Not at all - if God appeared tomorrow the evidence would change my mind. For a believer who has faith in a young earth the evidence of the entire earth and all sciences is not enough. This is the difference and danger of faith as opposed to rational skepticism.
Posts by Qcmbr
-
46Crazy Religions
by Qcmbr ini was reading a good article regarding the relative 'craziness' of faiths (blog) and they mentioned a lot about mormons.
in short they talked about the socially accepted craziness (as opposed to actual mental illness) of mainstream , culturally accepted faiths v those that are relatively new.
we see scientology as more crazy than catholicism if we fall into the trap of judging without consideration but when examined all religions have very crazy elements.
-
-
-
46
Crazy Religions
by Qcmbr ini was reading a good article regarding the relative 'craziness' of faiths (blog) and they mentioned a lot about mormons.
in short they talked about the socially accepted craziness (as opposed to actual mental illness) of mainstream , culturally accepted faiths v those that are relatively new.
we see scientology as more crazy than catholicism if we fall into the trap of judging without consideration but when examined all religions have very crazy elements.
-
-
Qcmbr
I think you can weave atheism into a dogmatic philosophy such as Stalinism but atheism itself isn't a belief unless contextualised as part of a philosophy. You could decide to enforce atheism as a central tenet of a philosophy at which point it ceases to simply be a stance of skepticism and you could turn it into a measure of commitment to a worldview. In certain Communist states I would be happy to say atheism is part of a belief system because you are expected to adopt a rejection of all gods as part of your faith in a political system. Here in the West not so much, there is no overarching political philosophy claiming it so it isn't subject to the same understanding, IMO, as a faith based belief. Atheism is pretty simple in this context.
Religion is part of the faith based paradigm that is so poisonous to mankind. When you decide you have a source of absolute truth you stop asking questions, you stop re-examining assumptions and you start making close minded decisions. You start defending a religion / party / philosophy and turning a blind eye to immorality. You end up with sane moral people sanctioning gas chambers, drinking kook aid laced with poison, flying aircraft into buildings and preaching door to door about an arbitrary set of statements that cannot be questioned. Faith is an all consuming beast, a true slave master and all the faithful are slaves whether they glory in it or not.
What is 'crazy' is our continuance in narrow paths of thought when a wealth of empiricle evidence is at our fingertips and self education is free. This is the first age when we truly choose to be ignorant or not.
-
46
Crazy Religions
by Qcmbr ini was reading a good article regarding the relative 'craziness' of faiths (blog) and they mentioned a lot about mormons.
in short they talked about the socially accepted craziness (as opposed to actual mental illness) of mainstream , culturally accepted faiths v those that are relatively new.
we see scientology as more crazy than catholicism if we fall into the trap of judging without consideration but when examined all religions have very crazy elements.
-
-
Qcmbr
Hi Parakeet, I'll look it up ( no time now , about to watch a film with family) but it was pretty traumatic experience which I am still exploring as I try to discover why I was able to believe like some of our board members despite reality staring me in the face every waking hour. It was not easy admitting to the board my awakening and I did contemplate never posting again in shame :)
-
46
Crazy Religions
by Qcmbr ini was reading a good article regarding the relative 'craziness' of faiths (blog) and they mentioned a lot about mormons.
in short they talked about the socially accepted craziness (as opposed to actual mental illness) of mainstream , culturally accepted faiths v those that are relatively new.
we see scientology as more crazy than catholicism if we fall into the trap of judging without consideration but when examined all religions have very crazy elements.
-
-
Qcmbr
I agree with the idea that religions can be viewed as crazy but when stepping back we can see that lots of religions have equally unfounded and bizarre behaviours. In addition to this I agree with the article's author that crazy behaviour is also seen in wider society such as in clothing.
As for discipleship I think you are being deliberately naive which leaves you either in the camp of being slightly devious or if you genuinely think posting an article is enough to denote discipleship then you aren't as on the ball as I give you credit for. I do think your support of AG which has moved beyond simple sympathy now to the stage where you are getting divine messages of support for her and of which you need to testify as a witness does place you into a disciple relationship. This is only a bad thing if you don't want to be her disciple.
-
46
Crazy Religions
by Qcmbr ini was reading a good article regarding the relative 'craziness' of faiths (blog) and they mentioned a lot about mormons.
in short they talked about the socially accepted craziness (as opposed to actual mental illness) of mainstream , culturally accepted faiths v those that are relatively new.
we see scientology as more crazy than catholicism if we fall into the trap of judging without consideration but when examined all religions have very crazy elements.
-
-
Qcmbr
I agree that dangerous religions are a different question , a religion like early Mormonism and the Heavens Gate group are extremely dangerous ( Mormonism almost tipped into full scale totalitarian hell) whereas some seem far more benign. The underlying justifications and regular practice is just as 'crazy' even if not harmful ( Mormon knickers never killed anything more serious than the odd romantic evening.) I find believing in a supernatural voices just as bonkers as sacrifing a pigeon to divine the future etc.
-
46
Crazy Religions
by Qcmbr ini was reading a good article regarding the relative 'craziness' of faiths (blog) and they mentioned a lot about mormons.
in short they talked about the socially accepted craziness (as opposed to actual mental illness) of mainstream , culturally accepted faiths v those that are relatively new.
we see scientology as more crazy than catholicism if we fall into the trap of judging without consideration but when examined all religions have very crazy elements.
-
-
Qcmbr
Did you read the article?
-
46
Crazy Religions
by Qcmbr ini was reading a good article regarding the relative 'craziness' of faiths (blog) and they mentioned a lot about mormons.
in short they talked about the socially accepted craziness (as opposed to actual mental illness) of mainstream , culturally accepted faiths v those that are relatively new.
we see scientology as more crazy than catholicism if we fall into the trap of judging without consideration but when examined all religions have very crazy elements.
-
-
Qcmbr
I was reading a good article regarding the relative 'craziness' of faiths (Blog) and they mentioned a lot about Mormons. In short they talked about the socially accepted craziness (as opposed to actual mental illness) of mainstream , culturally accepted faiths V those that are relatively new. We see Scientology as more crazy than Catholicism IF we fall into the trap of judging without consideration but when examined all religions have very crazy elements. Mormons have weird underwear but Catholics cannibalise magic bread to flesh wafers. JWs don't take blood but Hindus bathe in a sh*t filled, dirty river. The author makes the very valid point that our craziness extends well beyond religious observance and the example of clothing is pointed to where we see Victorian's tight, health endangering , organ damaging corsets as crazy but then encourage today's women to wear high heels which damage their feet. I found it quite a good reminder that craziness is all around us and we quite often engage in it without much thought, plus all religions and faiths are fundamentally equally crazy.
Amen.
-
25
Didn't Jesus symbolically give a blood transfusion for all of mankind?
by yadda yadda 2 injesus poured out his life blood, his soul, on behalf of mankind.
the wine taken at the memorial of christ's death represents this life, given as a sacrifice to atone for adamic sins.
jesus said that unless you eat of his flesh and drink of his blood, you have no life in yourself.
-
-
Qcmbr
There is no need to twist this into some contorted pseudo magical world of faith and spirit. Its generally only JWs and ex JWs who even see blood transfusion as an issue. It's not unless you have a rare blood type or have a cummunicable blood disease.
The concept of a blood sacrifice for sin is abhorrent and mature, grown up people should understand that the very concept is vile and immoral. There is no glory in the pretend concept of arbitrary sin being paid for by the real blood sacrifice of anyone. The myth of Christ is nothing to do with blood transfusions or magical kingdoms, it is simply a way for people to control other people and to soothe their conscious minds regarding the inevitability of death and the fear of pain.
I ache when I see otherwise sensible people give themselves so completely to a crazy delusion that they are incapable of seeing why what they say is bonkers and then allow their baser selves free reign via their delusion. I don't want to shun you but my god demands it.
-
57
MIT Survey on science, religion and origins
by Pterist ininteresting read and graph:.
*****i'd been warned.
a friend cautioned me that if we went ahead and posted our mit survey on science, religion and origins, i'd get inundated with hate-mail from religious fundamentalists who believe our universe to be less than 10,000 years old.
-
-
Qcmbr
Faith requires primacy over all other forms of knowledge. When formed it normally reflects the current scientific knowledge ( tec this is why you can delude yourself that you are in agreement with current science, you simply lifted current knowledge, mixed it with current morality and then added in the magic) but faith has no logical route to update itself without makong its former self look foolish. We have Catholics who were once at the forefront of science now having to recant young earth thinking in favour of current factual knowledge. The modern day mystic is on love with higgs bosuns and quantum effects and are scrabbling to say that of course thats what was true all along. Faith filled believers are darwinian to the core throwing untold millions of former beliefs under the cart wheel while boldly claiming that this time theyve got it right. Lock the faithful in a room with their god and their real knowledge ceases.
Roll on the day when faith is recognised as the intellectual millstone it is.
-
153
If there is a God why didn't he sign our DNA
by scotoma intodays scientists can and do insert their trademark into dna.. why couldn't jehovah anticipate scientists learning this technique and stumbling across a strand that says "human by yhwh"?.
that would have answered a lot of questions.. he could have even included a model number human2.0.
-
-
Qcmbr
AG if it helps your understanding replace the name Joseph Smith in my above comments.
Returning to the OP I think we could reasonably suspect that any advanced being who could have influenced mankind , Im thinking alien rather than god, could have left a calling card to he discovered when we reached a certain level of technological advance. DNA would be the perfect place to do it as well.