Moving Dudeism Forwards

[Andrea Da Fino]

Sometimes I'm a f****ng amateur, I forgot to say that if JCD was as they say he is today, or during the Inquisition, when btw they said it was God desire and not JCD, and during the Crusades, when they said God wants it and not JCD, if he was as they say he would have never been boarded because he was as undude as they were, and are. But he was boarded so probably he was just too dude for its time and place. That's why these days the original JCD followers have disappeared, most of them anyway, they've probably been boarded through the ages but this doesn't mean that there are some still around. These are the dudes we are talking about. Imdo. 

[Rev. Ed C]

I think my point still stands:  Don't focus on the bad, focus on the good.

I get what you're saying there, Hominid, about you can't pick and choose when it comes to your religion, but I ain't any of those religions, so I can pick and choose what I like

Dudeism is about taking the good from other philosophies and blending it in with our own ways.  If someone's already pinned down something great, why reinvent the wheel, why not just put the round thing on our Dudely cart?

To shut out anything that's come from a religion that any of us finds distasteful as a whole is not down with acceptance.   Dudeism is, at its core, about acceptance of a simple ideal, not about hate.  If you play the hate game and the "get away, we don't like your people here" game then aren't we just like those branches of religions that do the same?  Aren't we like those Christians who think Muslims worship a different god and so think they're heretics?  Can't we see, that in the same way Jews, Christians and Muslims worship the same god, Dudeists share ideals with most religions that we can shake hands and agree on?

Ok, maybe some will look down on us and not want to shake hands... Fuck'em.  That doesn't reflect badly on us, just them.  But if we don't shake a hand that's offered to us, that makes us the pricks.  If they've got some common ground, let them in, if they're here to tell us the opposite of what we think, tell them thanks but not thanks, but still offer them a beer.  If they get pissed off that you don't want to listen, let them run off and brood... no beer for them

Dudeism isn't about making enemies, it's about making friends.  If we turn other faiths into enemies just because we think they're "wrong", surely we're just doing to them what we hate them doing to others?

It's the Nick Griffin argument:
BBC is besieged by protesters angry that Nick Griffin, the BNP (far right political party) leader is allowed to be a guest on Question Time (a political Q&A roadshow).  Their argument?  "Nick Griffin should not be allowed a national platform because he's a fascist!".  Essentially trying to fight fascism with fascism.  "He tells other people what they can and cannot do, so we should tell him what he can and cannot do!"  FAIL!  What should have, and thankfully did happen, was that democracy and freedom prevailed, the BBC let him onto the show and people turned on him, making him a joke on national TV.

Don't fight fascism with fascism, and don't fight close-minded religion with close-minded religion

[Hominid]

Quote: "But you're slightly wrong when you link the Bible to Christianity, they have nothing to do with each other."
Andrea: not to sound insulting, but you don't know what you're talking about. The bible IS THE FOUNDATION OF Christianity. Without it, Christianity would have absolutely nothing to stand on.

BUT, after all is said and done, new shit has come to light: it turns out that the bible is just a regurgitation of earlier "sacred" texts that came out of ancient Egypt anyways; there is no historical Jesus; all the stories are just a repetition of ones written eons before, i.e. the virgin birth, John the Baptists, the 3 wise men, etc etc etc - all come from earlier writings - same characters, different names. Jesus is based on the Egyptian god named Horus. Look it up. It's all hogwash people... 

http://yeyeolade.wordpress.com/2007/04/09/black-people-wrote-the-bible/

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5.htm

[Rev. Ed C]

Quote: "But you're slightly wrong when you link the Bible to Christianity, they have nothing to do with each other."
Andrea: not to sound insulting, but you don't know what you're talking about. The bible IS THE FOUNDATION OF Christianity. Without it, Christianity would have absolutely nothing to stand on.

Personally, I'd say it has plenty to stand on.  Surely the New Testament is what sets Christianity apart from Judaism and Islam.  Christianity depends on the belief in Christ, as both a prophet (as the Muslims believe him to be) and the son/incarnation of God.  The bible may record what he said and did (apparently), but the new testament isn't so much a sacred text as a biography   It focuses not on what God says, but what Jesus (as the man, not the Deity) says.  It's a record of thought and deed, not a set of stone commandments.

That might just be my opinion on the matter, but I think taking the gospels as gospel is mything the point somewhat

[Hominid]

Rev. Ed. C.:

I'm not espousing hatred and close-minded religion; you get me wrong. People are cool; it's the religious systems themselves that have it wrong. Listen to my words: religion sucks. The mechanized, industrialized institutions that perpetuate hate, and say that "our way is the ONLY way" are at fault, not the innocent followers who are duped by their white-washed propaganda machine that gladly take their tithes every Sunday. (Or Saturday). Every religion has good - yes, I totally agree, and synthesizing a belief system out of those elements is the basis for a lot of positive evolution of the human race right now.  

An important distinction must be made between religion and philosophy.  They are as different as water and oil. Dudeism is a philosophy that is inclusive, I absolutely agree. Exclusivity in ANY belief system is the hallmark of prejudice, bias, and serves as fodder for zealots who like to blow shit up. No beer for you!

With all this, I'm trying to make people think about what religion REALLY is. Its history, the real basis for its existence... most people haven't a fucking clue how much it was built on evil, prejudice, hatred, and bloodshed. Words mean little when the actions of the founders (and deities) make our world wars look like child's play.

[Hominid]

"That might just be my opinion on the matter, but I think taking the gospels as gospel is mything the point somewhat"

Smart - myths are an interesting study... Joseph Campbell has a lot of interesting insights into the role of myth in our current society.

Anyways, an underlying truth here is that Jesus is not a historical character - he's a (I'm repeating myself here) regurgitation of the ancient Egyptian god named Horus. It's all just hearsay... That, plus the fact that we forget how he espoused abuse and violence. Not such a cool dude IMHO.

[Rev. Ed C]

I get what you're saying there, Hominid.  I do understand how we got to where we are in the state of religions and you're spot on.  Of course, a lot of the time religion was a masque for politics and I feel that sort of thing, although a part of the religion's history, should be struck from the doctrine.

I mean, when was the last time a Christian said the Crusades were really god's will and that they stood by them?  If anyone does stand by the crusades as a Christian act... they're an extremist

So, while I don't deny the history and the consequences in all religions (forget ye not those extremist Buddhists who went around doing all that killing), I think religion is indeed philosophy (/theology) at its core and that the bad stuff is a corruption of true religion.

Which essentially means we agree on philosophy being good and the other stuff being bad, but we just disagree on whether the bad should really be lumped in with the religion so much.  It's hard because I know some religions do have some horrid stuff in them, but I think a lot of that is bad translation and corruption on a human level.  The whole thing's laid down in stone... but no one can decide what the stones mean... bugger

I didn't mean to accuse you of discriminating against religion(s), I just mean to point out that as far as I think Dudeism should be concerned, we let the good in and tell the bad that this is a private residence.  But it looks like once again, on that we agree

I think I had a crossed wire back there somewhere... damn you forum-theology!!!

[Rev. Ed C]

"That might just be my opinion on the matter, but I think taking the gospels as gospel is mything the point somewhat"

Smart - myths are an interesting study... Joseph Campbell has a lot of interesting insights into the role of myth in our current society.

Anyways, an underlying truth here is that Jesus is not a historical character - he's a (I'm repeating myself here) regurgitation of the ancient Egyptian god named Horus. It's all just hearsay... That, plus the fact that we forget how he espoused abuse and violence. Not such a cool dude IMHO.

Actually, I heard it bares a lot of parallels with Mithras, a figure from Roman mythology.  Which is why Christ's birthday was made 25/12, because that was Mithras' birthday, and as we all know, the Romans did their best to amalgamate the new Christian faith with their old ways and the pagan ways.  Hence we get Christmas which takes elements of Saturnalia, and Easter which takes elements of pagan fertility celebrations (unless Jesus laid eggs...??).

Christ is possibly, much like Lao Tzu, an amalgam of many different things.  Some say he was the son of God, some say he was the 3rd prophet of god, between Abraham (or was it Moses, I forget who comes first) and Mohammad, some say he was just a man who was wise, some say he was a many who studied Buddhism in the east for many years.  We'll never know.

And, much like with Lao Tzu's philosophies, it doesn't matter who said them, just that they made good sense and speak from and to the heart.

[Hominid]

Ya, it helps to understand the history. It was actually the emperor Constantine who, in the 3rd century, appeased both Christians and Pagans by combining the various celebrations into one: hence we have Christmas on the 25th of December, originally a Pagan ritual (decorated trees and all). The Persian god Mithras predated Jesus by 600 years;  Horus by 25 centuries, but both (all?) have identical qualities. Speaks to me of plagiarism, which totally devalues their legitimate contribution to whatever belief system you want to adhere to. Unless of course, you like stories about Santa Claus and the Easter bunny...

[Hominid]

In the end, it's how you live your life. Your actions prove your beliefs, not the other way around. That's why I'm so hard on religion: so many people hang their hat on their "label", but their actions speak otherwise. Fuck religion. If you're a nice person, then I don't give a shit about what you believe, because it's all words anyways. I've come across beautiful, wonderful human beings from all walks of life. The best ones do not adhere to any religion, or philosophy for that matter. They just ARE what they ARE. The intellect and emotions are not engaged in any kind of dogmatic, religious justification for their actions... it's simply how they live.

[Andrea Da Fino]

Hominid Dude, you're not insulting, we're just exchanging opinion here so no one is insulted.

Anyway I doubt somewhere JCD talked or dug the Old Testament, but as Rev. Ed points out everything has been modified and rewritten during the Council of Nicaea and the Middle Age so no one for sure can say where the truth rests (and this is true for both who dig or not JCD), apart having a chance to have a look at the Vatican's Biblioteque which is a bit unpractical.

I base my opinion on the Gospel of Thomas only as it's probably one of the first drafts and it should be uncompromised, but I dig the parables anyway, and just forget the rest. For me a real Christian is someone whose first thought is "Cool man", and also I'm not strictly a Christian but a Dudeist Priest only that I find Christians (those who just are not f***ng interested in the Old Testament) as cool as Pagans, Buddhists, whatever. Probably the Sufis has the same problem with Islam, Rev. Ed can probably explain this better than me. Also let's not forget that here in Italy we grew up seeing JCD as kind of compeer, now things have changed a bit and we'll probably have to add Mohammed, which is not strictly a compeer. Or a Dude.

If I'm right the timeline should be Thorah which has been copied in the Bible which has been copied in the Qumran. It's a long tradition for religions to copycat each other, especially after one wins over another as our pagan compeers know about the Christmas tree and half of the Catholic points of view. I didn't know though that everything comes from Egypt and Horus, that's fu***ng interesting man.

JCD is not an historical character, it might be, but the same things applies to Lao Tze and The Dude, what's wrong with this?

And let's not forget that those uptight paraquats you're talking about would never be interested in Dudeism because it's way too cool for their uptight nature. Because it's always the human nature: uptights religions have an appeal for uptights people, if the world was made only by cool people all uptight religions would just die.

As you rightly say a lot of people hang their hat to something and behave in a different way, at times it also happens to Dudeists. But this can also mean that someone for a reason or another belongs to an uptight religion while being a good hearted person, which then usually says f**k religion and goes his or her way. For me the best way is always to just ask if someone is a Dude or not, whatever his religion, philosophy or whathaveyou. That's what I try to do, only that I apply this to everyone.

The fact that I find the uncompromised JCD as cool as The Dude, only because these are the two characters I know better, I think doesn't prevent me from being a Dude. Only that as I've said before I don't have experience about JCD in other countries. But let's not forget that the Roman Catholic Church is just one offspring of JCD, Lutherans are another one, and so on. I guess not everyone there is a fundamentalist. And let's not forget the friars which most of the times are pretty cool too. Imdo.

Also trying to make people think is never wrong dude. 

To summarize Hominid Dude I think we're saying more or less the same thing only that we have a slightly different point of view. Probably Rev. Al and Rev. Ed have wrapped it all up in a great way, imdo.

And if I'm not wrong also the resurrection has been predated from Mithra, which probably has been predated from Horus. This means that everyone predates everyone or that there are certain concepts which resist the passing of time through the ages? Oh well.

Fabolous conversation dudes, also because it's so dudely and everyone is cool here. Far out. 

[milnie]

just went back to the first couple of pages and re-read the original concept of this thread; how to move dudeism forward.
does this thing we have here need formal recognition as so many other threads ask? i dont think so.
how can this thought and life concept move forward? well, what does dudeism and being a dude mean to its members. is it to get a laugh from friends? is it to fill a void that other religions cant fill? is it an excuse to be lazy buggers? for me, coming in from being a tbl fan, it represents a lifestyle concept i aspire to: taking it easy, having good times, good friends, living in the now and going with the flow. thats not to say you cant take a stand against things that piss you off, but (and no offence guys) the constant christian bashing is getting a bit tiring. and i dont like any modern form of deity worship.
i really enjoy reading the theological debates that go on here, some of which is new shit coming to light for me, which is helped by the background of many dudes here of different religions.
dam, lost my train of thought ...
nope its gone.
oh, its back. to move dudeism forward, then as Ed C's original review appears to indicate the need for form or hierachical structure. is the community not too large now for consentual motions as there are so many different opinions vying for authority? can dudeism ever become more than it is now without structure? imdo by the way

[Andrea Da Fino]

nope its gone.
oh, its back.

Oh Rev. milnie, that's fucking funny, I've almost split my belly. 

But you said interesting concepts and great train of thoughts. I like too this theological discussion as I've learnt some new things pretty interesting. As for your questions, well, I just don't know. Each one of us has his own opinion and for each one of us our opinion is correct; that's why imdo we have to reach some kind of common point. Which we will if we think about it long enough.

For me a good mixture is what they use in those irish monasteries like the head of the order, the abbot and the monks, much similar to buddhist monasteries I guess. Loose yet stable. And if some dudes don't find it comfortable they can nevertheless stay outside the organization. I know I'm not writing correctly but this is English and I'm a f****ng Italian, so please get the example and forget the words. 

But above all we must have a clear answer for the outside world and ourselves to What is Dudeism and Who is a Dude. Something that can be applied to every background, culture and whathaveyou.

Given that we all know What would the Dude do then it shouldn't be so hard, three "precepts", three questions and three answers; but actually this is Olly's job, not mine. He's the Super Dude. 

[Hominid]

The only answer to the question "How do we explain Dudeism" is to tell them to watch TBL 10 times.  If they don't get it, they won't get us.  ;-)

[milnie]

Sorry if it seems I was pissin on the rug earlier. I was a bit crabit there.
Think there's a karma thing runnIng in tbl I need to get in tune with.