Pondering God-Delusion, Not The Book.

[insanezenmistress]

First, do any of my readers know that argument against the Bible that goes, If GOD wrote it, shouldn't it have had correct science, and information compatible with current knowledge?

 

 

I agree, shouldn't the word of god include wisdom that keeps on giving.....and knowledge that yields knowledge? Should it Not ?....

 

 

Well my atheist friends i have found it........the word of god...........well maybe parts of it.

 

Wouldn't you know it, god has written a holy book. At least parts of a holy book. I mean there is allot of myth....but the parts he wrote have knowledge in them yet to be debunked...i suggest you go seek it out.

 

We're talking electricity in 300 bce. Iron working about then too. Mathematics that we depend on today. Astronomy that agrees with modern understanding. These Holy books have it.

 

They are called the Vedas. But well, I have to admit, when I picked one up to actually read it, it looked like a bunch of hymns and long winded praises and names of god. Ill have to research this slowly.

 

But I have seen documentaries. and um i do study yoga......

 

Look around you tube. Fascinating stuff. and i got to wondering......

 

 

SO maybe the Bible's god did not answer to those parameters, but apparently the Hindu Brahman did. Do you consent to conversion? Or is there really another issue you have with the entity hitherto known as God?

 

Of course, you may fairly argue that the men who wrote the words created the knowledge.

 

I would say they merely discovered it. Should we lose all our information, and forget all that we knew, our minds, after such a reboot would start by studying his environment. As we did, we would again study the movement of stars, learn about growing food, discover counting and so forth and so on. The people post Apocalypse will someday possess the same knowledge we have now. Though it may take a different evaluational approach.

 

This is discovery of that which already is, and not new knowledge. New to us perhaps but existing form beyond our perspective.

 

You may also fairly argue, that a god who can shit stars really does not need to be worshiped.

 

 

I say.......LMAO........he sure does..... i mean lets pray he misses us.

 

It is this big what if that keeps us going.

 

It is ourselves we must judge. If you are so harsh with them, will you apply that toward yourself.....how well do you follow your logical creed? DO you love? DO you believe in Justice?

 

It is only ourselves that we must perfect to our liking. The blame does not fall upon another.

 

Even if we blame god, the logical end of god is our own reflection.

 

*

I have heard a christian argue that "we should not pray for peace on people who are unsaved. Because then they would never know that they needed Jesus."

 

I suppose that sounds right to many. How far the Dhrama has dropped. How far the Depravity of common sense.

 

I thought Jesus taught us differently. If the world had more natural peace, wouldn't it be easier to win them to Christ? If the troubled souls where comforted where they are in life, wouldn't it be easier to speak of god loving them? If the hungry where fed and kept safe wouldn't they already know god is, with out you ever having to speak a word about Jesus?

 

 

 

Some may fairly argue that simply isn't the case in Christianity, and *they comfortingly banter* it is not apparent in any other religion. All i can say is does any of the notion of goodness exist in your actions? How can we make that kindness spread to others? Cant even Atheist's chose loving and choose less their greed?

 

This is because something is dead within. The apathy toward peace and good will is not because of a religion anyway. And it is not because of a god delusion ....well maybe it is because of a god delusion...that is an ego biased warped psychosis of doing things in the name of god and being like unto Cain in your walk and understanding of god.....anyway....

 

 

But if what is causing our blindness to just being truth seeking people and being right toward each other, is a god-delusion, then it follows there must be a god-correctly. I do not think that a the opposite of god-delusion is atheist.

 

If we are deluded about god then our religions and our practices of life will bear their result. But then if we deny god exists and life according to our more Noble consciousness and out lives bear the results of that. We still have a god-delusion. Our thoughts about god that we no longer believe in, that we are liberated from are still delusional. Your merely discovered that those ideas where wrong and halted inquiry. Your ignoring those old ways of thought is no measure of how less deluded you are but a measure of things discarded. God-truth might be discovered as you study your self, how you operate, and how far your mind can expand and understand. AS you discover truth, you come to understand that things we associate with the vague primal notion of god. And that there is a very fine line between self and god. Each are as expansive as the other.

 

If you lose the imagination of god and absolutely have no clue about this mystical shit i am laying down ok ok..i hear you brother......

 

You have the essence of life...your existence can be what ever you make it. It all matters on how you think. If you think with bad intent, bad reality manifests.

 

 

opps i was rambling about god again...what was i talking about before.....

 

edited to deflate my position

[Snakefoot]

What the fuck does any of that mean? Stoned much?

[insanezenmistress]

I figured i;d get that responce.

 

i dont know how to explain. I am trying to test out something. I guess it did nt make much sence as it is. It is my theory about how i can try to defend a god positive argument.

 

But I am leanring to think about it as I go along. Not stoned much, just excited.

[Snakefoot]

I figured i;d get that responce.

 

i dont know how to explain. I am trying to test out something. I guess it did nt make much sence as it is. It is my theory about how i can try to defend a god positive argument.

 

But I am leanring to think about it as I go along. Not stoned much, just excited.

 

Yeah, firing neurons and dopamine will do that.

[insanezenmistress]

perhaps, but manaully opperated neurons does not nessicarilly equal meaningless mental banter. Do you have a queiton for me to clarify?

[NotBlinded]

I'm sorry, but I couldn't really follow you. I'm sure you know what you are saying, but it kinda goes out in left field every once in awhile. I got lost looking for the ball.

[insanezenmistress]

dang nab it.

 

 

well maybe we cna pick at some thing small... maybe this bit.....

 

But if what is causing our blindness to just being truth seeking people and being right toward each other, is a god-delusion, then it follows there must be a god-correctly. I do not think that a the opposite of god-delusion is atheist.

 

If we are deluded about god then our religions and our practices of life will bear their result. But then if we deny god exists and life according to our more Noble consciousness and out lives bear the results of that. We still have a god-delusion. Our thoughts about god that we no longer believe in, that we are liberated from are still delusional. Your merely discovered that those ideas where wrong and halted inquiry. Your ignoring those old ways of thought is no measure of how less deluded you are but a measure of things discarded. God-truth might be discovered as you study your self, how you operate, and how far your mind can expand and understand. AS you discover truth, you come to understand that things we associate with the vague primal notion of god. And that there is a very fine line between self and god. Each are as expansive as the other.

 

If you lose the imagination of god and absolutely have no clue about this mystical shit i am laying down ok ok

 

[Snakefoot]

dang nab it.

 

 

well maybe we cna pick at some thing small... maybe this bit.....

 

But if what is causing our blindness to just being truth seeking people and being right toward each other, is a god-delusion, then it follows there must be a god-correctly. I do not think that a the opposite of god-delusion is atheist.

 

If we are deluded about god then our religions and our practices of life will bear their result. But then if we deny god exists and life according to our more Noble consciousness and out lives bear the results of that. We still have a god-delusion. Our thoughts about god that we no longer believe in, that we are liberated from are still delusional. Your merely discovered that those ideas where wrong and halted inquiry. Your ignoring those old ways of thought is no measure of how less deluded you are but a measure of things discarded. God-truth might be discovered as you study your self, how you operate, and how far your mind can expand and understand. AS you discover truth, you come to understand that things we associate with the vague primal notion of god. And that there is a very fine line between self and god. Each are as expansive as the other.

 

If you lose the imagination of god and absolutely have no clue about this mystical shit i am laying down ok ok

 

 

Go through this entire thing and replace "god" with Santa Claus or Easter Bunny and see if it still makes sense.

[NotBlinded]

dang nab it.

 

 

well maybe we cna pick at some thing small... maybe this bit.....

 

But if what is causing our blindness to just being truth seeking people and being right toward each other, is a god-delusion, then it follows there must be a god-correctly. I do not think that a the opposite of god-delusion is atheist.

 

If we are deluded about god then our religions and our practices of life will bear their result. But then if we deny god exists and life according to our more Noble consciousness and out lives bear the results of that. We still have a god-delusion. Our thoughts about god that we no longer believe in, that we are liberated from are still delusional. Your merely discovered that those ideas where wrong and halted inquiry. Your ignoring those old ways of thought is no measure of how less deluded you are but a measure of things discarded. God-truth might be discovered as you study your self, how you operate, and how far your mind can expand and understand. AS you discover truth, you come to understand that things we associate with the vague primal notion of god. And that there is a very fine line between self and god. Each are as expansive as the other.

 

If you lose the imagination of god and absolutely have no clue about this mystical shit i am laying down ok ok

 

Yes, that I can understand and agree with, in repects to my own life and beliefs. I indeed rejected the god-delusion and became an atheist. But, what I was rejecting was the concepts about God. And in rejection of the Christian or any fundamental notions of God, I was inadvertently giving credit to their concepts of God by rejecting it. This said that what they described God to be was the only understanding so when I rejected their understanding, I was saying that they were describing God the only way God could be described. So yes, I agree.

[insanezenmistress]

 

Go through this entire thing and replace "god" with Santa Claus or Easter Bunny and see if it still makes sense.

 

yes i realise that ant word god is a place holder of things or ideals. Very human ideas and to insist on my fantacy as being the only truth is uncool.

 

But the human part of the mythology is something to concider. The part that belives in it's self gives it's life personal meaning.

 

Yes, that I can understand and agree with, in repects to my own life and beliefs. I indeed rejected the god-delusion and became an atheist. But, what I was rejecting was the concepts about God. And in rejection of the Christian or any fundamental notions of God, I was inadvertently giving credit to their concepts of God by rejecting it. This said that what they described God to be was the only understanding so when I rejected their understanding, I was saying that they were describing God the only way God could be described. So yes, I agree.

 

Thank you. and i am sorry about the wild length of my topic it is just that i never ... well tested my logic.

 

I feel like i am throwing my self to the wolves.

SO far I learned that I need to pick one simple idea not barf on the lions.

[NotBlinded]

 

Go through this entire thing and replace "god" with Santa Claus or Easter Bunny and see if it still makes sense.

 

yes i realise that ant word god is a place holder of things or ideals. Very human ideas and to insist on my fantacy as being the only truth is uncool.

 

But the human part of the mythology is something to concider. The part that belives in it's self gives it's life personal meaning.

 

Yes, that I can understand and agree with, in repects to my own life and beliefs. I indeed rejected the god-delusion and became an atheist. But, what I was rejecting was the concepts about God. And in rejection of the Christian or any fundamental notions of God, I was inadvertently giving credit to their concepts of God by rejecting it. This said that what they described God to be was the only understanding so when I rejected their understanding, I was saying that they were describing God the only way God could be described. So yes, I agree.

 

Thank you. and i am sorry about the wild length of my topic it is just that i never ... well tested my logic.

 

I feel like i am throwing my self to the wolves.

SO far I learned that I need to pick one simple idea not barf on the lions.

No need to be sorry. We all learn from everything we do and we grow from the experiences. I do like your "barf on the lions" metaphor though. It made me laugh.

[insanezenmistress]

 

well. since we are at agree...ummmmm how did you come to define the it-ness known as god? Is there any way to have a god positive arguement?

 

We hear all over this place the atheist whomp all over the chrisitans. But I can still apreciate their mythology, even find valitiy on the parables. Can have jesus. and want to side with the god positive people.

 

am i evil, devils advocate or deluded?

 

[NotBlinded]

 

well. since we are at agree...ummmmm how did you come to define the it-ness known as god? Is there any way to have a god positive arguement?

 

We hear all over this place the atheist whomp all over the chrisitans. But I can still apreciate their mythology, even find valitiy on the parables. Can have jesus. and want to side with the god positive people.

 

am i evil, devils advocate or deluded?

 

I think the best way to describe "It" is by negation, or what God is not. Have you read any of the thread here in the colleseum that Antlerman started called "The Love of Jesus"? I think you would enjoy it.

 

I too can appreciate their mythology.

 

I also think that many atheists are the most "spiritual" group of people because they have let the notion of God go, therefore freeing themselves from images of the Divine. They can then appreciate life for what it is.

[Shyone]

 

well. since we are at agree...ummmmm how did you come to define the it-ness known as god? Is there any way to have a god positive arguement?

 

We hear all over this place the atheist whomp all over the chrisitans. But I can still apreciate their mythology, even find valitiy on the parables. Can have jesus. and want to side with the god positive people.

 

am i evil, devils advocate or deluded?

 

I appreciate a lot of the words (mythology?). There is great wisdom in much of what I read, but I can't help but try to figure out what was spoken and what was added by means of explanation.

 

"But Jesus never said he was God" said the second century potential convert.

"It's written right ...<scribble, scribble>... here!" replied the gospel writer.

 

When Jesus spake about people, he grabs my heart. When he showed mercy, it blew me away. When he said, "Hate your relatives" I cringed and cannot believe he really said that. "Me, me, me" is not the message that I got from Jesus. Maybe he was a deluded egocentric narcicist, but I read something else in most of the words attributed to him; humility.

 

So sitting where I sit, I can pick and choose from what is consistent with my morality without having to take the whole package.

 

But then, I did the same with the Tao Te Ching and Shakespeare and Miguel de Cervantes.

 

I'm probably writing only to myself at this point. I doubt anyone else would agree even in part with this.

 

And I probably am way off what you were trying to convey. Sorry about that.

[NotBlinded]

 

well. since we are at agree...ummmmm how did you come to define the it-ness known as god? Is there any way to have a god positive arguement?

 

We hear all over this place the atheist whomp all over the chrisitans. But I can still apreciate their mythology, even find valitiy on the parables. Can have jesus. and want to side with the god positive people.

 

am i evil, devils advocate or deluded?

 

I appreciate a lot of the words (mythology?). There is great wisdom in much of what I read, but I can't help but try to figure out what was spoken and what was added by means of explanation.

 

"But Jesus never said he was God" said the second century potential convert.

"It's written right ...<scribble, scribble>... here!" replied the gospel writer.

 

When Jesus spake about people, he grabs my heart. When he showed mercy, it blew me away. When he said, "Hate your relatives" I cringed and cannot believe he really said that. "Me, me, me" is not the message that I got from Jesus. Maybe he was a deluded egocentric narcicist, but I read something else in most of the words attributed to him; humility.

 

So sitting where I sit, I can pick and choose from what is consistent with my morality without having to take the whole package.

 

But then, I did the same with the Tao Te Ching and Shakespeare and Miguel de Cervantes.

 

I'm probably writing only to myself at this point. I doubt anyone else would agree even in part with this.

 

And I probably am way off what you were trying to convey. Sorry about that.

Are you kidding? I agree 100%.

[insanezenmistress]

So sitting where I sit, I can pick and choose from what is consistent with my morality without having to take the whole package.

 

But then, I did the same with the Tao Te Ching and Shakespeare and Miguel de Cervantes.

 

I'm probably writing only to myself at this point. I doubt anyone else would agree even in part with this.

 

And I probably am way off what you were trying to convey. Sorry about that.

 

 

ON the contrary i am thinking we have melody. WHich is the point i am trying to make.

A person can defend their Jesus and spount only truth and logic. Becasue they can interpret the meaning of how the story relates to them.

 

I too take my 'gospel' form many soothsayers. But all the while kept finding a god in all the thigns that where not god. Still something to seek for. something yet unatained.

 

 

IS this the "god in the gaps" thingy?

 

Sometimes my god thing is my tool, my compaion, my illsuion... but i see in the bible a truth about not worshiping idols. Not even my own. And the operation of "god" i snot mine for the grasping.

 

Perhaps i cant even argue ther is absolutly a god, and you can have what ever relationhsip with it that you please. but what ever you chose, is not the Total god.

 

(*hopes i am not tossing my cookies again*)

 

izm

[insanezenmistress]

I think the best way to describe "It" is by negation, or what God is not. Have you read any of the thread here in the colleseum that Antlerman started called "The Love of Jesus"? I think you would enjoy it.

 

I too can appreciate their mythology.

 

I also think that many atheists are the most "spiritual" group of people because they have let the notion of God go, therefore freeing themselves from images of the Divine. They can then appreciate life for what it is.

 

 

Ahh. I keep trying to alude to we can have our cake and eat it too.

 

SO you mgiht agree that since we let go of GOD and Absolute athority and law, we where free to create as we wilt......

 

Whail i was reading your post, i thought something like i want to discuss god, as an atheist becasue i am a believer. And i want them to tell me how we disagree. And if we agree then aren't we all saved? (but that position requires bible verses and *yawn* i havent the time.

 

Maybe the christian where right once saved always saved. I have imagined writing a book called biblical atheism before.

[RankStranger]

Ok, I have no idea what's going on.

[Shyone]

So sitting where I sit, I can pick and choose from what is consistent with my morality without having to take the whole package.

 

But then, I did the same with the Tao Te Ching and Shakespeare and Miguel de Cervantes.

 

I'm probably writing only to myself at this point. I doubt anyone else would agree even in part with this.

 

And I probably am way off what you were trying to convey. Sorry about that.

 

 

ON the contrary i am thinking we have melody. WHich is the point i am trying to make.

A person can defend their Jesus and spount only truth and logic. Becasue they can interpret the meaning of how the story relates to them.

 

I too take my 'gospel' form many soothsayers. But all the while kept finding a god in all the thigns that where not god. Still something to seek for. something yet unatained.

 

 

IS this the "god in the gaps" thingy?

 

Sometimes my god thing is my tool, my compaion, my illsuion... but i see in the bible a truth about not worshiping idols. Not even my own. And the operation of "god" i snot mine for the grasping.

 

Perhaps i cant even argue ther is absolutly a god, and you can have what ever relationhsip with it that you please. but what ever you chose, is not the Total god.

 

(*hopes i am not tossing my cookies again*)

 

izm

I can dig it.

[Shyone]

Ok, I have no idea what's going on.

Me neither. I really think quite concretely most of the time. I try to get into the spiritual parts of the conversations, but I put my own concrete spin on them.

 

It goes over like a cement balloon most of the time.

[insanezenmistress]

Well i think i ought to stay random commenter and not topic starter. I never was too good at starting conversations.

 

 

i thank you all for you indulgence. The rest of the thread has been trying to figure out what to talk about, and get to know you stuff. that i have been trying to round toward a somekind of "thing"

 

any clearer?

 

izm

[Shyone]

Well i think i ought to stay random commenter and not topic starter. I never was too good at starting conversations.

 

 

i thank you all for you indulgence. The rest of the thread has been trying to figure out what to talk about, and get to know you stuff. that i have been trying to round toward a somekind of "thing"

 

any clearer?

 

izm

I wish I were deep enough to grasp all meaning, but I fail most of the time. It's like when I read Eastern wisdom. I kind of get it, like I get reading what you write on some level, but not good enough to reply intelligently.

 

As for starting topics, what the heck - it doesn't hurt anything, and if you have something you want to say, you can say it whereever you deem most appropriate.

[insanezenmistress]

Please dont even entertain the thought that i think you are not good enough intellectaully.

 

I am not even looking for that kind of answer. For example, i heared a conversation between to people argueing about Glabal Warming. The one who shoudl ahve one the argument said " i know global warming is a lie because my peppers have froze three years in a row.

 

And the learned person scoffed at his lack of scientific credentials.

 

Please i admire everyone's ideas. the whole point is to agree together and ask quesitons and test and proove what ever it is we think we know.

 

[Franko47]

It's quite alright, Mistress. We know you were trying to share some ideas with us here, but it was presented in a form that was a bit confusing.

 

After I smoked a huge doobie, I went back and read your original post. I think what you are saying is that the true God stands outside of human knowledge; or that we must integrate our science and knowledge as we go along.

 

The Old Testament is remarkably devoid of any practical information. Like healing wounds, irrigating crops, even building decent wheeled carts. At times it seems to ignore the fact that humans need homes to live in, food to eat, and want some kind of security and justice against tribal hordes of conquering maniacs.

 

There are seldom blueprints in religious writings for what makes for a just culture or civilization. Gods just want to be worshiped, we are all supposed to dream about the afterlife, and who cares about the problems of the happening now.

 

This was your neatest statement, though:

 

If we are deluded about god then our religions and our practices of life will bear their result.

 

 

This is similar to what we call examining the "fruits of the tree". This is also one of the many criticisms of historical religions; they tended not to lead to "enlightened societies" but in fact caused almost more problems than if we had ignored these beliefs in the first place. Christianity became a system of feudal theocracy with a deranged system of law and superstition-based atrocity. Not to mention xenophobia and violence and racism.

 

Apologists can whine all they want about why it turned out to be such a corrupt system, but the fact of the matter is that many religions by their mere conceptual nature lend themselves to being corrupted. The Aztecs were sophisticated in math, architecture, and farming, yet engaged in non-stop blood sacrifices that have made their religion historically infamous.

 

If a religion is to pit us against each other, and lead to violence, I do not blame "flawed" humans. I blame the essential conditions and terms of the religion itself. Even when I was a practicing Christian I still treated thinkers, Buddhists, Hindus, and so on as spiritual equals, as long as they believed in peaceful co-existence and all that lofty stuff.

 

If God is that great, then he should be able to impart a system of thinking that will avoid most of these problems.

 

But it seems that has not happened.

 

If God is that great, then he should have given us proper tools to discern these truths, instead of leaving it up to clerics, elitists, and intellectual whores to exploit the rest of us with it.

 

Which seems to be what has happened.

 

If God is so great, then you would think that being "touched" by him would transform a person for life, and affect them in ways where their goodness and generosity would be unmistakable- and their tolerance.

 

It's all disapointing, in a way. But perhaps, just perhaps, there really is a good God out there. Maybe those of us who believe in making Truth our authority instead of authority our truth are on the right track.

 

Maybe the whole thing really is a test. As in just how much bullshit a person will accept (especially when it caters to their own ego and racist tendencies) before one cries "enough" ! This isn't from God, it's just more bullshit made up by men who like to talk the talk but have no idea how to employ it, have no idea that they should have embraced all of humanity with some dignity instead of turning it into a school playground scenario of childish posturing and shouting "But we're right" from the rooftops - or at the point of a sword or gun.

 

I suppose that various forms of Buddhism come the closest to this sense of peaceful coexistence; it's occurred to me from time to time just how aggressive it makes many other religions look. And I mean "aggressive". It seems more and more these days, when encounter the religious zealot, they are practically shouting in my face, talking about violence and threats that will befall me, and so on, again like a child on a playground stamping their feet because they are so frustrated by their lack of ability to control other people.

 

Sorry if I've hijacked your thread a bit, but some of what you wrote did inspire me to think about some of these ideas.

[insanezenmistress]

oh You did wonderful. SO many things you said are good for biting on. The defencicy I own is I am not yet practiced at getting my idea out there to be broken down and discussed.

****Apologists can whine all they want about why it turned out to be such a corrupt system, but the fact of the matter is that many religions by their mere conceptual nature lend themselves to being corrupted. (snip)

If a religion is to pit us against each other, and lead to violence, I do not blame "flawed" humans. I blame the essential conditions and terms of the religion itself. Even when I was a practicing Christian I still treated thinkers, Buddhists, Hindus, and so on as spiritual equals, as long as they believed in peaceful co-existence and all that lofty stuff.

 

I on the other hand do blame human flaws as the reason we havent found /created a god that works.

 

If God is that great, then he should be able to impart a system of thinking that will avoid most of these problems.

 

But it seems that has not happened.

 

If God is that great, then he should have given us proper tools to discern these truths, instead of leaving it up to clerics, elitists, and intellectual whores to exploit the rest of us with it.

 

Which seems to be what has happened.

 

I feel bad you needed a doobie to understand me and I have learned that I need to refine what I try to say. At the heart of my issue is finding where the emotional disconnect happened between the noble thought intended when humans made religion, and the nasty evil thing it largely is.

 

I also think when Dawkins wrote his book, he did not give fair concideration to the god-sided argument. That means that I dont know what that argumeent(s) is (are) Nor exactly how it failed. Dawkins simplfied his re-utterence becasue to actaully defend his position fairly would be a few more longer books. And as for me studying them i am flawed in that i need things simplifed so i can think about them myself.

 

Sure I hear people dropping the end all statement "so and so's tea pot in outter space arguement fails miserably. But dont find out how to convince myself.

 

I have heard it said here many times one cant Choose what it is they believe, yet in another place they tell someone that they Chose or found their arguement for god failed.

 

Perhaps I am not so interested in disecting what failed about it as much as I am in figureing why I did not reach the same conclusion. I have a problem with not finding usefullness in my imaginary friend, to put it in common terms.

 

And I agree with you entirely about religion and humans wanting to beat everyone with "IAM RIGHT or die" mentality. But when I was a chrisitan that was never my position as a follower of jesus' teaching.

 

If my getting personal will clear things up, unlike many other deconverts, I had according to my imagination a good and responcive god. Now I come to find that the theology and religion wrapped around my experience of god was flawed and many of my ego baised uses for god have been flawed. But I still want there to be a place for god.

 

And I have confusion about why is it "better" for the mind to after letting go of obedience to godly (human) athority, to go thru the pain of tareing apart all support of keeping god?

 

resting here to see if it goes anyplace.

 

izm