Did the experiment and it yielded results. The results were things they call synchronicity, visions, foreknowledge, understanding something or deep conviction of the essence of something, seeing something, feeling peace, assurance, comfort, 'being touched' or that they call "anointing of the spirit" where a warm energy flows from head to toe, healing, the knowledge of being 'friends' with the Lord or affinity in the sense of connection.
I don't like what religious institutions do, and some other churches do, nor some preachers do. But I'm for the gathering of people, to discuss, eat together, and be there to encourage each other. To promote good will, friendliness, and simply have fun together. Music, games, and all.
There's something wrong with the way spirituality is being questioned, and there is definitely something wrong with human spirituality and how it is being introduced or described.
To say one religion is right is not helpful. Let people try all these gods to see who among them is the way, the truth, and the life. But honestly, I'm thankful to have been introduced to Jesus. It wasn't that easy, the truth about him has been covered from me in some way or other, and fear was the greatest obstacle.
I'm thankful he answered me on that day, and showed me things on other occasions.
All the other gods are not gods, and does nothing but feed themselves. I say this simply because there's an inherent danger when one pleads to these so called gods. If a demon attacks, or oppresses, call on the Lord Jesus and he will save you. Demons will flee even by just the mention of Jesus.
There's more I can tell you, but I wish you too will know the Lord. I pray that he reveals himself to you just as he has revealed himself to many people in the past and even today. If you're sincere about it, and ask him to show you, he is faithful enough to do so for your sake.
:)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
A phenomena occurs. It becomes widespread. Somebody starts speculating. Somebody hears about it. Someone makes something up, takes up some accepted mysteries, and goes to execute an agenda.
Then there was religion.
Or is it something they don't want you to know...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
Grad, it's also damaging to tell kids they're sinners/cursed and that they will go to hell. Condemning kids is simply inhuman.
TaintedWisp, good point.
Though I strongly believe, there's another and better perspective than what those in the pulpit are saying (may they be believers or non-believers) when it comes to life whether or not God exists.
houndofbakerville, being respectful is something I really see as a mark of some insight, empathy, and civility in a person. I applaud such people for doing such. :). I also keep a dual thing as you say, since it's the most logical choice. Having listened to many debates, watching Darren brown (which I had to do again), a lot of stuff from both sides and many more, not taking personal experiences as "the absolute reality for everyone" makes me ask, "what if what I'm getting at with all these information is not what is intended really?"
If you get my point, I think the feeling of "maybe no one is absolutely right on where they stand. Maybe the extremes are supposed to be for something else than just believing or not believing" or the simple uncertainty is not being "on the safe middle" rather a recognition of the fact that even what seems certain may not be so.
I'm with you completely.
FDFederation, yeah, I've listened to the gentlemen who wrote the book, "The end of faith" or something, as he talked about it. It's amazing how he speaks Paris then Tokyo because that's what I was thinking exactly. Maybe he's done some Derren Brown or something. Still all the more, I cling to the concept of sub-conscious than what he seems to say.
As you hint at, more of conditioning, in terms of inherent reaction to environment, personality, conditioning, decision making, perception skills, awareness, physical faculty etc etc etc etc
If mental illness can be cured, I really hope they can get to it soon and fast. I want to witness for my self how humans will think and what we will be considering and to what ends when our minds are "fixed" or "perfect" (e.g. pure in the sense that it is absolutely completely without taint or weakness).
Anyway, I hope this tangent is relevant. I think it is.
On a certain view, I don't know if this is related or not, but Dawkin's book for children and his quest seems exactly the same. Now, you know I take things independently and then later look for relationships between different things, so you have a good understanding of what this means to me.
When Dawkins say religion is a myth, and that all religions, this is more like the fundamentalist saying "science is wrong, and all science is bullshit". Forgive the words.
I assume Dawkins believe he's on a noble quest to oppose and show the world how crazy it is to force uncertain things to innocent children, and if this is so, I applaud him. But I believe the best way for reason and fact to question and put into perspective religion is through facts as it has always have done so successfully.
Children instead must not be considered as containers and people who "we need" or some object to be indoctrinated, rather real people who will someday have to deal with many things in life. I believe that a quest to educate specifically to allow children critical thinking is the most important skill that they can develop when it comes to these things.
If they can teach my children how to be critical about the ways of critical thinking, and be critical of the critical investigation of the ways of critical thinking, and so on and so forth ( :D ) then I'd sign in.
As an example, there's this guy here that claims to be Jesus. Yes folks, he's here at last. And to watch people just come in droves to accept this is totally unbelievable. I mean, you want to rofl, but you just can't. You feel some kind of pitty and some revulsion.
It's unbelievable that I've begin to question, maybe it's not religion that's wrong, its the people's lack of capacity to think that makes them so easily prayed upon not only by narcissistic cult leaders, but television, magazine, and all other bullshit that puts people into a box and defines them like they're nothing but stupid monkeys that are to be used and utilized by people who at least think they are smarter, powerful, knowledgeable or whatever.
It's crazy this world looks with respect to this issue.
TaintedWisp,
Maybe what they say about the FEMA camps is true.
More:
I've experienced personally how religion nor any moral value is completely ignored by people. Their law is themselves. What do I mean by this?
If there was no one that knew me, no one who would look for them and put them in prison, they would have killed me by now.
These individuals do not believe or at least don't care if they go to hell. They find the law or government to just be someone who they can run from or at least try.
And I saw only one problem:
They have no idea or understanding or that morality and respect for another person and that person's life and efforts and etc. is completely alien to them. They want something and will do what they can to get what they want.
They are law to themselves.
Now, it's not religion that is the problem. Certainly it's not the government. Certainly it's not their situation in life. It's themselves that is "problematic". If they were intellectual people, they can make up things and use words and books to justify their so-called "right" to just walk over someone.
What amazes me is the fact nothing stands in their minds to even question, "why am I thinking this, isn't this man's life valuable?" They just follow their urge.
This experience tells me a certain kind of danger, a possible danger that needs to be addressed.
Again, it's not because of lack or having religion or society or education, it's not because of the lack of science or having science, it's simply because there's no reason for them to think of me as something valuable and should be treated fairly.
My only solution to this is one thing: Domination.
It's a battle. There's no other choice. I can't reason with them. I can't teach them. If I say, "why do you want to kill me? Am I not one of you? Have I not laughed and eaten with you? Have I not shared what I can with you?" they just don't respond or understand that.
So, I will have to destroy them, or find a way to threaten them with my own ability to get to them first before they can get to me.
I hope there's another way to indoctrinate this people so that my children can live without this possible evil. It's just pure evil.
Just you promise me guys, that when the time comes religion is abolished you won't judge people because of what they believe but in what they've done.
I hope you continue to detest violence, injustice, and uphold civil rights, and let me have a chance in the pursuit of happiness. I hope there won't be a law that will be passed saying, "Any man who claims to hold any form of religion or belief in a supernatural deity or deities, is an enemy to our freedoms," or anything of the sort.
I know how extremist can be very destructive and inhuman, I hope whatever non-believers stand on today don't go into extremes as well.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
I'm beginning to enjoy your humor FDFederation. :)
I will look into those subjects.
I shall also contact the ministers of shroom and climb the holy mountain of shroom, and partake with them the holy shroom water, in an effort to summon the Flying Spaghetti Monster amidst the wonderful colors of the kaleidoscope of shroom heaven.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
The astro thingy about Jesus can be dismissed. People have done this. Watch the video on youtube going against the Zeitgeist.
edit:
"Weren't you trying to show that god's genocides were plans to avoid a greater evil?"
Yes. But in turn, I'm also trying to say what you say below:
"If you can misrepresent/misunderstand my point of view, which is written in modern English, and we are both from the United States, why would you think you can understand the biblical stories, which were originally written in ancient Hebrew dialect, then translated to Greek, then translated to Latin, then translated to old English?"
Exactly. This is also profound in nature. Interpretation is deadly or beneficial or anything in-between. This is why I understand the need for material proofs. We just can't take anyone for what they claim to say.
People have been burned because a town said this person practiced witchcraft, or that this nation is evil.
This goes to other things like extremism, passivism, and secularism. (correct the spellings or actual terms) And especially why there are so many denominations and sects.
"The chances of finding god is that same as finding the Flying Spaghetti Monster. It's really quit dishonest to tell people to trust in something that may not even exist. It's also quite dishonest to say that the unknown is unknowable because of divine intention."
Quite true. This is why I am against people forcing their belief or non-belief on other people, especially if those beliefs are geared towards teaching people things that will make them proper gentlemen and women. It is sad that not many teachers are able to address issues on a personal level, and rather go into categorical approaches.
And calling people sick and making "faith" to be a mental illness is absurd. It's just a flag that is waved, but each individual does have their true beliefs, guidelines, principles, or "faiths" by which they are animated.
No, the spaghetti monster does not exist. I've had monster amounts of spaghetti, but never a spaghetti monster. God is a completely separate subject from the spaghetti monster.
OT:
FDFederation, why do you put things like Spaghetti monsters and things? It just makes me feel like your not seriously trying to discuss and issue, but is rather already convinced on a particular idea, belief, or what ever that is called.
Also, if you can totally not give an answer to this, but I've since become curious of what you believe in and why you believe in what you believe. I want to look into what you know and see it for myself and understand it.
I understand how religion works and what it does to people. I'm not preaching religion, I'm preaching honesty and sincerity.
Now, science seems to be the opponent of God, but it's not.
Take from your example, you say it is blue because of light and molecules etc. Yes. But the question is why not red? Why is it that it is the blue spectrum of light that has enough energy to excite the electrons in the molecules? Why is it that when light and molecules in the atmosphere interact, this is the result?
Science acknowledges an existing thing, and takes it apart to see how it works. But it doesn't give the answers to why it works the way it works. Science is good for a purpose, but that purpose isn't to presuppose what and how or who God should be or must be so it can acknowledge it.
And, no, the above example is not intended to mean as you take it to be.
See how we can differ even in just appreciating what a written thing means and is supposed to be directed towards? See how biased we are? Can you see how necessary the "basis" I'm talking about up there with regards to what just happened?
I also know that those who believe in a universe that just existed in itself for itself does not put intent into the equation. There is no grand plan. No ultimate purpose. But in their doctrine, there is, and that is "to exist, to endure, and to die." Isn't that what their greater purpose is? The great non-purpose? "The purpose comes after existence" kind of thing?
But in my talk up there, this wasn't the issue. The issue was the problem of intent and the identity of God. It was taken into consideration that "let's say, God exists, this God issued an order of genocide".
Now, this was used to say,
1. Therefore the God of the bible is not real, because it reflected a bronze age man's thinking. It did not propose any other means, but acted and thought as if proving himself to be merely a lie created by a bronze-age man to lead a people and justify the genocide.
2. God in the bible is a fairy tale, because he contradicts his character. Omnipotent + Omniscient should not be equal to Bronze-age man decision making patterns.
So I provided my own "theory" not to prove or disprove, but to pose a question and to propose something. All are listed in the post above.
I'm going to hand this over, as I have models to work on. I've already shared some of my views. But lastly, this is what I have to say about this matter:
"Finding God is not reached by the movement of thought, but by the movement of being."
Where should we base our judgement if this was good or bad?
I'd assume if we were born in an alien world where genocide was an everyday thing, that a strong nation neighboring us can freely attack at any time and kill us all, it would be a no brainer. We will not realize, "Why do we have to kill each other?"
Why?
Two illustrations:
1. The way things are when decisions had to be made. Or the precepts upon which actions are then deemed benificial or otherwise.
2. Starcraft 2
2, it's obvious, it's a game of conquest. And the limits of the environment and the predefined idea or goal of the game in some way forces you to kill the other guy's units and destroy their base.
Thus we come to #1,
Let's assume we live in those times. There was no law. All things are governed by deities and their precepts. You grew up in a world where you see children being sacrificed to burn to please your gods, who "demand" it. You are treated as slaves, no right to yourself, and hold your elites to be gods themselves. You've seen how the king took what he wanted, killed those who defied him, gut those who do not worship his gods.
There is fierce competition amongst the nations around you. You go to war against another tribe every 10 years or so. You find that if you cross their borders, you will be raped, killed, or turned into a slave worst than your own nation have done to you.
You have been told tales about this people. How they steal everything and the list goes on.
In an environment where violence is a common thing, and community only exists to serve towards defense and or conquest, what would we be? What would our morals be? Where would be base our judgements on the actions we take?
Would we even consider that we have a choice? That outside our box there is some other form of civilization that is directly opposite to ours? If not, then where would we base our judgements between what is right and wrong?
Now, I'll take Hitchen's example of a pregnant woman being kicked around.
Because we are in this culture, and since cultural practices define the basis of assumptions and presumptions on things, we will naturally be opposed to this. Not only does culture or world view define presumptions on what is good or evil, it also forces us to assume certain outcomes, and cause-and-effect "machinations".
To elaborate, let's take this example:
Somewhere, at some time, a seemingly quiet and nice person suddenly comes out and kill people. Worst thing, one of those was your brother.
If you knew the guy would kill your own brother, wouldn't you try and stop him from killer her? What if you can do anything, wouldn't you just cause him to not exist, or even define everything centered on that single act so that this would not occur?
Now, what if you've done this. Redefined all the events that lead to this. Took every possible line of possibilities and made it so it won't happen. And after you've done this, it so happens that while your brother and yourself was hunting in the forest, he kills a deer, who causes the other deer to run and push something, that causes a branch to fall, which then triggers a landslide and everything is covered in snow?
What if when he killed that deer, it stopped a line of deers from being born, which then in the future goes astray into a man's house, where a child becomes inspired to create a very useful machinery that will eventually be developed and will cause a war that will force another scientist to create a series of robots which then will be reprogrammed to plant crops and construct buildings, and make sure 1 billion people have enough food, clean water, clothing, medical care, and shelter that will support them and allow them to birth 19 generations of children who then will bear children that will conceive the first ever principle that will .... etc, etc.
That was long, but it was worth it.
My point is evident, I believe.
Could you have decided any better if you had infinite knowledge and power? Would you not have to choose one (1) path in all the multiple and infinite possibilities? What if in another possibility God didn't have another choice but to choose the egyptians over the jews? What if in another possibilty, God will have to do one particular thing because it was the most and only choice in order to achieve a certain end goal?
Morality then and the definition of it's precepts are not as simple as we take it. In the eyes of a limited mind, it is so, but to an infinite mind, how can we even begin to conceive it?
We can only trust. And this is where faith comes in.
The real question is, why do we attack faith and try to disprove it? Is it because of our biases? Is it because of the laws in them?
What I see in most disbelievers is like what you'd see in a teenager who looks to those who gives him orders. It's like, he who has no sin cast the first stone kind of thing.
What is the purpose of removing faith and belief in God? Do you have a neighbor who uses the bible to torment other people or bully you? Why?
If you remove people's faiths, you must replace it with another. There is no other way.
I am for clearing things up, getting a deeper understanding, and possibly formulating a new set of fundamental principles that will eventually lead humanity to become more flexible while also self-nurturing.
Whatever the path may be, I do believe that a "peep hole" basis is wrong. Though we are to be responsible what we will eventually embrace, we have to acknowledge that we need some form of basis upon which to choose and decide.
"The Kingdom of Heaven" as mentioned, is the goal. No, I don't think this is a glimmering place of marble and streets of gold literally, but it is a system that is not only good for humanity in an isolated setting, but with a wider account of things and a far deeper understanding that has, if possible, infinite reach, in terms of time, space, and everything in between.
And for this, we need more truths that we have. And we need more processing capabilities and methodologies, a new mind so to speak, in order to even begin to take a step into considering the smallest thing that comprises this that we now cannot even imagine, but only believe to exist because someone who is come into man, who supposedly does not exist, said so. Or is reported to have said so.
Believe me, I heartily hold that the bible is not enough, and what we have now in this religion is not enough. What I know is enough is that this "foundation" that people constantly attack just because some preacher thinks this or that.
The notion, "if it works for you then so be it" only works with people who are not affecting each other. I believe that completely removing all the precepts that have been laid is wrong and will lead to terrible consequences.
As ever, the problem is not in what is revealed, but in who looks at it, what he makes of it and to what he does this. This is why I am in favor of the idea that we are responsible in seeking for truth, but the search there must be a goal and purpose, as certain as there will be inevitable results, affects, and effects.
The generation of today must be very careful what they remove, retain, or build. Religion is a word so raped and humiliated, but it's just a word that represents the core of how humans work.
We must have a basis to be able to operate. We must have some sort of cause, and some sort of guiding principle to guide us in our actions as we pursue this cause. This cause is always towards an end.
An open mind that has no basis lost. A runner who runs for no purpose is merely causing himself injury.
I don't know when Moses "released" his series of books, but I'm sure the Jews themselves would not have believed them if they were all "Twilight" books.
Trace our own series of literature and how we can tell fiction from accounts, and how we come to believe and lose belief of their authenticity and accuracy.
But then again there are examples of how another book can be taken by another person and introduce them in such a way and with certain combination of things to convince some people or group.
But I highly doubt that an entire nation would believe in something written so strongly for generations upon generations without that book having a lot of facts or truths in it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
You guys should read the Book of Enoch. It will explain some of the carnage.
Theoretical:
With regards to God not warning other peoples, this is just not true. My proof is Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar wasn't Jew, but a pagan, yet he's showed a dream for example.
There have been encounters with "prophets" and other nation's priests. Pharao's diety's vs Moses' 10 plagues was also shoutcasted to prove this.
Thing is, God will not force other peoples in those times. Why that is can be argued in many ways and respects. Based on the blogs and tweets in the Bible, it is as though it was a dilemma situation.
"I have a stiffed necked people here (which is both good and bad to some purpose), and I have a plan through them for the human race as they progress from age to age, and they'll surely be pwnd because the other neighbor will not listen..."
It seems that Moses' God did not have much of a choice, given that man has been given the power to choose, and yet is not above the order of things upon which their choices are to be made. To a certain degree, I think some of the carnage was given as a command, but I'm not certain if this was started by God or if Moses (being a man of rage that he is) could have made his own decision.
If I recall, there was a passage that mentioned this once, or at least implied such.
But yeah, not sure. I don't read much of the Old testament books especially those written by moses.
I believe when an Apologist comes into the argument or discussion that they in part are willing to test their own waters. Shutting the discussion down doesn't help.
It's safe to argue and discuss with Christians. Don't worry. ;)
Grad's arguments are well thought of, and I'd give him due credit for at least pointing them out and writing them down.
Did the experiment and it yielded results. The results were things they call synchronicity, visions, foreknowledge, understanding something or deep conviction of the essence of something, seeing something, feeling peace, assurance, comfort, 'being touched' or that they call "anointing of the spirit" where a warm energy flows from head to toe, healing, the knowledge of being 'friends' with the Lord or affinity in the sense of connection.
I don't like what religious institutions do, and some other churches do, nor some preachers do. But I'm for the gathering of people, to discuss, eat together, and be there to encourage each other. To promote good will, friendliness, and simply have fun together. Music, games, and all.
There's something wrong with the way spirituality is being questioned, and there is definitely something wrong with human spirituality and how it is being introduced or described.
To say one religion is right is not helpful. Let people try all these gods to see who among them is the way, the truth, and the life. But honestly, I'm thankful to have been introduced to Jesus. It wasn't that easy, the truth about him has been covered from me in some way or other, and fear was the greatest obstacle.
I'm thankful he answered me on that day, and showed me things on other occasions.
All the other gods are not gods, and does nothing but feed themselves. I say this simply because there's an inherent danger when one pleads to these so called gods. If a demon attacks, or oppresses, call on the Lord Jesus and he will save you. Demons will flee even by just the mention of Jesus.
There's more I can tell you, but I wish you too will know the Lord. I pray that he reveals himself to you just as he has revealed himself to many people in the past and even today. If you're sincere about it, and ask him to show you, he is faithful enough to do so for your sake.
:)
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
Guys, all I can tell you, is that when that day comes, just call out His name. You know what His name is.
Don't be afraid, ashamed, or anything. Just call Him, and He'll be there for you.
:)
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
A phenomena occurs. It becomes widespread. Somebody starts speculating. Somebody hears about it. Someone makes something up, takes up some accepted mysteries, and goes to execute an agenda.
Then there was religion.
Or is it something they don't want you to know...
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
Saltpeter is doing something very intriguing. I get it totally man. :D (or do I?)
houndofbaskerville, good points there man. The way you look at things is new to me personally. Must assimilate. :) Thank you for that post.
edit:
This discussion from QnA is very nice:
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
Grad, it's also damaging to tell kids they're sinners/cursed and that they will go to hell. Condemning kids is simply inhuman.
TaintedWisp, good point.
Though I strongly believe, there's another and better perspective than what those in the pulpit are saying (may they be believers or non-believers) when it comes to life whether or not God exists.
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
houndofbakerville, being respectful is something I really see as a mark of some insight, empathy, and civility in a person. I applaud such people for doing such. :). I also keep a dual thing as you say, since it's the most logical choice. Having listened to many debates, watching Darren brown (which I had to do again), a lot of stuff from both sides and many more, not taking personal experiences as "the absolute reality for everyone" makes me ask, "what if what I'm getting at with all these information is not what is intended really?"
If you get my point, I think the feeling of "maybe no one is absolutely right on where they stand. Maybe the extremes are supposed to be for something else than just believing or not believing" or the simple uncertainty is not being "on the safe middle" rather a recognition of the fact that even what seems certain may not be so.
I'm with you completely.
FDFederation, yeah, I've listened to the gentlemen who wrote the book, "The end of faith" or something, as he talked about it. It's amazing how he speaks Paris then Tokyo because that's what I was thinking exactly. Maybe he's done some Derren Brown or something. Still all the more, I cling to the concept of sub-conscious than what he seems to say.
As you hint at, more of conditioning, in terms of inherent reaction to environment, personality, conditioning, decision making, perception skills, awareness, physical faculty etc etc etc etc
If mental illness can be cured, I really hope they can get to it soon and fast. I want to witness for my self how humans will think and what we will be considering and to what ends when our minds are "fixed" or "perfect" (e.g. pure in the sense that it is absolutely completely without taint or weakness).
Anyway, I hope this tangent is relevant. I think it is.
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
Grad,
On a certain view, I don't know if this is related or not, but Dawkin's book for children and his quest seems exactly the same. Now, you know I take things independently and then later look for relationships between different things, so you have a good understanding of what this means to me.
When Dawkins say religion is a myth, and that all religions, this is more like the fundamentalist saying "science is wrong, and all science is bullshit". Forgive the words.
I assume Dawkins believe he's on a noble quest to oppose and show the world how crazy it is to force uncertain things to innocent children, and if this is so, I applaud him. But I believe the best way for reason and fact to question and put into perspective religion is through facts as it has always have done so successfully.
Children instead must not be considered as containers and people who "we need" or some object to be indoctrinated, rather real people who will someday have to deal with many things in life. I believe that a quest to educate specifically to allow children critical thinking is the most important skill that they can develop when it comes to these things.
If they can teach my children how to be critical about the ways of critical thinking, and be critical of the critical investigation of the ways of critical thinking, and so on and so forth ( :D ) then I'd sign in.
As an example, there's this guy here that claims to be Jesus. Yes folks, he's here at last. And to watch people just come in droves to accept this is totally unbelievable. I mean, you want to rofl, but you just can't. You feel some kind of pitty and some revulsion.
It's unbelievable that I've begin to question, maybe it's not religion that's wrong, its the people's lack of capacity to think that makes them so easily prayed upon not only by narcissistic cult leaders, but television, magazine, and all other bullshit that puts people into a box and defines them like they're nothing but stupid monkeys that are to be used and utilized by people who at least think they are smarter, powerful, knowledgeable or whatever.
It's crazy this world looks with respect to this issue.
TaintedWisp,
Maybe what they say about the FEMA camps is true.
More:
I've experienced personally how religion nor any moral value is completely ignored by people. Their law is themselves. What do I mean by this?
If there was no one that knew me, no one who would look for them and put them in prison, they would have killed me by now.
These individuals do not believe or at least don't care if they go to hell. They find the law or government to just be someone who they can run from or at least try.
And I saw only one problem:
They have no idea or understanding or that morality and respect for another person and that person's life and efforts and etc. is completely alien to them. They want something and will do what they can to get what they want.
They are law to themselves.
Now, it's not religion that is the problem. Certainly it's not the government. Certainly it's not their situation in life. It's themselves that is "problematic". If they were intellectual people, they can make up things and use words and books to justify their so-called "right" to just walk over someone.
What amazes me is the fact nothing stands in their minds to even question, "why am I thinking this, isn't this man's life valuable?" They just follow their urge.
This experience tells me a certain kind of danger, a possible danger that needs to be addressed.
Again, it's not because of lack or having religion or society or education, it's not because of the lack of science or having science, it's simply because there's no reason for them to think of me as something valuable and should be treated fairly.
My only solution to this is one thing: Domination.
It's a battle. There's no other choice. I can't reason with them. I can't teach them. If I say, "why do you want to kill me? Am I not one of you? Have I not laughed and eaten with you? Have I not shared what I can with you?" they just don't respond or understand that.
So, I will have to destroy them, or find a way to threaten them with my own ability to get to them first before they can get to me.
I hope there's another way to indoctrinate this people so that my children can live without this possible evil. It's just pure evil.
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
Just you promise me guys, that when the time comes religion is abolished you won't judge people because of what they believe but in what they've done.
I hope you continue to detest violence, injustice, and uphold civil rights, and let me have a chance in the pursuit of happiness. I hope there won't be a law that will be passed saying, "Any man who claims to hold any form of religion or belief in a supernatural deity or deities, is an enemy to our freedoms," or anything of the sort.
I know how extremist can be very destructive and inhuman, I hope whatever non-believers stand on today don't go into extremes as well.
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
I'm beginning to enjoy your humor FDFederation. :)
I will look into those subjects.
I shall also contact the ministers of shroom and climb the holy mountain of shroom, and partake with them the holy shroom water, in an effort to summon the Flying Spaghetti Monster amidst the wonderful colors of the kaleidoscope of shroom heaven.
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
The astro thingy about Jesus can be dismissed. People have done this. Watch the video on youtube going against the Zeitgeist.
edit: "Weren't you trying to show that god's genocides were plans to avoid a greater evil?"
Yes. But in turn, I'm also trying to say what you say below:
"If you can misrepresent/misunderstand my point of view, which is written in modern English, and we are both from the United States, why would you think you can understand the biblical stories, which were originally written in ancient Hebrew dialect, then translated to Greek, then translated to Latin, then translated to old English?"
Exactly. This is also profound in nature. Interpretation is deadly or beneficial or anything in-between. This is why I understand the need for material proofs. We just can't take anyone for what they claim to say.
People have been burned because a town said this person practiced witchcraft, or that this nation is evil.
This goes to other things like extremism, passivism, and secularism. (correct the spellings or actual terms) And especially why there are so many denominations and sects.
"The chances of finding god is that same as finding the Flying Spaghetti Monster. It's really quit dishonest to tell people to trust in something that may not even exist. It's also quite dishonest to say that the unknown is unknowable because of divine intention."
Quite true. This is why I am against people forcing their belief or non-belief on other people, especially if those beliefs are geared towards teaching people things that will make them proper gentlemen and women. It is sad that not many teachers are able to address issues on a personal level, and rather go into categorical approaches.
And calling people sick and making "faith" to be a mental illness is absurd. It's just a flag that is waved, but each individual does have their true beliefs, guidelines, principles, or "faiths" by which they are animated.
No, the spaghetti monster does not exist. I've had monster amounts of spaghetti, but never a spaghetti monster. God is a completely separate subject from the spaghetti monster.
OT: FDFederation, why do you put things like Spaghetti monsters and things? It just makes me feel like your not seriously trying to discuss and issue, but is rather already convinced on a particular idea, belief, or what ever that is called.
Also, if you can totally not give an answer to this, but I've since become curious of what you believe in and why you believe in what you believe. I want to look into what you know and see it for myself and understand it.
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
No question about it.
I understand how religion works and what it does to people. I'm not preaching religion, I'm preaching honesty and sincerity.
Now, science seems to be the opponent of God, but it's not.
Take from your example, you say it is blue because of light and molecules etc. Yes. But the question is why not red? Why is it that it is the blue spectrum of light that has enough energy to excite the electrons in the molecules? Why is it that when light and molecules in the atmosphere interact, this is the result?
Science acknowledges an existing thing, and takes it apart to see how it works. But it doesn't give the answers to why it works the way it works. Science is good for a purpose, but that purpose isn't to presuppose what and how or who God should be or must be so it can acknowledge it.
And, no, the above example is not intended to mean as you take it to be.
See how we can differ even in just appreciating what a written thing means and is supposed to be directed towards? See how biased we are? Can you see how necessary the "basis" I'm talking about up there with regards to what just happened?
I also know that those who believe in a universe that just existed in itself for itself does not put intent into the equation. There is no grand plan. No ultimate purpose. But in their doctrine, there is, and that is "to exist, to endure, and to die." Isn't that what their greater purpose is? The great non-purpose? "The purpose comes after existence" kind of thing?
But in my talk up there, this wasn't the issue. The issue was the problem of intent and the identity of God. It was taken into consideration that "let's say, God exists, this God issued an order of genocide".
Now, this was used to say,
1. Therefore the God of the bible is not real, because it reflected a bronze age man's thinking. It did not propose any other means, but acted and thought as if proving himself to be merely a lie created by a bronze-age man to lead a people and justify the genocide.
2. God in the bible is a fairy tale, because he contradicts his character. Omnipotent + Omniscient should not be equal to Bronze-age man decision making patterns.
So I provided my own "theory" not to prove or disprove, but to pose a question and to propose something. All are listed in the post above.
I'm going to hand this over, as I have models to work on. I've already shared some of my views. But lastly, this is what I have to say about this matter:
"Finding God is not reached by the movement of thought, but by the movement of being."
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
On "God orders genocide":
Where should we base our judgement if this was good or bad?
I'd assume if we were born in an alien world where genocide was an everyday thing, that a strong nation neighboring us can freely attack at any time and kill us all, it would be a no brainer. We will not realize, "Why do we have to kill each other?"
Why?
Two illustrations:
1. The way things are when decisions had to be made. Or the precepts upon which actions are then deemed benificial or otherwise. 2. Starcraft 2
Thus we come to #1,
Let's assume we live in those times. There was no law. All things are governed by deities and their precepts. You grew up in a world where you see children being sacrificed to burn to please your gods, who "demand" it. You are treated as slaves, no right to yourself, and hold your elites to be gods themselves. You've seen how the king took what he wanted, killed those who defied him, gut those who do not worship his gods.
There is fierce competition amongst the nations around you. You go to war against another tribe every 10 years or so. You find that if you cross their borders, you will be raped, killed, or turned into a slave worst than your own nation have done to you.
You have been told tales about this people. How they steal everything and the list goes on.
In an environment where violence is a common thing, and community only exists to serve towards defense and or conquest, what would we be? What would our morals be? Where would be base our judgements on the actions we take?
Would we even consider that we have a choice? That outside our box there is some other form of civilization that is directly opposite to ours? If not, then where would we base our judgements between what is right and wrong?
Now, I'll take Hitchen's example of a pregnant woman being kicked around.
Because we are in this culture, and since cultural practices define the basis of assumptions and presumptions on things, we will naturally be opposed to this. Not only does culture or world view define presumptions on what is good or evil, it also forces us to assume certain outcomes, and cause-and-effect "machinations".
To elaborate, let's take this example:
Somewhere, at some time, a seemingly quiet and nice person suddenly comes out and kill people. Worst thing, one of those was your brother.
If you knew the guy would kill your own brother, wouldn't you try and stop him from killer her? What if you can do anything, wouldn't you just cause him to not exist, or even define everything centered on that single act so that this would not occur?
Now, what if you've done this. Redefined all the events that lead to this. Took every possible line of possibilities and made it so it won't happen. And after you've done this, it so happens that while your brother and yourself was hunting in the forest, he kills a deer, who causes the other deer to run and push something, that causes a branch to fall, which then triggers a landslide and everything is covered in snow?
What if when he killed that deer, it stopped a line of deers from being born, which then in the future goes astray into a man's house, where a child becomes inspired to create a very useful machinery that will eventually be developed and will cause a war that will force another scientist to create a series of robots which then will be reprogrammed to plant crops and construct buildings, and make sure 1 billion people have enough food, clean water, clothing, medical care, and shelter that will support them and allow them to birth 19 generations of children who then will bear children that will conceive the first ever principle that will .... etc, etc.
That was long, but it was worth it.
My point is evident, I believe.
Could you have decided any better if you had infinite knowledge and power? Would you not have to choose one (1) path in all the multiple and infinite possibilities? What if in another possibility God didn't have another choice but to choose the egyptians over the jews? What if in another possibilty, God will have to do one particular thing because it was the most and only choice in order to achieve a certain end goal?
Morality then and the definition of it's precepts are not as simple as we take it. In the eyes of a limited mind, it is so, but to an infinite mind, how can we even begin to conceive it?
We can only trust. And this is where faith comes in.
The real question is, why do we attack faith and try to disprove it? Is it because of our biases? Is it because of the laws in them?
What I see in most disbelievers is like what you'd see in a teenager who looks to those who gives him orders. It's like, he who has no sin cast the first stone kind of thing.
What is the purpose of removing faith and belief in God? Do you have a neighbor who uses the bible to torment other people or bully you? Why?
If you remove people's faiths, you must replace it with another. There is no other way.
I am for clearing things up, getting a deeper understanding, and possibly formulating a new set of fundamental principles that will eventually lead humanity to become more flexible while also self-nurturing.
Whatever the path may be, I do believe that a "peep hole" basis is wrong. Though we are to be responsible what we will eventually embrace, we have to acknowledge that we need some form of basis upon which to choose and decide.
"The Kingdom of Heaven" as mentioned, is the goal. No, I don't think this is a glimmering place of marble and streets of gold literally, but it is a system that is not only good for humanity in an isolated setting, but with a wider account of things and a far deeper understanding that has, if possible, infinite reach, in terms of time, space, and everything in between.
And for this, we need more truths that we have. And we need more processing capabilities and methodologies, a new mind so to speak, in order to even begin to take a step into considering the smallest thing that comprises this that we now cannot even imagine, but only believe to exist because someone who is come into man, who supposedly does not exist, said so. Or is reported to have said so.
Believe me, I heartily hold that the bible is not enough, and what we have now in this religion is not enough. What I know is enough is that this "foundation" that people constantly attack just because some preacher thinks this or that.
The notion, "if it works for you then so be it" only works with people who are not affecting each other. I believe that completely removing all the precepts that have been laid is wrong and will lead to terrible consequences.
As ever, the problem is not in what is revealed, but in who looks at it, what he makes of it and to what he does this. This is why I am in favor of the idea that we are responsible in seeking for truth, but the search there must be a goal and purpose, as certain as there will be inevitable results, affects, and effects.
The generation of today must be very careful what they remove, retain, or build. Religion is a word so raped and humiliated, but it's just a word that represents the core of how humans work.
We must have a basis to be able to operate. We must have some sort of cause, and some sort of guiding principle to guide us in our actions as we pursue this cause. This cause is always towards an end.
An open mind that has no basis lost. A runner who runs for no purpose is merely causing himself injury.
/end blog
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
I don't know when Moses "released" his series of books, but I'm sure the Jews themselves would not have believed them if they were all "Twilight" books.
Trace our own series of literature and how we can tell fiction from accounts, and how we come to believe and lose belief of their authenticity and accuracy.
But then again there are examples of how another book can be taken by another person and introduce them in such a way and with certain combination of things to convince some people or group.
But I highly doubt that an entire nation would believe in something written so strongly for generations upon generations without that book having a lot of facts or truths in it.
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
You guys should read the Book of Enoch. It will explain some of the carnage.
Theoretical: With regards to God not warning other peoples, this is just not true. My proof is Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar wasn't Jew, but a pagan, yet he's showed a dream for example.
There have been encounters with "prophets" and other nation's priests. Pharao's diety's vs Moses' 10 plagues was also shoutcasted to prove this.
Thing is, God will not force other peoples in those times. Why that is can be argued in many ways and respects. Based on the blogs and tweets in the Bible, it is as though it was a dilemma situation.
"I have a stiffed necked people here (which is both good and bad to some purpose), and I have a plan through them for the human race as they progress from age to age, and they'll surely be pwnd because the other neighbor will not listen..."
It seems that Moses' God did not have much of a choice, given that man has been given the power to choose, and yet is not above the order of things upon which their choices are to be made. To a certain degree, I think some of the carnage was given as a command, but I'm not certain if this was started by God or if Moses (being a man of rage that he is) could have made his own decision.
If I recall, there was a passage that mentioned this once, or at least implied such.
But yeah, not sure. I don't read much of the Old testament books especially those written by moses.
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
I believe when an Apologist comes into the argument or discussion that they in part are willing to test their own waters. Shutting the discussion down doesn't help.
It's safe to argue and discuss with Christians. Don't worry. ;)
Grad's arguments are well thought of, and I'd give him due credit for at least pointing them out and writing them down.
In that regard, this topic is very interesting.
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.