From: BROTHERMOON <Bromoon@cris.com>
Subject: Re: CHRISTIAN RAVERS! READ THIS POST!
Date: Thu, 2 May 1996 16:06:32 -0400
On 1 May 1996, Raver000 wrote:
It's all about love people. God is love.
Actually, it's all about beliefs....God is love? Okay, you've stated yours. But whatever you believe, the rave event is all about peace with humanity - no rash, critical judgements based on any stereotype or propaganda - beings of the water planet celebrating unity. Right on. ;)
From: arivera@lib.occ.cccd.edu (YAHOO)
Subject: Re: CHRISTIAN RAVERS! READ THIS POST!
Are these Christians trying to be a part of SOMETHING greater or are they trying to make it their own? Point is, most ravers aren't into moralizing and aren't into converting others. So long as Christians don't assume the I'm-a-fucking-christian-and-my-god-is-the-only-god-and-that-gives-me-license-to preach-to-the-rest-of-the-inferior-population then sure, why not? Hindu's don't mind Christians, neither do Buddhists. And for the most part, the Christians I know don't mind Atheists or Jews or Muslums or Pagans or Witchdoctors or Shammans or Witches or Satanists or what have you.
Just listen to the beat that runs through it ALL. We might like different music but the beat is pretty constant. I'm all for unity.
Yahoo
From: lxfogel (Lee)
Subject: Re: More on "Rave Philosophy"
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 1994 17:34:00 GMT
R.J.Green-SE1@cs.bham.ac.uk (Robin J Green) writes:
I have found that
despite all this acceptance of all different cultures and influences,
some cultures and influences are a little more accepted than others. You
can be as outlandishly pagan, humanist, materialist, athiestic and
shamanistic as you like, but mention that you're a
Also, deitizing beings (i.e. "God", Jesus) external to ourselves further reinforces the whole idea of authoritarian hierarchies. I won't even touch on the entire history of oppression by institutionalized religion, Christianity being perhaps the most capable in this area.
So I would have to guess, Robin, that you define "being Christian" much differently than I have here. Spirituality is a personal thing, and I respect your right to have any beliefs that feel right for you.
tlims@mindvox.phantom.com (Richard Hall - Moby) writes:
...the idea of 'christian' raving might seem extremely odd when
looked at in the context of the 20th century cultural christian tradition
Most terms, like 'Christiann' are understood in the context of the present and recent history.
it's one of my strongest desires that people would re-evaluate christianity based on christ and not on the bullshit morass that so much of contemporary christianity seems to be. there is a lot of wonderful stuff in contemporary christianity, but it sure is hard to see sometimes with all the right wing homophobic capitalistic hateful complacent judgemental crap that comprised so much of current christian culture.
And like it or not, that "crap" *is* what defines Christianity today. When you say "I am proud to be a Christian", you are promoting the current definition of it, not your own personal redefinition. That's the problem with buying into labels. Isn't it enough to have a set of spiritual beliefs that just happen to embrace some aspects of Christianity? Why is it so necessary to label yourself a "Christan"? Why compromise yourself with all those negative associations?
christ is completely fucking awesome and i love him intensely, sorry if this pisses you off.
What matters to me is that we have in common some concepts/feelings of a spiritual nature, and that there are certain things about raving that can stimulate them in us. When this happens, the experience of our shared spirituality transcends any attempt to explain it. Some of us have already stated that the undefinability of rave philosophy is part of what's so good about it. Likewise, I feel that this undefinability is what allows more people to naturally experience it without having to conform to any labels or specific dogma about it. What I find exciting is that people are discovering their own spiritual sense *without* needing to know about a guru's teachings or religious dogma. The experience itself is the teacher.
In article rutledge@enuxsa.eas.asu.edu (Shawn T. Rutledge) writes:
Indeed, Christians do believe that everyone else is wrong in their beliefs,
but we do not judge them; we accept them as they are, and try to get them
to understand that they need not correct all of their own wrongs, but merely
become one with God.
Let's say we're at a slammin' party, dancing next to one another. The vibe is strong, and we are all feeling transported by the music and our shared energy and acceptance/love for each other. I am feeling connected to everyone around me, like we are one organism in sync with music that seems to be speaking to the fundamental nature of all things. At this moment, my body, my mind and my feelings are in perfect harmony. I, or whatever it is that "I" am experiencing is in a state of bliss, completely absorbed in the moment and feeling completely "right". Yet, at this time, there is absolutely no sense of an external God-being or anything remotely Christ specific.
What I want to know is this: To what extent do you invalidate my experience. How imperfect or limited was it due to it's non-Christian nature? I understand that you love me unconditionally and accept me for who I am, but how much of the spirituality that I experience is illusionary compared to yours?
The answer I'd like to hear is this: The experiential nature of such spiritual moments transcends any beliefs that we might have had coming into the experience, i.e. what we believe the reasons/explanations for what is happening are completely irrelevant. All that matters is that we can have these amazing, undefinable, shareable experiences - they are real/valid/meaningful and the beliefs we construct to help us understand them are secondary and not even important compared to the experience itself.
Unfortunately, I am guessing that your will *not* be able to tell me that your spiritual experiences at raves transcend your beliefs in God and Christ. It is this defining/confining of the spiritual experience, forcing it to conform to a particular belief system that bothers me, because it makes it harder for us to together let go and be free from all the varying notions of right/wrong, good/bad that tend to separate us.
Lee
From: R.J.Green-SE1@cs.bham.ac.uk (Robin J Green)
Subject: Re: More on "Rave Philosophy"
Question: How far does my xtianity invalidate your non-xtian experience?
Not at all. The experience is real. The difference comes in how you view the experience, how you evaluate it w.r.t. your belief system. Read on.
Question: How much of the spirituality you experience is illusary in comparison to my christianity?
Well, the answer is not simple, and it cuts to the root of the Xtian approach to the 'rest of the world' as they so condescendingly call it. The experience you have is true, that is not in doubt. It is real to you. Whether it is *objectively* real is the crux of the question. If it is not objectively real, if it is just a temporary subjective spiritual state, then it has no substance - It just feels good. As the assumptions behind this conclusion lead us to say that *all* experiences can *only* be subjectively viewed, there is nothing else to say about it. It is harmless insubstantial fun, there's no benefit or drawback other than feeling good.
If, however, you find the experience you have to be an expression of some larger, objective truth 'out there' which you have tapped into and surfed on, then the question becomes MUCH more serious. It not only affects you as a person, your world view, also your views on the nature of reality, the nature of objective truth, 'why we are here' etc. It seems much easier to hold the view that all experiences are merely subjective, they only happen to us because we want them to and that's all there is to them. We'll leave the objective truth to the scientists. It's just plain easier to cope with. Keep things simple.
This is called existentialism. We define our existance by *our* experiences as they are the only thing we can really know.
The experiential nature of such spiritual moments transcends any beliefs that we might have had coming into the experience, i.e. what we believe the reasons/explanations for what is happening are completely irrelevant.
We do NOT believe the reasons/explanations to be irrelevent. These beliefs are called "principles", which are a personality trait sadly missing in a lot of society today. Just because you believe the experience to be experimental, or to put it another way "testing the illusion of reality", why should your results be any "more important than" (transcend) the set of assumptions you use to evaluate the experience? If you believe spirituality is something people create within themselves (Humanism) then your evaluation of the experience you have had is that it was "of your own creation". If you hold a Christian world view, the experience was "of God", a small experience of an objectively real, infinitely powerful creator, your father, your friend, your protector, your King and Judge and Owner. It is an experience of what we hold to be the TRUE reality of the world.
Now go back and re-read that last paragraph until you understand it!
All that matters is that we can have these amazing, undefinable, shareable experiences - they are real/valid/meaningful and the beliefs we construct to help us understand them are secondary and not even important compared to the experience itself.
Is that really all that matters? Are these belief systems somehow less real and less important that what we can go out and experience? Is the world-view you employ effective in REALLY describing your experience? Do these experiences need to be evaluated anyway, or are they merely just a 'blip' of joy, just an excited physiological state in your biochemical existance? Do they mean more than just that? Or is it just that you want to *believe* they mean more than that, that you want to force yourself to find deeper meanings in it all?
Unfortunately, I am guessing that your will *not* be able to tell me that your spiritual experiences at raves transcend your beliefs in God and Christ.
I see no reason why they should, and I hope you can see why.
It is this defining/confining of the spiritual experience, forcing it to conform to a particular belief system that bothers me, because it makes it harder for us to together let go and be free from all the varying notions of right/wrong, good/bad that tend to separate us.
Experiences are never "forced into" a belief system. Everybody evaluates the world around them using an in-built belief system. Everybody has a belief system, just many people don't know it. The overwhelming belief system in our current western society is that of the "Materialist Humanist". You believe what you can see, feel and touch. You believe that the objectivity of science and technology is more real that any 'spiritual' experiences. You believe that people create their own lives, they shape their futures and if we only try hard enough we can do anything. Happiness is something you bring upon yourself, and you can choose to be happy by "thinking positive". You can become a better person. Does any of this sound familiar?
We cannot be free from these "varying notions of right/wrong", as they are the facts that define who we are. The only difference between you and me is that I *know* what my defining ideology is, and all that seperates us is that you don't, and you actively tell me that it isn't important. Me, I think it is.
So, there you go!
- Robin Green.
From: lxfogel (Lee)
As much as I love to debate theology, I'm gonna try my best to keep this discussion within the context of raving. Sorry for the length, though.
R.J.Green-SE1@cs.bham.ac.uk (Robin J Green) writes:
The experience you have is true, that is not in doubt. It is real to
you. Whether it is *objectively* real is the crux of the question. If it
is not objectively real, if it is just a temporary subjective spiritual
state, then it has no substance - It just feels good.
This view is representative of Western thought which separates the the objective from the subjective. Modern science (Quantum Physics) has demonstrated quite convincingly that the state of the "objective" physical universe cannot be separated from the role of the observer. Before Quantum Physics, Einstein's theory of Relativity showed that there is no absolute frame of reference in the unviverse for measuring how things move through spacetime. These revolutionary breakthroughs in how humans understand the universe were resisted by most of the scientific community for decades. Today, the Big Bang is being questioned as well. This is all a continuing part of the evolution of human thought, which, in the face of the most "objective" evidence available to us, is abandoning the notion of absolutes, away from the concept of one central force defining the nature of reality.
There is a lot of paradox and irony here, where "objective" scientists are telling us that there is no objectivity. I find direct parallels to raving, where authoritarian structure is largely shunned, where craziness and irrationality is nurtured alongside computer technology and images of fractals. At raves, we get to redefine ourselves, and redefine reality, and for some people, this is much more meaningful than a temporary feel-good state. For some, raving represents the potential each of us has to redefine the universe in the absence of the artificial rules imposed on us by all the authorities who are forever trying to tell us what is right and wrong, true or false. It is no wonder that the powers-that-be fear raving; they fear any challenge to their ability to define the "objective" good in their attempt to control our "subjective" little worlds.
If, however, you find the experience you have to be an expression of some larger, objective truth 'out there' which you have tapped into and surfed on, then the question becomes MUCH more serious. It not only affects you as a person, your world view, also your views on the nature of reality, the nature of objective truth, 'why we are here' etc.
I agree. This is why the keepers-of-objective-truth want everyone else to believe that their experiences are subjective, whether they be scientists or Christians. The scientific community is caving in on this now, because scientific evidence has shown that the line between subjectivity and objectivity is blurred. It seems our universe is really a giant Rave, a kind of controlled chaos with some guiding principles, like music, that define its flavor - and there are an infinite number of possible universes/raves with different principles/music - some are unstable/get busted, others form galaxies/go all night.
We do NOT believe the reasons/explanations to be irrelevent. These beliefs are called "principles", which are a personality trait sadly missing in a lot of society today.
Perhaps irrelevent was the wrong word. What I meant to say is the reasons/explanations/beliefs/principles are not absolute. When we rave [desperately trying to keep this within the context of this newsgroup], we let go of the principles and beliefs that separate us - afterall, we come from different backgrounds and believe different things. We concentrate on what brings us together, the shared joy of music, dance and the way our consciousness is altered in the rave environment. The music doesn't have any obvious principles and we are liberated by this.
If you believe spirituality is something people create within themselves (Humanism) then your evaluation of the experience you have had is that it was "of your own creation". If you hold a Christian world view, the experience was "of God", a small experience of an objectively real, infinitely powerful creator, your father, your friend, your protector, your King and Judge and Owner. It is an experience of what we hold to be the TRUE reality of the world.
Now go back and re-read that last paragraph until you understand it!
I understand it. But again, you are clinging to this subjective/objective duality. If you can fathom the possibility, like science is being forced to, that there is no separation between you and God, that we all are "God", then you would be able to accept the possibility that the spirituality we experience at raves is an experience where we connect to our own "Godliness" and to the "Godliness" in each other and to the TRUTH of reality.
Are these belief systems somehow less real and less important that what we can go out and experience?
Generally speaking - yes.
Is the world-view you employ effective in REALLY describing your experience?
It's getting better all the time. That's what I like about beliefs, they can be modified and changed to coincide with what is really happening. Not that our perception of "reality" is infallable, because ultimately, nothing is certain, not even this statement. =:-O
Do these experiences need to be evaluated anyway,
I guess I enjoy it, or just feel compelled to do so. Furthermore, evaluating why I evaluate things is a fun self-referential exercise that I find to be analogous to the drum-machine beat of house music, but that's getting off the topic.
or are they merely just a 'blip' of joy, just an excited physiological state in your biochemical existance? Do they mean more than just that? Or is it just that you want to *believe* they mean more than that, that you want to force yourself to find deeper meanings in it all?
Well, even a turd is made of atoms and embodies the laws of Physics, and so studying it can reveal some principles that can then be applied to a wider scope. That is how I feel about raves. They embody a mix of social, psychological, biological, technological and spiritual forces that *can* be analyzed in a way that can be applied to the world at large. Raves have the *potential* (like turds) for us to develop great insights around. It doesn't mean they are inherently more meaningful than anything else we do, just that they *can* be.
We cannot be free from these "varying notions of right/wrong", as they are the facts that define who we are.
But aren't we capable of redefining who we are as we update our notions of right and wrong? Most people I know are.
The only difference between you and me is that I *know* what my defining ideology is,
Do you claim to have Absolute Knowledge of your ideology? Wouldn't that make you God? If you are not God, then your imperfect knowledge of yourself is similar to mine, except that I accept the non-absolute nature of my beliefs and feel relatively free to modify or abandon them.
Lee
From: as179@yfn.ysu.edu (Tanya Smith)
Date: 22 Mar 1994 19:39:23 GMT
WOW!
So what you're saying is that objectivity does not exist because
we are essentially incapable of being objective completely
because we are not God (hence, not the object?)
True. But one can mind-fuck oneself with this objective/subjective
stuff (I have done it a hundreds of times). Eventually I reached
the point where, irregardless of whether my actual belief in a
superior force created within me the power to do or overcome
something, I had to truly have faith and trust that I am right.
Or else, chaos develops.
Kierkeegard once stated that even should he discover that Christianity
was a hoaz, he would still believe cos that belief created within
him a desired state of existence.
The ultimate truth is that we die and turn to dust. And even
then, that's our perception of "what is".
In fact, this very post is subjective and you all might not be
real.
Neither might I.
(:
One thing I'd like to comment on is Ralph's suggestion that a rave experience allows us to access a space (within ourselves) completely outside the realm of subjective vs objective. I think that space represents a state of being rather than of thinking or of doing or of feeling. If you all are like me, it is virtually impossible to "stop thinking" on will. I'm a philosopher and tend to ponder on spritual issues frequently. I feel about this issues and consequently act in a manner which supports my belief system (as Lee called it). But suppose for a moment that I stopped "thinking", that I just "AM". Then I would not feel about anything since my feelings derived from my belief system. Consequently, I would not act in any particular manner. I would just perceive. I believe I access this space when I am dancing, a state where I cease to think of myself in relation to those around me or in relation to myself. I simply am, which leads to an awareness of being "one" with everything.
Tanya
Ps sorry about all the typos. (;