Jesus vs Santa or visa versa

[NotBlinded]

From a certain perspective you are right, and in part this is what I am saying. The "people" or "figures" are real in the sense of they are caricatures of a variety of ideals or principles, or even actual humans, that are what I would call the embodiments of the fears and aspirations of human beings. They are symbols of these things given the clothing of transcendence, making them powerful representations. In the strictest sense, Brahma, or Vishnu, or Jehovah, or Krishna, or Jesus, or William Tell in most likelihood were/are not "real" in the temporal sense as things that can be tested and verified as you or I, but are "real" as living symbols created by us - mythologies.

 

Now the trick to the power of these living symbols, as I think I'll start calling them, is that for them to work as such in peoples lives, they need to operate on a different plane of existence then temporal creatures, so they have to be placed where they can escape the rules of human existence being applied to them. If people turn on the same criteria for evaluating these "beings", as they do everything else in interacting with their earthly existence, they will fail to work as powerful symbols anymore. If they don't transcend our worldly experiences, then they become a different creature like us. They become like evaluating whether ETs or Bigfoot exist, and using scientific, or logic, or any other sort of rational approach to them will show them to be "questionable" beings who probably don't really exist. But if the rules don't apply to them, then people can accept them as trascendent beings, so they can continue to fulfill the role of symbols for them.

 

Fundamentalism is religions worst enemy in the sense that it tries to do just this, and make them logical and rational, verifiable, provable, rather then being transcendent and symbolic. Since they are creations of us, and are "real" as a projection of our collective selves, they have to be able to change with us. Mainstream religious "believers" (adopters would be a better word) do not care much for the extremists in their belief system because they make the power of those symbols less accessible to them, by making them less transcendent and more temporal.

 

I fairly positive most mainstream believers would not be able to articulate this. It's just what I've seen through observation and consideration. They just try to avoid examining their beliefs with scrutiny because they know that they can't do that. They want the symbols, not the temporal. It's not intellectual dishonesty, is embracing mythologies for what they offer that transcends mortality.

That was wonderfully said.

[Antlerman]

 

My earlier question was, "how do you prevent fundamental classes from forming?" It would appear that every member of a society would have to be exactly and highly trained in order to prevent corruption of any discipline or a caste system would have to be created so as to create a sign of irrelevance concerning those not trained. This would be similar to gaining a college degree. Of course the problem then becomes evident simply by looking around. How many people argue about things they really know very little about? Should they be disallowed? Should privilege be granted to only the upper class (properly trained) so as to ensure that the lower class didn't get authority and create "trouble"?

 

None of those sound like acceptable solutions to me

Back to the bell curve: As long as you have diversity of ideas, you will have the bell curve in a free society. Take away the current fundies' or liberals' "causes" and new causes will arise and the bell curve recreated. The edges define the middle. The middle cannot exist without the edges. Society requires it's extremes in order to create dialogue and grow and evolve and define the middle ground where the bulk of the population exist. They are a necessary evil. You wouldn't want to take that away, despite the irritation and nuisance they can be. Otherwise, it's would be a repressive totalitarianism, wouldn't it?

 

 

That was wonderfully said.

Thanks!

[highvoltage]

As two interacting macroscopic systems approach equilibrium, the changes in the system variables will be such that the number of states available to the combined system increases.

Well, I think I can already determine that this version is necessarily incorrect.

 

My reasoning would be that I can produce 2 systems where in one the temperature differential decreases to a uniform state and in the other, the temperature differential increases. The fact that I can produce both says that a law can not require that either be always true. The wording in this version is, to me, very vague and dependent on perspective, but regardless, it is saying that only one direction of entropy can occur. I can provide examples (as noted on the other thread) which allow for either an increase or a decrease to occur. Thus no law can be made.

That's interesting; I'll have to think about it some more. I'd like to go back to my textbook and rework some of the problems and see if I can find the loopholes that you've pointed out. I think there are some problems with the ideas on the site you linked to, but without working out some math they're hard to point out. I'll pm you sometime when I get the time to do some more work in this area.

[Ssel]

Back to the bell curve: As long as you have diversity of ideas, you will have the bell curve in a free society. Take away the current fundies' or liberals' "causes" and new causes will arise and the bell curve recreated.

Two issues, one you have proposed a society in constant struggle and contention. At first it all appears reasonable intellectual and somewhat harmless. But for a bell curve to be maintained, there MUST be diversity. This becomes the requirement regardless of actual need. Such a society ends up being exactly as before, forcing a particular structure because it has accepted that structure as its means of survival, but it is at the expense of its people.

 

If people were to agree, and stop contending with each other, the governance would be threatened and people would have to be inspired into conflict and passionate diverse desires even though such thing ends up killing the larger percentage (for every one good goal, there are 100's of harmful goals).

 

This system would have to forbid people from ever agreeing.

 

Secondly, you have stated that it is the existence of the fundies that are preventing this nice bell curve of contention. We need merely get rid of them, then we will be free to fight amongst ourselves in diverse passion. Why do we have to be free of them for such a goal? Merely to create a statistical bell curve? All hail the bell curve? Tomorrow's God?

 

But back to the question.. Even when such a society is complete in its aspirations of bell contention, a fundamental class of people who have been programmed to understand nothing else but this perfect system must evolve within it. Once again, your back to a large group of majority righteous yet not entirely correct people forcing all others to go along. Those mainstreamers can not allow other thoughts of ways to govern to emerge and gain any strength. The dictatorship has merely changed its method of dictating so as to seem innocent of all of the confusion and contention. If a large group decide to not contend and live in harmony with each other, the governance will have no choice but to extinguish them.

 

Live our way, or not at all. And coming from just another fundamentalist mass produced by the requirement of the bell curve.

 

___

 

 

I would like to add that this system that you have proposed is almost exactly what the Jews were doing shortly before the forced advent of Jesus. Who then committed the unforgivable sin of causing peace, for which he was murdered.

 

This more mathematical version was re-introduced by Dr John Nash about 50 years ago. He mathematically demonstrated that to keep the government protected from rebellion, diverse passions were required to be maintained. The formula has been used throughout the world so as to prevent unions from gaining strength and rebellions from ever coming to fruition.

 

 

There is still a far better way.

[pandora]

And this new better way would be?

 

Even if you don't think we could understand it, please elaborate.

[Ssel]

And this new better way would be?

 

Even if you don't think we could understand it, please elaborate.

http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?s=&s...ndpost&p=116943

[SkepticOfBible]

I would like to add that this system that you have proposed is almost exactly what the Jews were doing shortly before the forced advent of Jesus. Who then committed the unforgivable sin of causing peace, for which he was murdered.

 

 

How did he cause peace?

[Ssel]

I would like to add that this system that you have proposed is almost exactly what the Jews were doing shortly before the forced advent of Jesus. Who then committed the unforgivable sin of causing peace, for which he was murdered.

 

 

How did he cause peace?

http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?s=&s...ndpost&p=114695

 

perhaps a little before and after as well.

[SkepticOfBible]

I would like to add that this system that you have proposed is almost exactly what the Jews were doing shortly before the forced advent of Jesus. Who then committed the unforgivable sin of causing peace, for which he was murdered.

 

 

How did he cause peace?

http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?s=&s...ndpost&p=114695

 

perhaps a little before and after as well.

 

When did Jesus ever offer a solution for slavery, which was theone of the worst human tragedy of the of the human race. The americans even fought wars over this issue because he couldn't resolve this problem

 

And how do you justify the following verses

 

 

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

-Luke 19:27 (KJV)

 

 

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace but a sword.

 

-Matthew 10:34 (KJV)

 

 

Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip; and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

 

-Luke 22:36 (KJV)

 

 

And that slave, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

 

-Luke 12:47 (KJV)

 

throughout history one can find a plethora of examples of the Church using Biblical verses to justify wars, inquisitions, biolence and slavery against man.

 

The following sites also raise some very good points

 

http://www.nobeliefs.com/jesus.htm

Cult Leader Jesus

[Cerise]

Live our way, or not at all. And coming from just another fundamentalist mass produced by the requirement of the bell curve.

 

Are you seriously suggesting that Jesus never ever implied that all people live the same way?

 

Seriously?

 

You can't find anything that sound a bit like "my way or the highway" in Jesus' teachings?

 

Is this some more mystically encoded creative interpretation that my poor blind eyes just can't "see"?

[Ssel]

Live our way, or not at all. And coming from just another fundamentalist mass produced by the requirement of the bell curve.

 

Are you seriously suggesting that Jesus never ever implied that all people live the same way?

 

Seriously?

 

You can't find anything that sound a bit like "my way or the highway" in Jesus' teachings?

 

Is this some more mystically encoded creative interpretation that my poor blind eyes just can't "see"?

Did I say that Christianity was the answer?

[Cerise]

You've more than implied it.

 

But I can't say as you've ever really given the answer. You've danced around the subject quite neatly every time you've been asked. It appears that you think Jesus is somehow part of the answer at the very least, though your reasoning for that has never really been clear to me.

[Antlerman]

Two issues, one you have proposed a society in constant struggle and contention. At first it all appears reasonable intellectual and somewhat harmless. ..........<snip>

 

(and so on.........)

 

Ssel,

 

I really don't know what that long response was trying to communicate. I am an intelligent and educated person. I shared it with another, even more intelligent and educated person and the consensus was "?????" I can read Jean Paul Sartre's Being and Nothingness and find it easily more comprehensible that this. I doubt your thoughts are so above all others as to not be able to make them understandable. If Sartre can do it.....

 

That aside, I would respectfully request that maybe a little attention be paid to not derailing threads with unrelated topics such as your 2LoT and this "mysterious" idea of some ideal world you wish to try to get our unenlightened minds to begin to see through mysterious speak. Let's start another thread for that topic.

 

I'm being selfish with this one here. The topic was about Santa Clause versus Jesus. I think examining the role of mythology in people's lives is fully on topic, and for me this is the single subject that I have been struggling with for many years to understand about the people I live with in this real world and society. I'm finally starting to sort this out here. It is what the purpose of the ExChristian site is: A community of people with similar backgrounds and struggles with these issues. This is actually working for me as it's designed for, and I'm extreemly thankful for that! I'd appreciate your efforts to try at least in this thread to stay on topic.

 

Thanks

[Ssel]

You've more than implied it.

What is implied is more a reflection of the listener than the speaker. If I was proposing Christianity as a great solution, don't you think that I would have proposed such long before now?

 

But to Jesus' defense, One thing he said that which IMuHO, stands out above all of the rest is that He taught to seek heaven on Earth - to keep trying and not give up. It is that "trying" that brings solutions and, in a sense, constitutes the force of life behind all things. His point was to keep trying for a heaven.

 

Unfortunately the very concept of Heaven had already been misrepresented and is still. I would attribute this misrepresentation of the concept of heaven to be the base cause of thousands of years of needless suffering. They have been aiming at the wrong goal and when they got to it, they found that they couldn't hold onto it and thus reverted to this chaos and social fire methodology.

 

The solution lay in better understanding the real necessary construct of Heaven. It is not about serenity. The real Heaven never has been. Peace and serenity were merely the ground clearing for a mansion they were never told of, merely told to seek it.

 

 

If you stop proclaiming impossibilities long enough to ask yourself and science what would truly be required to cause a very real Heaven on earth, the answer comes and the millions of years of human misery comes to an end.

 

Or, just keep having fun throwing rocks at each other.

[Ssel]

I'd appreciate your efforts to try at least in this thread to stay on topic.

 

Thanks

My understanding was that it was on topic. I apologize for my lack of ability to communicate such as to make it appear that I am both off topic and attempting to advertise something else. I am aware that if those listening to me aren’t really trying to see the truth of what I'm saying, then my lack of ability will make it too difficult.

 

It is not merely an issue of being intelligent or not. It is an issue of communication and of seeking solution rather than an enemy.

 

Again, I apologize for my failed attempt to communicate.

[Cerise]

You've more than implied it.

What is implied is more a reflection of the listener than the speaker. If I was proposing Christianity as a great solution, don't you think that I would have proposed such long before now?

 

Who said anything about Christianity? I was talking about Jesus.

 

But to Jesus' defense, One thing he said that which IMuHO, stands out above all of the rest is that He taught to seek heaven on Earth - to keep trying and not give up. It is that "trying" that brings solutions and, in a sense, constitutes the force of life behind all things. His point was to keep trying for a heaven.

 

And somehow this was an original and exclusive thought by Jesus? I'm pretty sure various pagans had thought about "trying" to make life on earth a paradise at least once or twice before Jesus thought of it.

 

Unfortunately the very concept of Heaven had already been misrepresented and is still. I would attribute this misrepresentation of the concept of heaven to be the base cause of thousands of years of needless suffering. They have been aiming at the wrong goal and when they got to it, they found that they couldn't hold onto it and thus reverted to this chaos and social fire methodology.

 

The solution lay in better understanding the real necessary construct of Heaven. It is not about serenity. The real Heaven never has been. Peace and serenity were merely the ground clearing for a mansion they were never told of, merely told to seek it.

 

Mmm hmmm....

 

 

If you stop proclaiming impossibilities long enough to ask yourself and science what would truly be required to cause a very real Heaven on earth, the answer comes and the millions of years of human misery comes to an end.

 

Or, just keep having fun throwing rocks at each other.

 

Or you could stop acting superior all the time. But no, that would be way too much to ask I see.

[Guest R]

Wouldn’t it be a kick if millions of adults believed Santa Claus was a literal historical person who lived at one time?

 

But not only that but actually and literally exists today and has a magic sleigh pulled by flying reindeer that travels all around planet earth once a year on Xmas day?

 

They would all be dragged off to the insane asylums.

 

But with Jesus that doesn’t seem to be the case.

 

Jesus is treated as if he was a true historical person who actually lived thousands of years ago and to add insult to injury, millions of Christians today actually believe he is still alive in the form of an invisible man.

 

They also actually believe that he exists in invisible form sitting on a cosmic easy chair in the sky somewhere and that he is going to return to planet earth on a white horse and literally levitate them off of planet earth and up into heaven some time soon.

 

There is no historical evidence the biblical Jesus ever lived and if it were ever officially revealed and proved I just have to wonder how Christians would react.

 

Would they continue to believe and live in denial that he never existed? Or would they face up to the truth and forsake their beliefs in such an obvious myth?

 

It just goes to show you that when millions believe in a myth as if it is literally true, it’s amazing how it can be believed to be true no matter how much proof that it is not.

 

When I look back on my former Christian beliefs I’m amazed that I allowed my mind to surrender to such a religious belief system.

[Guest Redneck22]

Wouldn’t it be a kick if millions of adults believed Santa Claus was a literal historical person who lived at one time?

 

But not only that but actually and literally exists today and has a magic sleigh pulled by flying reindeer that travels all around planet earth once a year on Xmas day?

 

They would all be dragged off to the insane asylums.

 

But with Jesus that doesn’t seem to be the case.

 

Jesus is treated as if he was a true historical person who actually lived thousands of years ago and to add insult to injury, millions of Christians today actually believe he is still alive in the form of an invisible man.

 

They also actually believe that he exists in invisible form sitting on a cosmic easy chair in the sky somewhere and that he is going to return to planet earth on a white horse and literally levitate them off of planet earth and up into heaven some time soon.

 

There is no historical evidence the biblical Jesus ever lived and if it were ever officially revealed and proved I just have to wonder how Christians would react.

 

Would they continue to believe and live in denial that he never existed? Or would they face up to the truth and forsake their beliefs in such an obvious myth?

 

It just goes to show you that when millions believe in a myth as if it is literally true, it’s amazing how it can be believed to be true no matter how much proof that it is not.

 

When I look back on my former Christian beliefs I’m amazed that I allowed my mind to surrender to such a religious belief system.

[Guest redneck22]

Christianity is one of the rare religions that is based on fact and not opinion. As far as Jesus sitting somewhere in a cosmic comfy chair, jesus does need a somewhere to be because he is outside of man's time and space.

[Vixentrox]

Christianity is one of the rare religions that is based on fact and not opinion. As far as Jesus sitting somewhere in a cosmic comfy chair, jesus does need a somewhere to be because he is outside of man's time and space.

 

Fact huh? That's rich.

[Antlerman]

Christianity is one of the rare religions that is based on fact and not opinion. As far as Jesus sitting somewhere in a cosmic comfy chair, jesus does need a somewhere to be because he is outside of man's time and space.

Wow! Thanks for clarifying that it's based on fact. Now I guess I don't need FAITH? Since it's based on fact then I don't need to use faith. That's good, because it's really hard for me to just believe outrages tales like the National Enquirer or the Holy Bible without facts supporting all those wild and wacky claims! Cool the Bible is science. Now I only have one book that I need to read!

[NotBlinded]

...jesus does need a somewhere to be because he is outside of man's time and space.

You have just limited god. How is it possible for One to be without limits and then have to be outside of something? That would lead me to the understanding that god is in everything.