|
Atheism (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| biznology |
the reason i guess i would be considered an atheist is largely because i dont follow a particular faith ar necessarily find solace in an otherworldly being that exists beyond our world. my main two reasons for not being religious, and specifically a christian, is really simply that i dont believe in following a popular work of fiction in order to affirm myself. i cant say i dont have faith in myself or the world, its just that i dont need to create and worship imaginary beings in order to feel secure. i think good things that happen in this world are the result of work and dedication. i also especially shy away from organized religion in the way that it promotes hatred for groups and to some extent yourself.
why should i follow an organization that makes me feel bad about myself or ohters because of something that may or may not have happened? late/ |
|
|
| Brownitus |
It's clear that the majority of people here are poorly read, misinformed and basically controlled by the media and propagandism.
Religion is not a "spiritual" means of life, nor is it anything semblant to a set of beliefs or values that supply the building blocks for one's set of morals. Religion always was, is and always will be the most widespread and-- evidently so-- efficient method of mind control\brainwashing, with the media at a relatively close second spot.
How many people here who claim to be "Christians" actually know anything about this so-called religion? Let's take a simple example-- the most basic one: How many people here celebrate "Christmas" as the "Birth of Jesus?" If you do, you are the typical morons who dilute the populace with your utter stupidity and infathomably gross preoccupation with ignorance. Your precious December 25th is the birth of the god of homosexuality in Greek mythology, the god Saturn-- and the 25th is Saturnalia, a day when, in ancient Greek civilization, men would become severely intoxicated, beat their wives and molest young males. (Oh, and in case anyone doesn't recall, Greek society is founded on homosexuality as a predominant theme in what was "High Society" of the times, with the culture eventually evolving this theme into a full-fledged ambition for all. Lesbos is the island where females were trained by the god Sapphos, as another citation of evidence). Quickly, the "infallible papacy" realized this pagan celebration-- Saturnalia-- would hurt all Christians\Catholics, as they'd soon begin to participate more and more in this annual "holiday." Bada boom, bada bing-- good ol' Pope realizes the danger of losing his following (read: POWER) and brainwashes them into thinking Jesus was born on this day, and that the evil Greek god was attempting to steal the true omnipresence and significance of the date. Well whaddaya know, the morons stayed put and this nonsensical day became institutionalized and engraved forever.
Here's another simple example: Did any of you know that Christianity has been used for hundreds of years as the supreme tool of oppression (on top of its already #1 spot in the brainwashing list!) upon Blacks? It began with what is today known as the "Crusades for Christ," which in reality was the slaughter of any and all Blacks in what became the Ottoman Empire later on and Nothern Africa\Egypt. This mission-- with the intent, obviously, that of total and extreme genocide of Blacks-- has an interesting quote to add to the irony: "Kill them all, God knows his own." - Pope Innocent III. Extending this, what today is known as "Thanksgiving Day" in America is actually this: on the 22nd of November in 1491, Santiago defeats the last Muslim stronghold in Spain (the Moors--from Baghdad, Turkey--ruled Spain, France and Portugal from the 8th century on). On this day, King Ferdinand gives "Thanks to God" and the Pope of Rome declares the day to forever be a day of "Thanksgiving" for all European Christians. When you celebrate "Thanksgiving," what in reality you are celebrating is the proclamation of this Pope of Rome who, later in league with Queen Isabelle, sent Cardinal Xemanoles to Baghdad, Turkey to murder any Moors (Black men, women and children) who resisted Christianity. All this for threatening the "white way of life" (Eurocentricism in its prime). Funny how countless invasions by innumerable declarations from past papacies have declared war on Black resistance throughout the Middle East and Africa.
I could go on and on, but I think it's anything but rude and\or cruel, and totally fair, to make the assumption that the majority of folks here are horribly ignorant, inherently brainwashed (as evident by the person who claimed he\she was-- to paraphrase-- "catholic by means of my parents being catholic") and will, most likely, never stray from this path of stubborn, repugnant behaviour. I did not type all that to force anyone to change their lives overnight, but merely as a "wake-up call," if it can be labelled as such. It's far from difficult to attain the truth on such common fallacies society as a collective is taught and relies on instinctively from an early age, due to the abhorrent "education system."
And then there's the whole issue of Freemasons and such, whose control and reach in religion-inspired\related events throughout history is astounding. I recommend all of you become familiar with William Cooper's work (www.williamcooper.com), Richard Epperson, Michael Baigent, any Freemasonry books by the members themselves, etc. It is not an overnight process, and is simply my request as someone who enjoys others becoming enlightened and climbing out of their cocoons of suppressed knowledge-retainment.
Again, remember one thing: all of which I have said is not opinion, but GENUINE FACT. Feel free to dispute, as I can back up any point easily with further events\supporting persons\referenced works, and remember, above all: believe nothing until you have researched it for yourself.
Yep, quite a long one here. Coulda just watched the Marxist CNN if I wanted propaganda and lies, though :) |
|
|
| acidfast7 |
Interesting info. I will have to read up on what you stated. I try extremely hard to never accept anything at face value, especially the media.
| quote: | | Coulda just watched the Marxist CNN if I wanted propaganda and lies, though |
Isn't that the truth. I from the beginning have stated multiple alternative hypotheses of who was REALLY reposnible for the recent "terrorist acts". My colleagues and I are able to engage in productive discussions of who really benefits from this attack. No one in the Middle East.
If I leave the confines of graduate school ... I am accused of being unpatriotic and a "TowelHead lover". "We should bomb the out of Afghanistan!" Isn't that a riot. In this day and age I would love to see people be objective and use their "noodle", that's why they have it. Becoming brainwashed and being associated with what I consider a "haven for the weak-minded" are the major drawbacks, in my eyes, to faithfully participating in religion.
I won't get into a discussion describing the differences between region and "belief in a higher power" because the use of "religion" as an abusive weapon has been clearly documented throughout history.
Good night to all,
Roger |
|
|
| Renegade |
Well I'm not so sure there's any real point in digging up the horrors inflicted by Christianity in the past. The people committing these acts already had the ideas firmly implanted in their heads and were happy to seek out any justification - religious or not - for the actions they intended to commit. Nowhere in the Bible does it suggest that black people are situated below white people in God's eyes (though it does condone slavery admittedly). The Pope who committed those attrocities would have already had these racist ideals within him by the time he saw it fit to justify his genocide with a greater - but ultimately unfounded - religious justification. If you trace back the history of any people, you will find - at some point - a dark past. But rebuking a people for attrocities committed many generations back makes absolutely no sense. It would make as much sense as condemning the German people of today for actions that Adolf Hitler committed barely half a century ago.
Having said that, I still don't agree with Christianity, but my reasons are more complex, more deeply entrenched in philosophical rationale, than simply because they burnt witches or murdered muslims several hundered years ago. Now I'm not trying to justify these acts - they are undoubtedly horrendous - but they are in no real way connected with the theology and philosophy of Christianity as a whole. Why would God be against blacks when his son, Jesus, was almost certaintly a black, Arabic man - not the blond haired, blue eyed adonis we see in contemporary art?
Nonetheless, I do agree with your oposition to the somewhat "dogmatic" nature, not just of Christianity, but of virtually all religions (Budhism - as it centres around the self, not around any god - is probably the only religion I in any way agree with). Any schemata that insists that blind, unquestioning faith is a good, healthy thing immediately loses all of my respect. People are all to easily led by the carrot of eternal life, and are afraid to question what they have been told on account of having that carrot - that bribe offered in exchange for whatever thread of individualism, liberty or freedom of thought they posess - taken away from them, leaving them, in their mind, without hope for the future.
But then, to any Christian reading this message now, what do you think there is in heaven that you are so willing to sacrifice this life for? What do you expect to find in heaven exactly? You are promised eternal life - personally I can think of no worse a fate. It is death that makes life - and everything we experience in it - meaningful. How long will it take before you get bored of everything in heaven? Can you leave if you like? What if you make it to heaven but the rest of your family ends up in hell? Will you still be happy? If you insist that hell doesn't exist, only heaven, then why does it say that it exists in the Bible? Why does God force you to be a sycophant to him all your life just to get into heaven if he loves you unconditionally? How can you be sure that heaven exists? How can you be sure that you're praying to the right God? If you're praying to Jehova, but it turns out that Allah is the one true God, do you still get to enter his heaven?
I could go on all day, but I've kinda gone off the topic a bit. By the way, top post acidfast7. Nice to have an expert opinion on here every once in a while. :) |
|
|
| InsomnEac |
| quote: | | I think it's anything but rude and\or cruel, and totally fair, to make the assumption that the majority of folks here are horribly ignorant, inherently brainwashed |
dude, you just wrote a novel on pretty much "research before you believe" etc etc (which i agree with by the way), but then you make this assumption most of us are ignorant, when only maybe 20 out of like 4700 have stated their views, and out of those maybe 20 people, how many seemed brainwashed?
:conf:
practice what you preach my friend. |
|
|
| u4ea:[soulstar] |
Well, I might as well join in the party and here are my comments :D:
renegade
| quote: | Yes, but the point is that Atheism is, sematically, the rejection of theism, which involves the negation of a set of beliefs, not the affirmation of any particular set of beliefs. The only possible proof or evidence in favour of atheism comes from the negation of religion, which can only be acheived by citing a lack of evidence supporting religion, not by citing a preponderance of evidence supporting atheism. Thus, the only reason I need to be an atheist is the fact that I "haven't seen a sign" that has given me enough evidence to follow any particular theology.
I am an atheist, by definition, because no form of theism has given me enough reason to believe. |
Evidence. Yes, the classic reason all die-hard atheists use in Atheism vs. Theists debates. I've seen the good, the bad, and the ugliest debates. The most amusing ones were the Christians bashing other Christians.. I just shake my head in disbelief (no pun intended)
Definition? It's like an internal (endo-)knowledge system that's closed. Once a person relies on a primary model of investigation, diametrically opposed and uncompromising to other seemingly unrelated thought systems, they quickly reach the threshold of gaining new (exo) values; new (exo) insights; or new (exo) knowledge.
| quote: | | Christianity, but of virtually all religions (Budhism - as it centres around the self, not around any god - is probably the only religion I in any way agree with). |
Virtually? Now, that's a very blanket statement. It's weak argument about 'other dogmatic' mystical systems, yet you know well the failings of Christianity, relative to your atheistic rationale.
Some Buddhist traditions branch off [or merge] into diversifications of theist-based systems: Tibetan (Vajrayana), Jen Chen (Quan Yin), Hindu (Vedas). And some of these traditions do more than just read books, intellectualize, and ritualize: They self-actualize, the quantum leap from a belief.
Another mystical system, Tao (wu wei principles), is similar to Buddhist systems (dharma of nonduality) in teachings but different in presenting perspectives of: cold harmony. The way a Taoist (tai chi, qi gong) and Buddhist (vipassana) teaches about its philosophy has little to do with dogmatism.. |
|
|
| u4ea:[soulstar] |
Continued...
plastike
| quote: | | Man creates their own destiny"....well ya, I believe man creates their own destiny because God ALLOWS them too. Also, people are saying "if there was a god, then why did the terrorist thing happen?" well, there's also Satan (in my religion) who opposes God, so I believe the terrorist act was a work of Satan. It's not like God said "HEY!!! BOMB THE WORLD TRADE CENTER AND I WONT GIVE A RATS ASS!! HAHA!"" There's a constant battle between good and evil on earth (from my religion) and as it turns out evil caused this terrorist attack to be won. |
Good lord, this is just flamebait waiting to happen.. You fit that **definition** above, except you're the anti-thesis of an atheist.
Why in the nine hells is God a He? You can trace the 'He' as man in alot of earlier European cultures' literature that has the undertone of egocentrism: male superiority and dominance.
USSR Junkie
| quote: | | Do u think thay've done it because of help of god??No, they have succeeded only because of their belief in SCIENCE. |
Success of science comes with a heavy price if you didn't know that; pollution, extinction of species, terminally diseases, weapons that kill life, depleting earth's natural resources, human deaths..
| quote: | u really need any god? Religion is a huuuuuge nonsense!
|
Just be careful about which religions you are ranting about. Not all is hogwash!! Do you realize the possiblity of life created on Earth is unbelievable huge in odds, mathematically?
torontotrance
| quote: | Ok, i'm a Christian (basically means, i believe there is a God who created the World in six days and rested on the the 7th day.) I also believe the Bible has NO errors in it. I have never had an error proved to me and it will never happen that someone finds an error, and also the bible speaks for itself. This is just my personal opinion. I'm kinda different from other christians in a couple ways,
|
you can check www.skepticsannotatedbible.com and tell me if the interpretations, line by line (Old and New Testament) are very biased or not.. From what I read, the Bible is riddled with sexism, hypocrisy of God, discrepancies in Genesis, and much more.. PROVE IT TO ME THAT THE AUTHOR IS WRONG.. ~.^ |
|
|
| u4ea:[soulstar] |
Personal Comments
So what does this all comes down to, folks? Every thought systems (theories, laws, rules, experiential) has the frequency of belief (possibly) subjected to its own learning environment. What is a frequency? A condition of a pattern that forms your perceptions. What you perceive is what you receive, what you believe as truth is what you think you experience as reality.
I found that Truth (of atheism and theism) is just as elusive as the quest for love, its words are vapid and meaningless without real experiences. The only question one should ask is: Has my beliefs caused a distinct transpersonal change?? So far, I haven't seen anyone in this thread [atheists and theists] say they've reached that distinction in some form, way, or shape..
As to the original thread topic, I neither believe or not believe there is a God. I am just not attracted to such Christian God-based faiths - going to a catholic school for 12 years made sure of that. And guess what? My family are buddhists! hahaha
By nature, I have an affinity for Buddhist cultures, philosophies, and practices. I only realized that after a few shamanic experiences of doing chants and having Satori awakenings (Level 5 as Shroomery.com's classifications of level 1 to 5). I have a fascination for metaphysics and esoteric science - I'm more liberal and reflexive to unique and provocative information that comes my way.
I am a Soulwalker, I walk and follow the path of the Soul.
Final Comments
For Christian faiths:
............ I noticed the fierceness [from past and current debates] of both the predominate Christian supporters and the atheist supporters, which varies from arrogance to self-righteous. It's more glaring when a Christian struts his/her style of 'preaching' to the 'unsaved'. The inherent problem with "Being Right", no matter how logical and reasonable that Christian person is, poses serious ethical questions on realtime equilateral morality for the non-Christians of the world. (taken from my post on anandtech.com)
What in blazes does it mean? The moment some Christian says the Bible is 'infallible', some 'unsaved' non-religious human being dies from hunger, from disease, from someone's gun. Since they're not Christians, they go to some horrible place, right?
..........With most buddhist literature I've come across and speaking with some buddhist masters of temples, the core and basic staple of their teachings is: Mindfulness, the psychophysics of mind, heart, and body. It is the most used word in all Buddhist literature of Buddha's [Pali canon] teachings and discourses. To be mindful is what a Christian lacks (for the most part that I have seen), that has not been taught well to temper his/her obsessive-compulsive ego-centre. Not to say, atheists (or even me) fair any better. I just find that one shouldn't really need to 'push' or 'convert' people, or be 'righteous'. But I, for one, will fiercely defend against people's thoughtless conjectures on subjects that they do not know.. (from anandtech.com)
What is mindfulness? It means to be an observer of your thoughts and actions - not get attached or cling to such things. Being mindful is knowing the good from the bad thoughts; knowing what good or bad actions leads; knowing the difference between delusion and discernment of one's knowledge and knowledge of others; and knowing what is dissonant to our character that we need to improve ourselves upon.
For the Athiests:
(Cartesian Atheist) Many things in the history of mankind are uproariously laughable. Even in our day and age, I'm absolutely certain, that a century from now, people will laugh at some of the things we believe. For me, skepticism is a guard against being outright wrong from the very start.
(Me) Yes, no doubt.. there are the bad fruits and the good fruits. Taoist practices are one of the good, a science of health for the mind, heart, and body. If you are skeptical of such practices, then various forms of kung fu would fall in that category too. I'm sure you're not a skeptic of that too?? The evidence is in the people who use and benefit from it. And the only evidence you will ever uncover is when you try it yourself. The fruits of wisdom must be labored by the oneself, even if one is a skeptic.:o) (taken from Shroomery.com)
For both of the above:
No one has been able to answer me this question I asked from anandtech.com or shroomery.com (debates): what kind of states have you experienced?
Sublime states:
Compassion, Love (spiritual), Joy, Awe, Wonderstruck, Rapture
Jhanic states:
Samatha (state of high bliss and tranquility), Satori (awakening of enlightenment)
These are very strong awakening states that make a profound impression on the person, it's not some little euphoric buzz one gets.. Until anyone in any mystical denominations or not has gathered some kind of authentic experiences, his/her words are just vapor..
For Twilight |
|
|
| hypronix |
renegade: | quote: | | Well I'm not so sure there's any real point in digging up the horrors inflicted by Christianity in the past. |
why? it just points out the way it has been used (by catholics at most - no offends). so it shows how much is Divinity involved in it.
the Crusades were the point where this was taken to its limit. because the Bible says (and though it is man-made, God has inspired its writers, didn't he?) that God is the only one that has the right to judge. So the pope has actually ignored God's word on that one.
By the way, great post Brownitus!
keep it up! |
|
|
| Geed |
| quote: | Originally posted by InsomnEac
well, first of all, i feel the same way as renegade, its hard to believe in something when there really isn't any proof either way, just a long history of people believing in it. its almost mipossible to to disprove a positive statement/belief (ie. there is a god, well how can we ever prove or disprove that?) when something has been believed in for so long, because it hasn't been disproven, it just becomes dogma. i think people adopted religeon because way back in history, alot of things happened that they couldn't understand, so they thought there must be some omnipresent, omnipotent dude up in the sky that is making this weird stuff happen, because they didn't have the scientific knowledge to understand what was going on. this thought also gave them comfort because they felt as tho they were being watched over and taken care of, and that as long as they led a resoectible life they would be taken to heaven for eternity after they die. more evidence they were just dealing with uncertainty in a way that made them feel comfortable. then after centuries of re-telling stories and translation from language to language, religeon was born. i don't have anything against the idea of god, but i do resent organized religeon sometimes, cos it seems so far removed from the ideas behind religeon. if there was a god, i dont think the religeon in practice these days is what he/she would have in mind. im not trying to disrespect anyone who is religeous or whatever, this is just my take on religeon, and i always tend to take the scientific view of things.
:cool: |
I culd not say it better myself.
I kind of dont like fanatics who go and tell the world "u wiil burn in hell cause u dont believe"
or "our religion is the only right one"{they all talk about the same thing so what the f?)
I personaly have my own opinion on life after death (reincarnation, or how u spell it} and I rely dont like bible I think that bible is just bunch of stuff to get people to behave.
to keep then in fear and to remind them of their mortality. |
|
|
| acidfast7 |
u4ea:[soulstar] -
Nice articulate response.
I am interested in this statement. Not that I doubt that validity of your argument but I'd prefer to see some evidence of this for my own personal edifictaion.
| quote: | | Do you realize the possiblity of life created on Earth is unbelievable huge in odds, mathematically? |
By the way, it is efforts such as yours that keep a thread such as this from disintegrating into a string of flaming arguments.
Roger |
|
|
| Brownitus |
| quote: | Originally posted by InsomnEac
dude, you just wrote a novel on pretty much "research before you believe" etc etc (which i agree with by the way), but then you make this assumption most of us are ignorant, when only maybe 20 out of like 4700 have stated their views, and out of those maybe 20 people, how many seemed brainwashed?
:conf:
practice what you preach my friend. |
I was speaking to those who posted within this thread. I am clearly new (read: 0 posts as of that post) to this board and having said that, obviously wouldn't be directing my comment to the entirety of this message board community.
Oh, and even 1 out of 10 people being "brainwashed" is more than enough. Maybe you should delve into mind control and life institutionalization works that detail the evolution of the spreading of fanaticism. One person can lead to many more. When there are none, the knowledge base, opinions and ideologies in general between the ten are almost identical, making the fear of one "popping up" far less apparent. I would conclude that you agree with this? |
|
|
|
|
