Religions Are Hard

[Goodman John]

I've been delving into the medieval Cathar faith, and my views have been of late very colored and otherwise influenced by their beliefs and teachings.

HOWEVER, in trying codify the Cathar religion and the faith behind it, I find myself following beliefs and ideas that either end up contradicting each other or pushing me deeper and deeper into a rabbit hole of theology. The sum effect of it, I have to confess, is that a lot of 'mystery and awe' one might have for the faith seems to lose some of its luster when you actually have to sit down and write it all out.

Judging from my own poor efforts, I can just imagine what it must have been like for the early proponents of this or that faith or religion. The Council of Nicea, I would imagine, took the wind out of a lot of the scholar's sails when they had to sit down and debate all the points brought before them and hammer out what was and wasn't going to be the 'official story' of Christianity. One wonders how many long days and sleepless nights the sages of old, of any faith, spent in trying to make sense out of what others wrote, much less what they themselves believed and wanted to pass on.

I wonder if any of you, in jumping into the deep end of the pool in your faith- whatever it may be- found yourself in the same position of losing a little of that 'mystery and awe' as you got down to the actual nuts and bolts that hold your beliefs together? In my own efforts to piece together a 'reasonable recreation' of the Cathar faith it's slowly morphing from a labor of love into just another academic exercise, and I don't know how- or if- I can avoid that change of focus. It's one thing to have it all in your head and think you've got a good handle on it, but a far different animal when you actually have to write it all out and see the man behind the curtain.

 

[leov]

I've been delving into the medieval Cathar faith, and my views have been of late very colored and otherwise influenced by their beliefs and teachings.

HOWEVER, in trying codify the Cathar religion and the faith behind it, I find myself following beliefs and ideas that either end up contradicting each other or pushing me deeper and deeper into a rabbit hole of theology. The sum effect of it, I have to confess, is that a lot of 'mystery and awe' one might have for the faith seems to lose some of its luster when you actually have to sit down and write it all out.

Judging from my own poor efforts, I can just imagine what it must have been like for the early proponents of this or that faith or religion. The Council of Nicea, I would imagine, took the wind out of a lot of the scholar's sails when they had to sit down and debate all the points brought before them and hammer out what was and wasn't going to be the 'official story' of Christianity. One wonders how many long days and sleepless nights the sages of old, of any faith, spent in trying to make sense out of what others wrote, much less what they themselves believed and wanted to pass on.

I wonder if any of you, in jumping into the deep end of the pool in your faith- whatever it may be- found yourself in the same position of losing a little of that 'mystery and awe' as you got down to the actual nuts and bolts that hold your beliefs together? In my own efforts to piece together a 'reasonable recreation' of the Cathar faith it's slowly morphing from a labor of love into just another academic exercise, and I don't know how- or if- I can avoid that change of focus. It's one thing to have it all in your head and think you've got a good handle on it, but a far different animal when you actually have to write it all out and see the man behind the curtain.

Thanks.
I am trying to lose religion, just rely on my intuition , synchronicities, e,t,c. I am not afraid to be wrong.

 

[Desert Snake]

If I make a "statement", like the nt is untenable, not including the Apocrypha, then you can trust that I have my reasons.

I always default to 'most relevant to confirm', concerning the texts, so, my opinion is 'more than one thing', considering , [in this instance, the texts.

Of course there is subjectivity to that.

 

[FooYang]

Thanks.
I am trying to lose religion, just rely on my intuition , synchronicities, e,t,c. I am not afraid to be wrong.

Once you've dealt with the necessary (theological/intellectual) complexities, practices and customs, your statement there is very important I think.

 

[Milton Platt]

I've been delving into the medieval Cathar faith, and my views have been of late very colored and otherwise influenced by their beliefs and teachings.

HOWEVER, in trying codify the Cathar religion and the faith behind it, I find myself following beliefs and ideas that either end up contradicting each other or pushing me deeper and deeper into a rabbit hole of theology. The sum effect of it, I have to confess, is that a lot of 'mystery and awe' one might have for the faith seems to lose some of its luster when you actually have to sit down and write it all out.

Judging from my own poor efforts, I can just imagine what it must have been like for the early proponents of this or that faith or religion. The Council of Nicea, I would imagine, took the wind out of a lot of the scholar's sails when they had to sit down and debate all the points brought before them and hammer out what was and wasn't going to be the 'official story' of Christianity. One wonders how many long days and sleepless nights the sages of old, of any faith, spent in trying to make sense out of what others wrote, much less what they themselves believed and wanted to pass on.

I wonder if any of you, in jumping into the deep end of the pool in your faith- whatever it may be- found yourself in the same position of losing a little of that 'mystery and awe' as you got down to the actual nuts and bolts that hold your beliefs together? In my own efforts to piece together a 'reasonable recreation' of the Cathar faith it's slowly morphing from a labor of love into just another academic exercise, and I don't know how- or if- I can avoid that change of focus. It's one thing to have it all in your head and think you've got a good handle on it, but a far different animal when you actually have to write it all out and see the man behind the curtain.

sometimes things are said or written that seem deep and meaningful initially, but end up being either a tautology, or very shallow, or just plain useless when you dig into them deeper. Someone awhile back tagged such statements as a "deepity". they sound deep, but aren't.

 

[Goodman John]

sometimes things are said or written that seem deep and meaningful initially, but end up being either a tautology, or very shallow, or just plain useless when you dig into them deeper. Someone awhile back tagged such statements as a "deepity". they sound deep, but aren't.

I don't think it's so much that, so much as like watching a magician do all sorts of 'how did he do that?' things, and then buying a book on magic tricks and learning how it's done- the effect is still there, and it's still impressive, but instead of seeing it from a 'WOW' perspective, you see it from an 'I see what you did there' perspective.

 

[syo]

losing a little of that 'mystery and awe' as you got down to the actual nuts and bolts that hold your beliefs together?

I wanted paganism to be real. i'm glad it's real. the mystery and awe became beautiful.

i'm giving christianity chances. now that's a puzzle.