What's the point of religion when we have education now?

[Pedro de San Patricio]

Satanism is a religion - and why should a satanist not murder a rich man? A Satanist could even murder a poor man just for fun.

Because Satanism doesn't condone murdering people for fun. Stupidity is one of the worst sins in Satanism. Killing someone for no reason is considered a pretty stupid and pointless act. That said, Satanism does have an openly relativist moral code and so doesn't have any universal prohibitions like "thou shalt not kill". Killing is perfectly fine if there is good reason, like your life being in danger or your community being attacked by another. Satanist soldiers can kill as many terrorists as required to complete the mission and this is considered perfectly guiltless and acceptable.

Same with the belief atheism. Why should an atheist follow any rule?

An atheist can still have a moral code. I'm an atheist. My entire philosophy is based on a life affirming position, which I call pro-life but has little to do with the hypocritical political Pro-Life movement of the religious/social conservatives. My disbelief in deities does not prevent me from believing that every living thing has inherent worth and rights and that these should be protected and nourished regardless of cost.

Atheists murdered lots of people of all religions.

People have murdered lots of people. The murderers and the victims have been of every theological position.

Sometimes people are even sacrifying their own children in their fanatisms - it's said so in Carthago and about the Philistines in Palestina. Or people are even doing war against babies - like the Nazis did because of their belief in darwinism.

Atheists have nothing to sacrifice anyone or anything to. The ancient Carthaginians and Philistines were not atheists. They were sacrificing their children to their gods, which should imply that they were devout theists. None of those children burned in the idols would have died that way had they been aware that their Ba'al was a fictional character.

 

[zaangalewa]

Satanism is a religion - and why should a satanist not murder a rich man? A Satanist could even murder a poor man just for fun.

Because Satanism doesn't condone murdering people for fun. Stupidity is one of the worst sins in Satanism. Killing someone for no reason is considered a pretty stupid and pointless act. That said, Satanism does have an openly relativist moral code and so doesn't have any universal prohibitions like "thou shalt not kill". Killing is perfectly fine if there is good reason, like your life being in danger or your community being attacked by another. Satanist soldiers can kill as many terrorists as required to complete the mission and this is considered perfectly guiltless and acceptable.

The american dream? Satanists fuck terrorists? Why not statanists love terrorists? And is the word "fuck" in the english language the opposit of the word "love"?

Same with the belief atheism. Why should an atheist follow any rule?

An atheist can still have a moral code.

or not

I'm an atheist. My entire philosophy is based on a life affirming position,

On what? ... Got it. "lebensbejahende Position". Okay: You are still alive. A short time ago you said "Satanist soldiers can kill as many terrorists as required to complete the mission and this is considered perfectly guiltless and acceptable."

which I call pro-life but has little to do with the hypocritical political Pro-Life movement of the religious/social conservatives.

Sure it makes not a big sense for you to say "Every life is holy".

My disbelief in deities

Christians don't believe in deities. We believe in god. That's why we were often called on our own atheists in our early history.

does not prevent me from believing that every living thing has inherent worth and rights and that these should be protected and nourished regardless of cost.

So you believe worth depends on money. I believe money is an illusion, dangerous because in our times someone can die on hunger if he suffers not the illusion money. Sure needs a human being resources. That's not any reason to kill someone.

Atheists murdered lots of people of all religions.

People have murdered lots of people. The murderers and the victims have been of every theological position.

Try to write a book about the theology of murderers. I don't see any sense in such a position. I see only empty pages in such a book.

Sometimes people are even sacrifying their own children in their fanatisms - it's said so in Carthago and about the Philistines in Palestina. Or people are even doing war against babies - like the Nazis did because of their belief in darwinism.

Atheists have nothing to sacrifice anyone or anything to. The ancient Carthaginians and Philistines were not atheists. They were sacrificing their children to their gods, which should imply that they were devout theists. None of those children burned in the idols would have died that way had they been aware that their Ba'al was a fictional character.

Hmm.

 

[chikenwing]

Childhood indoctrination's a huge part of how religion is perpetuated. Virtually every religion is chalk full of fanciful stories that are only believable when you're a child and said stories are disseminated by someone you trust implicitly, like a parent or someone -they- profess to trust implicitly.

Even without that indoctrination, though, people seek out spirituality (and therefore religion) for numerous psychological reasons. Science might explain the sun's movement and the lightning and thunder that come with a storm, but ever has the one of the greatest draws to any religion or spirituality been the human tendency toward fear of the uncertainty of death. Science will possibly never provide evidence definitive enough to drive away the human penchant for self-importance that drives many to the subconscious (and often active) belief that the unique level of reasoning and understanding that elevates humans above any competing species must be more than the result of the same sorta biochemical reactions happening in our skulls as those of (other) animals. One of the trappings of a reasoning, individual consciousness tempered with survival instinct seems to be an elevated sense of self, as though we're all the heroes of our own story. This makes the idea that our consciousness transcends the physical literally a more psychologically pleasing explanation than the alternative, and thus easier to believe. It also gives rise to the concept that this transcendent consciousness also transcends physical death, which in turn gives rise to the question of what happens to this transcendent "me" after my body stops reacting to stimuli and seems to be devoid of that super-physical consciousness. Enter uncertainty and fear of death, for which every religion offers a comforting explanation.

To a lesser degree, the question of where we come from has hardly been settled in the minds of most. The majority of humans haven't been directly exposed to the physical evidence supporting the evolution theory, and even if they had, the vast majority wouldn't be qualified to understand wtf they were looking at. Therefore, buying into the theory of evolution, for the average person, requires having faith in the people who tell you that scientists all believe it, having faith in the scientists who find the theory reasonable, having faith that the scientists who pioneered the theory analyzed the physical evidence properly, and having faith that the physical evidence even exists. The fact that TV says the scientsits agree doesn't necessarily make this theory any more compelling to the average person than a bearded magician in the sky who grants wishes having birthed the universe in 7 days through word alone. Most people also have a hard time conceptualizing how nothingness exploded into matter. It's actually easier for the average human to picture an anthropomorphic sky-ghost giving birth to existence, simply because nothingness and true spontaneity are literally difficult to envision. I find evolution to be the most compelling explanation I've heard, but I still have a hell of a time wrapping my mind around the Big Bang theory.

Add to that the human desire for contentment, which is generally achieved through continued success in matters and fields that are important to one on an emotional, subconscious level, and suplemented by the continued approval of those one loves/respects. Many people don't achieve these things, whether hindered by limitations in ability, procrastination, or imposed psychological barriers. Spiritualism offers the promise of contentment without the need for material success, which is largely competitive and not guaranteed. If one can make piety their highest value, one can achieve success without having to compete against people of possibly superior ability. Potentially, it's a path to happiness for the procrastinator, the underachiever, the coward, etc, that doesn't necessitate confronting the character flaws holding them back or competing with the other people seeking success in the same matters.

Simple don't go to church,even more simple leave people alone that do.

 

[Pedro de San Patricio]

The american dream? Satanists fuck terrorists? Why not statanists love terrorists? And is the word "fuck" in the english language the opposit of the word "love"?

None of this makes sense. I'm not sure how it relates, but the word "fuck" is simply a crude term for rough sexual intercourse.

On what? ... Got it. "lebensbejahende Position". Okay: You are still alive.

I guess. I only know a tiny amount of German due to the area I grew up in. Basically I mean that life has an inherent value from conception to natural death. I don't have to be a Christian to believe this. In fact, I'd argue that the true catholic/orthodox Christianity is fundamentally incompatible with my position.

Sure it makes not a big sense for you to say "Every life is holy"..

"Holiness" basically means "pertaining to religion or a deity". There are no deities and so the phrase "every life is holy" is nonsensical. That does not mean that life isn't precious or worth protecting and nurturing.

Christians don't believe in deities. We believe in god. That's why we were often called on our own atheists in our early history.

In English, "god" and "deity" are synonymous. The former is the native Anglo-Saxon term. The latter derives from the Latin "deus" of the same meaning.

So you believe worth depends on money. I believe money is an illusion, dangerous because in our times someone can die on hunger if he suffers not the illusion money. Sure needs a human being resources. That's not any reason to kill someone.

I didn't say that. I said that the cost of protecting and preserving life should not factor into the decision to do so, which is essentially the polar opposite of what you're saying I said. You can part with twenty bucks to buy a starving man a meal. Part of my political position is that this should be a social responsibility. I'd be thrilled to pay a 50% tax rate if most of that money was going towards feeding the hungry, housing the homeless, and healing the sick.

Try to write a book about the theology of murderers. I don't see any sense in such a position.

I'm not sure if you mean theology justifying murder or the religious beliefs held by various murderers.[/QUOTE]

 

[zaangalewa]

The american dream? Satanists fuck terrorists? Why not statanists love terrorists? And is the word "fuck" in the english language the opposit of the word "love"?

None of this makes sense. I'm not sure how it relates, but the word "fuck" is simply a crude term for rough sexual intercourse.

"Fuck" is the way how biologically live is created on earth. It's very strange to use such a word in the way how the english language is doing it. Unfortunatelly Germany learned it from U.

On what? ... Got it. "lebensbejahende Position". Okay: You are still alive.

I guess. I only know a tiny amount of German due to the area I grew up in. Basically I mean that life has an inherent value from conception to natural death. I don't have to be a Christian to believe this. In fact, I'd argue that the true catholic/orthodox Christianity is fundamentally incompatible with my position.

So a wrong Christianity would be compatible with your position.

Sure it makes not a big sense for you to say "Every life is holy"..

"Holiness" basically means "pertaining to religion or a deity". There are no deities and so the phrase "every life is holy" is nonsensical. That does not mean that life isn't precious or worth protecting and nurturing.

It still seems to me it would not make a big sense for you to say "Every life is holy".

Christians don't believe in deities. We believe in god. That's why we were often called on our own atheists in our early history.

In English, "god" and "deity" are synonymous. The former is the native Anglo-Saxon term. The latter derives from the Latin "deus" of the same meaning.

Nevertheless Christians believe in god not in deities. That's a very big difference.

So you believe worth depends on money. I believe money is an illusion, dangerous because in our times someone can die on hunger if he suffers not the illusion money. Sure needs a human being resources. That's not any reason to kill someone.

I didn't say that. I said that the cost of protecting and preserving life should not factor into the decision to do so, which is essentially the polar opposite of what you're saying I said. You can part with twenty bucks to buy a starving man a meal. Part of my political position is that this should be a social responsibility. I'd be thrilled to pay a 50% tax rate if most of that money was going towards feeding the hungry, housing the homeless, and healing the sick.

Perfect. You like to help others without any concrete motivation to do so but you would pay taxes for.

Try to write a book about the theology of murderers. I don't see any sense in such a position.

I'm not sure if you mean theology justifying murder or the religious beliefs held by various murderers.

And now the circle starts again?

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Childhood indoctrination's a huge part of how religion is perpetuated. Virtually every religion is chalk full of fanciful stories that are only believable when you're a child and said stories are disseminated by someone you trust implicitly, like a parent or someone -they- profess to trust implicitly.

Even without that indoctrination, though, people seek out spirituality (and therefore religion) for numerous psychological reasons. Science might explain the sun's movement and the lightning and thunder that come with a storm, but ever has the one of the greatest draws to any religion or spirituality been the human tendency toward fear of the uncertainty of death. Science will possibly never provide evidence definitive enough to drive away the human penchant for self-importance that drives many to the subconscious (and often active) belief that the unique level of reasoning and understanding that elevates humans above any competing species must be more than the result of the same sorta biochemical reactions happening in our skulls as those of (other) animals. One of the trappings of a reasoning, individual consciousness tempered with survival instinct seems to be an elevated sense of self, as though we're all the heroes of our own story. This makes the idea that our consciousness transcends the physical literally a more psychologically pleasing explanation than the alternative, and thus easier to believe. It also gives rise to the concept that this transcendent consciousness also transcends physical death, which in turn gives rise to the question of what happens to this transcendent "me" after my body stops reacting to stimuli and seems to be devoid of that super-physical consciousness. Enter uncertainty and fear of death, for which every religion offers a comforting explanation.

To a lesser degree, the question of where we come from has hardly been settled in the minds of most. The majority of humans haven't been directly exposed to the physical evidence supporting the evolution theory, and even if they had, the vast majority wouldn't be qualified to understand wtf they were looking at. Therefore, buying into the theory of evolution, for the average person, requires having faith in the people who tell you that scientists all believe it, having faith in the scientists who find the theory reasonable, having faith that the scientists who pioneered the theory analyzed the physical evidence properly, and having faith that the physical evidence even exists. The fact that TV says the scientsits agree doesn't necessarily make this theory any more compelling to the average person than a bearded magician in the sky who grants wishes having birthed the universe in 7 days through word alone. Most people also have a hard time conceptualizing how nothingness exploded into matter. It's actually easier for the average human to picture an anthropomorphic sky-ghost giving birth to existence, simply because nothingness and true spontaneity are literally difficult to envision. I find evolution to be the most compelling explanation I've heard, but I still have a hell of a time wrapping my mind around the Big Bang theory.

Add to that the human desire for contentment, which is generally achieved through continued success in matters and fields that are important to one on an emotional, subconscious level, and suplemented by the continued approval of those one loves/respects. Many people don't achieve these things, whether hindered by limitations in ability, procrastination, or imposed psychological barriers. Spiritualism offers the promise of contentment without the need for material success, which is largely competitive and not guaranteed. If one can make piety their highest value, one can achieve success without having to compete against people of possibly superior ability. Potentially, it's a path to happiness for the procrastinator, the underachiever, the coward, etc, that doesn't necessitate confronting the character flaws holding them back or competing with the other people seeking success in the same matters.

Simple don't go to church,even more simple leave people alone that do.

I wasn't expressing a conundrum I'm experiencing, so I'm not sure why you feel the need to advise me, but thanks?
Anyway, way ahead of you. Stopped going to church as soon as I realized I didn't believe.
Leave people alone, though? No, thank you. Many of my close friends are Christian, as is my mother and most of my family. I don't go out of my way to criticize and belittle people of faith. I simply found the question posed by the thread compelling and posted my thoughts on the matter. Sorry if you were offended.

 

[Pedro de San Patricio]

"Fuck" is the way how biologically live is created on earth. It's very strange to use such a word in the way how the english language is doing it. Unfortunatelly Germany learned it from U.

It's not a bad word, really. It's just a victim of French elitism. "****" is another perfectly good Anglo-Saxon word that the frogs managed to vilify and replace with one of their own.

So a wrong Christianity would be compatible with your position.

Potentially. You'd have to throw out huge and key portions of the Bible to make it work though, including the human sacrifice of Jesus. It's almost an either/or thing.

It still seems to me it would not make a big sense for you to say "Every life is holy"..

I don't say that every life is holy. I say that every life is worthy of protection and nurturing.

Nevertheless Christians believe in god not in deities. That's a very big difference.

There is no difference. English speaking Christians address their specific god as "God" or "The Deity" based on personal preference. A god is a supernatural being. Deity is synonymous.

Perfect. You like to help others without any concrete motivation to do so but you would pay taxes for.

It's not about helping others. It's about a moral obligation to cause life to thrive and a familial obligation to the rest of humanity. The latter point could possibly be called a nearly religious belief for me, even though it is backed by the very existence of several scientific subdisciplines. You are my cousin in the most literal sense of the term. We are literally family by virtue of descent from common ancestors. We could discover our common ancestors with enough effort.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

The american dream? Satanists fuck terrorists? Why not statanists love terrorists? And is the word "fuck" in the english language the opposit of the word "love"?

None of this makes sense. I'm not sure how it relates, but the word "fuck" is simply a crude term for rough sexual intercourse.

"Fuck" is the way how biologically live is created on earth. It's very strange to use such a word in the way how the english language is doing it. Unfortunatelly Germany learned it from U.

On what? ... Got it. "lebensbejahende Position". Okay: You are still alive.

I guess. I only know a tiny amount of German due to the area I grew up in. Basically I mean that life has an inherent value from conception to natural death. I don't have to be a Christian to believe this. In fact, I'd argue that the true catholic/orthodox Christianity is fundamentally incompatible with my position.

So a wrong Christianity would be compatible with your position.

Sure it makes not a big sense for you to say "Every life is holy"..

"Holiness" basically means "pertaining to religion or a deity". There are no deities and so the phrase "every life is holy" is nonsensical. That does not mean that life isn't precious or worth protecting and nurturing.

It still seems to me it would not make a big sense for you to say "Every life is holy".

Christians don't believe in deities. We believe in god. That's why we were often called on our own atheists in our early history.

In English, "god" and "deity" are synonymous. The former is the native Anglo-Saxon term. The latter derives from the Latin "deus" of the same meaning.

Nevertheless Christians believe in god not in deities. That's a very big difference.

So you believe worth depends on money. I believe money is an illusion, dangerous because in our times someone can die on hunger if he suffers not the illusion money. Sure needs a human being resources. That's not any reason to kill someone.

I didn't say that. I said that the cost of protecting and preserving life should not factor into the decision to do so, which is essentially the polar opposite of what you're saying I said. You can part with twenty bucks to buy a starving man a meal. Part of my political position is that this should be a social responsibility. I'd be thrilled to pay a 50% tax rate if most of that money was going towards feeding the hungry, housing the homeless, and healing the sick.

Perfect. You like to help others without any concrete motivation to do so but you would pay taxes for.

Try to write a book about the theology of murderers. I don't see any sense in such a position.

I'm not sure if you mean theology justifying murder or the religious beliefs held by various murderers.

And now the circle starts again?

Every human has concrete motivation to help people. It's called empathy, and is the culmination of emotion and reason that exists in every non-psychopath that hasn't been psychologically ruined by childhood trauma. Morality isn't a construct of religion, and if you think people lacking religious faith lack principles, it's because you either don't know many agnostics or atheists, or you're willfully dense.

 

[westwall]

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that religion is bad or dumb. I'm just saying we've outgrown it. We don't need stories about how the Sun moves across the sky because it's sitting in a chariot. We understand how the solar system works and know that it's actually the Earth revolving around the Sun. We don't need an illiterate Neolithic tribesman's best guess that the first people were made by Sky Father. We understand evolution now. We don't need these attempts to explain why the world is the way it is when we have the real answers to many of our questions.

Isn't it time for us to accept this and move on to bigger and better things now? Isn't it time for Jews to give up their Judaism and its attendant falsified history and ethnic supremacy? Isn't it time for Christians to give up their Christianity and its worship of an executed Jewish convict as the creator of the universe? Isn't it time for Muslims to give up their Islam and its calls for a global theocratic dictatorship? We don't need these things anymore. We can let go. Will you join the rest of the human family in letting go of the past and stepping out into the light of the bright future we can build together?

Religion performs a useful purpose for a huge number of people. Why does it bother you so much? Your anti religious rants, and the secular attacks on religion, bear every hallmark of religion based bigotry. It's funny how you all think you're so "superior" when you are every bit as bad as the worst of the religious nutters.

It is not up to you to dictate (and yes, I am using that word for a reason) what people should, or should not believe. That level of arrogance is simply a different manifestation of the religious bigotry you all rail against.

 

[Stephanie]

godless people are just so loving, caring and tolerant of others, aren't they?

self righteous and condesending is more like it

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

The point is apart from Salvation in Jesus Christ mankind shall spend eternity in hell. This is reality. Not religion. It's Bible truth and there have been many testimonies of Believers who have seen hell and seen the torment of the damned. The truth is that educated people are not necessarily "moral people"... When considering what is good for society one must ask what does the atheist man contribute to a society and what does the Christian man contribute to society? What legacy do they leave and can we multiply this by 300 million persons today - approx population of USA and draw a conclusion as to the state of our country and why it is in such chaos? I believe we can. I posted this earlier - note the two men - one an atheist - the other a Christian and what each man contributed to the Nation through his own bloodline:

Legacies Atheist Vs Christian US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

In a quote from Al Sanders in Crisis In Morality - Mr. Sanders gives us reason for thought on this matter. Consider these facts that he presents from his writings:

Max Jukes, the atheist, lived a godless life. He married a godless girl, and from the union there were 310 who died paupers, 150 criminals, 7 were murderers, 100 were drunkards, and more than half of the women were prostitutes. His 540 descendants cost the State one and a quarter million dollars.

But praise God, it works both ways!

There is a record of a great American man of God named Jonathan Edwards. He lived at the same time as Max Jukes, but he married a godly girl. An investigation was made of 1,394 known descendants of Jonathan Edwards of which 13 became college presidents, 65 college professors, 3 United States senators, 30 judges, 100 lawyers, 60 physicians, 75 army and navy officers, 100 preachers and missionaries, 60 authors of prominence, one vice-president of the United States, 80 became public officials in other capacities, 295 college graduates, among whom were governors of states and ministers to foreign countries. His descendants did not cost the State a single penny.

The memory of the just is blessed! -Proverbs 10:7
___________
As you can see, Pedro, from this presentation of the facts - America simply cannot afford your idea - although it does appear she is falling headlong into it anyway! Nevertheless, when the judgment of God falls - it shall cleanse our nation of Baal worship as cleanly as it did in Elijah's day when after 3 years of famine he returned to confront the prophets of Baal and put them to death. At last Israel returned to her senses - just as America shall do after her own famine / judgment / cleansing is completed
___________
Furthermore, on the matter of "education" once again we should turn to Proverbs because King Solomon was the wisest man to ever live upon the earth. It is wisdom to seek answers from the wise. Is it not? So with that we can look at Proverbs 17:16

Wherefore is there a price in the hand of a fool to get wisdom, seeing he hath no heart for it?
Proverbs 17:16

Clearly King Solomon felt it to be an act of futility to educate a fool because a fool has no heart to gain wisdom and what is an education, Sir, without wisdom to apply to it? Now by your own admission, Pedro, you are not a believer in Jesus Christ - you do not believe that God is. Therein the Bible identifies you as a fool. So you would be one that King Solomon would say should not be given an education. Because you lack the wisdom to know how to apply it to life. You are denying the very One who gave you life while greedily coveting His gifts. Truly it is the mercy of God that He overlooks your ignorance and has put you here to "learn" the truth. That God is. That Jesus Christ is God. And that every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is LORD.

In closing, you have the cart before the horse here. Humble yourself before the LORD and ask Him to forgive your sins - be willing to turn from your sins and learn from Jesus Christ. Open the Bible and read and seek the LORD early while He may be found. Then - once you are a Believer - you can concern yourself with an education if the LORD has those plans for you. Otherwise be happy with whatever he decides for your life.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

godless people are just so loving, caring and tolerant of others, aren't they?

self righteous and condesending is more like it

Now you're pulling the same move as the Democrats. Just because someone criticizes your culture doesn't mean they hate your people.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

godless people are just so loving, caring and tolerant of others, aren't they?

self righteous and condesending is more like it

Pedro does not see himself as godless. He is calling Lucifer his god, Stephanie. Did you miss that in his message?

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Hold on to their [INSERT COMFORT ITEM HERE] if it makes you feel better then. There's nothing too religion except fear. Sorry, but that's how it goes.

Changing the word doesn't change the fact that you are here to put them down.

I have asked you, the supposed grown up, to examine what you are getting out of this.

You seem to be unable to even wrap your mind around that idea.


Are you operating from the belief system that you are a creature of pure logic?

Based on this line of reasoning, nobody should argue or debate about anything. If I express disagreement with any of your opinions, the implication is that I feel you have logically erred in a conclusion, which in turn implies an intellectual defect, however minor. If pointing out what I don't like about your religion equals condescension, then expressing what I feel is errant about any of your opinions is some degree of the same.

If this is honestly how you feel, you might as well join the Dems in the declaration that criticizing president Obama is racist, because you're exercising an identical brand of hypersensitivity. If dissent makes you feel persecuted, I'd stay away from any people who possess both a brain and a mouth, as people with both tend to have opinions on your opinions and are likely to be vocally critical when disagreements arise.

 

[Correll]

Hold on to their [INSERT COMFORT ITEM HERE] if it makes you feel better then. There's nothing too religion except fear. Sorry, but that's how it goes.

Changing the word doesn't change the fact that you are here to put them down.

I have asked you, the supposed grown up, to examine what you are getting out of this.

You seem to be unable to even wrap your mind around that idea.


Are you operating from the belief system that you are a creature of pure logic?

Based on this line of reasoning, nobody should argue or debate about anything. If I express disagreement with any of your opinions, the implication is that I feel you have logically erred in a conclusion, which in turn implies an intellectual defect, however minor. If pointing out what I don't like about your religion equals condescension, then expressing what I feel is errant about any of your opinions is some degree of the same.

If this is honestly how you feel, you might as well join the Dems in the declaration that criticizing president Obama is racist, because you're exercising an identical brand of hypersensitivity. If dissent makes you feel persecuted, I'd stay away from any people who possess both a brain and a mouth, as people with both tend to have opinions on your opinions and are likely to be vocally critical when disagreements arise.

Not at all.

First of all, this question was asked in a very condescending manner. And the majority of the post who some from the left were not some much exploration of the question but a circle jerk of ridicule aimed at people that they don't like.

Second of all, my question was a leading question that would have given me an opportunity to show at least one role that religion plays. Except that the supposedly "grown ups" in question are able to asking people to do some soul searching but are unable to do it themselves.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Hold on to their [INSERT COMFORT ITEM HERE] if it makes you feel better then. There's nothing too religion except fear. Sorry, but that's how it goes.

Changing the word doesn't change the fact that you are here to put them down.

I have asked you, the supposed grown up, to examine what you are getting out of this.

You seem to be unable to even wrap your mind around that idea.


Are you operating from the belief system that you are a creature of pure logic?

Based on this line of reasoning, nobody should argue or debate about anything. If I express disagreement with any of your opinions, the implication is that I feel you have logically erred in a conclusion, which in turn implies an intellectual defect, however minor. If pointing out what I don't like about your religion equals condescension, then expressing what I feel is errant about any of your opinions is some degree of the same.

If this is honestly how you feel, you might as well join the Dems in the declaration that criticizing president Obama is racist, because you're exercising an identical brand of hypersensitivity. If dissent makes you feel persecuted, I'd stay away from any people who possess both a brain and a mouth, as people with both tend to have opinions on your opinions and are likely to be vocally critical when disagreements arise.

Not at all.

First of all, this question was asked in a very condescending manner. And the majority of the post who some from the left were not some much exploration of the question but a circle jerk of ridicule aimed at people that they don't like.

Second of all, my question was a leading question that would have given me an opportunity to show at least one role that religion plays. Except that the supposedly "grown ups" in question are able to asking people to do some soul searching but are unable to do it themselves.

Point taken. In retrospect, the OP was extremely presumptuous and pretty much built on the presupposition that we all -know- where we came from and that religion is false, and yeah, hard to interpret that self assured yet unprovable dismissal of your life view as anything but condescending.

I mistook you as hiding from debate, which is pretty insulting. My apologies.

 

[Correll]

Hold on to their [INSERT COMFORT ITEM HERE] if it makes you feel better then. There's nothing too religion except fear. Sorry, but that's how it goes.

Changing the word doesn't change the fact that you are here to put them down.

I have asked you, the supposed grown up, to examine what you are getting out of this.

You seem to be unable to even wrap your mind around that idea.


Are you operating from the belief system that you are a creature of pure logic?

Based on this line of reasoning, nobody should argue or debate about anything. If I express disagreement with any of your opinions, the implication is that I feel you have logically erred in a conclusion, which in turn implies an intellectual defect, however minor. If pointing out what I don't like about your religion equals condescension, then expressing what I feel is errant about any of your opinions is some degree of the same.

If this is honestly how you feel, you might as well join the Dems in the declaration that criticizing president Obama is racist, because you're exercising an identical brand of hypersensitivity. If dissent makes you feel persecuted, I'd stay away from any people who possess both a brain and a mouth, as people with both tend to have opinions on your opinions and are likely to be vocally critical when disagreements arise.

Not at all.

First of all, this question was asked in a very condescending manner. And the majority of the post who some from the left were not some much exploration of the question but a circle jerk of ridicule aimed at people that they don't like.

Second of all, my question was a leading question that would have given me an opportunity to show at least one role that religion plays. Except that the supposedly "grown ups" in question are able to asking people to do some soul searching but are unable to do it themselves.

Point taken. In retrospect, the OP was extremely presumptuous and pretty much built on the presupposition that we all -know- where we came from and that religion is false, and yeah, hard to interpret that self assured yet unprovable dismissal of your life view as anything but condescending.

I mistook you as hiding from debate, which is pretty insulting. My apologies.

No problem.

Using leading questions on the internet is difficult because so many people are so resistant to discussing the topics.

 

[Pedro de San Patricio]

godless people are just so loving, caring and tolerant of others, aren't they?

self righteous and condesending is more like it

Pedro does not see himself as godless. He is calling Lucifer his god, Stephanie. Did you miss that in his message?

Are you referring to my earlier post about Satanism's moral system? If so, then no. I am not a Satanist myself. I honestly don't even find the religion all that compelling. LaVey was basically just a wannbe Crowley. My actual philosophy is based around human kinship, the imperative to protect and spread life, and the social good. The single best illustration I can find for my worldview is this:

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

godless people are just so loving, caring and tolerant of others, aren't they?

self righteous and condesending is more like it

Pedro does not see himself as godless. He is calling Lucifer his god, Stephanie. Did you miss that in his message?

Are you referring to my earlier post about Satanism's moral system? If so, then no. I am not a Satanist myself. I honestly don't even find the religion all that compelling. LaVey was basically just a wannbe Crowley. My actual philosophy is based around human kinship, the imperative to protect and spread life, and the social good. The single best illustration I can find for my worldview is this:

You are a child of the devil none the less. You were born into it. Which is why you must be born again. See John 3:16 and Romans 10:9,10.

 

[zaangalewa]

"Fuck" is the way how biologically live is created on earth. It's very strange to use such a word in the way how the english language is doing it. Unfortunatelly Germany learned it from U.

It's not a bad word, really. It's just a victim of French elitism. "****" is another perfectly good Anglo-Saxon word that the frogs managed to vilify and replace with one of their own.

I don't have any idea why Americans call French frogs and Germans krauts and so on - whatever. You are not able to see your world with the eyes of a stranger. How can be the word for [one of] the most beautiful things on earth be used in such a perverted way how the english language is doing it? Sure everyone will accept this after a while - the bad side of fitness - but this is nothing what I can do. I will always be a stranger in the english speaking world - and the more the english speaking world is conquering my country the more I will be a be a stranger in my own country. On the other side it's a lot of fun to hear someone say something like "fucking Fleischwurstfachverkäuferin".

So a wrong Christianity would be compatible with your position.

Potentially. You'd have to throw out huge and key portions of the Bible to make it work though, including the human sacrifice of Jesus. It's almost an either/or thing.

Nevertheless there seems to be an open question in your soul - or a kind of yearning. Maybe it's the yearning to find a diamond of truth. There are lots of diamonds only 50 miles under your feet but I don't know how deep the truth lies under your feet.

It still seems to me it would not make a big sense for you to say "Every life is holy"..

I don't say that every life is holy. I say that every life is worthy of protection and nurturing.

But you don't know why. Perfect. God is with you. On the other side I'm asking myselve: "Is somone able to hold a good position in a storm without a good evaluated structure in- and outside"? Who has right to decide who has the right to live and who has the duty to dy?

Nevertheless Christians believe in god not in deities. That's a very big difference.

There is no difference. English speaking Christians address their specific god as "God" or "The Deity" based on personal preference. A god is a supernatural being. Deity is synonymous.

More easy: A Christian believes in god not in gods. That's a completly different thing. I don't know why it is so difficult for you to undertand this. We are the children the evolution as well as we are the children of the spirit of god. God is the source for all forms of spirit - he is the spirit - but he is not the ruler of every form of spirit. You are doing your own decisions - you are free. The problem is maybe the distance. You need more distance. This could be difficult to realize in some cases. In our church we have places to come more near to god - with more distance to the world. Our experience is we have to do something to come to god. So maybe to do nothing is a way for a greater distance - but I fear this is wrong too. A man who is able to do really nothing needs and owns an astonishing great spiritual power and trust in god. I fear the only way to be separated from god are sins, crimes, brutality, murder and so on. Not a good idea to go this way.

Perfect. You like to help others without any concrete motivation to do so but you would pay taxes for.

It's not about helping others. It's about a moral obligation

Moral and lack of moral seems to be very important in the english speaking world. I saw murderers of members of my family live a long happy well respected life. So I decided one day moral is a completly superflous thing. Indeed no one is able to live without justice - but to hope to find justice in this world here destroys only the own life.

to cause life to thrive and a familial obligation to the rest of humanity.

"humanity"? Should the right expression not be be "human race" in this case? Whatever. My wife said one day to me: "Blood is not thicker than water" - and I knew immediatelly what she was speaking about. It's one of the sentences I love most: "Blood is not thicker than water". You see: My logic is far away from the logic of machines. "Wrong" sentences are often much more true.

The latter point could possibly be called a nearly religious belief for me, even though it is backed by the very existence of several scientific subdisciplines. You are my cousin in the most literal sense of the term. We are literally family by virtue of descent from common ancestors. We could discover our common ancestors with enough effort.

Who is interested in science if Christians are not searching for the truth and reality of god and his creation any longer? Businessmen? Politicians? Warriors? Mindmanipulators and brainwashers? Crazy money making machines? Ferengi? ...