Sam K

By this, I mean any experience where one loses one's sense of self and individuality. That could be anything from a drug trip to a near-death experience to something experienced through meditation or trance.

The point is, for so many people, these experiences seem like a great goal to seek out. Many even hope that the afterlife (if such an existence could even be called "life") will just be an eternity of such "bliss." I am not one of those people. I don't even like the idea of temporarily "transcending" myself in such a way, because I treasure myself! I treasure my selfhood and having individuality, because it lets me experience, know, and care for other people and the world as distinct entities. If it's all just a sea of "we," life loses all color, all variety, and all purpose. To me, it's not worth it, no matter how "blissful" it may be.

I do firmly believe in a deeper existence beyond the physical. I'm even willing to entertain the idea that, on some fundamental level, everything really is united or derived from the same, infinite Oneness. But having been given the gift of individual existence and personal selfhood, I have no desire to return to such a unified state, at least not literally. Am I alone in this thinking?

Do you seek to attain some sort of mystical experience? Do you study and gain knowledge? Do you emphasize living a moral life? Perhaps you believe that we'll only be able to know God once we've died, gained enlightenment, or something to that effect.

Personally, I tend to experience God through other people, in experiences of love and kindness, in family and friendship. I prefer the idea of seeing God in the infinite variety and adventure of His Creation, rather than trying to mystically deconstruct my world into some static, blissful uniformity. To me, life and other people aren't things to be escaped or surmounted, but embraced and enjoyed. What are your thoughts?

And by "false prophets," I am referring to so-called psychics and such who make predictions about great, earth-shattering events that are to happen on a specific date (e.g. a fleet of alien spacecraft will land on Earth on Christmas Day of 2012).

What I mean is, why would a person in such a position, who has gained the confidence of a large number of followers, then make public predictions that they know won't come true? The only effect it ever seems to have is to publicly discredit them and confirm that they are not, in fact, what they claim to be.

...besides simply concluding that it is true or untrue? In other words, when you ask someone why they accept/reject Religion A, do you think answers like "I'm just not comfortable with the idea of there being no afterlife," or "I don't like the idea of a deity judging me," are actually valid?

I'll respect anyone's beliefs regardless of their reasoning, but it seems to me that, at its core, the only real reason to accept or reject any belief is how true or untrue you think it is. Am I mistaken?

I apologize if I didn't get my thoughts across clearly enough.

As I understand it, most chakra systems posit that each chakra plays a vital role in physical, mental, and spiritual wellbeing. If this is so, why, then, does the goal of most belief systems and/or philosophies centered around chakras put so much emphasis on the Crown chakra? It seems illogical to me that one would seek to strengthen one chakra more than the others (even if it is the most "spiritual" one") when health is ostensibly gained from the chakras being in balance with each other. Then again, my knowledge of chakras is rudimentary, so maybe I'm just misunderstanding.

If not, why? Not a particularly pressing question, I know, but sexology is one of my academic interests, and it's always annoyed me that male ejaculate is referred to as "semen," whereas female ejaculate has no equivalent term.

This question is mainly for non-vegetarians, but others should feel free to share their thoughts anyway.

Most people who eat meat would consider eating more intelligent animals to be unethical. This would obviously include dolphins and primates, but most meat-eaters I've run into (myself included) would also consider eating dogs to be unethical for similar reasons.

Where, then, does that leave pigs? Pigs are actually far more intelligent than dogs, yet relatively few individuals outside of certain religious groups have any problem with eating them.

If so, what are your views on it? Just curious.

I just read up on this guy a bit. Sounds like a pretty disturbed man, if you ask me.

And by "friends," I mean real friends, not friendly acquaintances.

Have your differing beliefs ever become an obstacle in the relationship?

This question also applies to any of the many branch organizations of theosophy, such as the Summit Lighthouse, the I AM movement, etc. I ask because, in studying theosophy through online sources, I've found many sources of pro-theosophical discourse, but relatively few sources which have argued against the beliefs of the movement.

Look up "theosophy" on wikipedia if you don't know what I'm talking about. Rather interesting read, if you're into this sort of thing.

By "safely," I mean without clogging the toilet or anything like that.

I'm an avid martial artist and I've always enjoyed video games of all kinds. I love the excitement and competition of a fight, even if it's only a sparring match, and one of my goals is to become a skilled fighter so that I can protect those I love if the need arises. At the same time, though, I'm a Christian who takes Christ's teachings seriously, and though I enjoy fighting, I would never want to seriously hurt someone unless it were truly necessary. Recently, this contradiction has really been bugging me simply because I can't make sense of it. How can a person enjoy fantasy or controlled violence as much as I do, while at the same time being firmly against injuring others unnecessarily? Is it morally sound to enjoy the activities that I do?