The Truth about Religion

[Abstruce]

There are other ways we "know" where you're coming from.

 

Number one, many of us came from the same place originally.

 

Very interesting, where did the rest of us come from?????

 

JQ

[Abstruce]

How do you know you are a "free thinker?"

 

Jakely.

 

Atheist are free from the hypocracy of religious folklore, we respect all man made gods as myth.

 

JQ

[Jakely Bront]

...or, for that matter, a newbie member, having all the qualities of a forum troll, pitch up and start disrespecting our members here for no other reason than to satisfy his innate trollness.

 

This member will get banned.

 

It's happened plenty times before, and as sure as Stanley is my witness, it will happen again.

 

Saying that this might happen to you, would also be pattern recognition.

 

Tone it down, Jake, and add something constructive to our forums.

 

How about if I answer questions by using analogies, avoiding direct reponses?

 

For instance, if I want to talk about this "trolling" idea you brought up, could I mention something about "Your Momma's" foot long armpit hair ... ?

 

If you feel like talking about somebody's "Momma," can I then talk about your "Momma," and mebbe about the four teeth she has left?

 

How "respectful" is it to make a snippy, feminized little remark about spelling "Truth" with a "capital T?" Is that "trolling?" Or, maybe it is not trolling, because that person has a "special reason" for it not to be trolling ...

 

How about if someone has a pinhead mind that needs innate satisfaction by trying to be "bossy" over other people using weak little ideas, with an intuitive need for "respect," any kind of respect, to help fill a sensitive little emotional void?

 

My "Momma" will make your lunch, and show you some patterns on the top of your little whiteboy pinhaid ...

 

Strange that whiteboys can dish it out, but cannot take it ...

 

The Jakemon.

[catholiboy]

There is no video.

There is no spoon.

We are not the gullible buffoons you are seeking.

 

Nicely done.

[Boerseun]

Dammit. I was about to reply to this, but now you're banned. Gosh. Golly, how did that happen?

 

If you're still reading your feeble attempts at participation here, Jake, and the answers to your ramblings, take your banning to heart as a lesson in simple manners and civility. Then, when you've learned to respect others, and grow up a bit, go and dabble in some other forum for a bit, just to test out your newly gained skills in respect and manners. Then come back and tell us all about it.

 

Fo'shizzle.

 

- Good job, pgrmdave :)

[catholiboy]

Atheist are free from the hypocracy of religious folklore, we respect all man made gods as myth.

 

JQ

 

How naive of you and Richard Dawkins, assuming you can know everything.

You respect it? Respecting involves you looking at the ideology and thinking, "Hey, I respect this as one of the infinite number of possibilities."

Instead of just dismissing all beliefs casually because of what you claim to "know."

Could you please point out what you actually mean by "hypocracy (sic)" of religious folklore? Or maybe you just thought saying that would make you look clever, without actually thinking in any way about what you were saying.

So, which one?

NEVER DISMISS ANY BELIEFS. This is a general good rule for philosophy.

[Abstruce]

How naive of you and Richard Dawkins, assuming you can know everything.

You respect it? Respecting involves you looking at the ideology and thinking, "Hey, I respect this as one of the infinite number of possibilities."

Instead of just dismissing all beliefs casually because of what you claim to "know."

Could you please point out what you actually mean by "hypocracy (sic)" of religious folklore? Or maybe you just thought saying that would make you look clever, without actually thinking in any way about what you were saying.

So, which one?

NEVER DISMISS ANY BELIEFS. This is a general good rule for philosophy.

 

Catholiboy

 

I casually dismiss all folklore as Myth, and you would do the same if you took the time to do any research.

 

Where, did I say I know, or could ever know everything?

 

First of all may I assume your religious convictions run deep and I have offended you? This is a normal anxiety response when held belief systems are questioned to be mentally healthy.

 

This response is similar to the drug addict when threatened with intervention of their drug usage.

 

Yes I do respect religion of all types as intelligently designed, "by humanity" for the express purpose of explaining the unknown and governing the masses from a 1st century world view in most cases.

 

"The hypocrisy of folklore" I apologies for the previous misspelling of the word.

 

Hypocrisy is the act of pretending or claiming to have beliefs, feelings, morals or virtues that one does not truly possess or practice.

 

Religious people claim to be "Theist" while thy are "Atheist", in regard's to all other religious folklore, different from their chosen mythology.

 

Therefore the hypocrisy is "Theist" to "Atheist".

 

Explanation:

 

A. People who believe the Myth of their religion, as reality or truth, in most cases believe other religions outside of their own mythology to be false and in some cases evil. Thus the hypocrit is bourn.

 

B. Atheist go one God further than the religious person.

 

JQ

[Boerseun]

NEVER DISMISS ANY BELIEFS. This is a general good rule for philosophy.

You as a true Christian sould dismiss Islam, Bhuddism, Hinduism, Judaism, basically, any other religion as false, and rightly so, seeing as the Bible says you should. There is, after all, only the One True God, the God of Abraham. Yet, you say things like "NEVER DISMISS ANY BELIEFS"...

 

Once again, the hypocrit is unmasked.

[InfiniteNow]

Strange that whiteboys can dish it out, but cannot take it ...

It's a bit like talking to a ghost now that you've pissed all over the carpet and got sentenced to the backyard, but I find it rather curious how skin color entered into your retort.

 

Also, it's spelled pinhead. :hihi:

[Turtle]

It's a bit like talking to a ghost now that you've pissed all over the carpet and got sentenced to the backyard, but I find it rather curious how skin color entered into your retort.

 

I suspect because Jakely IS Stanley and Stanley is a black man. The former is my speculation, the latter is part of our record.

 

The Truth about Religion is Relative. :hihi:

[Abstruce]

There is no video.

There is no spoon.

We are not the gullible buffoons you are seeking.

 

 

http://www.thegodmovie.com/clips.php

 

Here is the link to the video. I can't help you find your silverware.

 

JQ

[catholiboy]

You have assumed that

a) I am a hardliner christian

:) I dismiss all other religious beliefs.

 

I don't. It's just a case of my own personal feelings on the matter, feelings which I believe cannot be changed.

 

You also assume that I accept the Bible in all it's irksome glory. I don't: unlike evangelical Christians (who I dislike) I am more open-minded.

 

Abstruce, you are in fact right. Have a cookie. I do, however, resent the comparison of my religious beliefs to a drug.

 

Have either of you heard of epistemology? If so, you really should have known what I meant when I referred to being unable to know everything.

As in, testing stuff empirically is just as untrustworthy as thinking it over.

[Southtown]

Generalizations are all meaningless... :confused:

[HydrogenBond]

The personification of religion is actually quite important. What it does is create the proper perspective between the ego and the unconscious mind, with the inner self treated as being higher than the ego. If we assume the ego used 10% of the brains capacity consciously, the inner self can use 90%.

 

There is also another angle. Picture a school of fish swimming. They swin and react as one big organism. Fish do not have ego's. Instead their inner selves, i.e, their natural center of consciousness, create an unconscious connection that extends beyond the individuals into the school, making the school of fish act like one large organism. This is done with chemicals and sensory cues, but it all coordinates in 3-D at an unconscious level.

 

Hypothetically, if we gave all the fish egos and free will, the unity of the group would be disrupted to some degree. It would still exist but would be overlapped by an ego-centric affect making it less organized. For example, the orginal school may have the fish with the best eyes and reflexes on the surface of the group so the group can react the best when there are preditors. With the ego, the periphreal fish may decide we are too important to sacrifice and need to go into the center. The result would be the whole school being worse off. The big eye fish may be better off, but the big picture would be sacrifice for a smaller ego-centric picture.

 

In the human mind there is a combination of affects similar to the fish example. This is reduce to the survival of the species and individual. The survival and evolution of the specieis stems from the inner selves of the human species, overlapping making assignments that maximize the species. For example, in ancient Egypt, the pharoah was considered divine, because he was assumed to be a 3-D personification of the needs of the collective inner self. God is not a bad way to describe something so complex leading to such a good choice (at least at the beginning). It sort of like the school of fish unconsciously selecting a point fish that is best at finding food for the school. It wans't done by committee or politics. The focus of the whole body briings the best to the front.

 

The survival of the individual adds another layer to the dynamics, with the ego trying to position itself in the group The two may or may not overlap, i.e, usually don't. The ego-centric dominating the inner self results in the decline of empires. But the inner self is like a hologram. The hologram that is inside of each person is the template for the entire human body. Calling it God creates the proper respect. The bible attempts to show how the human body is organized apart from the ego.

[cwes99_03]

Dammit. I was about to reply to this, but now you're banned. Gosh. Golly, how did that happen?

 

If you're still reading your feeble attempts at participation here, Jake, and the answers to your ramblings, take your banning to heart as a lesson in simple manners and civility. Then, when you've learned to respect others, and grow up a bit, go and dabble in some other forum for a bit, just to test out your newly gained skills in respect and manners. Then come back and tell us all about it.

 

Fo'shizzle.

 

- Good job, pgrmdave :)

Wow, coming from your Boer, he must have really been uncivil, as you have a propensity to be from time to time.

[Abstruce]

The personification of religion is actually quite important. What it does is create the proper perspective between the ego and the unconscious mind, with the inner self treated as being higher than the ego. If we assume the ego used 10% of the brains capacity consciously, the inner self can use 90%. .

 

Humans know instinct of nature, it is ever-present under the facade we manufacture to manipulate our reality.:)

 

In the human mind there is a combination of affects similar to the fish example. .

 

I have a few bones to pick with your fish analogy.

 

Both Humans and Fish are systems of a common carbon based life form. The individual cell. Physical awareness starts at the cellular level to develop different systems, by chemical codes. Chemicals, are the basic form of communication, until a large system allowing greater capabilities is evolved.

 

The survival of the individual adds another layer to the dynamics, with the ego trying to position itself in the group The two may or may not overlap, i.e, usually don't. The ego-centric dominating the inner self results in the decline of empires. But the inner self is like a hologram. The hologram that is inside of each person is the template for the entire human body. Calling it God creates the proper respect. The bible attempts to show how the human body is organized apart from the ego.

 

HydrogenBond

 

This last paragraph is somewhat blury.

 

If I understand what you are trying to communicate here, It would go like this.

 

Humans fear their own mortality; therefore they have constructed a process in which they can achieve immortal status within their God delusion. Under all their rituals and folklore they live with the fact that Death is inevitable and no-body who has been dead for over a week has ever come back to talk about the Death experience, not even the so called Jesus. It has only been two thousand years since the death of the mythical Jesus, many Christians believe this mythical being from folklore will be returning soon, huh go figure :)

[Turtle]

Humans fear their own mortality; therefore they have constructed a process in which they can achieve immortal status within their God delusion. Under all their rituals and folklore they live with the fact that Death is inevitable and no-body who has been dead for over a week has ever come back to talk about the Death experience, not even the so called Jesus. It has only been two thousand years since the death of the mythical Jesus, many Christians believe this mythical being from folklore will be returning soon, huh go figure :)

 

Nice talking points. May I connect it to the thread title with my own exegesis? Thank you.;) So my thought is that there was a real person Jesus who has been mythologized, but that he was a savant magician something like our modern day David Blaine. In league with his disciples, or more to the point they with he, he travelled round like a gypsy living it up and performing magic and spouting religious verse and clever sayings.

Now I have heard a legend that the Gypsies were doomed to wander forever as they were tinkers and made the nails that crusified Jesus. Who better to make the magic props and then move on (as if banished) with a real still alive Jesus.

Well, just musing about the Truth of Religion. Discuss. :)