Religion to one of Personal
Religion. This will be the trick. Got a plan?

>
> Even better than being a sharp critic of some sect you believe you
> know, be a critic of your own belief/value system. Good Christians
> should find that angle appropriate.

When one is member of a sect, Christian or otherwise, they are taught
to believe that if they question their beliefs (actually the beliefs
of the sect) they will run amok or even come face-to-face with satan.
I think your statement is essentially valid and especially so when
applies to people under age 25.

>
> What is the resistance to just thinking of religions as belief
> systems? And why is it so strong?

The resistance is caused because humans are herd animals. We follow
our leaders - that is most people do. There are those who (like you
or I) are wired differently. To attract those who are following/
finding their own path will create momentum. . . perhaps enough to
cause some of the others to lift their heads long enough to see the
sunshine.

>
> If you quit thinking of religion in terms of sects, and instead
> understood religions to be simply belief/value systems, you just might
> notice that everyone, (Regardless of described sect) is at least as
> susceptible to really the same sort of profound error as those of any
> sect (religious or secular) we might describe.

Agreed. Have you articulated this list of profound errors? This
would be good to discuss with others.

>
> What about thinking of religion as an evolving phenomenon. Open source
> could make religion into something were not so ashamed of :)

Absolutely correct. People are currently being taught that their
religion is the divine word of God and that God is perfect and
therefore it is not necessary for their religion to change or evolve -
because like God Herself, their religion also is perfect. Someone
must challenge the validity of this logic be explaining that it is no
longer viable, healthy or compatible in our modern reality. The
belief that Religions that have fundamental disagreements with each
other can each be perfect must be challenged. One must accept the
notion that only one o the 3 monotheistic religions can be the only
true expression of God - else none are. This is a heavy message to
push.

Atypican, most OSR discussions I have seen seen neglect the fact that
Religions don't only relate to knowledge/beliefs, they also involve
technique. There are many - prayer & meditation would be the first 2
that come to mind. Can one learn to apply technique via an online
experience or do you recommend that people show up, for example, at an
established religious institution to receive instruction.

Also, are there others who have shown interest in collaborating at
this early stage of transition? I see all kinds of people and sites
springing up. Are we witnessing the rise of Interfaith Tower of
Babel?

Gotta hit the gym.

[atypican]

> This may sound weird but why did you initiate it?

There were and are various intertwined reasons. I would love to
expound upon them better than I may be able to right now as my mind is
on other personally important issues right now (so here what you get
without prodding and provoking me further).

I began the project as my own personal collection before I ever
intended to release it as a publication. I never found the idea of
joining a religious sect appealing. I have family members that I feel
I have lost (in a sense) to indoctrination. As my collection began to
develop (as I matured) I noticed that I was inadvertently practicing
self-criticism. I got to a point with my belief/value system where I
was so sure of my reasoning and intentions that I wanted to expose
myself to the best challenges that I could find. No one in my social
environment was even interested, so I went to various religiously
oriented internet discussion groups to see what challenges might be
offered.

The dialogs I had only firmed my resolve.

> > Religion belongs to the individual. Not the group.
>
> Agreed, but it doesn't.

:)

> People typically seek confirmation of their
> beliefs by joining communities of similar belief.

And who could blame them? I would however encourage people to also
look for the benefits of engaging those with significant differences.

> For "religion" to serve
> mankind into the future, it must be uncoupled from being a group or
> community function and redefined in terms of an individual function.

agreed.

> We are at a point in time when people are awakening to this prospect.
> How to actually facilitate the process will require precision.

I am hip.

"An invading army can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has
come" ~ I forget who

> Even the term "Religion" is extremely charged.  Psychologically, I do
> not know that it is possible for an individual change their view of
> religion from being Group-centered to one where the centre (starting
> point) becomes being the Self - not the church, not the priest, not
> even God.

It is possible. I did it.

> > Religion is IMO misused when used to describe a sect. Religion quite
> > simply is an individuals belief/value system.
>
> Yes, ones religion is very much akin to ones belief system.  When
> joined together, people with similar belief systems join together to
> become known as a sect.

!! I am amazed to be understood

> > Alternatively I like to think of religion as our ideological/
> > traditional inheritance as a whole. The valuable and the detrimental.
>
> Religious belief systems and forms of expression originated, I
> believe, as a function of the tribe.  Via natural processes such a
> population grown and war, tribes became dominated or assimilated into
> larger more powerful tribes - city-states, nations, etc; until we are
> currently experiencing an enormous clash of cultures that have emerged
> in different locations and were born at different points in time.
> There are many points of conflict including political (ideological)
> and economic.  Our focal point is Religion and how to disarm it as a
> point of inter-cultural conflict.

Ding Ding Ding... now were talking about something :)

> Simple, show people that each
> individual has the capacity for spiritual development through their
> own internal resources through a simple framework of understanding and
> a modicum of guidance (via freely available internet resources).

I think it's important to realize that for each individual there is a
normal and healthy transition from relying on other peoples opinions
to more fully thinking for themselves.

“No doubt another may also think for me; but it is not therefore
desirable that they should do so to the exclusion of my thinking for
myself” ~ Henry David Thoreau*

> > Religion doesn't work? I can sympathize with that statement, but what
> > would you suggest be done about it? Refuse to engage it? Refuse to
> > recognize our role as links connecting the past with the future?
>
> So many now are refusing to engage in any form of religious belief.
> This in itself may be feeding a materialistic/consumer oriented view
> of life on the planet.  The reduction of religion in day-to-day life
> is not breeding humility.  We are becoming me-centred consumers
> searching for immediate gratification.  This is a whole other
> discussion.

One that perhaps later we'll dig into.

> > If one is to condemn "religion" than one is to condemn a sect (with
> > religion understood as you've redefined it (does that prefix mean
> > again or back there?) ) Condemning a sect is dangerous behavior,
> > better to critique a specific problem within a sect then to condemn it
> > outright, Which is known as religious intolerance.
>
> It is not a matter of condemning religion, it is about How To evolve
> people beyond the concept Institutional Religion to one of Personal
> Religion.  This will be the trick.  Got a plan?

Yep.

> > Even better than being a sharp critic of some sect you believe you
> > know, be a critic of your own belief/value system. Good Christians
> > should find that angle appropriate.
>
> When one is member of a sect, Christian or otherwise, they are taught
> to believe that if they question their beliefs (actually the beliefs
> of the sect) they will run amok or even come face-to-face with satan.
> I think your statement is essentially valid and especially so when
> applies to people under age 25.

I would like to begin a private (later to be made public) dialog with
you about demographic or audience issues.

> > What is the resistance to just thinking of religions as belief
> > systems? And why is it so strong?
>
> The resistance is caused because humans are herd animals.  We follow
> our leaders - that is most people do.  There are those who (like you
> or I) are wired differently.  To attract those who are following/
> finding their own path will create momentum. . . perhaps enough to
> cause some of the others to lift their heads long enough to see the
> sunshine.

I look forward to it.

> > If you quit thinking of religion in terms of sects, and instead
> > understood religions to be simply belief/value systems, you just might
> > notice that everyone, (Regardless of described sect) is at least as
> > susceptible to really the same sort of profound error as those of any
> > sect (religious or secular) we might describe.
>
> Agreed.  Have you articulated this list of profound errors?  This
> would be good to discuss with others.

how many different ways do you think the problem of excessive trust
manifests itself?

> > What about thinking of religion as an evolving phenomenon. Open source
> > could make religion into something were not so ashamed of :)

> Absolutely correct.  People are currently being taught that their
> religion is the divine word of God and that God is perfect and
> therefore it is not necessary for their religion to change or evolve -
> because like God Herself, their religion also is perfect.  Someone
> must challenge the validity of this logic be explaining that it is no
> longer viable, healthy or compatible in our modern reality.  The
> belief that Religions that have fundamental disagreements with each
> other can each be perfect must be challenged.  One must accept the
> notion that only one o the 3 monotheistic religions can be the only
> true expression of God - else none are.  This is a heavy message to
> push.

It's a message that I think needs to be indirectly addressed. I think
there are plenty of people who would find the concept of compiling
their own collection attractive.

> Can one learn to apply technique via an online
> experience or do you recommend that people show up, for example, at an
> established religious institution to receive instruction.

Yes to the former no to the latter.

> Also, are there others who have shown interest in collaborating at
> this early stage of transition?

Yes. There are also people who are helping the project along and don't
even know it.

> I see all kinds of people and sites
> springing up.  Are we witnessing the rise of Interfaith Tower of
> Babel?

Oh I don't know. I am glad to meet you.


thanks,
atypican

[JOHN SALVIS]

When you have more time available, perhaps we can reconvene.
I would look forward to it.
 - john

---

From: atypican <david...@gmail.com>
To: Open Source Religion <open-sourc...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sat, August 28, 2010 12:29:52 PM
Subject: Re: Who is publicly promoting OSR?

[atypican]

Alright. Thanks for your patience.

> Are we witnessing the rise of Interfaith Tower of Babel?

In my experience I have found that peculiar semantic idiosyncrasies
often render interfaith dialog nearly fruitless. So I might understand
what you are getting at.

> How to actually facilitate the process will require precision.

Well I don't think a one size fits all solution is realistic. I do
however have some understanding of the precision required to not make
enemies. The FPB project is a continuation of an ancient and rich
textual tradition. Even though I am in agreement with the statement:
“Most who admire virtue, follow not it's lore”, FPB is a work of
symbolic communication, and record keeping. It will appeal mainly to
those who already value these traditions.

I will tell you that dialog with people who really understand what I
am trying to do is hard to come by. Sidian appears hip to alot of it,
( I like the term "belief modules" etc..) but I think he's too focused
on group maintenance issues.

I hope that's enough to provoke you to share your perspective more.

On Aug 29, 7:52 pm, JOHN SALVIS <jsal...@rogers.com> wrote:
> When you have more time available, perhaps we can reconvene.
> I would look forward to it.
>  - john
>
> ________________________________

> From: atypican <davidmja...@gmail.com>