Some questions from a passer-by

I feel like we are almost working through a language barrier, here. There are words that we are using quite differently. Myth is an easy example.

Perhaps, it might be instructive for you to tell us a bit about where you are coming from, Reneza. It's hard to share when we do not know what our common ground is.

Maybe we can take a short break?

Cabur Senaar wrote: I feel like we are almost working through a language barrier, here. There are words that we are using quite differently. Myth is an easy example.

I understand what you're coming from so perhaps I can define what I mean by myth as it means to most modern people in English, although not the strict original definition: "fictional story that may or may not contain actual historic fact, but used to explain a particular concept." This is the definition used by Campbell in his book. I do understand that the strict definition is merely story but this is not how it is used by most people today.

Cabur Senaar wrote: Perhaps, it might be instructive for you to tell us a bit about where you are coming from, Reneza. It's hard to share when we do not know what our common ground is.

Do you mean my own beliefs? I'd rather not at this point because I didn't start this discussion to do so and I don't think it's relevant right now. But if you'd like to understand certain definitions of what I'm saying, I'm more than happy to clarify

Cabur Senaar wrote: Maybe we can take a short break?

It's a good idea but I love to discuss such things

Jestor wrote: As i said, TOTJO doesnt tell you WHAT to believe, that is left up to the individual...

It's clearly not about that though. It's about a self-proclaimed religious organization defining what its members actually believe.

Im sorry, "whats about"?

Your line of questioning?

TOTJO 'does' nothing, it is merely an entity...

It is the people that do...

Jestor wrote: We could have made/used non-religious titles, and someday, that may happen... Not today...

There are plenty of other ranking-titles that could have been used but religious (specifically Christian) ones were chosen. Obviously it has a religious motive otherwise it wouldn't have chosen them.

Well, thank you for letting us know our motives...

You provided your own answers, lol...

You dont need us!

Jestor wrote: Because 'the jedi path' is very individualistic, and, and to get all the combinations of possible definitions, you would have to ask all the Jedi...

The "Jedi path" doesn't even seem to exist but as a vehicle for secular free speech promotion by what you're saying. If it's definition is "individual" as you say, anyway.

Well, I can see why you say that... lol...

Jestor wrote: Somewhere, we talk about Jediism being a "synergistic ideology"... That probably sums it up best...

Can you define this?

Typo...

syncretic ideology







Need ideology too?

Jestor wrote: My 'thing' is "my life, and how I live it"...

So is Jediism libertarianism now?

If that is how you define it, sure...

IM not worried about labels...

You sure are, lol...

Jediism is however you are defining it for you... Its why you wont understand from the seat you are in, lol...

Jestor wrote: You are not judging without trying to understand...

Where have I judged anybody? I'm asking questions.

Sorry, you miss this? You quoted it...

It dosnt say you ARE judging at all...

You sure read a lot into stuff, lol...

You are "reserving judgement", that better?

Jestor wrote: Show me how this was rude?

You were very demeaning by saying "people like me" have a "minimalist understanding" while proclaiming yourself as some sort higher consciousness or something. It was rather unprecedented. You can see it in exactly the text you quoted.

Nope, you inferred that...

How would you have preferred I said that...

Thats twice now you have suggested I was insulting...

I am beginning to think you are just playing with us for fun...

I do have a higher understanding of who I am, and what I think a Jedi is, but that makes me no better than anyone...

Jestor wrote: I have a very minimalist understanding of many things...

So why did you say "people like you" and then "while jedis like me... etc."?

Cause you would fall into the "non-jedi' people... and I would fall into the other...

Jestor wrote: Then you must be a fireman, becasue only a fireman/woman knows what it is really like...

This is absurd logic. This is like saying "you need to try heroin before you know it kills you slowly"

No, you need to try heroin to understand what it feels like...

There are plenty of studies that tell show you it can kill you...

Jestor wrote: Are you missing the metaphor with this?

So what is a Jedi? I can't be a Jedi unless I know what it is, but nobody here seems to have a clear answer.

No... We dont...

You have to figure that out for yourself, lol...

Jestor wrote: By using titles that the rest of the world is familiar with, it is a little less explaining...

A majority of the world didn't grow up in traditionally Christian countries.

The founders of this temple did..

Jestor wrote: that this was your argument for their definition...

Because that's what the films say, otherwise if it's any different nobody here has a clear alternative answer for me.

Well, that was your logic, not mine...

Perhaps you should not have provided an example...

I dont know, lol...

I was explaining the confusion from my end...

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yes, lets start from a common ground...

Please tell us what a religion is, from a agreed upon source...

Please feel free to share when you do...

Jestor wrote: Im sorry, "whats about"?

"Jediism"

Jestor wrote: Well, thank you for letting us know our motives...

Well, few others wish to tell me, so what else am I supposed to do other than deduce from what I read here?

Jestor wrote: syncretic ideology... Need ideology too?

That makes more sense, thank you. No need for the latter part.

Jestor wrote: IM not worried about labels...

You sure are, lol...

If by labels you mean words with definitions then yes. I prefer if when people claimed they were something, they were able to define it.

Jestor wrote: Jediism is however you are defining it for you... Its why you wont understand from the seat you are in, lol...

By what you say, it literally has no meaning.

Jestor wrote: Thats twice now you have suggested I was insulting...

The text speaks for itself.

Jestor wrote: Cause you would fall into the "non-jedi' people... and I would fall into the other...

So what is the line between Jedi and non-Jedi?

Jestor wrote: No, you need to try heroin to understand what it feels like...

So how do I "try" Jediism?

Jestor wrote: There are plenty of studies that tell show you it can kill you...

There are also countless things online that would suggest that Jediism is not much more than playing dress-ups and role playing but I'm trying to give the benefit of the doubt by asking you people what you believe.

Jestor wrote: You have to figure that out for yourself, lol...

Then it's meaningless. But plenty of people have given vague definitions at least. Is it difficult for you to give at least one?

Jestor wrote: The founders of this temple did..

Ok, but then it doesn't sound really universal then but rather chauvinistic.

Jestor wrote: Please tell us what a religion is, from a agreed upon source...

I didn't start this thread to do so and I don't see how it would help at all.

Pardon me... but this thread seems to have gone very far astray...

Reneza, you're asking people here to define something that has little definition beyond what you make it. We're not the only 'religion' that won't be able to present to you definite answers to similar questions.

My question to you is, why is it so important that you draw perfect lines around Jediism?

The simple answer to your questions, is that unless you hang around, read the discussions here, read the sermons etc. and explore our materials for yourself, you are not going to understand Jediism.

No one has the answers but you. Now I know that is probably an unsatisfactory answer, but it's the one that everyone else has been trying to explain to you..

Reneza wrote:

Senan wrote: Not every Christian believes every part of the Bible because the Bible in it's entirety contains contradictions.

They are required to by definition otherwise they are not defined as Christians. The definition of Christian was made with the Nicene Creed and it has been agreed upon ever since that anything contrary to this is not defined as "Christian." If you just allow everyone to define words, there is no meaning to anything and dialog goes out the window.

A minor point to make here: Christians don't even agree on exactly what should be or shouldn't be in the Nicene Creed. What seems like a fairly trivial part of it on the surface has caused enormous schism between Christian denominations. There are also many Christians who reject the Nicene Creed entirely, saying that Scripture alone is the source of one's beliefs. This is a common belief among non-denominational evangelicals in the United States and others.

Finally, the Nicene Creed (well, the ecumenical version of it) does not say anything about Scripture except that it documented and prophesied the resurrection of Christ and that the Holy Spirit spoke through the Prophets (of Scripture.) It definitely does not say that every Christian should "believe" every part of the Bible, since various parts of the Bible (Joshua, for example) contain directives from God to wage holy war and commit genocide, among other pleasant things.

Edan wrote: Reneza, you're asking people here to define something that has little definition beyond what you make it. We're not the only 'religion' that won't be able to present to you indefinite answers to similar questions.

Then does this mean that the only thing Jediism is is a synonym for "individual belief system"?

Edan wrote: My question to you is, why is it so important that you draw perfect lines around Jediism?

I didn't say "perfect" but I am seeking explanations which I'm slowly concluding.

Edan wrote: No one has the answers but you. Now I know that is probably an unsatisfactory answer, but it's the one that everyone else has been trying to explain to you..

This seems to be exactly the reason that most western countries except the US refuse to recognize Jediism as a valid response on a census forms or as a religion at all.

Adi Vas wrote: A minor point to make here: Christians don't even agree on exactly what should be or shouldn't be in the Nicene Creed. What seems like a fairly trivial part of it on the surface has caused enormous schism between Christian denominations. There are also many Christians who reject the Nicene Creed entirely, saying that Scripture alone is the source of one's beliefs. This is a common belief among non-denominational evangelicals in the United States and others.

Actually mostly they do. The only valid thing which you pointed out was the addition of the filioque by Roman clerical authorities. But even regarding this, it's one word among every other one that has remained the same throughout history. If a Christian rejects the Nicene Creed they are not a Christian - this was established and has been the absolute definition since its foundation and only recently in the modern era have small sects (and the Mormons) began to use the term Christian despite not being defined by it.

Nonetheless even if we are to disregard the Nicene Creed there is still quite a good definition of what a Christian is in the person of Jesus and his teachings as presented in the New Testament. Less can be said about Jediism so far it seems.

Adi Vas wrote: Finally, the Nicene Creed (well, the ecumenical version of it) does not say anything about Scripture except that it documented and prophesied the resurrection of Christ and that the Holy Spirit spoke through the Prophets (of Scripture.) It definitely does not say that every Christian should "believe" every part of the Bible, since various parts of the Bible (Joshua, for example) contain directives from God to wage holy war and commit genocide, among other pleasant things.

I never suggested it did. In fact for most of Christian history until the protestant reformation when sola scriptura was a thing, the Bible was seen as secondary to the Church. But you must also know then that it has been almost a consensus for almost the entirety of Christian history that Christians no longer need to obey most of the 613 instructions in the Old Testament, having been made null by the coming of Jesus.

Also, your use of such a passive-aggressive phrase furthers my belief that among people here it seems eerily rather common to make snide swipes at Abrahamic faiths.

<yawn>

i hate dogma, jediism has no dogma...dogma is inflexible, inflexibility causes strife...the vast majority of mainstream religions thrive on causing strife and driving people to their "god"...this is especially common in some of the abrahamic religions....

to me jediism is more of a philosophical lifestyle. we don't tell you what to think, or how to think, instead we teach you how to think for yourself, how to decide for yourself, how to define your own path.

among the various jedi groups we share a few common beliefs...how we define the beliefs varies individually just like among various christian sects...judaism does believe in christ but they don't believe in his messianic nature the way other christians do...

we believe in the force...how each of us defines it is likely to vary. for me it's energy in all its forms, energy is quantifiable it can be measured and manipulated, there are also aspects of the force that as of yet cannot be quantified because we lack the methods to do so....this does not make them any less real...

personally i don't give two sh...ts about what others think of me when i mention being a jedi. if they laugh, they laugh...it just shows how closed minded they are and they will never know what it is like to walk my path. most people are actually quite interested once i start discussing it with them.

so take it as you will....or don't, either way i'm not fussed by it...we frequently get people seeking to "deconstruct" what we are....we're still here...we're still growing and evolving....how many religions truly encourage knowledge, understanding, and acceptance and truly mean it?

“Religion is (1) a system of symbols which acts to (2) establish powerful, pervasive, and long lasting moods and motivation in men by (3) formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and (4) clothing these conceptions with such as aura of factuality that (5) the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic.”

Using this definition by Clifford Geertz will help in understanding Jediism as a religion.

Jediism, as practiced here, is neither creedal nor revealed. Some religions are both (Christianity, Sikhism, and Islam) but religions such as Shinto, Hinduism, or the indigenous religions of North American or Africa are neither. Some religions eschew reliance on a deity such as Zen, Confucianism or Daoism, so also with Jediism. Jedi can be theists or not. Jediism is analogous to transtheistic religions in that it focuses more on practice than belief.

Metaphysics is the philosophical discipline that studies being, or, in other words, studies the nature of reality. In this sense, Jediism is metaphysical and philosophical. Metaphysics is subject to rigorous logical analysis requiring precision of language. The proofs of philosophy are subject to different standards than experimental science.

This quote is in my lecture notes but I can’t remember where I got it.

"Campbell believed myth had an important purpose in human life, and defined its four major functions:

1. The Metaphysical Function - Awakening a sense of awe before the mystery of being.
2. The Cosmological Function - Explaining the shape of the universe.
3. The Sociological Function - Validating and supporting the existing social order.
4. The Pedagogical Function - Teaching and guiding the individual through the stages of life.

Mythology and storytelling is a universal human drive. Through these four steps, myth informs and enhances human understanding of not only the world around us, but who we are, both in society and within ourselves. By mythologizing our own lives, we can understand them, and work out our place in them. By experiencing our own adventures, we too can learn."

Academic definitions of myth:
Myth is a “traditional narration which relates to events that happened at the beginning of time and which has the purpose of providing grounds for the ritual actions of men of today and, in a general manner, establishing all the forms of action and thought by which man understands himself in his world.” (Paul Ricoeur, The Symbolism of Evil)
Myth is a traditional narration regarding the nature of the sacred.
Myth is a traditional narrative account of the origin of an aspect or symbol of the sacred.
Myth is the narrative embodiment of an idea.
Myth narrates a sacred history: it tells of an event in primordial time or it tells how reality or a part of reality came into existence.
Myths can be known, experienced, lived in the sense that one is seized by the sacred in the ritual re-enactment of the primordial event.
The mythic person says, “That myth is true for me because it tells the story of how and why the world is the way it is.”
The truth, validity or effectiveness of a myth is determined solely on the life in the world of the participants (believers) in the myth.
Myth is the symbolic expression of primal experiences.
The symbols in the myth represent a primary aspect of experienced reality.
Myth is a narrative account of the origin of the symbol.

Some persons here at TotJO refer to the Star Wars myth in order to express their understanding of the symbol of the Force.

RyuJin wrote: i hate dogma, jediism has no dogma...dogma is inflexible, inflexibility causes strife...

I am not talking about that at all. If you had read any of the text in this thread, you would see that I'm asking for definitions. If something has no definition, it lacks substance and is only an image

RyuJin wrote: the vast majority of mainstream religions thrive on causing strife and driving people to their "god"...this is especially common in some of the abrahamic religions....

So do any human systems.

RyuJin wrote: to me jediism is more of a philosophical lifestyle. we don't tell you what to think, or how to think, instead we teach you how to think for yourself, how to decide for yourself, how to define your own path.

This sounds awfully hubristic.

RyuJin wrote: among the various jedi groups we share a few common beliefs...how we define the beliefs varies individually just like among various christian sects...judaism does believe in christ but they don't believe in his messianic nature the way other christians do...

Except Christianity actually has a foundational idea of what it actually is while from my discussions here it seems Jediism does not. Furthermore, Jews "believe" in Jesus as much as a historian believes in Jesus and so to use "believe in" in this sense is completely unsuitable.

RyuJin wrote: we believe in the force...how each of us defines it is likely to vary.

So it seems that my understanding was right; "the Force" is a synonym for "individual belief system" with Star Wars imagery and nothing more. If anyone would like to suggest otherwise, let me know.

RyuJin wrote: personally i don't give two sh...ts about what others think of me when i mention being a jedi. if they laugh, they laugh...it just shows how closed minded they are and they will never know what it is like walk my path. most people are actually quite interested once i start discussing it with them.

Is self-aggrandizement and belittlement of others really so common here..?

RyuJin wrote: so take it as you will....or don't, either way i'm not fussed by it...we frequently get people seeking to "deconstruct" what we are....we're still here...we're still growing and evolving....how many religions truly encourage knowledge, understanding, and acceptance and truly mean it?

I don't know about others, but all major religions in history have been "deconstructed" by everyone including their own adherents, and for good reason. It's a good thing and healthy because it raises questions and it forces individual adherents to actually answer questions and not simply accept things as given. Knowledge and understanding do not come from taking a fictional order of warrior monks and applying their religious ideology to the real-world while also resisting any questions about it. It just makes it look all the more ridiculous