Why god is a bunch of horse shit:

Assuming that the christian "god" exists(ha ok sure).
Hes a fucking dictator...
Follow him or BURN.
So....
Everyone is a sinner, jesus died for our sins, we must ask to be forgiven and so on blah blah blah...
You can lead a good life, be a generally good person, help others, be nice, whatever, but not believe in god or jesus, and he would throw you to an eternity of burning.
Now an eternity wouldn't be a really really long ass time +1000 years, its _forever_ as in, it doesn't end, infinite number of years.

Then comes along a child molestor, who's killed and raped dozens, whos bombed buildings, and so on blah blah blah...
Hes cought, sentenced to death, prays for forgiveness and really means it, whoops hes free to go yay.

Anyone see how this is completely wrong in so many ways and anyone with half a brain should be able to see how wrong it is?
Religion is retarded.

Religion is retarded.Couldn't agree with you more.

thats why u need to pick your own conception of god.

dont confuse religion with spirituality

but im gonna enjoy checking this thread from time to time to hear people spout off shit like they believe they have the mental capability to discern the big picture from God's point of view.

You can lead a good life, be a generally good person, help others, be nice, whatever, but not believe in god or jesus, and he would throw you to an eternity of burning.

Can you please find some scripture or some church documents from a Christian religion that support this? I am not an overly religious person, however my in-laws are VERY religious. The generic Christian faith in no way states that those who do not believe in God will burn in hell eternally.

However, if the evil sinner(in your case a rapist or a murdered, shall we say?) did *truly* repent(and this could be known only to God) then he would be forgiven, but not necessarily glorified with the most righteous of people.

Lastly, I would point out your entire argument is flawed from the start, because to agree with your argument, you must be willing to assert that God does forgive those who repent, and asserting that would mean you believe in God, first and foremost.

This isn't the sole logical flaw in the concept of a supreme being. For example:

Why would a God (or Goddess, for the feminists who reject the very idea of an evil patriarchial religion) create a sentient race and pose an ultimatum: a life of obsequy or an eternity in Hell? If He really wanted sycophants, He could have created humans as such.

Why would God allow such suffering to befall the world, especially the faithful? Religion and mythology propagate(sp?) the fallacy that good things happen to good people, whereas in reality, good things happen to those who make them happen - usually at the expense of others, at that.

Why are the three main monotheistic faiths (as well as quite a few others) so self-contradictory? For example, we supposedly have the ability to choose to put our faith in God and thus possess free will, yet there are prophecies (which mean a predetermined future) that accepted as absolute truth in the religious texts.

The proof for these religions has more holes than Swiss cheese. That's why I prefer Buddhism.

For example, we supposedly have the ability to choose to put our faith in God and thus possess free will, yet there are prophecies (which mean a predetermined future) that accepted as absolute truth in the religious texts.

I don't understand this. Please explain in sentences that are decipherable w/o the super secret aethist decoder ring. Thanks!

Although not over religious myself either, kinda on the fringes atm and really struggling with it, there are some things about your notion of the Christian religion that you have misconceptions about and need to be corrected for you to understand this better. Its not suprising you think religion is horseshit, the conception you have of god is too small. Hes not some angry man taking down notes on every sin you have, looking to send you to hell, quite the contrary.


Assuming that the christian "god" exists(ha ok sure).
Hes a fucking dictator...
Follow him or BURN.
So....
Everyone is a sinner, jesus died for our sins, we must ask to be forgiven and so on blah blah blah...
You can lead a good life, be a generally good person, help others, be nice, whatever, but not believe in god or jesus, and he would throw you to an eternity of burning.
Now an eternity wouldn't be a really really long ass time +1000 years, its _forever_ as in, it doesn't end, infinite number of years.

The Christian God is anything but a dictator. God, while being a being unable to be described in categorizing terms, as that limits Him, is the infinite source of love. And through Jesus, he proposes to us a covenant. Not a contract, which is a negotation of terms, but a covenant, a giving of onesself. He gave us free will so that we can live our lives in whatever fashion, but He is desperately longing for a relationship with us. If he didn't give us free will, there'd be no purpose behind our creation, as little drones of His will would mean absolutely nothing to us. Instead, we are given free will, with the power to choose, if we will, to enter into this covenant with him. It is basically the idea that we just have to open the door, and He will receive us, we just have to take the first step towards him, something we cannot. Sin isn't something that makes God angry or vengeful, it is merely us taking a step away from God when he is wishing completely that we would join Him. The idea of hell is also not a burning pit where we suffer endlessly from flames. Instead, it is the absence of God. It is a seperation, the act of not chosing God's grace and salvation, and thus being without Him. God does not exclude those who are not aware of Him because they haven't been informed of His existance through missionaries or whatever means. In fact, and this is mostly my opinion, but my belief is that a good life served with moral intents (relative yes, but I'm sure most of you understand what is generally meant by this, so don't let it be a point of nit-picking, haha, thx) in any religion is infinitely better and more pleasing to God than living the Christian faith for an hour a week.


Btw, if you wish to know more about the trinity, and the teaching behind the reason for it and the origin of Jesus and his necessity, I can explain it to the best of my ability if you wish.




Hes cought, sentenced to death, prays for forgiveness and really means it, whoops hes free to go yay.
That part is very important, don't forget. It can't be he prays and says he means forgiveness and its really convincing and everybody is brought to tears by his execution. He has to mean completely every ounce of it, not just wishing he hadn't done it so he isn't being killed. Everybody is falliable, and some people make much larger errors than others. Is it acceptable? No, but does it happen and is it possible to be sorry for a wrong doing of such magnitude? Yes.


Your ability to disprove religion will not be found in the Church's teachings, as it is a system that is built to be proven by it's own structures. Religion can be used to prove religion. The question of whether or not it is true is based on a much more simplistic yet infinitely more complex question, of whether or not God exists and how one can obtain a certain level of confidence in this as to feel faith in God is legitimate.

Sorry, force of habit :(

1) Christians acknowledge that whether one believes/worships God is a conscious choice. Therefore, human beings have free will and the ability to alter the future through their actions.

2) The Bible/other religious texts also have prophecies that are considered to be true. Take Judgment Day for example (there are probably better prophesies to illustrate the point, but I don't remember any off the top of my head). It is inevitable, as are many, many other events predicted by people who are believed to have had visions from God. So the future is predetermined, and our free will to alter it is an illusion at best.

The only conceivable ways to prove the religious views on this matter valid in my eyes would be to provide a mathematically precise extrapolation of the future that the prophets saw, or have the religious collectives discard the notion of prophecy entirely.

In any case, the original point Cron's post and my first one are two significant questions posed to Christianity. This one is just nitpicking :)

an eternity of burning.


A common misconception, but as I recall the whole "lake of fire and brimstone" bit is not for all eternity and in the end satan and his buddies get 1/3 of the earth or something.

mankind = god ..

Who cares what religion believe in..

Some people need religion, it keeps you sane, think about it.

Life is Bleak, there is nothing after you rot into worm food.

That doesn't sound appealing to me, does it to you?

So what's an easy way to keep people sane and give them purpose in life..so they can live beyond eat, sleep, fuck, die.

It's not that hard to grasp, really, it isn't.

So religion gives purpose, do or don't believe in him, your free choice, let those people be..UNLESS they start hassling you about it..then pummel into em with as much anti-god material you got...you'd be suprised how many jaws will drop if you do it.


Orun

The Christian god - a big white guy.

Need I say more?

He's also a hippy. 8(

I wholeheartly agree with Cronuus.
The "christian" god is an invention of the christians themselves.
Powerhungry people decided about the rules, they decided (and still decide) about what is right, what is wrong and what we have to believe in. And they make money and get power out of it. And billions of sheep following them blindly.
You know... like the Bush administration.

For example, we supposedly have the ability to choose to put our faith in God and thus possess free will, yet there are prophecies (which mean a predetermined future) that accepted as absolute truth in the religious texts.

There is no inconsistency between the concept of freewill in the exercise of faith and prophetic visions of events in the future.

Freewill in the Christian faith is an individual decision process. Each of us is given the choice to believe or not believe as we see fit. Each of us is given the ability to choose between right and wrong and to act, within the context of our individual beliefs, as we want. For Christians this equates to choosing to accept Christ as Savior and then applying his teachings to their lives on a daily basis. Up until the actual commission of sin there is a choice to not sin.

Biblical prophecies are generally about future events on a larger scale than individual lives although exceptions do exist. So in books like Daniel or Isaiah or The Revelation of St. John prophecies dealing with events surrounding the return of Christ speak about global events. These things will come to pass (perhaps) but it is still up to each person to choose their course. God reveals things that will happen but not how each of us individually will deal with that knowledge.

This is one of those psot where you really SHOULD stay away but cant. There are so many different religions that you will more than likely not get the same answer. Youll have 1 from Catholics, one from Baptists, Lutherans, Satanists (correct term?), Pagan's and the list goes on.

You forgot Taoists

I expected at least another month or two to pass before this topic rose its ugly head again. Ah well, here we go:

Can you please find some scripture or some church documents from a Christian religion that support this?

In the gospel of John you'll find something to the effect of "None come to the Father but through me (Jesus)." This is one of several scriptures that support the idea that without belief in and acceptance of Jesus as one's savior you're going down.

God, while being a being unable to be described in categorizing terms, as that limits Him, is the infinite source of love.

I find this a dubious notion. I think you'd necessarily have to extend it due to this hypothetical deity's infinite nature. Thus, god would be the source of love, hate, jealousy, generosity, murder, rape and Skittles.

He gave us free will so that we can live our lives in whatever fashion, but He is desperately longing for a relationship with us.

I doubt an infinite being is desperate for anything, other than -- perhaps -- the alleviation of boredom. However, this god is often ascribed certain qualities, such as omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, omnibenevolence, and having a plan for the future. These get in the way of halcyon ideas such as those normally put forth by Christians. For example, if this god is omnipresent and omniscient, he already intimately knows each one of us and knows the future, so in effect he is already experiencing whatever "relationship" we are going to have. We just haven't gotten there yet.

Of course, god is often described as rational but inscrutible. Given this, it seems unlikely a relationship could exist between finite humans and infinite gods any more than between a 15 year old kid and a packet of sea monkies.

Sin isn't something that makes God angry or vengeful, it is merely us taking a step away from God when he is wishing completely that we would join Him.

I think this is scripturally untenable. The Bible includes numerous instances of the god exhibiting vengeance both in Old and New Testaments. In many cases, the punishment vastly overshadows the crime.

The idea of hell is also not a burning pit where we suffer endlessly from flames. Instead, it is the absence of God.

This is a very recent notion that, I think, is based more on a desire to picture god as a nice guy rather than on scriptures, which do mention fiery places "where men weep and gnash their teeth."

God does not exclude those who are not aware of Him because they haven't been informed of His existance through missionaries or whatever means.

There've been several attempts in the liturature to support this assertion. For example, William Lane Craig points to a verse or two in an attempt to show that everyone has the inherent knowledge of god/Christ necessary to make the decision to embrace Christianity. This hasn't flown far outside of Christian circles. Truth is, there's just too much in the bible damning those who've never heard of Christianity. Other fundamentalists just accept it as part of god's will and move on.

Each of us is given the choice to believe or not believe as we see fit.

Pharoah in Exodus is just one exception. He was punished for making decisions against the Hebrews, but his decision making was affected by god "hardening his heart." Hardly fair, eh?

There's also the problem of trying to support free will while asserting that the creator is also omniscient, for at the moment of creation, the creator knows the precise course your life will take. Thus, free will is an illusion.

Taino why can't you SHUT THE FUCK up with your anti-American BULLSHIT?

This post had NOTHING to do with it until you opened your cock holster.

I cannot stand religion in general. Being brought up in a family that was half Catholic, and half Southern Baptist killed it.

Why would a God (or Goddess, for the feminists who reject the very idea of an evil patriarchial religion) create a sentient race and pose an ultimatum: a life of obsequy or an eternity in Hell? If He really wanted sycophants, He could have created humans as such.

First off, Im not arguing any which ways, just pointing holes in logic.
For this statement I'll referance Hinduism, Which despite what some will say is monotheistic(AND poly..), the entire point of souls and the reincarnation process is a cleansing.
EVERYTHING is a part of the "one great god"(Brahma or Brahman? I can never remember which is which..).
Souls being a direct part of him, in this scenario, the point of living is to cleanse the soul, as you become more and more pure you ascend the ranks of society, eventually become dietized, and then finally rejoin him Pure.

Why does he need you pure? who knows,


Why would God allow such suffering to befall the world, especially the faithful? Religion and mythology propagate(sp?) the fallacy that good things happen to good people, whereas in reality, good things happen to those who make them happen - usually at the expense of others, at that.


Note the above example, if that were the goal, why give you a free ticket?, it defeats the purpose.

Why are the three main monotheistic faiths (as well as quite a few others) so self-contradictory? For example, we supposedly have the ability to choose to put our faith in God and thus possess free will, yet there are prophecies (which mean a predetermined future) that accepted as absolute truth in the religious texts.

Again, Above example(and before anyone says it, Hinduism IS an appropriate example in a god discussion..)

One problem I see, is that people think god has unlimited power on earth, they expect him to be juggling mountains or something to prove hes there.
This could very simply not be true, God may be restrained, even if by only his own will, possibly for the reasons mentioned above.

Think of Earth as a Strainer, you have all the different religons vying for dominancy, all the confusion, the naysayers, the peer influence.
Sounds like a pretty ideal situation to make sure only the very best come outta the end, doesnt it?
Ever stop to think Confusion may very well be part of "the plan"?

Why not?.. one of the very cores points of religon, is to Believe, despite all the naysayers, despite all the so called "Evidence" to the contrary.
Once again to that funny word faith.


Thats it in conclusion, Well I have no Opinion on the matter, just trying to encourage alittle open-mindedness, as theres hardly only one explaination for everything..

Rants like this are funny, they are always started by atheists. For what reason? You don't believe in God, ok. Why rant about it? Is there some ounce of doubt in the back of your mind that is nagging you so that you need to rally other atheists together to help ease it? If you truely, 100% don't believe in God then what's to rant about? You have made your choice, believers have made there choice. Perhaps you need to know that there are others that feel the way you do, Im not sure. But always keep one thing in mind when spitting in God's face. If you die today as a believer and there is no God, then you lose nothing, but if you die today as a non-believer and God is real, then you stand to lose a lot.

Hey Marz your sig exceeds the limits as stated in the rules ...

Really? Are you going to leave the boards again because of it?

Well said Nucci. If you don't believe in god..great, if you do great. It really makes for an argument that is never ending on either side. Plenty of people all over the world share the same views on both sides of the spectrum, this isnt a couple people against a million here.


Ibudin

If you die today as a believer and there is no God, then you lose nothing, but if you die today as a non-believer and God is real, then you stand to lose a lot.

Inevitably, Pascal's Wager (the name for this argument) rears its ill-conceived head. Two problems:

1) There are hundreds of sects with their own views on the requirements for salvation. Some are rather liberal, others are quite strict. Many of them are highly exclusive; that is, if you don't believe in this particular interpretation, you lose regardless of the depth of your faith. So it's not just believing in a god, it's believing in the right god. And it's not just believing in the right god, but believing in the right god the right way.

However, if this god is truly good and just, it will understand why some choose not to believe at all based on purely rational reasoning. A just god cannot hold such people accountable, but it may very well hold accountable those who believe incorrectly due to preferences in dogma.

2) You're suggesting people should believe just to avoid punishment, which is disingenuous at best.

hehe. i was hoping id be wrong about this thread.

Btw. there are very few true atheists out there

imo (personal story aside), through studying several branches of science, i find i dont have enough faith to believe that this universe came from nothing and is spiraling nowhere. Just look at how all these scientific laws that we have discovered (notice discovered not invented) intertwine in such a beautiful and dare i say perfect harmony.

but there is a big difference between just believing in the existence of a supernatural being (lets just use God for a lack of a better word) that is beyond most of our comprehension that set everything in motion, and having a personal connection with that higher power. That of course is a personal journey which i have no right to tell you how u must walk it

I wont get into a rant on my opinions on religions because 1) it doesnt make a difference right here and right now and 2) ive been trying really hard to love and understand them and not be judgemental

However, i have been able to pull some really good stuff that works from some religions. Like that Saint Francis Prayer is so very true. I had read it when i was younger and it meant very little but in recent years it has come to mean so much to me. I dont see stuff like that as belonging to a specific religion.

Bottom line (before i start to really start rambling on) is if you keep an open mind you can take what you feel is good from whatever religion (because almost all of them have some good practical things in them) and just leave the rest.

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance-- that principle is contempt prior to investigation"
---Herbert Spencer

Can you please find some scripture or some church documents from a Christian religion that support this?

No need to. Go to any Christian service on any Sunday. Hell, I heard this 3 times last Sunday at my fiance's church (in quite an interesting service). If you're not "saved" you're not going to get into Heaven.

Interpret that how you want. You're in purgatory, you're in hell, however you want to look at it. In theory, you don't go to heaven. I don't see it as "burning in hell" but it's certainly possible to see it that way - many people do.

"Up until the actual commission of sin there is a choice to not sin."

If you're Catholic, this ain't so. In the Catholic faith, if you thought about it, you did it (I have this on good authority from Faervas, and other Catholics will tell you the same), and these uncommitted sins are considered just as serious of an infraction as actually doing the deed. A significant part of Confession is the spilling of these 'sins': 'I have had impure thoughts', etc... There are also sins of *omission* in the Catholic and other branches of the Judeo Christian faith. Kind of sick, eh? Also, I seem to recall that 'coveting' (one's neighbor's wife or his ass or his mule...), which implies nothing other than desire, is also a 'sin' according to good ol' Yahweh. 'Free will', eh? (/cocks an eyebrow) If you have the 'free will' *not* to think or feel things, which seems awfully creepy and Orwellian to me...

Regards,
Nydia Ywalmoriel
Autonomous Collective

I think I'll stick to the Dharma, thank you :) . Desire may be the cause of suffering, but it isn't a 'sin', which I never could get my mind around anyway...

i believe you are speaking more along the lines of the hardcore Baptists who believe the only road to salvation is the acceptance of Jesus Christ as your personal savior and that he died for your sins, yada yada yada

Then of course you get into controversies over people that were never taught about Jesus or were just raised different blah blah blah

its all a bunch of mental masturbation

(you almost tempted me to go off on organized religions :p )

In the Catholic faith, if you thought about it, you did it (I have this on good authority from Faervas, and other Catholics will tell you the same),

I would not tell you that, with the obvious exceptions pertaining to the 10 commandments.


(edited to add obvious exception comment)

blah, i shoulda stayed out of it.

I was raised in a Catholic household Nydia and I know exactly what Faervas is talking about. I left that particular denomination in my past when I became old enough to recognize that "the church" was teaching people to do things that are clearly against the scripture that their particular dogma is supposed to be based upon.

That's not to say that Catholics are "bad" or "wrong", just that I and my healthy skepticism bone have problems with some of their teachings.

Despite all that I still believe in Jesus and his Godhood. I wish I had the ability to address the issues Thormir raises but I can never seem to find a good way to express my beliefs concerning free will and predestination. God is not omnipotent though, nor do I believe He is omniscient. Heretical though those ideas may be to monotheists everywhere.

/ponder
Why do we get all the good topics when I have no time to devote to them?

"Cat's Cradle" and "The Sirens of Titan" come to mind for some reason.

The most common counter-argument is that the god has some sort of limited omniscience. It gets kind of complicated, and since it's not a very common argument I'm not well read on the deeper aspects of it, but there are a couple simple problems I can point out.

First, describing just what a god knows or doesn't know in order to resolve points like I raise seems awfully ad hoc. In this case, apologists seem to be defining and redefining god without basis, simply to avoid problems.

Second, and related, is that this argument puts apologists in the position of talking out both sides of their mouths. On the one hand, they tell atheists that their god is inscrutable and beyond mortal comprehension. On the other hand, with arguments like these they seem to be committing the same act they declare impossible when it suits them.

It's very easy to become trapped in one's own argument when discussing such things.

Don’t hate god hate organized religion; organized religion is much like the American political system, they say one thing but do another and when you get down to it, the politicians only fuck of the real importants of the subject. The same way religion as fucked up god.

To not believe in something greater then you is sign that your full of your self. Even if the world is wrong about the existence of god, the main thing that god gives people is FAITH. Faith is the belief in something with out any form of proof. It is a strong force and if people don’t believe in them self, if they cant have faith in them self at least then can have faith in god, even is the organized religion they follow is corrupt it can be a good thing.

Every culture since cultures existed believed in a god. If you have a open mind every religion is VERY similar. You have to look past the political bull shit and read it and get at what they really mean and they all mean the same thing.

Just look at how all these scientific laws that we have discovered (notice discovered not invented) intertwine in such a beautiful and dare i say perfect harmony.

Actually at the present time they dont. With the lack of a Unified Field Theorum we use different equations and mathmatical priciples for small (sub atomic) and large (anything bigger) objects.

Its so funny to see people argue about sin as though it's an action.

We are all atheists, some of us just believe in fewer gods than others. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

-Stephen F. Roberts

When I, a thoughtful and unblessed Presbyterian, examine the Koran, I know that beyond any question every Mohammedan is insane; not in all things, but in religious matters. When a thoughtful and unblessed Mohammedan examines the Westminster Catechism, he knows that beyond any question I am spiritually insane. I cannot prove to him that he is insane, because you never can prove anything to a lunatic — for that is a part of his insanity and the evidence of it. He cannot prove to me that I am insane, for my mind has the same defect that afflicts his. All Democrats are insane, but not one of them knows it; none but the Republicans and Mugwumps know it. All the Republicans are insane, but only the Democrats and Mugwumps can perceive it. The rule is perfect: in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane. When I look around me, I am often troubled to see how many people are mad. To mention only a few:
The Atheist, The Theosophists, The Infidel, The Swedenborgians, The Agnostic, The Shakers, The Baptist, The Millerites, The Methodist, The Mormons, The Christian Scientist, The Laurence Oliphant Harrisites, The Catholic, and the 115 Christian sects, the Presbyterian excepted, The Grand Lama's people, The Monarchists, The Imperialists, The 72 Mohammedan sects, The Democrats, The Republicans (but not the Mugwumps), The Buddhist, The Blavatsky-Buddhist, The Mind-Curists, The Faith-Curists, The Nationalist, The Mental Scientists, The Confucian, The Spiritualist, The Allopaths, The 2000 East Indian sects, The Homeopaths, The Electropaths, The Peculiar People, The...

But there's no end to the list; there are millions of them!

-Mark Twain

Carry on.

because we just havent figured it out yet. it all works out though somehow whether we understand it or not. As ive said ive just dabbled in certain scientific areas and am not an expert but i do have alot of experience with RL matters. But this is a thread about organized religion, so leave God out of it :p

Palimax, I've been looking (albeit not very hard) for the author of your first quote for ages. Thanks!

To not believe in something greater then you is sign that your full of your self.

No, it's a sign that you've found no evidence that there's something out there that's "greater" than you, whatever that means.

It is a strong force and if people don’t believe in them self, if they cant have faith in them self at least then can have faith in god, even is the organized religion they follow is corrupt it can be a good thing.

Which god? And which rules shall you live your life by? People do good and ill in the name of faith and belief. Personally, I find living by faith akin to fooling oneself. But if self-imposed mind tricks are what it takes to get a person by, more power to 'em.

If you have a open mind every religion is VERY similar.

No, if you've never studied comparative religion and will simply accept whatever notion floats your boat, then every religion is VERY similar. The actual truth is that religions have come in all shapes and sizes; some religions (such as Christianity) vary considerably sect to sect.

i think that quote from Mark Twain palimax posted pretty much sums it up. Whats funny is ill bet this thread will include at least 3-4 more pages of people saying how either 1) thier religion is superior to anothers or 2) how some other religions is wrong

Just concentrate on your own spiritual development and the rest will take care of itself. You can preach and rationalize all you like to anyone you like but the bottom line for me is:

The spiritual life is not a theory. We have to live it.

I don't believe in God.

And Eurotrash sucks, thank you.

James Randi (a noted skeptic on all things supernatural) on his website regarding religeon:

www.randi.org/jr/072503.html (http://www.randi.org/jr/072503.html)

While I suggest you read it in it's entirety, even if only to understand his views; I don't foolishly think I'll convert anyone - here's a wonderful snippet:

As a child, I was told to believe that savages were doomed to boil in molten sulfur if they did not accept the "merciful" deity that was described to me, even if they had no opportunity of knowing about him/it! That deity, from what I was told, suffered from many serious defects that I was told to avoid. He/it was capricious, insecure, jealous, vindictive, sadistic, and cruel, and demanded constant praise, sacrifice, adulation, and ego-support, or the penalties could be very severe. I found, early on in my observations, that religious people were very fearful, trembling and wondering if they'd committed any infractions of the multitude of rules they had to follow. They were — and are — ruled by fear. That's not my style.

But it was the incredible stories I was told, that really made me rear back in disbelief. For examples, they told me, some 2,000 years ago a mid-East virgin was impregnated by a ghost of some sort, and as a result produced a son who could walk on water, raise the dead, turn water into wine, and multiply loaves of bread and fishes. All that was in addition to tossing out demons. He expected and accepted a brutal, sadistic, death — and then he rose from the dead.

There was much, much, more. Adam and Eve, they said, were the original humans, plunked down in a garden to start our species going. But I didn't understand, and still don't, that they had only two children, both sons — and one of them killed the other — yet somehow they produced enough people to populate the Earth, without incest, which was a big no-no! Then some prophet or other made the Earth stop turning, an army blew horns until a wall fell down, a guy named Moses made the Red Sea divide in two, and made frogs fall out of the sky….

I needn't go on. And that's only a small start on one religion! The Wizard of Oz is more believable. And more fun.

Well, I thank the mythology for giving me Handel's "Messiah," but that doesn't make up for the suffering, grief, fear, and the millions of dead that need not have been....

Consider: a man believes — beyond any doubt — that his god is the only god, is all-powerful and all-knowing, has created him and the entire universe around him, and is capricious, jealous, vindictive, and violent. That same god offers the man a choice between burning in eternal agony in a fully-defined hell, or living forever in a variety of paradises — some of which involve streets of gold and others an ample supply of virgin delights. Is there any choice here? Will the man fail to carry out any command or whim of this deity? How can we doubt that religion is a compulsory system that absolutely rules its adherents? It's a tyranny, a trap, a disaster of infinite size and scope. I'll have none of it.

Examine the notion of a "loving god." This god only loves you if you follow the rules. No questions, no doubts, no objections, are allowed. "Because I said so, that's why." He/she/it loves you as a farmer loves a draft-animal; you're useful, you obey, and you're docile. If you stray, your firstborn will be murdered, if you don't follow a capricious order, you're a pillar of salt. This is "love"? If so, I'll take indifference.

Anyway, if you need me, I'm just another skeptic fanning the flames :)

Eh..
kind of sort of irony..
People are dumb for trying to explain God in human terms, i.e. emotions or desires or even in a corperal sense.
It was a necessity at one time, in so far as religion helped the world develop and organize. But that time is past.

People are EQUALLY dumb for trying to disprove the existance of god based on the same false assumptions. God does or does not exist based on the reasoning of humans.. he either is or isnt wholly indepedant of our beliefs.

We live in a new age.. where information is availble.. Centralized controlled religion is on the way out.. as we have evolved.. so has our spirtual understanding and our relationship with our creator..

It is as it should be.. personal.. private... individual.

Centralized controlled religion is on the way out

Weird. I've read in several places over the last few years that membership in centralized, controlled religion is going up.

In a 30 second search on google, I couldn't find any hard data either way. Anecdotal evidence shows expansion of several large churches in my suburban area.

James Randi is great. For years he's had a monetary prize available to anyone who could demonstrate supernatural abilities under controlled conditions. I believe the prize is currently over 1 million dollars (probably states the right amount on the site), and it's gone unclaimed for decades.

I wouldn't say organized religion is on the way out. In fact, the various denominations are plucking up converts, particularly in the former Soviet Union. The "Moral Majority" doesn't get much news anymore, and even the Christian Coalition is relatively mum, but they are very politically active, active on college campuses, and retain a very strong support base.

And, of course, one very organized (in its way) religion is growing steadily: Islam.

I got busy and wanted to reply on page two, but the workplace had other ideas... so:

God does not exclude those who are not aware of Him because they haven't been informed of His existance through missionaries or whatever means.

Once again, I offer the reason that the missionaries could pursue their goals with absolute zeal was/is that many of them truly think that without their special version of God, the people to which they are providing their ministry are doomed to Hell. Thormir has mentioned the passage from the gospel of John.
I’ll take it one step further, and say that unless you are providing the tithe to a church, thereby giving them the money to keep going and make more converts.. to make more money… to make more converts, etc. then you are an untapped source of income to them. Like any good con game,they will try to tap into your pocket- and ensuring an eternity of suffering in hell if you don't believe and pay is surely a fine way to get some gullible people to part with their cash. Before you argue about this point: Clearly, for a very long time the Catholic church was a for-profit entity; it even went as far as to sell indulgences for sins comitted. Also, many Christian televangelists beg for money so that you can be forgiven.

To not believe in something greater then you is sign that your full of your self


You can easily reject a Christian god and believe in something greater than yourself. Indeed, some causes, such as freedom of speech, the right of every man woman and child to live a life free of oppression and other such ideals are thought by many to be greater than the life of any one person. Of course, I realize that is not what you meant, but to someone who does not recognize the superiority of some benevolent otherworldly being, goals like these can become very important. No, this ties very closely into the humanity = god comment. By saying this, you are accepting full and total responsibility for your actions. Unlike those who think what happens on earth is a god’s will, people who subscribe to this theory think the salvation of humankind lies with humankind itself- though not in the traditional life after death manner many Christians subscribe to. Rather, they think that through improving conditions and attitudes of the people on earth both now and in the future, they will secure a better place for everyone to live. So, unlike those who think a god/gods will make everything better, even though it has been proven most gods are pretty hands off kinds of entities, they think it is up to people to make the world a better place for people.

dont confuse "centralized controlled" with people going to church.

People arent bound and controlled by religion they way they once were.. in almost every area except the Mid East that is..

they way they once were

Isn't this kind of playing with definitions? I think it's either organized religion or it's not. If you're looking to compare the status quo with something even a hundred years ago, let alone a few hundred years ago or the Middle Ages, you're kind of just looking to argue for the sake of arguing.

Huh?

History is a continous line.. you cant look at one part without any conception or realization from where that part came from..

The world, Today, is VASTLY different from that even 10 years ago.
People today have unprecedented access to information and ideas.. Maybe your young enough where you take that for granted. But our age is that of a communication and information revolution. While the change from the time when religion was the very basis of society to where where we are today is dramatic.. It has NEVER been more dramatic since the last few years... People can obtain knowledge for themselves.. easily.. instantly..
intellectual independance.... The biggest leap foward for the individual in 2000 years.. and you toss it aside, pay it no mind.. as if it was always there.

Goddamn it.. your ignorance is astounding.. I want to keep this civil.. but it is insanely infuriating having to explain facts that are right under your nose..

You think Medieval villages were the only people who had a intense and strong dependance on the church for community, education, identity?
How about we go to Boston, and talk to some Irish Catholics? How about we go to Atlanta and talk to some Southern Baptists? How about we go to Mulberry Street in New York and talk to some Italian Roman Catholics??
Go to any town in the East and you can tell what type of neighborhood your in by the name of the Church. St Stans? Oh.. Polish Neighborhood. Mt. Carmel? Oh French.
These people came from all over the world.. and what was the FIRST thing they built when they settled?
A church.
Think about that..
Now.. we the grandchildren, and the great grandchildren, safe and secure have no need for what helped sustain these people and keep them strong in a hard world.
Fine..
Yes the Church was controlling.. and involved in peoples lives to an extent thats no longer necessary.. But respect what it was.. respect the good that it has done, the cement that held together the bricks of your culture.

A "sin" is nothing else but something that some powerful puppetmasters have invented to prevent you from doing it.
They say something is bad because they don't want you to do it. That's all.

There is one very simple example to show you about how silly those rules are.
Sexuality. Nature created men with a need for sex. You do want to have sex. Its your nature. And it is your nature to have different partners. Because you look out for different partners and at the end you pick the best, the most potential one that could bring up the best (strongest, most intelligent) kids for you. This is nature.
Now if god wanted us to only fuck one person in our whole life, wouldn't he have created us the way we just want to fuck one person on our whole life? eh? Hello? God isn't stupid (if he even exists). he created the universe. If he creates this insanely complex thing called life, look at the n ature, everything if perfect.. then he will also think about sexuality of men and make sure it is done the right way!
He doesn't like.. give us sexual needs so we suffer and get frustrated and deny it and blackmail it! What fucking bullshit is that?!

It is a need every person has. Everyone that claims not to have a need for sex has just been manipulated so much their entire life that they believe not to have a need. Its not just christian religion, the muslim one is just the same, of not worse.

Its a simple and logical example why all the sins are just inventions of the people in charge to reach their goal. Whatever could be a threat to a religion is simply a sin. Now ok, killing someone is a sin aswell. Thats good. but we don't need a fucking religion and go to church and hear the word of god to simply know that killing someone is wrong. Use your fucking brains!

There.

Da Mayor: Doctor...
Mookie: C'mon, what. What?
Da Mayor: Always do the right thing.
Mookie: That's it?
Da Mayor: That's it.
Mookie: I got it, I'm gone.

theres your sin.

People have an innate sense of right and wrong. not taking into account the people who have some sort of mental illness.

But beside that.
Why do you keep putting Human definitions on what god is, or isnt? God doesnt "want" or whatever.. he just is.. or isnt.
If 100 years ago, someone said Saturn was made of green cheese, and someone else disproved that.. The existance of Saturn wouldnt be in doubt, but only the first persons ideas. Saturn is still there.. just not what we thought it was.

I believe in God.. he exists to me. You dont.. he has no place in your life, he doesnt exist to you. Maybe thats part of the nature of what God is.
I know my faith in God has helped make me a better person in my life. But its not necessary for survival anymore.. its more of a concious, free decsion that people come to or dont, in our world today. 50-100 years ago we wouldnt have had a choice.. the Church was all around, involved in every part of our lives, we would be born into it and die in it. Today.. a person has to go to the church, seek it out.

I feel that a big part of life is a spirtual journey. Coming to grips with faith and God is a wonderful experience, and I feel... a natural part of life.

Goddamn it.. your ignorance is astounding..

Yeah. Right. Whatever.

Did "bible churches" exist 200 years ago? How many Buddhist or Ba'hai temples were there in the U.S. 200 years ago? How many campus style churches serving 1500 people at one service were there 200 years ago? These things all affect whatever phrase you want to use: organized religion, religious control, whatever.

I said nothing about the "communities" surrounding churches. I didn't say that history wasn't a continuous line, or that the instant access to information wasn't important.

You're doing exactly what I said - you're looking to start an argument.

Its a simple and logical example why all the sins are just inventions of the people in charge to reach their goal. Whatever could be a threat to a religion is simply a sin.
Replace "religion" with society and you are on your way to realizing that a "sin" started as a crime. As religion became more and more tied into society, the rules of the religion and the rules of the society became closer and closer. So, sin became equal to crime in many regards. A lot has changed since then- Today, in the US at least, you can commit a sin and not a crime, and vice versa.

As an extension of this, what is OK in one society might be vastly different in another. Among some of the aboriginal people of Australia, for example, if you caught your woman having sex with another man, it was perfectly OK to murder the man.

People have an innate sense of right and wrong. not taking into account the people who have some sort of mental illness.
People have a sense of what is right and wrong in the context of their society through exposure to the behavior of those around them as they grew up. As stated above, what is "right" in one area might be "wrong" in another.

Edit: changed one kind of muddy phrase to make it clearer

Hey Esbat :)

Ever read Somerset Maugham's 'Rain'? (his first short story, can be found in most anthologies of his work) It's a fabulous, and fabulously funny in a very black way, story about sin, missionary zeal and all-too-human frailty... ;)

I recommend that anyone who has the slightest interest in good literature and this thread read it :) .

Again, I gotta go with Buddha on this one. 'Right (thought, speech, action, livlihood...)' is self evident, assuming that one can see through the self-delusion and desire muddying up one's waters, and no coercion to such is necessary. The concept of 'sin' is one invented to impose conformity and behavior from above by cloaking it in religious authority, but to mangle a quote from a completely different religion, 'If it is not found within, one will never find it without.'

There have been some really interesting psychological studies done recently on the hierarchy of motivation/justification with regards to why people obey 'laws', religious or otherwise. I'm about to have to go into lab, but if I find time, I'll post some lonks or extrapolate further...

Regards,
Nydia Ywalmoriel
Autonomous Collective

Ever read Somerset Maugham's 'Rain'?

No, I've never read that story.


'Right (thought, speech, action, livlihood...)' is self evident, assuming that one can see through the self-delusion and desire muddying up one's waters, and no coercion to such is necessary.

That is a pretty DAMN big assumption. To change the words and keep the meaning (Esbatized, of course):
The correct path is possible provided you are one of the very few people on the planet earth with enough intellegence to see what is right and wrong and enough wisdom to act in the appropriate manner.

It is just as valid to say "Time travel is possible, assuming you can work out the correct way to do it".

One thing organized religion is good for is taking a great mass or people and getting them all more or less on the same page with regards to what is right and wrong. And lets face it- that is a huge benefit for running an orderly society. Tack onto that the fact that there are a great number of people who do better when they are told what to do, and the benefits grow... up to a point.
In a society such as ours (the US) with no standardized "right" religion, things can get a bit sticky.

There have been some really interesting psychological studies done recently on the hierarchy of motivation/justification with regards to why people obey 'laws', religious or otherwise

Are you referring to the "levels of morality motivations"- like the first one being "fear of punishment" and the highest being "to ensure the wellfare of humanity"?

One thing organized religion is good for is taking a great mass or people and getting them all more or less on the same page with regards to what is right and wrong. And lets face it- that is a huge benefit for running an orderly society.

To paraphrase Voltaire:

"If all men were philosophers we wouldn't need religion. But all men are not philosophers, so religion is an unfortunate necessity. If god didn't exist, we'd have to invent him."

Dear Esbat:

Not much time here, but re your comments on my statement about 'right xxx...' being self-evident: I don't agree with your 'translation' at all, and that was not what I was attempting to say. I don't think that the statement is inherently elitist at all, actually. Nor is 'right xxx' going to be the same for someone else in a given situation as it is for me, my mom, or the homeless guy living under the underpass east of the campus here. What I was attempting to say is that *all* individuals have the capacity for discerning what 'right' action (etc) is at a particular moment and that attempting to impose the notion of 'sin' in order to generate desired (by the person/institution doing the imposing) action (etc) is inherently flawed and almost always self-serving.

"Are you referring to the "levels of morality motivations"- like the first one being "fear of punishment" and the highest being "to ensure the wellfare of humanity"?

Yes, although I take issue with some of that work. A think a closer parallel to what my *personal* view is regarding this subject might be found in Maslow's hierarchy of needs. What 'right xxx'... is for a given person, *including* their choice of morality motivations, religious model, etc, is, in my opinion, going to be influenced by where they fall out here.

Regards,
Nydia Ywalmoriel
Autonomous Collective

Careening into semantics now. It reminds me of the common argument that there is no such thing as altruism, that what appear to be altruistic acts all have some kind of reward, even if it's merely emotional. In this case, it seems, altruism would have to be redefined in some manner. So it is with the concept of "right." If everyone inherently knows what the 'right' choice is -- yet clearly their 'right' choice can be wrong for someone else -- then 'right' as a concept loses some of its punch.

At the very least, I think this line of reasoning highlights the subjectivity of it all.

Thormir:

I agree wholeheartedly that the entire subject of religion/morality/psychic hygiene/whathaveyou is highly subjective, and it can be difficult even to define terms between the parties involved in any discussion of such. In fact, when I was typing out that first statement earlier today it made me a bit queasy as I typed it out, even though I agreed with it. And the use of the word 'right' implies an opposing 'wrong', in our dualistic way of looking at things, which is an unintended side effect.

'Altruistic' acts that 'make the world a better place', for example, can be and usually are self-serving acts - they're simply serving love, esteem, or self-actualization needs (to use Maslow's terminology). Does that make 'altruism' a useless word? I don't think so... :) .

A belief in 1) a God/Gods and/or 2) a rigid code of right and wrong, prescribed by a Supreme Being(s) obviously serves the needs of many many people on the planet. While neither of these concepts does anything for me, I am convinced that there are or were selective advantages to having the capacity for religious awe/ecstacy and so we have the 'god module' in our brains (as Ramachandran terms it) and all the associated lovely religious and social baggage that goes with it...

Creationists and other religious literalists, please feel free to assume that God lovingly formed that portion of each and every one of our little brains, and that folks like myself, Thormir, and other folks who 'haven't seen the light' just need to be 'turned on'... ;)

Regards,
Nydia Ywalmoriel
Autonomous Collective

Nor is 'right xxx' going to be the same for someone else in a given situation as it is for me, my mom, or the homeless guy living under the underpass east of the campus here

Hmm.... this is difficult, but I'm of the opinion there can be a line drawn, one one side of which there is the right course of action for everyone, and on the other side the wrong course of action- again, for everyone.

Stealing because you are starving and trying to feed your baby so it does not die? Wrong. Of course, I'd *DO* it in a second if put into that situation. That does not make it any less wrong.

Being a woman and walking with your face uncovered? Wrong in some places, perfectly acceptable in other places- based on how you were raised. Still, I'd argue that it is possible to boil this down to either an absolute right or wrong no matter who or where you are. However, changing the culture and the opinion of the people who hold the opposite view might be a very long road.

So, I recognize that culture has a huge role in what is right or wrong. I'll also say that despite this, an act is either right or wrong no matter what culture you are dealing with. In the case of the veil above, I think that it is every person's right to choose to cover their face or not as they wish. I also realize I'm condoning something that is a crime elsewhere.

To take it one step further, it is possible to believe a wrong is a right and a right is a wrong if you are taught that from an early age. Again, it does not make it any less right or any less wrong in an absolute sense.

What I was attempting to say is that *all* individuals have the capacity for discerning what 'right' action (etc) is at a particular moment and that attempting to impose the notion of 'sin' in order to generate desired (by the person/institution doing the imposing) action (etc) is inherently flawed and almost always self-serving.

I disagree, to some degree, but I'm also cynical. People are (by and large) self serving idiots- what is the "right" thing to do for many people is what they can get away with. Going into the levels or morality, most people operate at the "because I fear punishment" and "because I was told to do it" levels of morality.

So, even if they can distinguish the "correct" course of action based on what is "moral" to do, they (in many cases) will not choose to do that if they can choose a self serving result instead.

(caveat) I had to type this over the course of an hour in fits and starts, and while it makes sense to me, there might be some clarity problems to others

Something i read this afternoon that may be useful to some of those like me which think we are too smart and self reliant to need god.

But suppose instict still cries out, as it certainly will...."Nothing is going to turn me into a nonentity. If i keep on turning my life and my will over to the care of Something or Somebody else, what will become of me? I'll look like the hole in the doughnut." This, of course, is the process by which instinct and logic always seek to bolster egotism, and so frustrate spiritual development. The trouble is that this kind of thinking takes no real account of the facts. And the facts seem to be these: The more we become willing to depend upon a Higher Power, the more independent we actually are. Therfore dependence is really a means of gaining true independence of the spirit.

There are alot of really smart people on these boards as well as some big egos. Im glad there were arrogant S.O.Bs that came before me to show me the way.

...am convinced that there are or were selective advantages to having the capacity for religious awe/ecstacy and so we have the 'god module' in our brains (as Ramachandran terms it) and all the associated lovely religious and social baggage that goes with it...

You're not alone. You might eye the precis for this (http://www.secweb.org/bookstore/bookdetail.asp?BookID=733) book by Susan Blackmore and take a read through this (http://www.secweb.org/asset.asp?AssetID=313) article that pertains directly to what you suggest above. A brief read and good food for thought.

And the facts seem to be these: The more we become willing to depend upon a Higher Power, the more independent we actually are.

Phrases like these are a lollipop for the masses. Taste good, can suck on 'em a long time without losing the flavor, but ultimately lacking in substance.

A belief in ..... selective advantages to having the capacity for religious awe/ecstacy and so we have the 'god module' in our brains

That, or someone very violent and powerful convinced the first small group of humans that if they knew what was good for them, they'd better believe in his/her imaginary friend thousands of thousands of years ago.

Soon, a little cult sprang up who supported this first individual and (even though they could not see or hear him) preached the wonders of his imaginary friend and made life *very very* difficult for those that did not at least give lip service to the fact Imaginary Friend was real.

And we are still dealing with the fallout today.

In short /agree Cronuus you are spot on :)

Religion is teh pwn :b

I don`t begrudge people thier beliefs,everyone has a right to belive what they want.

My opinion about religion : People belive in an afterlife,mostly because they are unable to accept that when they die,they will simply cease to exist.They must belive that they will go on to a better place,etc
I wouldn`t want to live for eternity,it would get abit boring and repetitive after the first few millenia ;)

There are many,many reasons why people have religious beliefs.Conditioning from childhood,loss of loved ones,etc,etc,etc In fact there are so many reasons people belive in an afterlife i doubt i could list them all.
People often say,proove there is no god ( the christian one )
I would simply show them how many parts of the bible are simply not possible e.g. Noahs Ark,Adam and Eve,etc,etc.Also that the bible is so quite obviously invented by humans it`s laughable.I mean,for fucks sake even God the almighty being that created the universe is supposed to look like a male human :rollin I mean what possible use would an omnipresent being with infinate ability to shape everything have for say,fingernails,eyelashes,etc,etc Also i think it is simply remarkable how humans seem to so resemble apes :)
Notice how everything in the bible is gender biased to suit the age. It was Eves fault that adam got booted out of eden.It was Pandoras fault for unleasing whatever was in that box or whatever,and so on and so forth.

I`ll stop now because i could go on and on about why religion is BS,but that fact is that most religious people belive what they do so blindly that nothing could ever make them change thier minds. :(

I`ll also say this,it`s not PC at all but i have to say it.Out of all the religions i dislike the religion of Islaam the most,simply because it is by far the most oppressive,brutal and extremist of all religions i am aware of.However this doesn`t mean i hate muslims,because not all are maniac mass murderers.Alot are very nice people :)

/peace out

haha....


Ever read a book called "Guns, Germs and Steel"? Its about how and why western culture became predominate.. its a great read.. but.

in that book, the author talks about intelligence. In it, he demonstrates how a tribesman in a Bali jungle has the same level of intelligence as a Wall Street broker.. its just applied differently in order to help that person adapt and survive and prosper in the most efficent way. Neither could survive in each others world...

Faith and spituality have a correllation to that assertion.

You live your life, you take what YOU need to thrive and prosper.. You accept God in your life.... or you dont..
You are not more "enlightened" ... You havent figured anything out or broken free from anything. You just dont have that "need".. others do.. you have other needs in your life that perhaps other people dont..

Now to address some factual fuck ups.

Soon, a little cult sprang up who supported this first individual and (even though they could not see or hear him) preached the wonders of his imaginary friend and made life *very very* difficult for those that did not at least give lip service to the fact Imaginary Friend was real.
wow.. talk about having no conception of history.. Why dont you look up what early christians went though and suffered.. They were persecuted and often tortured, the term martyr came to being from christians who would not renounce god even under incredible torture and even death.

I would simply show them how many parts of the bible are simply not possible e.g. Noahs Ark,Adam and Eve,etc,etc.Also that the bible is so quite obviously invented by humans it`s laughable.I mean,for fucks sake even God the almighty being that created the universe is supposed to look like a male human I mean what possible use would an omnipresent being with infinate ability to shape everything have for say,fingernails,eyelashes,etc,etc Also i think it is simply remarkable how humans seem to so resemble apes
Notice how everything in the bible is gender biased to suit the age.
again.. your attacking another humans conception of what god is.. AT MOST all you can prove is that other human is wrong about the nature of god.. at most.

A "sin" is nothing else but something that some powerful puppetmasters have invented to prevent you from doing it.
They say something is bad because they don't want you to do it. That's all.
we had a whole thread about this Taino.. sorry you missed it. Sin of action and inaction.. The only rule is "love your neighbor"

It reminds me of the common argument that there is no such thing as altruism, that what appear to be altruistic acts all have some kind of reward, even if it's merely emotional. In this case, it seems, altruism would have to be redefined in some manner.
Very small minded and only applicable in singular acts.. It loses any relevance when applied to a longer time. A persons character or lifestyle override it to a large extent.. People like MLK, Mother Theresa, Gandhi, more and more people who devote their lives to a faith, a belief in the meaning of their lives and their duty to fellow man.

Creationists and other religious literalists, please feel free to assume that God lovingly formed that portion of each and every one of our little brains, and that folks like myself, Thormir, and other folks who 'haven't seen the light' just need to be 'turned on'...
"There are no Atheists in foxholes"
Your lives have no need for god.. so he isnt in them.. its that simple..
Your beliefs would change with your circumstances. Take everything you own, your comforts gone and your security a thing of the past... I doubt your atheism would hold as steadfast as peoples faith have.

So, I recognize that culture has a huge role in what is right or wrong. I'll also say that despite this, an act is either right or wrong no matter what culture you are dealing with. In the case of the veil above, I think that it is every person's right to choose to cover their face or not as they wish. I also realize I'm condoning something that is a crime elsewhere.

To take it one step further, it is possible to believe a wrong is a right and a right is a wrong if you are taught that from an early age. Again, it does not make it any less right or any less wrong in an absolute sense.
You talk of culture as if it was a foreign thing..
What IS culture.. its an invention and creation of man.. it is a reflection of the ideals of man onto itself. The remarkable thing is how VERY similar in morality almost all cultures are.

I disagree, to some degree, but I'm also cynical. People are (by and large) self serving idiots- what is the "right" thing to do for many people is what they can get away with. Going into the levels or morality, most people operate at the "because I fear punishment" and "because I was told to do it" levels of morality.
Are you saying people dont rape because of fear of punishment?
People dont cheat on their wives or husbands because of fear being caught?
Sorry.... your wrong.

well i think its simple.

If you have a relationship with God, then u understand it. If you dont, then u dont understand it. Its not a blind faith thing. sure there was a leap of faith to start out but since then ive seen results. I could go into detail but thats not appropriate to post my life story on the message board.

Ive lived life where i was god for many years and ultimately that didnt work well. Ive found a true alternative and it works for me. If you are happy with your life, then thats all that matters. gonna just post something else that popped out at me that i read yesterday

Much to our relief, we discovered we did not need to consider another's conception of God. Our own conception, however inadaquete, was sufficient to make the approach and to effect a contact with Him. As soon as we admited the possible existence of a Creative Inteligence, a Spirit of the Universe underlying the totality of things, we began to be possessed of a new sense of power and direction, provided we took other simple steps. We found that God does not make too hard terms with those who seek Him. To us, the Realm of the Spirit is broad, roomy, all inclusive; never exclusive or forbidding to those who earnestly seek. It is open, we believe, to all men.

Im not here to preach or to tell you what to do, im just trying to get people to open thier minds to possibilities beyond thier limited inteligence (and yes. as a human being, your inteligence is very very limited).

Since everyone seems painfully ignorant (myself included, up until about 2 years ago, several books, and alot of throwing aside old ideas) of the actual origin of the "Christian" church.


**NOTE**
For the non-judaeochristian bunch, skip down to the bottom. You don't want to read all of this, and it might not make much sense anyway.


The church became "official", if you will, around 200AD. It was a group of five different districts of sorts, each associated with a different city. Councels were held with members of all five cities when decisions needed to be made, and no one was All went fine and dandy, minus persecution and such, until about the 10th century.

Rome decided that it had a special priveledge through Peter (who had actually spent more time in another city, Constantinople, but don't tell that to them). This also rather strangely coincided with the rise of Charlemagne (spelling) trying to reform the old roman empire. During his reign, there were quite a few "Artifacts", including the Spear of Destiny and letters from the early church fathers - and were found out to be faked by Charlemagne in an attempt to centralize the Church. Even after his death though, the Roman church was a bitch. They broke with the other 4 cities on the counsel, "excommunicating" them. Again, that doesn't make much sense. Anyway, that church went on to become the Catholic Church.

Then Martin Luther came along and started the protestant reformation, spawning all the "Christian" churches today, abandoning all of the tradition and history that Catholic church had mutilated to give them power.

So now we have a split from a split. It's like a videotape of a videotape of an event. Not very accurate huh? And guess what? The original 4 cities on the counsel stayed together, and has humbly been existing AS IT WAS SINCE 200AD.

So anyway, all you protestants out there, Martin Luther would turn in his grave to see the church today, because Protestants, instead of ditching just one pope, have made everyone one into a pope - now we ALL are the final word on how we interpret the Bible...There is something better out there - or at least closer to what it should be.......


**The Bottom**
With the late Carl Sagan as my inspiration, I would suggest that the naturalists or humanists or evolutionists, whatever you want to call yourselves (and I'd probably be in this group as well as any other that I'm in - I don't see a contradiction) write up a code of morality, seperate from any religion, because damnit, if we ARE just animals (and I'll start a thread on that later), we need to rise above our instinctual fears and aggression and decide a set of rules that ALL humans can agree on. This needs to happen because until that exists (and it may and I'm simply ignorant of it, which means it hasn't caught on), the Ten Commandments are the best basic set of rules we have.

We need to quit this petty arguing. Let people believe what they want, as long as it doesn't violate this international morality code.

"That, or someone very violent and powerful convinced the first small group of humans that if they knew what was good for them, they'd better believe in his/her imaginary friend thousands of thousands of years ago."

Yeah, I get that, and what you wrote that followed, and agree that it's a very powerful force in shaping humanity (the forced propagation of in particular monotheistic patriarchal religions)... but it's not the whole story. Religious awe/ecstacy is a very real thing to those who have experienced it, and boy, is this is a situation where 'all roads lead to Rome'. People 'hook up' by chanting, meditating, performing an incredible variety of rituals, and they *get something* out of the experience, whether alone or one of those huge 'Warehouses 'o God' (as I like to call them) that litter cities across the Bible Belt. I don't think that it's any coincidence that Catholic masses are held in imposing buildings, with kaliedoscopic stained glass windows or brilliant murals, that the priests perfume the air with incense, that beautiful, ethereal music is played, often coming from an unseen source, that the Eucharist is taken with such ceremony... all of these are acts that help transport the believer into *another place* where they actually have a psychophysiological experience. Alas, although I was raised Episcopal, and sang in the choir for seven years, and went through confirmation with great ceremony, I never got the big hit to the brain. Although Jesus seemed like a pretty nice guy, I certainly didn't feel any need to 'turn my life over to him', or whatever my friends were doing, and the rampant misogyny and paternalism in the faith I found negating and distasteful.

My first bona-fide 'religious experience' didn't come until I became involved with the Old Religion (Wicca), in my mid twenties. As a biologist with a strong interest in endocrinology and a reasonably good understanding of how living organisms are physiologically and psychologically affected in all sorts of ways by solar and seasonal cycles, this was something that, at least, seemed to have some sort of basis in genuine human experience. I did solo practice, hooked up with a group following the Sumerian tradition for a while (and I can say that these folks were the 'real thing' in terms of both their practice and that they did so in a very down to earth and loving way /hug), and eventually wound up in a very small group of 5 individuals, all male except me and with a heavy interest in what is often called 'magical work'. Anyway... it was the autumnal equinox and we were all out on a rock on the north side of lake grapevine and it was a cool and foggy evening and we started in on some chanting and... I got the bullet to the brain. I had the undeniable sensation of being larger than, and outside myself, that the sounds we were making were coming *through* ourselves, etc... I have neither the intention, nor, in truth, the ability to describe the evening's events completely, but it was the first nondrug related incidence of being completely absorbed by such an experience that I had ever had. (I did also have once what I believe to be a bonafide and valid 'religious experience' while on a hallucinogenic drug which was extremely powerful but quite different).

In any case, I eventually became convinced that Wicca, while at its best it is a warm and loving practice that honors biological realities, is, like other forms of religious practice, another fairly arbitrary tool for stimulating one's God Module. And most Wiccans freely acknowledge this. If you've ever had the chance to read Drawing Down the Moon, Margot Adler's very insightful look at different pagan groups in the US, what you will find among the stories are some very frank and funny admissions from folks who started out engaging in some very off the wall practices as a joke (the Discordians, etc). Well, something curious happened. They had religious experiences anyway, and now there are practicing sects of Discordians, and even folks who follow the Necronomicon (a totally ficticious book whose name came from a series of H.P. Lovecraft horror stories, that someone ended up throwing a bunch of creepy stuff based on his references together into an actual book and, well, now there are folks who practice it (laughs)).

Anyway, this has run a lot longer than I intended, but I guess the thrust of my reply to you is this: don't be so quick to discount religion as *merely* a tool used by human societies to control and manipulate their members and others, although it has certainly been used frequently for that purpose. I think that there *is* something more basic at work here, and that the capacity to have faith (in something) seems pretty intrinsic to human beings, and interestingly enough, other primates and some other mammals (elephants) show the capacity for, and the demonstration of, some sort of 'religious' awe as well.

And on that note, may all beings be happy :) .

Regards,
Nydia Ywalmoriel
Autonomous Collective

If their was no religion in the world.. would there be peace on earth>?
Some people like to have 2 different views on this question..

Yes : What are most wars/disputes in the world about today.. religion. (end of story)
but..
No :If there was no religion, then their would be no reason to be good in life because there wouldnt be a afterlife. Causing mass caos.

IMO everyone goes where they want to when they die. Their is no such thing as hell.. it just a myth made up so people would do good things to prevent themselves from going there. Everyone goes to 'their own place' when they die (i hope)

If there was no religion, then their would be no reason to be good in life because there wouldnt be a afterlife. Causing mass caos.
This is such a bullshit bro.
I mean.. you asusme that all the good on earth, every nice action, every friendly behaviour is just being done "so I get in heaven in my afterlife". This is an incredible statement.
Does noone on this godforsaken planet just do good things just.. because THEY LIKE BEING NICE????

I am not nice just to get something in return. I am not doing business here, being nice in order to buy a heaven-ticket. I am being nice and friendly to my friends because I like them. I help the weak bewcause it makes me feel good. I listen to my friends and help them because I like them. And after all.. I do not kill people simply and solely because I have a brain and know that it is not good. I destroy a life when I kill someone. I have no right to do so. I don't need no religion for it. I just need a halfways working brain. That's all.

Yes, I have a religion. But it just has 2 rules.

1. Do what you want
2. but don't hurt anyone in any way by doing so

That's Tao


And this is all religion that I will ever need in my life and I will lead a happy life following these rules. And I will not ever kill anyone, start as chaos and do something to buy a haven-ticket.

My two cents,

I'm a pretty middle of the road guy when it comes to religion, I spent some time really getting into it for awhile a year or two back (In Taino's hometown at one point too oddly enough)

but my basic take on it is this.

I Believe in God, and Jesus Christ, and the tenants of my faith.

If I follow these things, I'll end up in "Heaven"

Or, I'm wrong there is no God, but I lived a good life anyway. Sucks that God isnt really there, but hey it turned out all right anyways

Or I have the choice to say .. no I don't buy it.

I decided to do whatever the hell I feel like etc etc

One of two things will happen, I'll be right, and there is no God, and when I die, thats it *poof* I'm gone.

Or I'm wrong he really is there, and i have to explain to him why I purposefully ignored him.

Or I'm wrong he really is there, and i have to explain to him why I purposefully ignored him.
How would a loving, caring, wonderful and overly forgovong god be so cruel and put you in this position and punish you like this?
This is exactly one of those inventions of the christian religion. A truly wonderful god would always welcome you and you have nothing to explain. I mean, he knows everything anyways, so why do you have to tell him?
This is the same as "telling your priest your sins so god can forgive them". How on earth do you need a priest for that? God knows this all anyways. So talk to god, ask him for forgiveness and you get it. You dont need a priest.
But... the hidden reason is, the priests wanted to know about you. They want to hear your sins. And this gives them power. They know all the secrets of all people in their community, means they have a huge power. Smart huh?

God, if he exists, he does not want you to go to church, pay church taxes, tell your sins to your priest, punish yourself. He wants you to live your life. Happy and in peace! This is all. Everything else, duties, stupid rules, punishment.. its al just inventions from the church to keep you afraid so you do what they want you to.

The gate that gives me life is the gate that gives me death. Only a few understand this intuitively.

Tao..

we had a whole thread about this Taino.. sorry you missed it. Sin of action and inaction.. The only rule is "love your neighbor"

You're being selective again Lleauaric. The Jewish & Christian faiths, in the words of Jesus, can be summed up in two rules, not one. From the gospel of Matthew Chapter 22 (NIV):

34 Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together.
35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question:
36 "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?"
37 Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'
38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
39 And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'
40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

You are not more "enlightened" ... You havent figured anything out or broken free from anything. You just dont have that "need".. others do.. you have other needs in your life that perhaps other people dont..

This applies to experiential knowledge but not to reason. I would consider a person capable of utilizing logic more enlightened than one who cannot do so. Of course, "enlightenment" is such a subjective term that it can easily be turned on its head (a dithering idiot who possesses simple-minded faith in <deity> could equally be termed enlightened by a fan of the deity).

Why dont you look up what early christians went though and suffered.. They were persecuted and often tortured, the term martyr came to being from christians who would not renounce god even under incredible torture and even death.

The poster was painting with a broader historical brush, from the beginning to a century or two ago. Persecution of Christians occurred off and on over 3 centuries before the Constantine's endorsement of the religion gave it power. Over the subsequent 15 centuries or so, Christians inflicted their own persecutions and tortures upon others, including each other. "Love they neighbor" indeed.

BTW, not believing in a god only removes that god from your life. It has no impact on the intrusion of that god's followers, which is the larger problem.

The only rule is "love your neighbor"

Scripturally this is just false, and it hardly originates with Christianity. A few centuries ago saying something like the above could result in charges of heresy.

Very small minded and only applicable in singular acts.. It loses any relevance when applied to a longer time.

Evidently it takes an even bigger mind to realize I was drawing an analogy to point out that arguing a word into meaninglessness necessitates the redefination of that word.

"There are no Atheists in foxholes"...Your beliefs would change with your circumstances.

A purely arrogant assumption. Get over yourself. Here's an anecdote from an atheist who was once in a foxhole. During a bombing a number of soldiers and civilians took refuge in a church. Ultimately, the structure lost stability and collapses, killing everyone but the atheist. Why? He was the only one who stood in a doorway; the rest were in the nave clutching their bibles and praying.

People still tout this phrase as if it was evidence for anything. One could just as easily say that under poor circumstances your faith would disintegrate.

Are you saying people dont rape because of fear of punishment? People dont cheat on their wives or husbands because of fear being caught?
Sorry.... your wrong.

Quite true. In fact, Christians sometimes ask me why I don't rape, murder, etc. My response: "Hey, if your religious beliefs are all that keep you from doing that kind of thing, go on believing."

If you have a relationship with God, then u understand it. If you dont, then u dont understand it. -- Boneskin

You're forgetting ex-Christians here, such as myself, Nydia and others, including ex-pastors. Many ex-Christians state that they felt they had a "relationship with god" as strong as any other's. While reasons for losing faith vary (maybe a few of them were stuck in a foxhole for too long), for most, they find that their beliefs just don't hold up under examination. But more than a few of these people understand perfectly well what it means to "have a relationship with god."

With the late Carl Sagan as my inspiration, I would suggest that the naturalists or humanists or evolutionists, whatever you want to call yourselves (and I'd probably be in this group as well as any other that I'm in - I don't see a contradiction) write up a code of morality --Kincaidia

Objectivism, utilitarianism, secular humanism, Taino's taoist rules above, the Golden Rule mentioned by L2 as if it were Jesus' idea, secular Buddhism...there's a lot out there, really that doesn't depend on religious belief. Take the good, leave the bad, have a good life.

I would consider a person capable of utilizing logic more enlightened than one who cannot do so.
depends on where you are standing..
To be in harmony with your world, whatever it is.. seems to be the highest form of enlightenment..
Is the Philosopher more enlightened than a tribesman who can survive alone in the harshest jungle?
depends on where you are standing..

Evidently it takes an even bigger mind to realize I was drawing an analogy to point out that arguing a word into meaninglessness necessitates the redefination of that word.
Ya.. I was speaking directly at the analogy. threads weave in and out and following different lines can be confusing.. If you dont stand by the original analogy, or the contination of the arguement in the subjectiveness of right and wrong.. then Mea Culpa.

The poster was painting with a broader historical brush, from the beginning to a century or two ago.
sorry.. thats just not how it read.. he basically made it seem some people got together and started oppressing people into belief.. conviently skimming over events that directly contrast that statement.

Scripturally this is just false, and it hardly originates with Christianity. A few centuries ago saying something like the above could result in charges of heresy
Fuck sciptures... truth has to be felt in your individual heart... if not.. then its not truth.. believe in yourself as you believe in your deity.

Fuck sciptures... truth has to be felt in your individual heart... if not.. then its not truth.. believe in yourself as you believe in your deity.

As sympathetic as I am to this viewpoint, it seems to me that you are basically inventing a god you feel comfortable with, one based on your own personal ideology. While it's certainly convenient (and believers of this sort tend to be easier to get along with than the bible thumping variety), ascribing personal beliefs to an ambiguous variation on the Christian theme rings specious to me.

This isn't a point in need of answer; it's more illustrative than anything else.

it seems to me that you are basically inventing a god you feel comfortable with, one based on your own personal ideology.

And thats my point.. Thats what religion IS becoming..
I firmly believe that church dogma is on the way out. People seek out churches now with Ministers or Priests with interesting and intelligent and relevant sermons and viewpoints.
Its MY faith.. Its MY life..
We have this wonderful thing of freewill and consciousness. Of Individuality.
The world was a different place when churches were what they are.. they arent needed in the way they once were..
Mostly tradition now... community...

I dont "invent" God.. , its how god comes to me.. its how I interpret his presence in my life. I would say that man CANT understand god in a independant fashion, you can only understand in the context of his place in your life.
90% of the people I know will say "Ya.. I believe in God.. in my own way"
Thats what its all about.. Coming to find God in your own way.
Its convienient for an atheists arguement to use flaws in Church dogma to disprove God exists.. All you end up proving is man is fallible.

In 50 years.. thats religion in America.. individual, yet meeting in a church for community and fellowship... at least thats how it is around me.. in the North East..

Have I mentioned that I'm an ordained minister (http://www.ulc.org) recently?

...seriously :)

wow.. talk about having no conception of history.. Why dont you look up what early christians went though and suffered.. They were persecuted and often tortured, the term martyr came to being from christians who would not renounce god even under incredible torture and even death.

Hi, L2, sorry you read my post incorrectly. That is my own personal, private version of how religion got started- not just christianity, religion itself. It was meant to be funny, but I've accepted the fact that my sense of humor makes zero sense to just about everyone else. Such is life.

Another idea that I toss around from time to time (and more related to Christianity) is that there are a great number of people who can not accept that the are done and turned off like a light when they die.

My post was not addressing Christianity at all, but rather the "god module" discussed in the quote at the top of my post. As for the martyrs, they were just the same as the countless heathens and pagans who met their ends at the hands of the same people- it is just that the others have not had a rabid postmortem fan club spreading words of their deeds and deaths all over the place.

The REALLY funny part (and the one you glossed over) is that once it was realized what a powerful tool of oppression and ignorance Christianity could be... the same culture that had been putting Christians to death just a few generations in the past could be found embracing Christianity with both arms.

God, if he exists, he does not want you to go to church, pay church taxes, tell your sins to your priest, punish yourself. He wants you to live your life. Happy and in peace! This is all. Everything else, duties, stupid rules, punishment.. its al just inventions from the church to keep you afraid so you do what they want you to.


Ahh, yes... I forgot that you have complete access to the inner workings of the mind of God and somehow know exactly what he wants.



Anyways, I know if *I* were omnipotent, I'd make a bunch of mini humans on a planet for sheer entertainment. What else is there to do, he has an infinate amount of time.
I would want them to worship me, kick each other's asses, then worship me some more.

Damn.. should have read the rest of that post. Seems L2 is getting a bit rabid on the subject.

Your beliefs would change with your circumstances. Take everything you own, your comforts gone and your security a thing of the past... I doubt your atheism would hold as steadfast as peoples faith have.

Wrong. Get over yourself. I might find myself at the Christian Mission to get some food, but that is about it. See, in my heart and with all of my being, I know that there is nothing and nobody who is going to help me get back on my feet. No God in Heaven, yadda yadda yadda. Nothing, just people trying to get by every day.

You talk of culture as if it was a foreign thing..
What IS culture.. its an invention and creation of man.. it is a reflection of the ideals of man onto itself. The remarkable thing is how VERY similar in morality almost all cultures are.
Some cultures *are* alien to me.
They appear similar if you focus on the similarities. They can also seem very different if you choose to focus on that. I'm not seeing a point here beyond that, really.


Are you saying people dont rape because of fear of punishment?
People dont cheat on their wives or husbands because of fear being caught?
Sorry.... your wrong.

Nope. I'm right. I'm not saying this applies to everyone- in fact you'd have to understand the levels of morality we were talking about, which is where these quotes came from. There are people who operate on that level- who will not rob a bank or cheat on their taxes because (and only because) they are afraid of getting caught. To them, punishement is the deterrent.
Kind of like going to Hell is flashed out to get converts to Christianity. Nothing like throwing out neverending torment and punishement to reel those folks (and their wallets) in!

For Nydia:
Religious awe/ecstacy is a very real thing to those who have experienced it, and boy, is this is a situation where 'all roads lead to Rome'. People 'hook up' by chanting, meditating, performing an incredible variety of rituals, and they *get something* out of the experience, whether alone or one of those huge 'Warehouses 'o God' (as I like to call them) that litter cities across the Bible Belt.

These same mechanisms were used in some primitive societies to program the warriors to kill. Chanting, dancing, drug use, whatever- the point was to quickly change the way they operated to make them into killers.

Music has been shown to stimulate areas in the brain that you would not expect- such as the visual centers. Chanting and dancing have been shown to have a dopamine effect in the brain.

My assertion is that you don't need religion to trigger these areas, you just need to know how to do it.

Don't you think that if god exists in the way it is described all over.. that he would appear and fucking get rid of all doubt so we follow him?
Don't you think its stupid to be the most powerful, all knowing and perfect being in the universe and let everyone doubt in you because they don't see you, don't have proof?
An existing god would come down to earth and show himself, speak to us and show us the right path.

But nooo... we pray and "hear the voice of god". Yeah right. Its all just illusion. People see god appearing to them in a vision. Thats as good as it gets. Take a fucking picture of god. Drag him to a talk show! Sounds silly? Well, a god that gives us 23948934 rules to follow but does not give us one fucking proof that he even exists sounds much more silly to me.

I believe in a force, in an intelligence. Something created our life. But.... since this force does not appear, this force does not come down and give us all clear directions, I personally use my brain and decide that this force does not want me to follow any rules and simply do what I personally like to do.
Means I am a good part of society but I follow whatever belief that I want.

This force clearly want to stay the hell out of our lifes. Because else this force would come and talk to us! This force created us and this force knows that people need proof to believe and that people are uncertain. So you either
a) come down and make sure that we are on the right path
b) don't interfere with us at all and let us all live our own life the way we want.

And b) clearly means that there are no rules from god. This is bullshit. God, the force, the intelligence, allah, jesus, they want us to do what we want, believe what we want.
Rules about religion are nothing els ebut inventions from powerhungry businessmen trying to controll people.


Think about it. If you wanted people to follow you, people to follow your rules and if you were the most powerful thing in the universe (god), then you would fucking come down to earth and make sure, give proof and talk to them personally. And if you don't, you do willingly not want them to follow any strange fucked up rules. And god clearly does not come down to earth, this means to me that your whole god and religion thingie is a simple lie!
I will stick to my rules of life that I do what I want and don't hurt anyone. This makes me personally feel good and enjoy my life. Have a good day.

If you were truly sure god doesn't exist, you wouldn't be trying so hard to convince yourselves.

/nod Crist0

Ibudin

If God truely exists .. then please introduce him/her/it to me...

Crist0, your point makes absolutely no sense. This is a discussion forum. We talk about religion in this thread. I don't give a flying fuck about what you believe. But in this discussion "God" is the topic and I add my opinion to it.

Great, a forum about religion and you curse at him. Smooth.

Taino, Crist0's statement is another common lollipop believers use to try to justify this or that. Empty in meaning, but it sounds good, and it's useful to people who can't contend with the logical objections to their beliefs (well, useful til they're called on it anyway).

Child: What do you mean there's no Santa Claus?!
Momsy: There just isn't, dear. He's not real.
Child: Well if you were sure he didn't exist, you wouldn't be trying to convince yourself!

I've gone from Christian to agnostic to atheist over a period of 12 years or so, and nothing I've learned during that time or since suggests I should think otherwise. I'm not trying to convince myself of anything, more like sharing results of my research and dispelling the illogical thoughts possessed by some of my fellow human beings.

For example, L2's belief system is based on personal revelation and belief in what he sees as god's nature and god's desires. While I term this the "wishful thinking" approach to Christianity, he's right in that it's quite common in one form or another and growing moreso. Can it hold water on a logical level? Seems unlikely, for at least a few reasons:

*Different people receive different revelations, from L2 to Zehn to the lady who sticks her baby in an oven because god told her he was a demon to people with very different views from the previous three and each other.

*The above could be justified, to say that god's will is tailor-made for each person, but some of the above are very willing to interfere in the lives of other believers in an attempt to change their viewpoint. Not very efficient.

*With this method, the god relies on people's individual interpretations of inner feelings. I can't think of a worse medium for transmission of divine thoughts and wishes. Far better to have a set of standards, which leads us to...

*The bible. If it's now simply a guidebook where you can pick and choose what you like and discard the rest, it loses 90% of its purpose (the rest being quasi-historical). We can see this in L2's posts on this thread: early on he all but quotes chapter and verse; later it's "Fuck scriptures!" This sort of belief system allows for pretty much anything. While one could say, "But it's god's wish to believe and act thus," I'm a bit too cynical to think that the human isn't the deciding factor in what is believed (well, that and I don't believe in gods).

All that said, if L2 and those like him live decent lives conducive to healthy society and all that, then it's all the same to me. The great thing about his type of belief system is that it's low impact compared to the hammer of organized religion.

The reason for quoting scripture was that We can see this in L2's posts on this thread: early on he all but quotes chapter and verse;

Bleh... cheap shot.. and you know better...

Context.. context.. I quoted the bible in reference to the gay bishop thing and other times people made false claims about what God said or wanted... I didnt say.. "Oh this what I think" it was more of a "no.. thats not what the bible says.."
You quoted scripture back.. does that mean you believe in it?
When I say "fuck scripture", nothing is changed.. I have always discounted OT and taken what I want from the bible... I take what speaks to me...


I dont mind debate.. but dont be dishonest in your assertions.

the problem with a lot of you with your "issues" with christianity (which maybe you should just stop caring if christianity is such bullshit to you) is that you base your whole opinion of christianity on certain churches or people who pounded on your door trying to save your soul. Most of these people have an interpretation of the bible that is only based upon what their preacher told them. Who would actually read the bible? Oh my. Too much work. So you can be incredibly misguided because these people will interpret things in odd ways or in ways that suit it to their own means. Organized religion has screwed up a lot of things. Look at the Catholics vs. Protestants battles that have been going on since the beginning of Protestantism. These organizations want control. If they truly followed Jesus they'd not have these huge expensive temples and use their money to bbuy fancy cars and what not. Did Jesus have a car? OMGOSH NO!~
Anyway I'm getting crazy on here. Don't listen to the churches. Churches are simply meeting places so old people feel a sense of community, old people don't like arguments, old people are set in their ways. The youth of churches are simply church-goers' children or new recruits who are out to show each other just how christian they can be; so they belong, so they have a sense of community. Everyone wants to belong. Church is great for these people, I'm not knocking it really. But if you want the best understanding of true christianity then read the only source available and that's the bible. Unless you just want to start an endless debate, in which case you are successful.

If God truely exists .. then please introduce him/her/it to me...

Do you believe that time exists?

I've seen the effects of time. I've witnessed time passing. But I have yet to meet time. I've never shook his hand, yet I know it's there.

But by your resoning, because I cannot meet time, obviously he cannot exist!

I've gone from Christian to agnostic to atheist over a period of 12 years or so, and nothing I've learned during that time or since suggests I should think otherwise. I'm not trying to convince myself of anything, more like sharing results of my research and dispelling the illogical thoughts possessed by some of my fellow human beings.
That line could have been from me. Well maybe I wouldn't have expressed myself so well. I wholeheartly agree with you.
Its been 12 years since I said no to christianity. I was a "good" member of the christian (catholic) belief until then.

And L2. Time is not a person, an intelligence, a being. God is. That's a huge difference. And god is mighty, powerful. He (due to christian belief) created men the way he felt like, earth, life, the universe. He makes rules, he wants us to do things, he punishes us, he speaks to us.
Did time ever speak to you?
Can't you see the difference and why the sentence "Please introduce me to him" makes perfect sense?

wasnt me taino.

But since you mentioned me...

How do you claim to have any knowledge about what God is or isnt..
Why a Being? Why an Entity?
You assume so much...
Then limit what you know to what others told you, or what others believe.
>shrug<

We live in a new age.. where information is availble.. Centralized controlled religion is on the way out.. as we have evolved.. so has our spirtual understanding and our relationship with our creator..
It is as it should be.. personal.. private... individual.
How do you claim to have any knowledge about what God is or isnt.. Why a Being? Why an Entity?
You assume so much...
Then limit what you know to what others told you, or what others believe.

Based on the two statements above, it seems that everyone has as much right (and is as correct as anyone else) whenever they make a claim about god.
If the governing bodies that create dogma are invalid *and* each person's relationshio with god is individual-
It seems any claim made by anyone on the subject is as right and as valid as any other claim.

Taino, Crist0's statement is another common lollipop believers use to try to justify this or that. Empty in meaning, but it sounds good, and it's useful to people who can't contend with the logical objections to their beliefs (well, useful til they're called on it anyway).


Actually my "lollipop" is pointing out how much trouble you all seem to go through trying to justify your views, mostly to other people who feel the same(the "atheist" crowd here is making 3/4 of all the posts on this thread).

I'm not religious, and I don't fall into your "believer" category, however I am not going to write 3 pages a day here to try to solidify my insecurities on the issue either. Ask yourself why you are preaching atheism so vehemently. If there's no god, who cares? Why does it bother you so much that other people think there is?

the problem with a lot of you with your "issues" with christianity (which maybe you should just stop caring if christianity is such bullshit to you) is that you base your whole opinion of christianity on certain churches or people who pounded on your door trying to save your soul. Most of these people have an interpretation of the bible that is only based upon what their preacher told them.

Actually, Mokas, for myself my "issues" are with assertions of Christianity as a valid belief based on what I find to be faulty reasoning or historical misinformation presented as fact. A lot of this is quite independent of any one preacher or sect, though most of my attention has been focused on fundamentalists, since they tend to be the most political.

How do you claim to have any knowledge about what God is or isnt..

Well, for one thing we can go by the claims about god made by believers. For example, we're told god has certain characteristics. If those characteristics are self-contradictory or do not match what we observe in the real world, it's worth pointing out. This kind of thing doesn't apply so much to your own, rather malleable point of view, but you're the exception rather than the rule.

Actually my "lollipop" is pointing out how much trouble you all seem to go through trying to justify your views, mostly to other people who feel the same(the "atheist" crowd here is making 3/4 of all the posts on this thread).

What are you talking about? I've mostly been debating and discussing with L2, who is a believer of some stripe, and the occasional drive by. And if an atheist or agnostic or whatnot makes a good or faulty point, that's worth acknowledging. And really, it's no trouble at all, thanks.

I'm not religious, and I don't fall into your "believer" category, however I am not going to write 3 pages a day here to try to solidify my insecurities on the issue either. Ask yourself why you are preaching atheism so vehemently. If there's no god, who cares? Why does it bother you so much that other people think there is?

Well, maybe you can solidify your insecurities elsewhere. I'm well past the point of being insecure about religion. And seriously, where have I or anyone else preached anything? In fact, the discussion has spent very little time on atheism and more time on the intricacies and pitfalls of relgious belief.

Would it bother you if your non-belief resulted in jail time, ostracism or execution? In some countries these things happen, and it happened in the US a couple centuries ago. George Bush senior stated during his presidency that he didn't think atheists should be citizens. Personally, I'd rather bring this kind of discussion out in the open rather than bury my head in the sand.

And besides, I like debate. You can learn a lot, teach a lot, and while minds rarely change understanding is a good thing.

Why do you keep putting Human definitions on what god is, or isnt? God doesnt "want" or whatever.. he just is.. or isnt.
If 100 years ago, someone said Saturn was made of green cheese, and someone else disproved that.. The existance of Saturn wouldnt be in doubt, but only the first persons ideas. Saturn is still there.. just not what we thought it was.

I skipped the rest of the posts because I couldn't stop thinking about how horrible an analogy this was :\ . It doesn't work the same way...Saturn is a viewable and substantial object. We can take pictures of it and such. Now show me a picture of your god, please. And, I'll tell you what, you can say he's made of whatever you'd like to.

Crist0's statement is another common lollipop believers use to try to justify this or that. Empty in meaning, but it sounds good, and it's useful to people who can't contend with the logical objections to their beliefs

Exactly :)

Would it bother you if your non-belief resulted in jail time, ostracism or execution? In some countries these things happen, and it happened in the US a couple centuries ago.


Please point out to me anywhere in US history where someone's religion was the basis for jail time or execution.

Keep tossing out those labels at me :) if you payed attention you would notice I am not religious, Rev Mandari.

Saturn is a viewable and substantial object. We can take pictures of it and such
Was it so much 100 years ago?

Actually, Saturn has been known to be a real object since the time of Aristotle :) . Because it is a large gas giant, it is visible with the naked eye, and has been used by astrologers and astronomers since the time of the ancient Greeks; the festival of Saturnalia, among other events, was named after the planet (which is supposed to have sinister effects in ones chart it would seem). Details of the planet's surface have been visible and charted over the last 4 centuries, ever since the first telescopes came into use.

Interesting choice of an anology to challenge btw, considering the topic! Galileo, one of the inventors of the modern telescope, got in serious trouble with the Pope (faced charges by the Inquisition, was brought to Rome in chains, and *imprisoned*) for daring to produce a publication stating that the Earth was not the center of the universe, based on evidence he gathered using just such an instrument to study planetary motion... An interesting timeline of the events and religous politics surrounding Galileo's life and work can be found here:

es.rice.edu/ES/humsoc/Gal...eline.html (http://es.rice.edu/ES/humsoc/Galileo/galileo_timeline.html)

Regards,
Nydia Ywalmoriel
Autonomous Collective

I just find it gigglesome that people think that without religion, we'd all just be 'nice' to eachother anyways. I'm sorry, but without eternal consequences, I think I'd stop waking up at 5 AM to go to work and just grab a gun, kill a couple people and then pop myself off to avoid criminal justice which is historically based on religion anyways.

Afterall, without any sort of god in place to hand out eternal punishment, why not? Without religion, killing is not wrong. There is no 'nice' save beyond what your own standards are. And if you don't believe that you only have to look around to get an idea of how widly varied peoples opinions are.

I'm not a big fan of organized religion, but it helps. It gives people something to do that will hopefully bring them closer to faith.

Anyways, I'm missing the Packer game. Late's.

Without religion, killing is not wrong.
That has got to be the silliest thing you have said so far...

Not really =/ I would probably take out some other people with me when I died, if I didn't know I'd go straight to hell for it. The idea of heaven and hell keeps tons of people in line.

"I'm not a big fan of organized religion, but it helps."

Rofl! Helps what? Helps provide 'divine' sanction for the oppression of groups of people and individuals by each other, by methods including killing? Just look at the suicide bombings going on almost daily in Israel, and countless other examples around the world and tell me how much organized religion is 'helping' prevent people from committing crimes against each other.

At best, organized religion is 'crime-neutral' in terms of the amount of crime/oppression it generates versus the amount of crime it dissuades. Basic ethics can be and are coded into law, and are self-evident to most people, without any need to resort to organized religion.

Sincerely,
Nydia Ywalmoriel
Autonomous Collective

Heya Nydia..

How many atheists are here?

showcase.netins.net/web/m...ssions.htm (http://showcase.netins.net/web/mamrelund/about_missions.htm)

once again.. the evil christian faith strikes..

I read this read the day it started then missed a few days & am too damn lazy to read what I've missed, but here is my 1/2 cp worth:

You can say whatever you want to on this board but NOTHING anyone says on an EQ message board is going to change someone else's religious beliefs. Type away until you are blue in the face..you are still just wasting your time & energy trying to tear holes in other peoples beliefs. Believe in who & what you will & let others do the same.

Dayzee JustDayzee
Knight of Erollisi
Autonomous Collective

Ohhh n0s!1one1!

Someone doesn't like the debates we have here and thinks they are pointless, yet feels the need to come in and make a post about how pointless they are!

Of course, that doesn't change the fact that she's right.

Hey Dayzee! :)

I'm all for 'living and let live', regarding people's beliefs - and I wasn't challenging Zehn's faith in that post :) . However, I *am* challenging his assertion that organized religion 'helps', when all is taken into balance, people behave morally, or more importantly, that the imprint of organized religion is somehow required for individuals to be able to distinguish right from wrong, or for societies to function in an ethical and civil fashion...

To try to convince Zehn, or anyone else posting here, to change their *faith* would be pointless. To point out that some of the conclusions that they reach using that faith as a springboard are, in my opinion, bullshit? Fair game, and you betcha... :)

Warm regards,
Nydia

Does noone on this godforsaken planet just do good things just.. because THEY LIKE BEING NICE????

Umm,i do :) just not on these boards very often ;)

Btw,my opinion on most major religions is that they were invented to control people.It`s very simple really,tell an average person that if they do what you say and follow these rules,they`ll get into an infinate paradise.Disobey and you`ll end up in an unimaginable land of torture.
Uhhmmm,k

I would probably take out some other people with me when I died, if I didn't know I'd go straight to hell for it.

The mentality of some people amases me...

How do you claim to have any knowledge about what God is or isnt..
Why a Being? Why an Entity?
You assume so much...
Then limit what you know to what others told you, or what others believe.
>shrug<
I personally believe i a force. This all, the universe, all beings, life has been created by a force, an intelligence. This is not what I am arguing about. I am a spiritual person. I don't believe all that shit I get from the christian church (I dont know the others well enough to ramble about em). There's a huge difference between arguing the existance of a force, of a "god" and arguing the christian church/belief.

I personally argue the christianity. All those rules and all that bullshit they tell you about what you have to do, how you have to act, how god is and what he wants you to do... this is what I am fighting against. You know very well that the christian church is giving you rather exact explenations about who god is, what he wants (it starts with "he"... maybe she's black?), how you have to live your life and and and. God is personally speaking to us. Moses did, Noah did, Jesus was a real person and so on. This is very much defined. If someone talks to you in person, it damn sure is a being. After all god himself made the 10 rules (dunno the word in english). There are thousands of examples to show why god is a being, god is a man, god is cruel, god speaks, god is wanting you to do things for him, god is making rules you have to follow, god is punishing, god is a mean bastard, and yet, god can also be very nice.. blabla.

This is 1:1 what the christian church is telling us about god. And this is what I am arguing.

But I am not arguing about the fact that "something out there, no clue what and no clue how" created life, created universe. I am very spiritual myself. But I believe in life and in myself. I don't pray to a god nor do I see any reason to act in any way different then to do what I want and not to hurt anyone by doing so.

That sounds alot like the Chewbaca defence.

Just kidding there but as a dedicated agnostic I have nothing to offer here.

Heh..

Me and you are pretty close in faith then Taino.. close...
I lean more on tradition than you do, but I essentially agree with everything you posted.

Except the part about speaking.. you take speaking too literally...

Ever been to a art gallery? Ever had a painting "speak" to you? Or a great song? Or a poem?
Get my point?
Sometimes something touches something deep in a persons "soul", for lack of a better word.
I cant explain it.. and neither can anyone else.. it just does..

That is essentially what Islam teaches as well Taino, why limit your efforts to debunking christianity? Especially given that christianity's dark times were a thousand years ago for the most part and Islam's are still happening right now?

given that christianity's dark times were a thousand years agoWe are (on this planet), right now, in this second, killing people in the name of god and good and justice. Don't lean out of that window, you may fall.

Btw,my opinion on most major religions is that they were invented to control people.It`s very simple really,tell an average person that if they do what you say and follow these rules,they`ll get into an infinate paradise.Disobey and you`ll end up in an unimaginable land of torture.
Uhhmmm,k

Might want to clue Jews in on that.. since there is nothing in the jewish faith about heaven or hell..(at least, until recently, for a segement)..
Judiasm was around for 1000s of years with people thinking that when they died, they were reborn (with no memory or connection, therefore the individual was destroyed), IF They thought that.. but Death was/is most certainly an end.

Not really =/ I would probably take out some other people with me when I died, if I didn't know I'd go straight to hell for it. The idea of heaven and hell keeps tons of people in line.

If this is the case I really don't have much hope for mankind

Please point out to me anywhere in US history where someone's religion was the basis for jail time or execution.

Ever hear of the Salem witch trials (a microcosm of similar persecution practiced throughout the Christian world)? The religious beliefs of the accusers led to the execution of 'X' number of women (Someone else can fill in the blank). In the last decade there've been a couple instances where Christian communities have arranged for practitioners of Wicca to lose their jobs as teachers (one sort of "ostracism" that I mentioned in my post). Slavery also qualifies in this regard.

Afterall, without any sort of god in place to hand out eternal punishment, why not? Without religion, killing is not wrong.

Humans are social creatures. Wanton murder is not conducive to societal development, so it is natural for that sort of thing to be restricted within societies. And this is what we see, even in societies where there is no such thing as eternal punishment in the afterlife.

After all god himself made the 10 rules (dunno the word in english).

We call them the 10 commandments, though there are actually 325 or so of these rules handed out in the Torah. A lot of them deal with things like the unclean periods for men and women, burnt offerings, and how it is forbidden to wear two different kinds of cloth (those cotton/polyester blends will cause you a lot of trouble in the end =)

That is essentially what Islam teaches as well Taino, why limit your efforts to debunking christianity?

I can answer this for myself. First, Christianity is far more pervasive in the US than Islam. Second, I know a lot more about Christianity than Islam, and that's likely the case for most of the posters to these forums. Not much use arguing to a wall. Third, Islam is leagues "tighter" in its concepts than Christianity, and the Koran suffers much less from contradictions and innaccuracies. It does contain a few, most importantly some that are proof against the usual Islamic denial: that translation has altered the meaning.

We are (on this planet), right now, in this second, killing people in the name of god and good and justice. Don't lean out of that window, you may fall.

Didn't know this type of activity was limited to Christianity.

Yes, I've heard of the salem witch trials mandari, let me repeat..

Please point out to me anywhere in US history where someone's religion was the basis for jail time or execution.

I'll point out in case you're not understanding, the salem witch trials were in the 1690s, the US declaration of independence was in 1775, ergo the salem witch trials are not US history but British colonial history. Just admit you put your foot in your mouth over the assertion that people in the US have been jailed and executed for their religious beliefs.


We are (on this planet), right now, in this second, killing people in the name of god and good and justice. Don't lean out of that window, you may fall.


We are killing in the name of christianity? Where? I know I am not, I know my country is not..is your country? I can't think of any mormon terrorists for example, or methodist...but I can think of a lot of islamic terrorists...

So again, why are you limiting yourself to going after christianity when Islam has a far worse track record in recent history? Doesn't it make sense that if you are against violence in the name of religion you should be just as(if not more) opposed to islamic violence now as christian violence centuries ago?

Many people don't know that Osama (or Usama, as the local Fox channel says) bin Ladin is actually a devout Episcopalean, and attends services faithfully each Sunday.

Religion doesnt kill people..

Religion is an idea.. a concept.. a feeling..

People kill people. People lie, manipulate and coerce. They take the spirit of the idea and twist it and mangle it. Religion is tool.. but one that would have been easily substituted for whatever these demogogues needed to meet their ends.

It is a shame that people cannot tell the difference between Faith and Religion.

Despite, my Fuck Scripture statement.. I still find meaning and relevance in alot in there.. I dont take it to verbatim though, nor do I attach any carved in stone, musta happened zealotry to them

Bleh.. lunch hour is too short.. gg

Actually, Crist0, I glossed over your question and presented an example to support what I'd had in mind when I wrote that statement. I did write "US" so was right in idea but wrong in words, at least with that example.

If church-sanctioned slavery, and all the brutality that institution abetted, doesn't count as imprisonment and execution, I don't know what does. Additionally, in 1882 the Cavalry was sent to Utah to disperse the Mormon population and confiscate their property. The reason? They refused to halt their practice of polygamy (which was recently outlawed in the US). Lastly, there have been a number of cases of imprisonment or legal action taken against parents who, for religious reasons, deny themselves or their children necessary medical treatment.

L2, if a religious text explicity mandates the persecution of a set of individuals, what are the followers to do? How can they be blamed for inflicting ills in the name of their religion (using your criteria)? I think your view is a bit idyllic, even if I agree with the spirit of it.

Despite, my Fuck Scripture statement.. I still find meaning and relevance in alot in there..

Only a fool wouldn't. There's obviously some good lessons to be learned, along with some that aren't so good. The practical person takes the good wherever he may find it.

L2, if a religious text explicity mandates the persecution of a set of individuals, what are the followers to do? How can they be blamed for inflicting ills in the name of their religion (using your criteria)?

on the assumption that this isnt a pure hypothetical.. Im going on given interpretation of previous events in history..
i.e. Inquisition

I think we as humans went though very dark times.. Times when the individual had almost no control of their destiny and were molded and manipulated into what powers greater than them wanted..
Torture, Murder, War.. these are without a doubt not mandated by the 'core' message of Christ. Yet they were carried out in his name during times. How does this come about?
$$
I think youll find out that almost any time a action of violence or aggression is done in the name of God.. youll find the TRUE reason was economic.. like most things.
Another principle reason for the start of the Inquisition was
economics and money. When the idea of the Inquisition was becoming
more widely known of, Spain was not in a very prosperous time. Spain
had used a lot of money and resources during the reconquest of
Granada, and the wars in Spain and Italy. The government began to
realize that they were low on money, and that they needed to replenish
their financial funds, before their signs of weakness were evident to
the public. If that ever happened, the people might take advantage of
the weakness and try to overthrow the government. Therefore, the
officials and monarchs needed to find a way to acquire money. They
were able to get the necessary money using the Inquisition. They
killed hundreds of thousands of Jews and took their possessions,
their money, and anything else they could find. They used these things
to replenish the wealth of the government.
or the Salem Witch hunts.
Many of the people accused had property disputes..
So again.. the idea perverted and used in a evil way.

We dont live in those ages.. where we didnt know better, and didnt have access to the information we do today.. Religion had a power over people that was sometimes, warped and abused to serve personal ends..
TOday.. there is no excuse..
I dont excuse the evil of man to other man in other ages.. Im just grateful that we are in a world were it is becoming increasingly harder to use the power of religion in such a way..

What if ... (and yes this is far fetched) mankind is in his/her evolution towards becomming God?

If church-sanctioned slavery, and all the brutality that institution abetted, doesn't count as imprisonment and execution, I don't know what does. Additionally, in 1882 the Cavalry was sent to Utah to disperse the Mormon population and confiscate their property. The reason? They refused to halt their practice of polygamy (which was recently outlawed in the US). Lastly, there have been a number of cases of imprisonment or legal action taken against parents who, for religious reasons, deny themselves or their children necessary medical treatment.


Slavery was not because of the religion of the slaves, the mormons broke the law, it was not because of their religion. Your last point is exactly the same, the people are being prosecuted for child neglect, not because of their religion.

That's like saying a satanist sacrifices a baby, but he isn't going to be prosecuted for the baby's death, but because he is a satanist. You're really just digging a deeper hole for yourself on this one, just admit you were wrong when you claimed people in the US have been imprisoned or executed just because of their religion.

on the assumption that this isnt a pure hypothetical..

There are actually a few lines in the NT that allow for violence. "I come not to bring peace but a sword," for example (not the best, but it rapidly comes to mind). Also, there's a line in John, I think, that all but excuses any violence brought against Jews. Granted, there is much to discourage violence as well, but those aren't the lines you'll hear quoted when the Christian soldiers march onward. The Koran also makes allowances for violence against those "not of the Book" (I quoted a couple of them long ago when Jedd was still about).So it's not a pure hypothetical by any stretch.

I do agree that economic factors can influence religious pogroms and crusades (and just about anything else, at that). However, I don't think this exculpates "religion" from all guilt. Divinity should know better in choosing its words if it seeks to avoid such things.

One thing is certain, though; times are better now than then.

That's like saying a satanist sacrifices a baby, but he isn't going to be prosecuted for the baby's death, but because he is a satanist. You're really just digging a deeper hole for yourself on this one, just admit you were wrong when you claimed people in the US have been imprisoned or executed just because of their religion.

So... what you are saying is that people should be required to abandon selective aspects of their religion in order to blend better into the majority's opinion on how they ought to live?

I'm having a hard time following that line of thought. What about Rastafarians smoking marijuana? American Indians using peyote in their services(legal in some areas, illegal in others)?

If something is intrinsic to your religion but it is illegal and you are jailed because of it... it seems that drawing a line where religion stops and legality begins is a pretty difficult thing to do.

Or am I missing the argument?

Yeah, oddly enough when your religion involves neglecting children or sacrificing babies, I would have to say people should abandon that facet of their religion in order to abide by society's laws...which strangely enough prohibit human sacrifice and neglect of children.

Call me crazy.

Oh, sure, I agree.

However, that neglects the drug use questions.

I found this on a board I frequent and thought I'd share.I liked it anyways.....



PATHWAYS

Well, it had been yet another bad day in the office, and once again it
was the fault of that new girl, MaryAnne. She is one of those Wiccans,
a so called witch. How can anyone in their right mind make this claim,
knowing that it goes against God and all of the teachings of the
bible? She doesn't even have the common decency to keep her satanic
symbol, her pentagram necklace hidden from the view of the decent,
God fearing people in the office. She has some nerve. I find that I
cannot hate her for this though, for I know that she has been
deceived. Satan works his evil in ways that she cannot see. I've seen
that so called Wiccan Rede that she has tacked to the wall above her
computer. On the surface, it looks like a decent loving belief, but
all one must do is look, look closely and see that by practicing this
way, and not embracing Jesus Christ as savior she is on the pathway
to hell. As I've said, it was a bad day in the office.

Three times in the past few weeks I have been called in to see my
supervisor, and he has told me that I am not allowed to preach to
MaryAnne the word of God, to show her the error of her ways. Today, my
supervisor told me that if I continue to "harass" MaryAnne, he will be
forced to terminate me. How can he say this? He himself is a God
fearing man. And, how can he be so tolerant of the evil that he sees
insinuating itself into our workplace?

As I lay down to sleep last night, I asked the Lord for
guidance. "God, grant me a true vision of you, so that I may better
lead the faithless onto the righteous path," "Oh, a true vision of Me
is it? Are you sure that you're ready, truly ready to see, my son?" I
sat bolt upright in bed, and there, at the foot of my bed, white of
hair and beard, in a long, flowing white robe, stood the Lord my God.
I made to leap from the bed and fall to my knees in front of Him, but
he stopped me with a gesture. "Kneel not before me at this time my
son. Instead, rise and walk with Me, so that you may get a glimpse of
what I truly am, as you asked of me in your prayer."

He took my hand, and as I looked, my bedroom was no longer there, but
a pathway thru the woods. We started to walk, and I was too awestruck
for words. We took the path to the left, and we were then inside St.
Catherine's Church, in the middle of a service. While still standing
beside me, God seemed to expand and fill the whole of the
church. I could see smiles of contentment forming on some of the
parishioners faces. I felt blessed. God smiled upon me."The Catholics
hold such pretty masses, don't they? I like to stop here in this
church, because not only do they speak the words, but they live the
life, thru teaching, helping the sick and poor, not only with
handouts, but helping them learn to help themselves. Now let us walk
on," And we were back on the pathway.

We traveled a bit further along, and then were in the parlor of a
funeral home. A young woman was kneeling before the casket, resting
her head on it and crying. I could see by the similarity, that this
dead man must be her father. God knelt beside her, and drew His arms
about her. "Miss him, that is all right, but weep not for him, for now
he is with Me". She wiped her eyes, and stood with a sad smile upon
her face, and said "Good-bye Daddy. I'll miss you," and turned and
left the room.


And we were back on the pathway. We walked a little ways, and we were
in front of a large lodge of some kind. I could hear music and
laughter spilling out of the windows. I turned to look at God, and was
shocked to see, not the flowing white robe, but Him wearing leather
and animal furs, his hair and beard now the color of wheat, and a
sword strapped across His back. He strode forth, and I saw him
approach a figure I had not seen before. As I looked close, I was
shocked to see that it was the same face that I had just seen dead,
but looking young and strong, and dressed in ancient looking garb, an
ax strapped to his waist. God strode up to him and grabbed him in a
great bear hug. "Welcome my son. We've been waiting for you. Now, go
inside and raise a cup or two, and meet with your brother." And, with
a hearty slap on the back, he sent the man inside. And then we were
back on the pathway.

We walked a bit further, and then we were in a mosque. At least I
believed so, as I had never been in one before, but had seen pictures
of them. The group of worshippers was not large, but I could see their
rapt faces as they listened to the mullah speak. He was speaking to
them of purity, both of the mind and the body, bringing them closer to
Allah. And as he spoke, God, dressed now in the robes of the desert,
walked among them and briefly laid his hands upon each set of
shoulders. And, from their faces, I could see that these men knew
that the words of the mullah were true, and that their spirits felt
touched by God. And then we were back on the pathway.

After we had walked a bit, we found ourselves in an African village.
People with skin as black as night, the women with their breast
shamefully bared, were dancing in a circle, to the rhythm of the drums
being played by a group of men. Somehow though, I was not offended by
the bared breasts, and the music seemed to seep into my soul. God was
then a mighty lion, and He let forth a mighty roar. The villagers did
not seem to hear, but the drums increased their pounding, and the
dancers danced with a frenzy. And then we were back on the pathway.

We walked a bit more, and were on the top of a cliff. There sat,
painted and covered with feathers, an old Navajo man. As I watched, he
seemed to change into the form of an eagle and take flight, and we
were flying with him, soaring high into the air, seeing the vista
spread out below us. And God, in the form of an eagle Himself, seemed
to guide this other eagle thru the air, over mountains and thru
valleys, until he came upon a group of men. As I watched, the old
Navajo man was no longer an eagle, but a young boy instead, and he
sat at the feet of these men, to listen to the words of his elders.
And then we were back on the pathway.

We traveled a bit, and then we were in a forest clearing. I knew this
place. It was known as a place of devil worship and evil. In the
center of the clearing roared a great bonfire, and kiwi torches
outlined a circle of sorts. Inside this circle, in a circle
themselves, stood 7 men and 6 women, dressed in robes of varying
colors, their arms raised to the moon. Was that one woman MaryAnne? I
really couldn't be sure. And God walked among them in the circle,
touching each one. He seemed not to be an older man now, but as he
made each of three turns around the circle, he was first a young
girl, bouncing with energy, then a woman of middle years, with a
tender smile for all Her children, and finally, an old woman, body
bent, but holding Her head up with pride. And a woman stepped
forward, and yes, it was MaryAnne, and lifted her head to the
sky. "Great Goddess, Mother of us all, thank you for joining us
tonight. Stay if You will, go if You must. Know in our hearts You
will always be welcome.Blessed be!!" And we were back on the pathway.


As we walked along, ahead in the distance I saw the most beautiful
man. Yes, beautiful, though I would never normally think of a man
this way. With blonde hair, and a golden robe, he seemed to radiate
sunshine. God and this golden man nodded to each other as they
passed, sharing a smile together. "My Lord" I asked, "was that an
angel?" "Well, yes, he is known as that to some. He is also known to
some as a god himself. That was Lucifer" And His words caused me to
stumble. I couldn't believe that we had just passed the ultimate
evil. God looked at me, and He knew my mind. And he chuckled a
bit. "Think about it logically My son. The Lucifer that you know is a
fallen angel, cast out of heaven for challenging Me. If I am the all
powerful being, above all others, how could he do this? How could I
allow it?" "But, in the bible...." I stammered. "The Bible is a
wonderful book, as are the Koran and the Torah and many others, but
they are just books, written by the hand of man, not written by Me.
And, it's a bit confusing as well if the truth be known, but that's
not up to Me to fix. These books are wonderful, but only as guidance,
for each man and woman must think for themselves." And, I believed He
was right in this.

"Now, come forth, we must journey a little more before you go back"
and He took my hand once again. As we followed the pathway, we soared
thru the stars, listening to the music of the heavens, we became a
little flower and a mighty oak, we became a babbling brook, and a
mighty ocean. We flitted from flower to flower as a little honey bee,
and ran across the plains as a mighty stallion.

And, all too soon the pathway returned us to my home. God held my hand
a moment longer, and smiled into my face.

"My son, you prayed tonight for a true vision of Me. For
vision, you must only open your eyes and see what there is to see.
Good night to you". And then He was gone, and I was back in my bed. A
dream I thought, only a dream, that couldn't have been real. At that
time, a bolt of lightning lit up my room thru the window, and thunder
crashed thru the sky, and I thought I heard, from seemingly far away,
"Remember, the Lord works in mysterious ways My son".

This morning as I entered the office, I went to the machine for a cup
of coffee, and standing there, I spied MaryAnne. As I approached her,
I could see her barely cringe, and I could see in her face that she
was expecting yet another onslaught from me and my book. She seemed to
cast her eyes about for a way to escape, but there was none. I walked
up to her and smiled. "I think I owe you a bit of an apology" I said.
"I've been a bit narrow minded of late, and I really had no right to
subject you to what I did. It's not up to me to say how you find your
path to your spirit, and I was wrong to think that was so," MaryAnne
just stood there, not knowing what to say.

"So, I just wanted to say that I'm so sorry, and I hope you will
forgive my trespass. God bless you MaryAnne, and...uh.... Blessed Be?"
You know, I always thought that it was just a saying, about peoples
jaws dropping to the floor, but MaryAnne did her best at that moment
to prove me wrong.

Slavery was not because of the religion of the slaves, the mormons broke the law, it was not because of their religion. Your last point is exactly the same, the people are being prosecuted for child neglect, not because of their religion.

If their religion mandated a certain behavior, then yes, their religious beliefs are being persecuted. Whether they should be persecuted or not is another question (and clearly, in many cases they should). The connection may not be as direct as you feel my statement warrants, but that's hardly my fault or concern. I've explained my assertion thoroughly, and here you are again; must be channeling some of those insecurities you mentioned earlier.

Oh, and if I'm wrong in my assertion, who cares? Why does it bother you so much if people think it is correct?*

If their religion mandated a certain behavior, then yes, their religious beliefs are being persecuted.

This starts into a discussion of the Duties of the State to the individual.
A good example is the one where the Super religious, literal translation type parents refused to allow medical attention for their child, because they felt there religion said if he was going to get better, God was going to do it..

While the State has the obligiation to respect peoples choice of religion, that duty is outweighed by the States duty to protect those who cannot protect themselves, or make choices for themselves.
Freedom is wonderful... but we cannot have freedom without security..
Whereas a Freedom infringes on the security or well being of other people, it becomes the moral obligation of the State to put a stop to it.
Nobody has the right to make choices on anothers life, even your child.
This filters down to lesser extent.. Our government, right or wrong has determined that certain drugs lead to behaviors that are harmful to society.. those drugs are illegal and have been deemed not appropriate for unregulated human consumption.

Dear Zoritza:

Thanks for sharing that post - it was a lovely thing to read :) . I don't find that I support the idea of an overarcing supreme Being, but I do very much believe that we are one species sharing our living planet and are capable of our own 'salvation' through taking that realization to heart. Recognizing the essential humanity and dignity of all peoples, even though their beliefs might differ widely from ours, makes ethical demands of us to treat others humanely.

To those who might argue this point, it is no accident that we 'dehumanize' our enemies (political, religious, ethnic, etc) as a pretext/justification for pogroms, acts of war, religious crusades (for example, was Khadafi *really* 'the next Hitler'?), etc: it requires a deliberate act of mental gymnastics in order for normal human beings, even those living under great stress and/or under very miserable conditions, to be able to oppress, torture, and kill each other. I'm very much a secular Buddhist, but do loving-kindness meditation as part of my practice because I believe (yes, I used the word believe ;) ) that part of the path to saving *ourselves* (as individuals, and ultimately as a species) lies in our ability to (as the Christians put it) 'love our neighbor as ourselves'...

Ugh, too much work, and too little sleep this week - my train of thought just jumped the track ;) . Be well, everyone...

Regards,
Nydia Ywalmoriel
Autonomous Collective

Or to put it another way: We're all (as human beings stuck on a finite Earth, and hence interdependent) living in a giant game of 'Prisoner's Dilemma'. I'm more than happy to admit, btw, that loving-kindness meditation *is* yet another religious/dogmatic tool for achieving a specific end, in this case the ethical treatment of other humans (something which should be self-evident, see above); it just doesn't rely on divine sanction.

Ugh, late for lab, anyone got any duct tape? ;)

Regards,
Nydia

You're pure evil, Nydia, I just know it!

Nydia:

Want to get into the "people are good vs. people are evil" argument?

I feel the need to froth at the mouth and spew venom.

I've explained my assertion thoroughly, and here you are again; must be channeling some of those insecurities you mentioned earlier.


Again, because you repeatedly skip over this point to paint me with one of your religious labels, I am not a practicing member of any religion. I would also like to point out a flaw in comprehension on your part..when I said


I'm not religious, and I don't fall into your "believer" category, however I am not going to write 3 pages a day here to try to solidify my insecurities on the issue either.


I'm not saying I am a christian with insecurities about god. What I am saying is I am not religious or a believer, but I am not going to write page after page to try to make myself feel better about my spirituality or lack thereof. Maybe if I actually added the words "like you" onto the end of that statement instead of assuming it was understood, it would have made more sense to you.


Oh, and if I'm wrong in my assertion, who cares? Why does it bother you so much if people think it is correct?


Your assertion(in case you forgot):


Would it bother you if your non-belief resulted in jail time, ostracism or execution? In some countries these things happen, and it happened in the US a couple centuries ago.


I don't defend christianity here, just point out to Taino the holes in his anti-religious violence stance(which I guess he saw the logic in and now will campaign just as hard against islam for its injustices, since he completely dropped the subject).

I do argue against someone's point when they claim that the US has, in the past, jailed or executed people simply because they weren't christian. Fallacious painting of the US as some sort of conversion by the sword state, even a couple of centuries ago, isn't something I will let slip past without comment.

Comprende?

I haven't painted you as any sort of believer since my first post in regards to your comments. What you said:

I'm not religious, and I don't fall into your "believer" category, however I am not going to write 3 pages a day here to try to solidify my insecurities on the issue either.

The use of "however" separates the latter part of your sentence, which I paraphrased, from the former. How tricky words can be!

You left the * off of my quote. It marked the point where I paraphrased you:

If there's no god, who cares? Why does it bother you so much that other people think there is?

We have our reasons for posting, debating, discussing these topics and others. Who are you to question them? And, as you say, "who cares?"

I do argue against someone's point when they claim that the US has, in the past, jailed or executed people simply because they weren't christian. Fallacious painting of the US as some sort of conversion by the sword state, even a couple of centuries ago, isn't something I will let slip past without comment.

Yes, reading comprehension. Did I not say that the words I posted did not accurately reflect my thoughts? Why look, I did! Now let's see where I said the US was a "conversion by the sword" state or anything of that nature... Amazingly enough, I didn't say anything of the sort, though I did add some examples where legal proceedings of some sort clashed with religious practices.

What I am saying is I am not religious or a believer, but I am not going to write page after page to try to make myself feel better about my spirituality or lack thereof.

Well, you'll certainly write page after page pointing out things I didn't say (or, at the very least, didn't mean) and cunningly dodging any rational explanation from interfering with your train of thought. But truth is, I don't write these posts to make me "feel better" (than...?) either. I already posted about this, so enough of that.

Now you've written page after page of your comment and hopefully you feel better about defending the US from accusations I wasn't making. Well done, citizen!

Well, you'll certainly write page after page pointing out things I didn't say (or, at the very least, didn't mean)



Now you've written page after page of your comment and hopefully you feel better about defending the US from accusations I wasn't making.


You did make the accusation, you're finally admitting you didn't mean that, and if you will reference the recurring theme in my response to what you said:

"Just admit you put your foot in your mouth over the assertion that people in the US have been jailed and executed for their religious beliefs."

Now that you've finally done that..

Dear Esbat:

Feeling contentious today? ;) . Naah, I don't think I'd be willing to try to defend the position that people are good *or* evil; they're mammals. Mammals that, like other mammals belonging to social species, like to be fed, be warm, get strokes from their packmates, feel like they have a place in the pack, score a mate (competing to land/keep one if applicable), provide for their offspring, etc etc ad nauseum. Most of human culture, 'civilization', and religion is window dressing for serving these basic needs/desires.

Human beings are distressingly short-sighted, but almost all humans can comprehend that other people have the same needs and suffer just as they do if those needs are not met.
Religion has repeatedly been used with 'good intentions' throughout history as a framework in which to promote the recognition that what affects others, ultimately affects one's self (the concept of Karma, 'an it harm none, do what ye will', 'Love thy neighbor as yourself'...) and the ethical treatment of other human beings, but in my mind is a poor tool for this purpose because of the whole issue of divine sanction. Ultimately, when difficulties arise, (Insert Supreme Being here) becomes the trump card, a means of both *commanding* behavior, and denoting the 'believers' as 'chosen people' and nonbelievers as 'infidels' or something else not quite fully human, not part of the 'pack'.

Call me naive, but I *do* believe that all, or nearly all, human beings, are capable of handling the concept that their actions that negatively affect others, ultimately affect themselves (or their descendants), and that (going a bit farther here) that the vast majority of people intuitively do not *deliberately* act in such a way as to increase the suffering of others, nor do they gain satisfaction from such, because they have the capacity for empathy. Certainly, it is constructive to encourage people to recognize the above, and the happy converse, that actions that *positively* affect others (or, say, the environment), eventually 'pay off' for them (or their descendants), because, really, how wonderful is the alternative? Humans are certainly capable of viewing all of our species as one 'pack', and many religions make that statement as well. And, well, if I'm a fool for laying my money down in the Prisoner's Dilemma, then so be it ;) ...

Regards,
Nydia Ywalmoriel
Autonomous Collective

Bleh..
You gloss over so much..
We are different from every other single animal for at least one gigantic reason..
Free Will.
No other being on the planet has this.

Take the "fight or flight" reflex.. when faced with danger or a theat every single entity on the planet does one or the other, and even humans have this impluse..
But..
We are the only ones who can control this. Overcome our basic most hardwired instincts, and instead deal with these things in another more reasoned way.

Art? Love? Desire of Knowledge? Honor? Yen for the Spirtual?
I know biologically that emotions are chemicals released by glands in the brain that soak onto our cerebellum storing memories and triggering emotions.... But I also believe that there is something more...
I chose to believe in nobilty of humanity.. that life has meaning and what I do, how I live and how I treat people matters.. and How I raise my son matters too.
If im a fool.. then so be it..
but given the choice? Ill be a fool for "something"

Oh! I want to make it *really* clear that I *don't* support cultural or political or 'religious' monoculture, both of which I think would be really detrimental to the health of humanity as a whole (just as crop monoculture is ;) ). Just in case someone might read the above happy happy 'we're all one human family' thing and think that such was implied...

Regards,
Nydia

"I chose to believe in nobilty of humanity.. that life has meaning and what I do, how I live and how I treat people matters.. and How I raise my son matters too.
If im a fool.. then so be it..
but given the choice? Ill be a fool for "something"

I didn't imply that humans aren't capable of being noble, that life doesn't have any meaning (it certainly does to me!), and I *certainly* didn't imply that the good things that we do don't matter... quite the opposite! Esbat was asking if I thought whether humans were *intrinsically* good or evil. I don't think that we *are* either (simply human), but we certainly have the capacity for extremes of both 'good' and 'evil' behavior, towards ourselves, each other, and the world...

And re the 'nobler' human traits: I am a published poet, believe it or not (blush), and my partner is an artist. But we are not the only species capable of either, or of overcoming our instincts. Ever seen Michael's (a male gorilla living in Georgia) paintings? Koko (the older female gorilla who lives with him) constructs jokes and stories in *our* language (well, ASL anyway), dotes on pets (tried to teach one of her kittens to sign, and mourned grievously when it died), and is a merciless tease to her companion. They aren't the only other species, either, that have demonstrated the capacity for art, religion, politics, and what we would consider to be 'culture'. No offense baby, but while we have big brains, we ain't all that ;) . Deflating that myth that we as humans are soooo special (and more insidiously, that some humans are more special than others) is not, in my opinion, degrading, but liberating; it enables us to see things as they are, and appreciate the more noble/beautiful things that we do as individuals and a species that much more...

Regards,
Nydia

With regards to Koko and other primates:Dear Cecil:

What is the bottom line with Koko the gorilla's ability to learn sign language? I know she only communicates through her handler, who seems to engage in a great deal of subjective translation. I saw an excerpt in Harper's Magazine of a supposed Internet chat with Koko a few years ago that made me rather dubious that the gorilla was capable of any use of language. Nonetheless, there is a strong perception out there that Koko has learned to sign. What is the straight dope? --Fabian Braithwaite

Cecil replies:

Don't be too hard on Koko, Fabian. If you judged strictly from Internet chat, you'd have to question the linguistic abilities of many humans. (D00dz!) Scientists have debated for years whether gorillas really understand language or are just, you know, aping us. The consensus among animal researchers seems to be that they understand at some level, but are less adept at using language themselves. When I read transcripts of Koko's alleged conversations I often think: Jeez, a trained monkey could do better.

A couple obvious problems present themselves when one looks into this talking-ape business. The first, as you suggest, is that interpretation of the gorilla's conversation, if such it be, is left to the handler, who generally sees any improbable concatenation of signs as deeply meaningful. During the 1998 on-line chat you saw bits of in Harper's (the whole thing is at www.koko.org/world/talk_aol.html), for example, Koko, without being prompted or questioned, made the sign for nipple, which Francine Patterson, her trainer, interpreted as a rhyme for "people." (Patterson further claimed that this was a reference to the chat session's audience.) Even if you buy the idea that gorillas, who cannot speak, grasp the concept of rhyme, this sounds like wishful thinking. Similar examples abound: "lips" is supposedly Koko's word for woman, "foot" her word for man. Koko made a lot of signs, and sometimes expressed desires or other thoughts, but nothing in the transcript suggests a sustained conversation, even of the simple sort you might have with a toddler.

That brings us to the second problem. What constitutes language use? In 1979 Herbert Terrace of Columbia University published a skeptical account of his efforts to teach American Sign Language to a chimpanzee named Nim Chimpsky. Nim accomplished the elementary linguistic task of connecting a sign to a meaning, and could be taught to string signs together to express simple thoughts such as "give orange me give eat." But in Terrace's view Nim could not form new ideas by linking signs in ways he hadn't been taught--he didn't grasp syntax, in other words, arguably the essence of language. (A dog, after all, may understand that bringing his leash to his owner is a sign that he wants to go out, but nobody sees that as evidence of language use.)

Terrace's work was a major blow to talking-ape proponents. But their case started looking stronger in 1990, when researcher Emily Sue Savage-Rumbaugh of Georgia State University presented evidence of language development in a bonobo chimp named Kanzi. One of the more telling complaints made about gorillas like Koko who communicated via sign language was that they often babbled, producing long, apparently meaningless strings of signs. Their handlers would then pluck a few lucky hits from the noise and declare that communication had occurred. Savage-Rumbaugh got around this problem by teaching Kanzi to point to printed symbols on a keyboard, a less ambiguous approach. She claimed that the ape demonstrated a rough grasp of grammar using this system. What's more, when presented with 653 sentences making requests using novel word combinations, Kanzi responded correctly 72 percent of the time--supposedly comparable to what a human child can do at two and a half years old.

Today, from what I can tell, scientific opinion is divided along disciplinary lines. Many researchers who work primarily with animals accept or at least are receptive to the idea that apes can be taught a rudimentary form of language. Linguists, on the other hand, dismiss the whole thing as nonsense. Personally I'm happy to concede that the boundary between animal and human communication isn't as sharply drawn as we once thought. Animals (not just primates--check out Alex the talking African gray parrot sometime) can use language in limited ways. They can respond to simple questions on a narrow range of subjects; they can express basic thoughts and desires. I'll even buy the possibility that some are capable of employing elementary syntax. However, all this strikes me as the equivalent of teaching a computer to beat people at chess--a neat trick, but not one that challenges fundamental notions about human vs nonhuman abilities. I've seen nothing to persuade me that animals can use language as we do, that is, as a primary tool with which to acquire and transmit knowledge. I won't say such a thing is impossible. But in light of the muddled state of the debate so far, the first task is to decide what would constitute a fair test.Nipple?

hmmm.... Nydia took my whole argument and used it. Still, I'll disagree with her that taking the high road of "do onto others as they will do onto you" isn't always the best route to take- even primates dabble in duplicity and lies.

As for language.... I'm more inclined to think that social species such as wolves/dolphins/elephants have a means to relay information to each other (co-operation being what holds many of these social structures together); I'm NOT sure that they can do differential calculus.

As for L2 thinking that we are "noble"- well, we are certainly gifted with a hell of a whole lot more brain power than most (if not all) species. Still, dogs can be trained to override their fight of flight reflex and even (as you stated) humans have a hard time dealing with it in extreme situations- one of the reasons that military training conditions one to follow orders without question *and* uses training that will mimic battlefield conditions.

Still, I'm inclined to take his side of things in the long view in regards to humans having a bit of something extra. I'll just disagree with what that something extra's nature is.

Jehovah! *snicker* :evil

Nim Chimsky...fantastic.

mmmm....mental masturbation thread :p

What if ... (and yes this is far fetched) mankind is in his/her evolution towards becomming God?



A teacher's Greatest joy is when thier student surpasses them.


http://www.valorite.com/darsig.jpg

Finally revealed! it`s gods true form!!11!11! :b

http://www.uni-leipzig.de/~rp/relped/relant/relant0014.jpg

sow plz god

Considering a lot of evidence supports that Jews, Christians and Essimites (ancient) all support the same god (and many others), which leads way back through to paganism and Osiris being the first God to be single-worshipped (by the original israelites, and excluding many ancient tribes), i have to say i am agnostic against all moral judgement which tells me to believe in the chaos theory.

However, my personal beliefs, which are related to Buddhism tell me that in an oddly scientific way, it is inevitable that there actually is a God, but not as most people think of it. I started writing a book on my beliefs about a year ago, but i never bothered to finish it, especially since i really couldnt come up with the grammar for alot of what i was trying to say.
I won't go into many details, but my beliefs are based somewhat on a process of elimination between psycho-history and science (the big-bang theory and the structure of space-time). I can think of no other purpose for existence other than to experience, for that is all that we do, and regardless of what we do in our lifetimes, in the long-run, we are performing our duties. Every experience needs to be acquired in order for God to have a concept of what it is. This can be entwined with space and time, since God is not a being, but God is everything that does and does not exist.

Take this thought...
You have infinite intelligence and knowledge. You decide to create a working universe inside your head, with your thoughts. You think of the position of every particle and non-particle to create a fully functional big-bang within your head and proceed to think of how everything proceeds from its beginning to its end.
Is the universe within your head any less real than the real universe?? Especially to the inhabitants within your universe, who's lives, thoughts and emotions have all been thought of by you.

I'm not saying that were are the figment of an imagination, but that we are the result of inevitability.

but that we are the result of inevitability.

So we're gonna have to wait until November to get the answer to this thread.