[#69290]
Written by: cool_as_dino [20/11/2007, 18:06]
warning: the statements below are from an atheist that was raised catholic and
spent many many years soul searching before finally accepting that he could not
logically justify any religion, christian or otherwise.
kukudrulu:
you are missing one fundamental point. you yourself say that the bible cannot be
taken literally, that it is symbolic, it\'s written for another time etc etc. let
me ask you this - how do you know what is symbolic and what isn\'t? when there
are statements in the bible like god commands that we \"take the babies of our
enemies and dash their heads on the ground\", or when god struck down sodom for
the sin of homosexuality, or when they collected the foreskins of the islamic
people that they conquered for the glory of god, why is that more symbolic and
for another time than jesus? what gives us the right to pick and choose which
parts of the bible are legit and which aren\'t? if it\'s our own \"feelings\" or
\"beliefs\" then why pick christianity? why not islam, buddhism, hinduism, sikhism
or even the flying spaghetti monster? all religions are contradictory. all
religions could not function if people followed every letter in their texts. all
religions could not function if people did not follow the leader\'s
interpretations of said texts.
dalezer:
don\'t worry mate, i know exactly where you\'re coming from, but you\'ve missed an
important point. there is no god, to believe in evolution is to decry god. god
did not setup evolution as a great mystery, lesson or some other bullshit for
humans to unravel or to challenge their beliefs. if you believe in jesus, or
some other crap from the bible, then you have to believe in genesis. you also
have to believe that god will kill homosexuals with fire and brimstone, you have
to kill your enemy\'s babies, and you have to collect the foreskins of the
muslims that you conquer. you can\'t pick and choose what you believe in,
otherwise you\'re just kidding yourself. but you are right about humans stopping
evolution of the species. our medicines keep alive the deformed and diseased.
our social and political agendas keep us from interbreeding, which means that we
don\'t benefit from \"hybrid vigor\", which is why we have race specific diseases
and traits. races exist because of ancient geographical separation, which
doesn\'t exist now, so we could all screw each other and make the tan race and
all be healthier. but this will never happen, not in our lifetimes. the other
thing to keep in mind is that when humans started becoming populous 100,000
years ago or so, the average life expectancy was about 30. the life expectancy
is now 2.5x that. what you are proposing will never ever happen, because no one
in their right mind will say \"let\'s throw away all treatments\". your suggestion
is that we need to cure diseases and deformities. this again will never happen.
diseases evolve also, you will never wipe them out. deformities will always
occur, all of us are carriers of thousands of recessive genes that given the
right improbable circumstances will combine with someone else\'s recessive genes
to cause deformity. you shouldn\'t bump uglies with your sister because the genes
aren\'t very recessive at that point, but if you go back far enough, we are all
related. what we are doing by keeping all of ourselves alive as long as possible
is raping the planet. plagues and other virulent diseases evolve as a natural
population control, by eliminating these we are over populating the planet. the
agricultural revolution was by far the worst thing that ever happened to this
planet. eventually, the earth will shit itself and forcibly wipe us out, and a
few billion other species as well. but that\'s another story....
[#69409]
Written by: kukudrulu [21/11/2007, 07:35]
cool_as_dino,
thank you for your warning. i'll have that in mind in this reply.
i'm surprised that a self confessed atheist uses the term 'soul' when do not
believe in a soul simply because they cannot logically justify its existence
with evidence. be that as it may, let me inform you the the religions you
mentioned have a common core that is metaphysical later branching out into
different sects following the traditions and customs to where they originated.
converts subsequently embraced these religions in accordance to their
temperaments and spread throughout the world.
metaphysics is a unique discipline requiring an expanded consciousness that
brings logic to philosophical levels that goes beyond what is visible and
palpable which an atheist cannot fathom. please don't take this as belittling or
insulting an atheist, i'm just describing here the mind condition of a typical
atheist. in fact i have great respect of an atheist engaged in the
investigation of the physical sciences as his mindset is suitable for the
discipline. you chose to be an atheist and i respect that. but as an atheist you
should know your limitations and religion is one. so why do you engage us to a
discussion on the subject knowing full well that our reply will necessarily be
tinged with metaphysics which you will reject? the outcome of any discussion
with you on the subject will end as an exercise in futility. so why do you make
this post? let me cap this post with a story given by a hindu master to those
that questioned his wisdom:
a bird alighted on a branch of a tree beside a pond and a frog approached the
bird to engage him in a conversation:
frog: hi there. how do you like my pond? don't you think it's big and
beautiful?
bird: yes, i think it's beautiful but i've seen the ocean and it's
much bigger than this.
frog: (annoyed by the bird's reply) how big is the ocean, twice this
pond?
bird: no. much bigger.
frog: (almost in anger) how big is it? ten times this pond? hundred
times?
the bird stared at the frog, looked at his surrounding and just flew
away. the bird realized that there is nothing he could say that would
impress in the frog's mind the enormity of the ocean.
so my friend, pardon me if i make like a bird and fly away. have a good day.
[#69440]
Written by: cool_as_dino [21/11/2007, 18:12]
it would appear that humour and sarcasm are not part of "metaphysical" studies.
with all due respect, this is garbage. an atheist has to fathom and accept
things which defy logic. for example, that there was no beginning to the
universe, that it just was, and forever will be. that time is infinite. that
life began not from a divine spark, but from a random series of extremely
improbable events that led to organisisms that started from very basic proteins
into the life forms we see on the planet today. that things that cannot be
explained now are due to our extremely limited knowledge, not miracles. this is
far more difficult than the magic proposed by different religions. i can
guarantee that i am far more educated in religions than you are. you may be an
expert in the religion that your parents chose to raise you in, or the one that
you have since chosen for yourself, but for the last 20+ years i have studied
many religions, including, but not limited to: catholocism, anglican, orthodox
catholicism, islam, judaism, taoism, buddhism, hinduism, paganism, wikka,
satanism, and the dreamtime of the australian aborigines. i have also included a
smattering of the philosophical and psychological studies of confucious, freud,
jung, de button, lewis and other modern and current thinkers. i am familiar with
atheist works by the likes of richard dawkins and others. my acceptance that i
am an atheist is recent, but i was always uncomfortable with my religion, so
spent a long time studying others.
what you describe as metaphysics is easily explained by other means. if you are
familiar with maslow's heirarchy of needs, you will understand that there is a
drive in all humans to make sense of the world, to educate themselves, and to
feel a sense of belonging and community. religions all started as movements that
governed people. religions are a way to control even dictators and kings,
because they must accept that there is a higher power. they are also a way to
control the community, to establish rules and boundaries, and to create a sense
of belonging. they also provide answers to difficult questions, neat little
packages so that time is not wasted trying answer the unfathomable. in ancient
times, there was great risk of defying this. many scientists were executed for
heresy, the same people that revealed things that even religious people think is
true. no one thinks the earth is flat, or that it is the center of the universe.
even now, many people believe in divine intervention, miracles, or faith
healing, yet if any of those people became ill, they would make a beeline for
the doctor. it's as if religious people conveniently forget that doctors are
scientists, they study genes, and often diagnose and cure illnesses based on
genetics (evolution).
you can belittle me all you like, i am quite used to it. atheists are
unfortunately in the minority in this world. i'm a minority in many senses of
the word, physical, social, mental, racial (in my community), sexual and
religious, so i have no issues with being belittled. as long as i am not
personally insulted (which you have not done), you can say anything you like. i
expect the same respect in return though.
this seems ironic to me, considering that an atheist has to continuously justify
things that are scientific fact, whereas a religious person just has to make the
argument "you just have to believe and have faith". i notice that you have not
challenged any of my statements, for example that all religions have
contradictory doctrines. nor have you explained how it's possible for so many
religions to develop from one great unifying metaphysical truth. to me you are
implying that all religions are facets of the same "metaphysical religion". this
is illogical, as all religions claim that they are the one true religion, and
that believers of any other religion will not receive whatever reward in their
respective afterlives. if there was one true metaphysical religion, then it's
illogical that it would splinter. you are right about it being subject to local
influences, that's just further proof that it's humans making up religions not a
divine being.
apologies, my understanding was that this was a public forum, and i was
permitted to express an opinion different to yours. my goal is to educate,
enlighten, and give permission to those like me that are eternally uncomfortable
with their religious beliefs to accept that there is an alternative.
how big is the universe? bigger than this pond? ten times? a hundred times?
how many micro organisms are there in this pond? are they smaller than this
pond? ten times smaller? a hundred times smaller? why can't i see them? how
often do they reproduce, and hence mutate at every generation?
what is harder to believe, that somewhere there is a body of water bigger than
the pond, or that every drop of that pond potentially contains hundreds of
different life forms that can't be seen with the naked eye?
[#69541]
Written by: kukudrulu [22/11/2007, 14:08]
permit me if you will but taoism is not a religion. ask any tao practicing
chinese. lao tsu, its founder, is a chinese philosopher as with confucius who
came after.
metaphysics is neither a religion but a science in its own right. similarly
occultism is a science too but i've avoided using this term because many people
equate occultism to witchcraft and dark rituals. it is not! although witchcraft
is covered in occultism, there are loftier aspect to it. many scientific
discoveries were long known by occultist of old before they were discovered. the
human aura was well known in ancient occult science but contemporary science
rejected it until kirlian photography was stumbled upon. now it is the subject
of scientific investigation. prana (sanskrit) or ki (chinese) also known as
etheric energy has recently been discovered by contemporary science and they
call it plasma. scientist still cannot contain that form of energy and it is
available in abundance all around us! occult science also include evolution and
the concept of a soul. it's in this latter where the core of religion begins.
dogmas and doctrines is where they differ and even contradict.
your search for truths has to directed in the opposite direction. instead of
looking into the diffences, look to where they are similar and then go deeper.
if you search outward you will find diversity but if you search inwards you will
find unity. i don't know if i am making any sense to you but i'm a bit rusty
here as i retired from these studies about ten years ago. but my life is guided
by what i have learned in over 40 years of study. instead, may i recommend that
you read "the ancient wisdom" by clara codd to get you started in this
direction. the same book is also written by annie besant but i find her writing
style too technical while clara relates it to the environment we live in.
you say that i have not contradicted you in your beliefs. that's because i think
contradiction leads to confrontational arguments. i prefer discussions where
opinions and ideas are expressed freely and in this manner you learn more than
from arguments. from the manner that you express yourself i sense you are in
turmoil and cannot find satisfactory answers to your questions so you seek
refuge in atheism. please don't take this as an attempt to educate you because
i'm not. i'm just offering you alternatives in your quest for truths.
atheists are
