Limnor wrote: ↑Sat Oct 10, 2026 9:26 pm
I Have Questions wrote: ↑Sat Oct 10, 2026 3:07 pm
I suppose that’s how a confessional works, or seeing a therapist, or talking things through with The Samaritans etc. Enabling a person to offload their guilt, stress, anxiety etc in a safe space is good from a mental health/therapy perspective. Especially when that process comes with a perceived result of forgiveness. I believe ancient orientals used trees, or a particular favourite tree, to unburden themselves.
Sadly I think organised religion manipulates people into having more feelings of guilt or inadequacy as a mechanism for justifying their own existence. They place themselves between the individual and their Christ, as self appointed gatekeepers. But they get their authority to do so from people abdicating their own responsibility. Mormon leaders are only Mormon leaders when you choose to be led by them. If you don’t then you can see they know no more about Christ than you or I do. No special insights.
I think there are similarities in your examples, sure. Except we’re talking about God, and there is nothing higher. Life can only come from God. If that life comes directly from him, like you, I don’t see what a human institution can add without eventually claiming some gatekeeping authority that doesn’t belong to it. There is of course a presupposition that there is a God.
And also a presupposition that you have the accurate explanation of God.
I’m reminded of Isaiah 44, where a man cuts down a tree, burns part of it to warm himself, and carves the rest into a god before which he bows down. I wonder whether religious institutions sometimes do something similar. We construct an organization to serve God, then gradually elevate that organization into something through which God must be approached.
I think this brings us back to the topic of the thread. The LDS Church infantilises members, treats them factory workers who simply need to follow a prescriptive set of instructions and not question those instructions. God, if such a thing exists, and Christ, if he was everything that people claim him to be, would not be bothered one iota about the coffee drinking of the person who is out there helping others, being a good neighbour, etc. etc. etc. That Christ would not be demanding 10% of your income to gain access to a place where you could commune with God. Christ would not be telling you to stop asking awkward questions. It’s this production line of arbitrary tasks and criteria and endless meetings that drives people away from the Church. Imagine having to be assigned to be a good neighbour to someone.
People, especially young people want good examples to follow and a freedom to think for themselves. The Mormon Church provides neither.
I’m all for people believing in whatever they want if it generates selfless good people. Gods, trees, mind coaches, whatever, it’s all equally beneficial as far as I can see.
Marcus wrote: ↑Sat Oct 10, 2026 7:47 pm
I Have Questions wrote: ↑Sat Oct 10, 2026 3:07 pm
...Sadly I think organised religion manipulates people into having more feelings of guilt or inadequacy as a mechanism for justifying their own existence. They place themselves between the individual and their Christ, as self appointed gatekeepers.
But they get their authority to do so from people abdicating their own responsibility. Mormon leaders are only Mormon leaders when you choose to be led by them. If you don’t then you can see they know no more about Christ than you or I do. No special insights.
I agree, especially with the part I bolded, and that's the point I was making with the sentence mg excerpted. In proper context:
Marcus wrote: ↑Sat Oct 10, 2026 3:10 am
...I'm an atheist, but if there were a god who created human brains, I think they would at the very least expect humans to use their own brains as much and as well as they possibly can. I don't see any conflict between that and a believer using their brain to be Christlike, or an atheist using their brain to be an ethical and moral person. Each is using the resources of their self to try to be their best self, as they understand it.
Following another who has declared themselves a prophet, even to the extent that you 'forgive' them their errors, see them as human just like you,
and STILL just follow along doesn't seem to be a path that uses one's own resources in the best way possible.
I'm really liking IHQ's tree idea. You're really just working it out in your own mind but formalizing the process by taking advantage of the majesty of Nature. That's pretty appealing.
I was always partial to this plum tree depiction that used to be in the Metropolitan. The small image size below doesn't do it justice, as it is almost 6 ft tall by 16 ft wide. One whole room was devoted to it:
Old Plum
Kano Sansetsu
1646
The massive black trunk of an ancient plum tree stretches across four sliding panels, its gnarled branches twisting vigorously. Against the gold ground, delicate blossoms sprouting from the old tree suggest the chill of early spring and symbolize renewal. These panels originally formed one wall of a room in Tenshō’in, a subtemple of Myōshinji, a major Zen complex in Kyoto. Once visible in an adjacent room at Myōshinji and now preserved in the Minneapolis Institute of Art, their reverses depict the Chinese theme of the “Eight Daoist Immortals.”
https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/44858
That’s an impressive art piece. I can’t claim the tree idea as mine. I read it somewhere. I think Taoism promotes the notion that embracing nature as a means of understanding your place in the world. As a way of keeping your mental balance. A place where you can think things through for yourself. It’s a far better place for higher level thoughts than sat in a pew listening to someone slog through a series of quotes that end with the key message of switching your own brain off and doing exactly what 15 old men in Utah tell you to do instead. Doubt your doubts, as it were.
Trees will stand there listening to you exploring your own thoughts. And they won’t judge you for that morning cup of Joe.
