February 13th, 2014, 02:51 PM
How important is it to choose the God you follow?
Most of us inherited whatever God we follow from our parents. IOW, we never chose the Gods we follow regardless of which God that is.
If following and choosing God is important, then should you not judge the various God's and choose the best of what is on offer?
Are you comfortable with letting your most important decision in life to be made by others?
Regards
DL
While It Is true that parents have a very big thing with choosing what anyone believes In once their children enter adulthood they can research more religions and choose another if they so desire. That is not true everywhere however because in certain countries there's only one religion and no education about any of the others so those children probably won't ever change.
If the indoctrination has taken hold before adulthood or even in children in their teens or younger, it is difficult to deprogram themselves. That is why I think it to be child abuse to have children indoctrinated into any religion before they can actually choose which theology they want.Originally Posted by cosmictraveler
Regards
DL
I think there are other more important decisions to be made than deciding which imaginary being you imagine is more real than the other imaginary beings.
The question assumes that a deity is being followed/worshiped.
I have a 6 year old and a 3 year old, neither have any concept of god, religion etc. My 6 year old did ask me what the building is with the "3D triangles" - I managed to divert his attention elsewhere.
We are atheist but my children are not raised atheist, they are raised in total ignorance of such matters.
I too believe that indoctrinating a child into a religion is a form of child abuse but I also acknowledge that the abusers are just part of a bigger cycle of such abuse.
However don't you think that the abusers (who were once victims) Should be made aware of the abuse they are inflicting on innocence. Just because they never had a choice does not mean they should not give a choice to there own children. My children as yours will be able to decide what they wish to follow, if any when they're older.
Oh, no, not this child abuse nonsense again. It is normal for parents to "indoctrinate" their children, by teaching them a set of values. Atheists do it, too, but it's just a different set of values. If they did not teach their children, that would be abusive in my opinion, since the children would not be learning necessary life skills. All you are saying is that you don't like what these people are teaching their children, and you want the children indoctrinated to your own set of values. You're intolerant.
Adults tell children that Santa Claus exists. Then they tell them that God exists. Neither exists, but because of the complexity of the God argument it takes longer to wash out of the brain, if at all. Fortunately some people do achieve it to make the world a better place.
I do not think it possible to raise children in ignorance of anything, as like it or not, they will emulate their parents.The question assumes that a deity is being followed/worshiped.
I have a 6 year old and a 3 year old, neither have any concept of god, religion etc. My 6 year old did ask me what the building is with the "3D triangles" - I managed to divert his attention elsewhere.
We are atheist but my children are not raised atheist, they are raised in total ignorance of such matters.
I too believe that indoctrinating a child into a religion is a form of child abuse but I also acknowledge that the abusers are just part of a bigger cycle of such abuse.
I believe in raising children to use intelligent use of freedom of choice. Give your children the tools to make decisions. To try to withhold information makes that information more desirable in the minds of children. It adds mystery. That is not what you want to do.
Just tell them all the truths you know and train then to look hard and intelligently at whatever they choose in life.
The older they get, the less should be kept from them.
Regards
DL
While our governments maintain the Noble Lie religions will continue to lie with official sanction and thus the sheep will not know that they are being lied to.However don't you think that the abusers (who were once victims) Should be made aware of the abuse they are inflicting on innocence. Just because they never had a choice does not mean they should not give a choice to there own children. My children as yours will be able to decide what they wish to follow, if any when they're older.
They enforce abuse laws with the minor cults that they do not control but will allow the lies of the mainstream cults because they fear for their jobs as especially in the U S, it they do not admit to belief in the lies, they will likely never get elected.
Regard
DL
Set of values!Oh, no, not this child abuse nonsense again. It is normal for parents to "indoctrinate" their children, by teaching them a set of values. Atheists do it, too, but it's just a different set of values. If they did not teach their children, that would be abusive in my opinion, since the children would not be learning necessary life skills. All you are saying is that you don't like what these people are teaching their children, and you want the children indoctrinated to your own set of values. You're intolerant.
You are following secular laws and there is no way on this earth that you would ever endorse the barbaric laws of your religion. So the values given by your religion you do not even believe in.
Secularism has the better values and laws in spite of religions getting in the way of progress and civilized laws.
Why do you not push for your God's laws to be the law of the land?
Because you know that they are not good laws.
Martin Sheen burns a hypo-christian - YouTube
Regards
DL
Yes. In spite of religious resistance.
One of the main Christian tenets is vicarious atonement. Have a look at what that looks like to Santa and why Jesus should be taken right out of Christmas.
Christ is Back in Christmas! - YouTube
Regard
DL
You're making a lot of assumptions about what I believe and what laws I push for.
According to Wikipedia, Martin Sheen is Roman Catholic. I wouldn't use him as a model of good parenting, considering how Charlie turned out.
Oh, no. That was horrible. It implies that Xianity works off sado-masochism and it is probably correct. Personally I could not get any satisfaction out of a man being nailed to a cross, and yet this is precisely what drives Xianity.
More on religion and child abuse from Dawkins and Krauss:
Atheist Richard Dawkins claims religious indoctrination is child abuse, arguing that while teaching children about religion is not abuse, forcing children to believe that religious claims are factual and true is a form of child abuse.
Lawrence Krauss, theoretical physicist, cosmologist, bestselling author and advocate for science education, has also argued that religious indoctrination can be child abuse. For example, Krauss has argued that teaching children Biblical creationism as a legitimate scientific alternative to the theory of evolution is a form of child abuse:
“If you’re introducing it (creationism or Intelligent Design) as reality, if you’re telling your kids the world is 6,000 years old, and they shouldn’t believe scientists because there is no way humans are related to other animals, and don’t believe any of that stuff you learned in school, or take you kids of out of school because they are learning something, then it is like the Taliban at some level, which is an extreme form of child abuse.”
Assumptions that you did not even attempt to refute as they are truth.You're making a lot of assumptions about what I believe and what laws I push for.
According to Wikipedia, Martin Sheen is Roman Catholic. I wouldn't use him as a model of good parenting, considering how Charlie turned out.
You have the same hypocritical trait as most Christians.
Ones religion has nothing to do with parenting skills and you are just throwing stones at others to deflect from your own position.
Regards
DL
Come to the science side, Gnostic Bishop!
Do you remember those viral spam emails that used to circulate? They'd say that you'd get blessings if you forward the email to 20 people you know, or bad things would happen if you didn't. The first time I saw one I thought about it for a minute, by the 5th time I saw one I was throwing it strait into the trash. Then after that, imagine you see a couple of people knocking on your door. They tell you about their religion, give you literature about blessings that will happen if you follow them, curses if you don't. On further questioning, it turns out you need to do as they are doing to really become a member of the church, to help spread the word. So the whole thing is the same as a viral spam email, but with humans, not mail servers, acting it out. The religious information game is being seen more clearly for what it is.
But you think of yourself as not being like that, having something deep, having something intelligent. Something that's true because its true, (Like gravity) not something that's true because lots of people forwarded the spam email out of fear/desire. Could there be an incredible entity that's sort of behind all the things in the world? Sure. The beauty of science is that its open to all possibilities. Its not open to falsifiable untrue information, like that sacrificing a goat will make it rain, so a lot of religious stuff is incompatible. But deep, true-on-their-own things are. And if that's what you believe, why dress it up like a religion? Why not just make it your hypothesis?
Gnostic Christians are all in for science and I do not need fantasy, miracles and magic to bolster my beliefs as they are all natural, unlike literalists.
You might want to read up on Gnostic Christians and why Christians killed us and burned our scriptures.
In that day, you and I would have called the Gnostic the thinking man's religion and they were basically the scientists of that day. Gnosis mans knowledge, not unfounded opinion.
You and I are close in thought and I am willing to forgive you not recognizing your spiritual side.
We can't all be perfect my friend. LOL.
Regards
DL
That seems somewhat unlikely, given the two words at the start of the sentence.
Yeah?Gnosis mans knowledge, not unfounded opinion.
Knowledge of what?
Oops.I am willing to forgive you not recognizing your spiritual side.
For our purposes here, it would be knowledge of what most call God and I call Godhead, --- just to differentiate from the Abrahamic God or Gods.That seems somewhat unlikely, given the two words at the start of the sentence.
Yeah?Gnosis mans knowledge, not unfounded opinion.
Knowledge of what?
Oops.I am willing to forgive you not recognizing your spiritual side.
My Godhead is I am and yours should be as well. That is what the real Jesus, a man and Rabbi, if he existed at all, taught.
Alan Watts - On The Book of Eli - YouTube
Regards
DL
Just another loon preaching,
What I thought.
You're deluding yourself: you have no knowledge of such.
So some guy - who you admit may not have existed - said I should have that particular god.My Godhead is I am and yours should be as well. That is what the real Jesus, a man and Rabbi, if he existed at all, taught.
How do you he was right?
Oh wait, you don't.
Unlikely, since the very term "Christian" required a suspension of belief to accept personified superstitions, salvation of makebelieve crimes of our ancestors (a repugnant and bankrupt view if ever there was one), and attempts to seek knowledge of a supposed dead person who is now an invisible being.
I'm not sure indoctrinations into superstition is so destructive that is should be considered child abuse--but it certainly is a form of neglect and failure to teach reasoning as well as a recipe for anti-intellectualism that harms and impedes advancement of modern societies.
Last edited by Lynx_Fox; February 14th, 2014 at 04:41 PM.
I know we're close in thought, I've been in to some of that stuff. You and I are closer than you and a fundamentalist. That's why I'm making my pitch to you.
In the end its an appeal to simplicity. It feels so good to strip it all away, all the religious trappings, to acknowledge the fact that you don't know but are seeking truth, to commit yourself to scientific understanding. Nothing that's independently true out there in the universe will change when you do this. That wonderful glowing feeling of connection watching a sunrise, the awe of the mysteries of existence, none of that goes away when you embrace science. All of it is still there, staying with you. It needs no name, no spam emails or worship to make it true, its just there, part of human experience. All that has changed is that we have admitted our lack of understanding it all, and in so doing we become closer to truth, and we focus on the things we can understand, in tangible reality.
Its really refreshing.
Gnostic Christian BishopSet of values!Oh, no, not this child abuse nonsense again. It is normal for parents to "indoctrinate" their children, by teaching them a set of values. Atheists do it, too, but it's just a different set of values. If they did not teach their children, that would be abusive in my opinion, since the children would not be learning necessary life skills. All you are saying is that you don't like what these people are teaching their children, and you want the children indoctrinated to your own set of values. You're intolerant.
You are following secular laws and there is no way on this earth that you would ever endorse the barbaric laws of your religion. So the values given by your religion you do not even believe in.
Secularism has the better values and laws in spite of religions getting in the way of progress and civilized laws.
Why do you not push for your God's laws to be the law of the land?
Because you know that they are not good laws.
Martin Sheen burns a hypo-christian - YouTube
Regards
DL
You presume too much. Harold has stated nothing, absolutely nothing, about religious beliefs here. He's certainly not claiming any such beliefs as his own let alone that religious beliefs should be transmitted to children.
All he's suggesting is that parents are obliged to teach their children values. Atheists do this in much the same way as people of religious faith do. They're just based on different things. If you re-read what was written, you'll see that he considers it abusive to children to not teach values because they need them as basic life skills.
I suspect you're too ready to see enemies in the bushes when there aren't even any bushes. Read what's written. If you want to criticise someone's thought or logic, make sure you really understand the position they've actually argued. Otherwise you'll find yourself rushing off to tilt at windmills as you've done here.
Problem is that parents usually bring their children to their religious ceremonies every week.If the indoctrination has taken hold before adulthood or even in children in their teens or younger, it is difficult to deprogram themselves. That is why I think it to be child abuse to have children indoctrinated into any religion before they can actually choose which theology they want.
Regards
DL
February 17th, 2014, 03:18 AM
I think one important reason why people pray to a god is because they feel a boundary between them and him.
You rather form a boundary to something you know since you have been a child.
So…this is like asking:
-
"From all the possible places on earth, how could you know that your home is worthy of being loved by you?"
-
The answer is…no way to know…most people love their hometowns even if they are godforsaken shitholes or the most boring place on earth.
What makes your hometown a great place aren't attributes of the place but the fact that it is yours.
I guess people have the same attitude about their god.
Not to forget…most religions teach that other gods don't exist…so for a believer there is not really a choice or better to say…nothing to chose from.
-
Plus many people don't think it is such an important choice, because they think god will give them credit if they are good persons no matter which god they prayed to.
-
So….am I comfortable for sharing my parents (dis)believes?
Yes. Because It maybe wasn't me who picked it…but it was me who kept it. Of course that didn't enlarge the chance that this believes are right…but what does?
Do people really need to be taught certain things? I don't need to be taught that it isn't right to kill people, to rob them, to screw their wife, make love not war, and the list goes on and on. It's no revelation and if you think it is then you might need to do a little introspection. Common sense prevails in so many otherwise redundant teachings. How many times do you need to hear it? If you need it every day then maybe you're not able to do what most of us find easy and I shouldn't have to listen to you for that very reason. If you're unable to grasp reality then why in the world do you expect others to heed your words? Doesn't matter if you quote Jesus or the bum on the street, if they didn't know each they would probably say the same things. Common sense does not need to be accredited to anyone. That in itself is common sense.
If you weren't taught it, where do you think you got it from?Do people really need to be taught certain things? I don't need to be taught that it isn't right to kill people, to rob them, to screw their wife, make love not war, and the list goes on and on.
Common sense is usually wrong. If your moral beliefs were just common sense, then everybody would believe the same things. Instead, people generally believe more or less the same things as their parents, people from the same geographical locations, socioeconomic classes, etc.. Is that just a coincidence, or are they perhaps influencing one another?It's no revelation and if you think it is then you might need to do a little introspection. Common sense prevails in so many otherwise redundant teachings. How many times do you need to hear it? If you need it every day then maybe you're not able to do what most of us find easy and I shouldn't have to listen to you for that very reason. If you're unable to grasp reality then why in the world do you expect others to heed your words? Doesn't matter if you quote Jesus or the bum on the street, if they didn't know each they would probably say the same things. Common sense does not need to be accredited to anyone. That in itself is common sense.
The simple answer is yes. And those things realistically need to be encoded into us at a pretty early age to be most effective because ultimately what should stay people's behavior is the emotional burden they'll have to bare.Do people really need to be taught certain things? I don't need to be taught that it isn't right to kill people, to rob them, to screw their wife, make love not war, and the list goes on and on.
I agree. But most people don't develop the reasoning skills until behaviors are habits instilled in us--well into our 20s at the earliest when our brain's judgement centers are fully developed. Many never get to that point of moral reasoning or introspection.It's no revelation and if you think it is then you might need to do a little introspection.
I find "common sense" the most uncommon.Common sense prevails in so many otherwise redundant teachings.
I think this boils down to how we learn things. On one side is the religious that depends on various interpretations and selective (even cherry picked) passages from some ancient cultural set of rules--all too often out of context, or derived from the school of hard knocks rather than bases in reasoning--and combined with religious apologist claims that no rational systems that lessens suffering is possible despite centuries of progress in legal, philosophical and scientific evidence to the contrary. On the opposite end is those that try to find rational underpinnings to all rules we should follow--while denying the experiences from the past tied to anything religious and even shunning the well proved methods of routine, ceremony and repetitions story telling so effective in teaching younger folks and reminding older folks. Ideally we find components from both sides of the argument.How many times do you need to hear it? If you need it every day then maybe you're not able to do what most of us find easy and I shouldn't have to listen to you for that very reason. If you're unable to grasp reality then why in the world do you expect others to heed your words? Doesn't matter if you quote Jesus or the bum on the street, if they didn't know each they would probably say the same things. Common sense does not need to be accredited to anyone. That in itself is common sense.
Do you think it is possible to learn everything and simply abide by those teachings without ever observing or experiencing that which you've been led to believe? Do you really learn from simply being taught? Perhaps I need to rethink the difference between teaching and learning from experience. If being taught is equivalent to learning then I have erred. So many teachings can occur on one subject, how does one differentiate or select what's right?
Yes it is if you don't consider different scenarios. If I was totally aware of where I was geographically, socially etc. then common sense should mean taking those factors into consideration. I wouldn't walk down Main St. Baghdad carrying a anti Allah placard for example, no matter what I believed.Common sense is usually wrong.
I'm going to add something else on to this thread, since I saw this:
Misconceptions of science and religion found in new study
The public's view that science and religion can't work in collaboration is a misconception that stunts progress, according to a new survey of more than 10,000 Americans, scientists and evangelical Protestants.
I hear what they're saying. So when I tell you to "come to the science side", I am speaking about science as you're primary world view. When science is your primary world view, you can't have faith in things like the power of prayer without scientific evidence. If religion is your primary worldview, you can have faith in things like that. However I have to make it clear, you still can, and should, be part of science, even if it is your secondary world view. Even if you believe in something like creationism, you could make contributions in chemistry or some here and now science, though biology is a field you should stay away from if you don't want to see your faith conflicting with your science.
So don't let people with science as their primary worldview turn you off to science in general, whatever you believe in.
As important as choosing a wife.
I reject your premise, especially on this forum.
I do not speak for everyone on this forum of course, there is a diverse mixture.
However, from what i have noticed, this forum is overwhelming atheist/agnostic. Or at the least there religious views (if they have any) accept a god but searches for alternative answers to the big question other than "gods will"
I would also say, on this forum. Most members parents likely did not share the same views & had more religious faith, considering the vast knowledge that the internet affords did not exist when "our" parents were younger.
again, cant speak for everyone, but i would say this is the general norm around here.
Yes, yes they do. If they didnt, we would not have thousands rotting in prisons for the exact same things you mentioned. Prisoners are not a different species than you, they were not born "evil." Most are not even truly that jacked up.
Besides, I highly doubt you are a perfect saint. If you are saying you never broke the law in your life. Never screwed someone over, never once got into a fight, never broke the speed limit or ran a stop sign. I personally call bollocks.
Everyone makes mistakes, most are just lucky enough they are nothing major or dont get caught.
Hmm.
How much has the internet contributed to a rise in atheism?
I know I "turned atheist 1" long before the internet was even thought of.
1 In that I realised I actually was, rather than "rejected/ gave up on" belief.
Internet, society in general. I contribute some of my atheisim to the internet, but not all of it. Biggest influence was the bible, Reading it and thinking "god is a jerk" for lack of better terms, turned me off to christanity.
However the internet let me explore other religions to try to find the one I fit into, till i realized they were all the same made up BS with just a diffrent flavor added in. Living in the bible belt doesnt give much room to explore other religions without the internet.
Society's views in general have changed. We are ever progressing to much more tolerant/liberal views depicting others life choices. In todays society you can be a flaming homosexual satan worshiper punk rocker with an affinity for collecting pink tutu's....and you would still be generally accepted by the masses.
Thus, "coming out" as an athiest in a heavily religious community is much easier than it use to be.
I also think the internet has helped many with religious persuits. Plus, the anonomity of the internet allows you to poke fun at others religious practices you wouldnt normally do in the real world.
If you follow anything, choice should be involved.
Does anyone else find it odd that a christian is saying we are destined to walk in the footprints of our parents, when his own god promises free will?
It depends what you interpret free will to mean.
I never said I was perfect, far from it. However I have no doubt that a majority of bad guys know when they're committing a crime. I think we may need to define what it is to be taught. I mean you can tell a person anything, is that teaching? My concept of being taught includes not only absorbing the information but taking the time to digest it. IOW's use your brain to determine the logic & reason of what you hear. You can tell me anything but in the end it may come down to just how well I teach myself.Yes, yes they do. If they didnt, we would not have thousands rotting in prisons for the exact same things you mentioned. Prisoners are not a different species than you, they were not born "evil." Most are not even truly that jacked up.
Besides, I highly doubt you are a perfect saint. If you are saying you never broke the law in your life. Never screwed someone over, never once got into a fight, never broke the speed limit or ran a stop sign. I personally call bollocks.
Everyone makes mistakes, most are just lucky enough they are nothing major or dont get caught.
If you taught me that walking on thin ice is dangerous then should I test it? If for some reason I did, then something went wrong either in the teaching or my reasoning. Was there something excluded by my teacher, did my teacher lack the ability to teach, how well was my teacher taught? Ultimately it is my decision, I either heed the lesson taught , doubt it, or completely disregard it. Finding out you are wrong is generally a painful experience.
Look at what happens here on this forum. Science, although not infallible, relies on testable theory or experimental truths. Yet despite the constant stream of scientific information put forth, there are still people who come here to spew their own drivel. Most of them were 'taught' what the forum experts tell them but they choose to ignore it. Being taught does not mean you learned anything. So if being taught is just listening then that's what it is. However I think it means much more than that. Does it come down to intelligence, an individual's capacity for knowledge? Or can knowledge easily be replaced by ignorance or unawareness?
Duck
Hmm.Not having a time machine 40+ years ago, I managed to be a Sunday School teacher in 1968 and an atheist by about 1973 iirc.How much has the internet contributed to a rise in atheism?
I know I "turned atheist 1" long before the internet was even thought of.
1 In that I realised I actually was, rather than "rejected/ gave up on" belief.
No internet was involved. It just sorta happened. Though I did continue singing sacred music, some things you just can't give up.
I do not consider believing in God to be down to parenting and inheritance of faith.
I believe it to be individual choice, and not a choice of own accordance, but a choice that is made in an individuals mind, on which story they believe.
Some people may not believe the story and believe in science for example. Having a scientific mind, they never excepted the stories to be real.
Some cultures force religion on people, but even in these cultures, there is people who do not believe, but they are too scared of their own culture, to not worship a myth.
In all reality it is down to individual thought and whether or not that individuals mind allows them to believe.
That is why people lose faith, normally a turning point in their life, allows them to see reality.
It is hard to believe in ''pink invisible unicorns''.
disclaimer - I have no problem with religion, it is your choice, although I consider it to be creation to keep the poor quiet and the rich in their castles.
Free will is just that, Assuming what you want to do is based in reality. Your welcome to do it. Choice.It depends what you interpret free will to mean.
Moral & legal reasons aside, you have free will to bash someones skull in with a baseball bat. You might not enjoy the consequences of your actions...but you have the free will to do it.
Likewise, you have free will to be an astronaut or a world famous author, or a neuro surgeon. Granted, to become such things takes extreme amounts of work & dedication to achieve, but there is nothing stopping someone from doing so.
You have free will to do such things. I doubt you have free will to lift cars like superman or turn invisible or other magical things, since this is not based in reality. But based in reality, you have free will to do as you please.
Most just choose not to exercise this benefit of existence to its fullest.
I agree with you, Most people do have a fairly decent moral compass. However somewhere along the way they learned what is right and wrong. Its not inherit, its learned. Learned from parents, a book, the police man throwing you in the squad car. Somewhere it is learned.I never said I was perfect, far from it. However I have no doubt that a majority of bad guys know when they're committing a crime. I think we may need to define what it is to be taught. I mean you can tell a person anything, is that teaching? My concept of being taught includes not only absorbing the information but taking the time to digest it. IOW's use your brain to determine the logic & reason of what you hear. You can tell me anything but in the end it may come down to just how well I teach myself.Yes, yes they do. If they didnt, we would not have thousands rotting in prisons for the exact same things you mentioned. Prisoners are not a different species than you, they were not born "evil." Most are not even truly that jacked up.
Besides, I highly doubt you are a perfect saint. If you are saying you never broke the law in your life. Never screwed someone over, never once got into a fight, never broke the speed limit or ran a stop sign. I personally call bollocks.
Everyone makes mistakes, most are just lucky enough they are nothing major or dont get caught.
If you taught me that walking on thin ice is dangerous then should I test it? If for some reason I did, then something went wrong either in the teaching or my reasoning. Was there something excluded by my teacher, did my teacher lack the ability to teach, how well was my teacher taught? Ultimately it is my decision, I either heed the lesson taught , doubt it, or completely disregard it. Finding out you are wrong is generally a painful experience.
Look at what happens here on this forum. Science, although not infallible, relies on testable theory or experimental truths. Yet despite the constant stream of scientific information put forth, there are still people who come here to spew their own drivel. Most of them were 'taught' what the forum experts tell them but they choose to ignore it. Being taught does not mean you learned anything. So if being taught is just listening then that's what it is. However I think it means much more than that. Does it come down to intelligence, an individual's capacity for knowledge? Or can knowledge easily be replaced by ignorance or unawareness?
There is a saying that ignorance of the law is not a valid defense. In court, this means if your defensive argument was "I didn't know that was illegal" sorry but that doesn't fly. However i doubt even lawyers know the letter of the law of every single law on the books. If someone is doing 50 in a 35, but didn't know it was 35. Were they wrong in there actions? They were not purposely breaking the law, they just had not been taught they were breaking it due to ignorance.
Yeah something like "thou shall not kill" seems simple enough that it would not seem necessary to carve it into stone tablets but....hey
Also, Is killing acceptable or is it always a bad thing? What about self defense? Or during a war? Assisted suicides? what about DNR orders or making end of life decisions for loved ones? There are many instances where taking another life is deemed, atleast socially to be acceptable.
Very few things in the world are black & white, Its all quite complicated & must be learned.
Being taught the world is flat and then saying you trust it because you learned it that way is somehow not indicative of being taught IMHO. What I think is that maybe you can get away with it in religion.
Knowledge based on personal experience is valid knowledge. Nothing that I believe crosses the line natural explanation. I do not have to go into the supernatural to explain anything.What I thought.
You're deluding yourself: you have no knowledge of such.
So some guy - who you admit may not have existed - said I should have that particular god.My Godhead is I am and yours should be as well. That is what the real Jesus, a man and Rabbi, if he existed at all, taught.
How do you he was right?
Oh wait, you don't.
Most see the spirit world as supernatural. I do not.
All I am selling is Jesus' methods for enlightenment. Jesus, the Jewish and Gnostic Christian Jesus that is. Not the Roman slave Jesus.
How do I know that the Jesus I follow is right is a good question. He told me so.
I had inadvertently internalized the myth of Jesus when I argued hard against literalists.
That is the method Jesus taught, be he real or imaginary as most who think think. It worked for him.
Him being the consolidated learning he had done in the East.
Matthew 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.
Both his political and religious messages are of freedom. Not slavery.
Even if you are not a believer, choose freedom and not the slavery of Rome's and your government's religion.
Be I am, not a God, but the best a man can be.
Regards
DL
The point is: personal experience provides knowledge of what?
You cannot show, let alone know, that what you claim about your experience is, in actual fact, the correct interpretation.
Er, that would be wrong.Nothing that I believe crosses the line natural explanation. I do not have to go into the supernatural to explain anything.
Since you're claiming that your "knowledge" is of "god" then, by definition, that's supernatural.
Then you apparently have a peculiar, non-standard and most likely incorrect definition of what "supernatural" means.Most see the spirit world as supernatural. I do not.
Some (possibly non-existent) guy who (supposedly) died 2,000 years ago told you?How do I know that the Jesus I follow is right is a good question. He told me so.
And you claim that you're not going into the supernatural and not crossing the line of natural explanation.
My government doesn't have a religion.Even if you are not a believer, choose freedom and not the slavery of Rome's and your government's religion.
And what Rome thinks has bugger all to do with me.
Yeah right.Be I am, not a God, but the best a man can be.
As it happens I'm the best me that ever existed. No-one else even comes close.
+ 2 on your last.To call me Christian is to insult a moral man.Unlikely, since the very term "Christian" required a suspension of belief to accept personified superstitions,
Literalist Christians are inherently immoral as they must develop a double standard because they forgive their God for sins that they condemn men for.
I am a Gnostic Christian ad esoteric ecumenist. Perhaps a ghost of one of the ancient Gnostic Christians murdered by the Christians when Constantine bough and enslaved the then Orthodox Church.
That aside.
In a sense you are correct. A gnostic Christian, to reach apotheosis must internalize the Jesus myth to let his spirit side personify it to the subconscious mind as it seeks God.
IOW. Ignite the spark of God within you as you as you seek the best rules to live your life by. That is God. Rules.
At least till you have an apotheosis. Then you realize that the natural world has an invisible life.
salvation of makebelieve crimes of our ancestors (a repugnant and bankrupt view if ever there was one),
+ 1
That is the Christian view. The reverse of he Gnostic Christian view that follows the more Jewis view of Eden as our elevation and not our fall.
It is what it is but I do not see us as seeking knowledge directly. We seek information and turn that to knowledge and then wisdom.and attempts to seek knowledge of a supposed dead person who is now an invisible being.
The knowledge gleaned by apotheosis is more advise that leads to information and then on to knowledge and wisdom. My pain from apotheosis is my business but here is the part that gave the pleasure of finding the cosmic consciousness. The home of the (sort of) dead. The Godhead I have knowledge of. Not a shred of proof though and it seems that I myself cannot confirm this at present. There are interesting experiments being done by science though. They might catch up before I die.
I'm not sure indoctrinations into superstition is so destructive that is should be considered child abuse--but it certainly is a form of neglect and failure to teach reasoning as well as a recipe for anti-intellectualism that harms and impedes advancement of modern societies.
- 1 on your opinion of child abuse, in my opinion, but I give it back to you because you heart is not as hidden as mine. Something I work on. Do not change.
This following is not for you. Please allow.
that it is my view that all right wing literalists and fundamentals hurt all of us who are moral religionists, --- as well as those who do not believe. Literalists hurt their parent religions --- and everyone else, be he a believer or not. Literalists and the right wing of religions make us all into laughing stocks. Their God of talking animals, genocidal floods and retribution has got to go. So must beliefs in fantasy, miracles and magic. These are all evil.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HKHaClUCw4&feature=PlayList&p=5123864A524 3470E&index=0&playnext=1
They also do much harm to their own.
African witches and Jesus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlRG9gXriVI&feature=related
Jesus Camp 1of 3
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=48b_1185215493
Death to Gays.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMw2Zg_BVzw&feature=related
For evil to grow my friends, all good people need do is nothing.
Fight them when you can. It is your duty to our fellow man.
Regard
DL
I am not committed to any idol. Not even science. I am a seeker after God and it has paid off. It showed how to not be for or against as the sages advised and you would have me become an idol worshipper?
Tsk, tsk.
The bar of excellence needs move continually upwards if we are to find a better Gods than the ones we presently suffer.
Be they our political Gods or our Spiritual Gods.
Bite your tongue my friend and seek a better God.
Regards
DL
Thanks for the critique. Perhaps Harold will agree. Perhaps not.Gnostic Christian BishopSet of values!Oh, no, not this child abuse nonsense again. It is normal for parents to "indoctrinate" their children, by teaching them a set of values. Atheists do it, too, but it's just a different set of values. If they did not teach their children, that would be abusive in my opinion, since the children would not be learning necessary life skills. All you are saying is that you don't like what these people are teaching their children, and you want the children indoctrinated to your own set of values. You're intolerant.
You are following secular laws and there is no way on this earth that you would ever endorse the barbaric laws of your religion. So the values given by your religion you do not even believe in.
Secularism has the better values and laws in spite of religions getting in the way of progress and civilized laws.
Why do you not push for your God's laws to be the law of the land?
Because you know that they are not good laws.
Martin Sheen burns a hypo-christian - YouTube
Regards
DL
You presume too much. Harold has stated nothing, absolutely nothing, about religious beliefs here. He's certainly not claiming any such beliefs as his own let alone that religious beliefs should be transmitted to children.
All he's suggesting is that parents are obliged to teach their children values. Atheists do this in much the same way as people of religious faith do. They're just based on different things. If you re-read what was written, you'll see that he considers it abusive to children to not teach values because they need them as basic life skills.
I suspect you're too ready to see enemies in the bushes when there aren't even any bushes. Read what's written. If you want to criticise someone's thought or logic, make sure you really understand the position they've actually argued. Otherwise you'll find yourself rushing off to tilt at windmills as you've done here.
I do agree that I push my side hard and I am jumpy. I have to match what my fundamentally foolish Christian antagonists do.
I just do not take it to stupidity as most literalist Christians have to do to sell their views.
My non-politically correct ways will grow on you.
Regards
DL
I have such memories.Problem is that parents usually bring their children to their religious ceremonies every week.If the indoctrination has taken hold before adulthood or even in children in their teens or younger, it is difficult to deprogram themselves. That is why I think it to be child abuse to have children indoctrinated into any religion before they can actually choose which theology they want.
Regards
DL
Unfortunately they include chatting with the others about the key club of the various churches and of which of our fathers had beat up their mothers in the usual Saturday night parties and or orgies.
Key clubs in churches. What todays children do not know. We do not teach well.
Regards
DL
From an esoteric POV, all boundaries between our minds and the internal spark of God we all have is self imposed. We fear letting go as we fear the pain. Not surprising. Too deep and the pain and pleasure are magnified. I think we all have our natural inhibitions to opening to the subconscious and Godhead. That is why only Shaman used to do it I would guess.
So praying is basically looking outwardly for God while Jesus tells us to look inwardly. Praying is an attempt at self gratification and an insult to a God. That is why Jesus taught to not do it in public. Sports figures have yet to get that message.
The batter is praying for the pitcher to screw up. Self gratification. Right? All praying is basically like that. Yes, thinking of others and hopping their situation improves and other such praying, noble as it is, is still the hope that you are talking to a God who is listening to little old you and that is rather self-gratifying for your to believe is it not?
Regards
DL
If people did not need to be taught, and if we did not all pass up the information we have learned, then we would have never left the caves and trees.Do people really need to be taught certain things? I don't need to be taught that it isn't right to kill people, to rob them, to screw their wife, make love not war, and the list goes on and on. It's no revelation and if you think it is then you might need to do a little introspection. Common sense prevails in so many otherwise redundant teachings. How many times do you need to hear it? If you need it every day then maybe you're not able to do what most of us find easy and I shouldn't have to listen to you for that very reason. If you're unable to grasp reality then why in the world do you expect others to heed your words? Doesn't matter if you quote Jesus or the bum on the street, if they didn't know each they would probably say the same things. Common sense does not need to be accredited to anyone. That in itself is common sense.
The bible, evil as it can be, has the odd bit of wisdom.
Proverbs 3:12 For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.
Although sometimes, as you likely know my friend.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soDZBW-1P04
All correction has a bit of bullying in it from the recipients POV.
Regards
DL
I think I begin to see where you might be coming from but I also think that you have forgotten to solve one of the pieces of the equation.Do you think it is possible to learn everything and simply abide by those teachings without ever observing or experiencing that which you've been led to believe? Do you really learn from simply being taught? .
We do have and are born with good basic morals in the sense that we know that of the only two basic options we can choose from when young, cooperation or competition, is to cooperate. That insure a better chance of survival.
Competition, what we would call the evil side of evolution, enters or is demanded only later in life.
We only turn to competition to insure our share of the resources available. If we did not do so we would die.
Your task and mine is to find a way of ending the competition between people without making man extinct as he no longer seeks the fittest and the whole population and species goes into decline.
Magazine - Can Babies Tell Right From Wrong? - nytimes.com/video - YouTube
Experiments with altruism in children and chimps - YouTube
Regards
DL
You can leave a wife but if you actually choose a God, have an actual apotheosis, then you may not be able to leave the Godhead found. You cannot un-clang a bell, so to speak.
Regard
DL
You are right off my correction scale and do not seem to have a social consciousness but let me try. Let me refute some of your horrid thinking with a better mind than mine.
I do not consider believing in God to be down to parenting and inheritance of faith.
I believe it to be individual choice, and not a choice of own accordance, but a choice that is made in an individuals mind, on which story they believe.
Some people may not believe the story and believe in science for example. Having a scientific mind, they never excepted the stories to be real.
Some cultures force religion on people, but even in these cultures, there is people who do not believe, but they are too scared of their own culture, to not worship a myth.
In all reality it is down to individual thought and whether or not that individuals mind allows them to believe.
That is why people lose faith, normally a turning point in their life, allows them to see reality.
It is hard to believe in ''pink invisible unicorns''.
disclaimer - I have no problem with religion, it is your choice, although I consider it to be creation to keep the poor quiet and the rich in their castles.
Richard Dawkins What if scientists worked like religions? - YouTube
Let me know if your light goes on. If it does then we might have a chance at a chat.
Regards
DL
Duck.
To your last. Exactly my point.
You just want to hear it in your germs but I won't lie to you. My terms are farther seeing than yours.
Regards
DL
Yeah.
Which is bugger all to do with "god".
What?You just want to hear it in your germs but I won't lie to you. My terms are farther seeing than yours.
Since you haven't defined your terms (but HAVE shown that you're using the standard definition) then that's up for dispute.
I won't even ask what "hear it in your germs" is supposed to mean.
My bad. It should read terms.Yeah.
Which is bugger all to do with "god".
What?You just want to hear it in your germs but I won't lie to you. My terms are farther seeing than yours.
Since you haven't defined your terms (but HAVE shown that you're using the standard definition) then that's up for dispute.
I won't even ask what "hear it in your germs" is supposed to mean.
Think of the word God as meaning ideal. You will get it.
Regards
DL
Then you're being as nebulous as you were before you"defined" it.
Ideal what?
Can you show that any ideal actually exists except as a concept?
How does an ideal talk to you?
It does not. It is what you set.Then you're being as nebulous as you were before you"defined" it.
Ideal what?
Can you show that any ideal actually exists except as a concept?
How does an ideal talk to you?
In this case it is the ideals in rulers and laws to live by.
Rules and laws are all religionists can follow as set by their God and that is also all you can follow as set by whatever authority you bow to even if yourself.
Regard
DL
So, essentially, when you say you believe in god you believe what you yourself decide?
When you say that Jesus tells you he's right that's YOU telling yourself YOU are right?
Yeah.In this case it is the ideals in rulers and laws to live by.
Bollocks.
In other words: more nebulous crap.that is also all you can follow as set by whatever authority you bow to even if yourself.
There's a difference between being taught and being influenced by what you hear. Unfortunately, if you've been influenced by words then there is no guarantee you've learned anything.
I've been here almost 10 years and many know that I have always professed that unless everyone just emerged from a cave then all theists would most likely have heard of God before choosing to believe. If simply hearing about God is the same as being taught then those who spread the word are the equivalent of university professors. You have to put your trust in another person(s) before you can believe in God, so before you choose God you must first choose a person. There's no other way unless you formed the opinion yourself without outside influence, never hearing(being taught?) a single thing about a god.
Only fools would believe in a God before finding one. Hear say and book say should not cut if for anyone but it does. Mind you, I think that most who profess a belief are just lying to themselves unless they have suffered apotheosis. All they are doing is assuaging their tribal natures and their churches have dumbed then so far down that they do not know it.There's a difference between being taught and being influenced by what you hear. Unfortunately, if you've been influenced by words then there is no guarantee you've learned anything.
I've been here almost 10 years and many know that I have always professed that unless everyone just emerged from a cave then all theists would most likely have heard of God before choosing to believe. If simply hearing about God is the same as being taught then those who spread the word are the equivalent of university professors. You have to put your trust in another person(s) before you can believe in God, so before you choose God you must first choose a person. There's no other way unless you formed the opinion yourself without outside influence, never hearing(being taught?) a single thing about a god.
Sheep are sheep and the churches have learned how to fleece them both mentally and monetarily.
Regards
DL
Looks like another flexible definition has come into play here.
Im very tempted to follow the christian god with its promise of a blissful afterlife in heaven. However the Papua new Guinean mud god Pikkiwoki promises me a very large boar & all the coconuts I can carry after death. So...you know, its a very difficult decision to make man, I dunno. Its hard to pass on free bacon.
Or the same set of values but with a different justification.
All definitions should remain flexible unless you are an idol worshiper.Looks like another flexible definition has come into play here.
Regards
DL
I am not an atheist but secular values are a better set of values as they respects the law of the land.Or the same set of values but with a different justification.
Even though the U. S. has a poor law of the land thanks to it's church influenced political system.
Regard
DL
Freedom from religion. How sweet it is.
Religion was invented to serve man but man has become slaved to religion. How sweet for religious hierarchies. No wonder the U.S. promoted slavery at one time. If the average U.S. citizen was slaved to the churches, he was not going to allow anyone to be free.
Regards
DL
Yeah, maybe you're getting confused here.
Definitions may be somewhat fluid - subject to change over time.
What they should NOT be is different for everyone.
You appear to be following the latter course.
Unless a definition is "sufficiently fixed" how do people communicate?
Cheep shot.You're making a lot of assumptions about what I believe and what laws I push for.
According to Wikipedia, Martin Sheen is Roman Catholic. I wouldn't use him as a model of good parenting, considering how Charlie turned out.
What bible law are you pushing for?
Stoning adults for concentual sex perhaps.
Regards
DL
Simple minds put all in a little box for ease of handling. Atheists are all the same are you?That seems somewhat unlikely, given the two words at the start of the sentence.
Yeah?Gnosis mans knowledge, not unfounded opinion.
Knowledge of what?
Oops.I am willing to forgive you not recognizing your spiritual side.
It happens that Gnostic Christians are the only Abrahamic cult that has full equality for women and gays and is a non-literal thinking man's religion.
That puts us a cut above but don't give points for that. Back into your little box.
Regards
DL
Through semantics.Yeah, maybe you're getting confused here.
Definitions may be somewhat fluid - subject to change over time.
What they should NOT be is different for everyone.
You appear to be following the latter course.
Unless a definition is "sufficiently fixed" how do people communicate?
The commandment was not to kill. Not not to murder. Ever wonder why?
Murder was too specific and the scribes wanted us to look at all killings and not just the murders.
Regards
DL
You're rapidly showing yourself to be dumber than I'd previously imagined.
Semantics: the branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning. The two main areas are logical semantics, concerned with matters such as sense and reference and presupposition and implication, and lexical semantics, concerned with the analysis of word meanings and relations between them.
How do you "analyse" a word's meaning if you don't know how the guy is using it?
If I tell you "my pet rabbit died yesterday" can you use "semantics" to work what I'm actually saying?
ONLY if we have common ground.
If MY "definition" of "pet" is "bright green", "rabbit" is "dinner plate" and "died" is "needed washing" and you're not aware of that would we actually be communicating?
I doubt it.
That makes no sense.
Someone's secular values could be in conflict with the law (or not).
Someone's religious values could be in perfect agreement with the law (or not).
Also, I said "the same values". My point was that an atheist and a religious person could have the same values but think the reasons/justifications are different.
Then to your first. You are quite dumb to speak to one you think dumb.You're rapidly showing yourself to be dumber than I'd previously imagined.
Semantics: the branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning. The two main areas are logical semantics, concerned with matters such as sense and reference and presupposition and implication, and lexical semantics, concerned with the analysis of word meanings and relations between them.
How do you "analyse" a word's meaning if you don't know how the guy is using it?
If I tell you "my pet rabbit died yesterday" can you use "semantics" to work what I'm actually saying?
ONLY if we have common ground.
If MY "definition" of "pet" is "bright green", "rabbit" is "dinner plate" and "died" is "needed washing" and you're not aware of that would we actually be communicating?
I doubt it.
I am not that dumb.
Regards
DL
Or not.That makes no sense.
Someone's secular values could be in conflict with the law (or not).
Someone's religious values could be in perfect agreement with the law (or not).
Also, I said "the same values". My point was that an atheist and a religious person could have the same values but think the reasons/justifications are different.
Thanks for not making a point.
Regards
DL
Unsupported assertion
Or not what?
Thanks for not making any sense.
Whut?
Yeah.You are quite dumb to speak to one you think dumb.
I tell teachers that all the time.
See PhDemon's comment.I am not that dumb.
Was his name bugs bunny?
the title of this thread is funny.
as if a God chooses you and makes you follow him. that could get a bit dicey if you don't feel the same feelings for the God that has chosen you. Could lead to being stalked by God.
Oh, man, what's 911 gonna do for you? It's God!
If there is a god & he is a just one, he would judge you by the actions of your life. Not what name you decided to call him by or how often you worshiped. If he is not a just god, then he deserves no such devotion. and if there is no god, then you will have gained nothing but lost time out of your life talking to an imaginary friend instead of doing something useful for the world. Thus, religion seems real simple "try not to be a jerkoff" 1 simple command, would serve you well in this life and the next. Isnt even a command, just a suggestion. try not to be a prick
In Genesis Chapter 1 verse 27 it states:Now what does that say about God?So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them...
Well, God is clearly male. His creation is however both male and female, which is puzzling.
In C19 the idea of Darwinism suggested that man was descended from ape-like creatures, ruffled quite a few feathers at the time because it was interpreted by some that God was a monkey.
If God was so smart would he have created a being whose history has been one of war and conflict?
Now the answer to this is of course that this planet is the only one in the whole wide universe where God's creation has suffered a Fall, and that's why he had to send down his son, which presumably means that God was having an off day when he created Man, but we should still be grateful that salvation is still attainable through God's Word which is the Bible.
Not according to the bible I grew up with. And I quote ...Well, God is clearly male. His creation is however both male and female, which is puzzling.
Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created. KJV Genesis 5:2
The next verse 5:3 states that when Adam was 130 years old he became the father of a son (not daughter) in his own likeness, after his image, named Seth.
At what point then did the separate races of Man develop? We should all look the same as one race in God's image.
1. Well, my children don't look like me. One blond with brown eyes, one with very fair skin, black hair and greyish eyes. They are my children despite the fact they look neither like me nor each other.At what point then did the separate races of Man develop? We should all look the same as one race in God's image.
2. If a god can be both male and female, surely such a god could also encompass any and all potential forms of body and colours of eyes, hair and skin so that all descendants of the couple named Adam would still be made "in God's image".
I'm always perplexed that people who claim to believe in an all-powerful supernatural being won't grant that omnipotent being the power or the freedom to do some pretty pedestrian stuff. If I did believe in such a being, I'd think it should be capable of anything.
Is this a suggestion that God is an hermaphrodite? A New York rabbi concluded that God is hermaphroditic, and it only took him 13 years of intense study. In which case we should all be hermaphrodites as we are made in God's image. But as every monotheist knows, God favours males, and is therefore sexist. The global war against women began with biblical interpretation, and only in the last few decades have women been able to fight back, with limited success.
The Bible appears to me to work off these misguided assertions. I would like your opinion as why more women do not rebel against the Bible (not to mentioned the Koran) when it is clearly loaded against them. It is a male dominated book. Henry Morton wrote a book called The Women of the Bible. It only really served to emphasize the low status of women in the Bible. Yet before the Bible women were considered at least the equals of men. If God's Word is the Bible, then I do not agree, and why I am inclined to look at God as more of a mathematician, which is probably incorrect, but more correct than biblical fiction.
Would omnipotence also imply that one can nullify one's own omnipotence?
No. It's a reference to Genesis 5:2.Is this a suggestion that God is an hermaphrodite?
#$%@&ed if I know. I think it's really about people not working out what the central notion behind "the fall", or original sin if you prefer that description really is, and therefore, what the bible claims we need to be "saved" from. No fall, no redemption needed.I would like your opinion as why more women do not rebel against the Bible (not to mentioned the Koran) when it is clearly loaded against them. It is a male dominated book.
Having worked out that the problem boils down to women willingly engaging in icky, normal, natural sexual behaviour which thereby makes them icky, it's pretty easy to walk away without a backward glance.
The other issue is that far too many people think they know what's in the bible, but they really don't. Once you've found the umpteenth endorsement of rape as a "good thing", usually alongside a similar endorsement of enslaving people as another "good thing", it's about time to put that book away and find better guides to living. Of course, some folks like to find the bits that talk about how you have to treat Jewish slaves better than the usual conquered, captured kind of slave and try to persuade themselves that "it's not so bad really". Yes, it is that bad and no person with any kind of humane moral compass would countenance a word of it. That applies equally to men, but I suppose the attraction of being in control of all the women and children might counterbalance that. I'd hope not, but people are people and the bible calls to and endorses the worst in many of us.
As does the Koran. It's a very similar book. The major difference being that it's the work of a single author, rather than a digest of historical writings as the bible is.
Religion I feel is merely what clergy say to further their own ends, based loosely on God's words.
IMO, humans will use any tool to further our agenda,
So evil science, who makes evangelists' hypotension medication, computers, smartphones, TVs, cars, etc. lol...
Considering many theists contributed to scientific development (yes, the guy who invented algorithms wasn't a Muslim...) then it's always been a false dichotomy.
3 things can happen: you're right or you're wrong or it doesn't matter. As I see it, if it's important then two of these choices are not good and the only good choice is the right one. However you can't know. Choosing to be right, wrong or neutral is not really choosing, it's guessing. So any choice has the same chance of success when selecting. Thus the importance of choosing for a god is, well, non-existant. It's a stalemate.How important is it to choose the God you follow?
Well of course it is important to choose the right God.
You really would not want to follow some cheap and chintzy God that only made false promises and never actually delivered on them.
My parents made me go to church all the way up through my junior year of high school when I finally rebelled and said "no more!" The first church I was forced to go to was Presbyterian and later it was a Baptist church. The last few years I hated going and to this day I wake up on Sunday morning and pleasantly think that "I don't have to go to church today." So, my parents played a small role in making me an atheist and I follow no god(s). I never spoke with my parents about this after I quit going to church so I don't really know their reasoning. There are, of course, other more important reasons that I'm an atheist.How important is it to choose the God you follow?
Last edited by PumaMan; March 2nd, 2014 at 09:07 AM.
(the wonka meme makes anything sound funny)
"Which God" is a funny question. One can chose any, or some, or even all and not be thought morally deficient. But, if your answer in "none", you are held suspect, by many.
I know lots of members have marveled at this, as have I. I suppose my answer would be have to be: a real God. But, it seems paradox's would have to abound if there were a real God.
I honestly believe in God but I dont want to. While my circumstances, may be different than most others, and l will not speak too much of these unique circumstances of mine, I just cant seem to help believing in God, and I wonder how Much of it is my so called illness, and how Much of it is the fact that I was raised to believe in God.
Such a view is ignorant of how culture works, in my opinion. Culture would not function if people did not pass down their beliefs and value systems to their children. Telling your children what you believe and encouraging that is not child abuse. Abusing your children because they choose to go a different way is child abuse, but not simply passing on your beliefs. There are all kinds of philosophies on right and wrong. Is it child abuse to teach your children that sharing is good? Many philosophies disagree with that assertion.If the indoctrination has taken hold before adulthood or even in children in their teens or younger, it is difficult to deprogram themselves. That is why I think it to be child abuse to have children indoctrinated into any religion before they can actually choose which theology they want.
Regards
DL
| « are we becoming more kind ? thoughts on evolution | The Relationship Between Perception and Reality » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
61Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
