Drazjan — Drazjan

Good points.

Christianity and all religions started as pagan.

Orthodoxy just says that the pagan religion got bigger and became the mainstream.

Catholics have always used idolatry. — Drazjan

I do not see it quite that way although that is certainly what they are today.

The literal reading of myths is what ruined Christianity. Before that, they made sense.

I hope you can see how intelligent the ancients were as compared to the mental trash that modern preachers and theists are using with the literal reading of myths.

https://bigthink.com/videos/what-is-god-2-2

Further.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/03132009/watch.html

Rabbi Hillel, the older contemporary of Jesus, said that when asked to sum up the whole of Jewish teaching, while he stood on one leg, said, "The Golden Rule. That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the Torah. And everything else is only commentary. Now, go and study it."

Please listen as to what is said about the literal reading of myths.

"Origen, the great second or third century Greek commentator on the Bible said that it is absolutely impossible to take these texts literally. You simply cannot do so. And he said, "God has put these sort of conundrums and paradoxes in so that we are forced to seek a deeper meaning."

Matt 7;12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

This is how early Gnostic Christians view the transition from reading myths properly to destructive literal reading and idol worship.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oR02ciandvg&feature=BFa&list=PLCBF574D

Regards
DL

effortless. — Ciceronianus the White

Oky dokly, but I can think of nothing more boring. It would be like a perpetual re-run.

Regards
DL

The two figures you refer to are in no way the same thing. — uncanni

They are to most Christians, Trinitarians and all.

Neither are real to me, so I will not argue against your point.

Regards
DL

1. If someone loves someone without that love being reciprocated, then the person is stalking their love, which doesn’t constitute love. — James Moore

I would like to raise an objection to your first premise. First, there are many counterexamples of this not being the case. What about a mother who loves the child in her womb without having even met the child. Is that mother all of a sudden a stalker? Surely you wouldn’t think so. — James Moore

She is a stalker if she, like Jesus, tells that baby that it will suffer purposelessly in hell if the child does not love his mother back just so.

I do see a reciprocal love there. At least whenever the baby of zygote develops it's instincts.
The mother insures the both her health and the baby's, while the baby does its best to reach it's best possible end.

Candide.
"It is demonstrable that things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for as all things have been created for some end, they must necessarily be created for the best end.”

However, according to scripture we are “all His children.” — James Moore

According to scriptures, there are also real talking serpents and donkeys, but yes, when in fantasy mode, the bible says that.

Strange then that our Father condemned us all unjustly. Then again, we Gnostic Christians have always called that prick a demiurge.

What about the teenage fans of One Direction? — James Moore

Lots of reciprocity there. Artists give art and those who like it give their cash and adoration pay back.

2. God loves everyone, without that love being reciprocated. — James Moore

That first is demonstrably false, unless you think you could murder someone you loved.

Hell. The bible begins with god murdering A & E after god deciding to have Jesus needlessly sacrificed/murdered.

If god love us all, he sure shows a satanic kind of love.

Regards
DL

Reproduction of Evil: A Clinical and Cultural Perspective — uncanni

The author thinks religion comes first and I doubt that I would gain much from her perspective as I have no problem with human to human evil. What we do is no worse than any Alpha male or female would do or any animal looking for its place in our various hierarchies.

Do let me know if you read anything that might refute my naturalists views. If she says that god gave us free will, she is a liar, both on the creation side and the evolution side.

We have no choice in having to compete and cooperate as the situations change, unless you choose to not compete.

Everyone has the same aptitude? What does that mean? — uncanni

All humans all have the same human character traits. We bring them out as required.
You focus on the evil while ignoring that we do the good a lot more than the evil. Are all human character traits shared, more or less, by all normal humans?

Regards
DL

While I agree that it is the only "world" we know of, what do we know of what is possible? — ZhouBoTong

We know that this is the best of all possible worlds because it is the only possible world, given our history and physics.

As to what is possible, many things, but only to the future.

Isn't morality put simply, "how we ought to behave"? — ZhouBoTong

Not if one side does not agree. Slavery, many found immoral, yet at the wrong time, if you said so, yuou might be killed. Slavery was quite moral for a long time. It basically still is, depending on how you see your position as compared to our oligarch owners.

Regards
DL

If you have free will, — PhilosophyAttempter

Good post.

This does not apply to Christians as their bible says that they have no free will.
God controls their ability to believe or not.

God harden hearts against his own wish to be believed to be god.
In 2 Corinthians 3;14 - 15 God hardens Jewish hearts against their believing in Jesus as their messiah.
John 12;39-40 says about the same. The same applies to Romans 11;25, 2 Corinthians 4;3-4,

God is simply modulating his goodness — TheMadFool

God is quite good at that, especially when he is doing genocide or infanticide.

That prick is not fit to modulate his goodness, if he has any.

As to M.A.D. So far so good, but you will note that that is about our evolution of trying to find the most powerful/fittest nation, with the prayer that a Trump idiot will not go to M.A.D.

Regards
DL

And hate eventually leads again to love. — Metaphyzik

Show how please.

The main question for me is are we taking abstractly about ideas here? — Metaphyzik

No. Science and a proven theory of how our instincts guide our morals

If we stay in theoria then hate may be simply a state of patterns that are about to shift. Then the question of what brings it about is kind of silly. — Metaphyzik

Hmmm.
Divorce came to mind, but if you think the reasons for it are silly, you re ignoring the misery of the couples that may want to know why things are falling apart in their lives.

Regards
DL

How do you know that you were born with these and didn't acquire them as the result of trauma and abuse? — uncanni

I think we are all born with an almost unlimited potential in terms of human aptitude. We will do as we must to survive.

But yes, my abuse is what jacked up my selfish gene to helping form my a criminal mind and delinquent aptitude.

Regards
DL

Furthermore, why do you conclude hate is triggered by something or is necessary for your belief of yin and yang theme. — Seneca Advocate

Hate is an emotion and all our emotions are triggered by something or someone.

Why do you conclude that some hate without a trigger? That seems really strange.

I feel that hatreds only feel our souls with negative energy and conducts us in a wrong way. — Seneca Advocate

Oh my. The hate of slavery ended slavery in the U.S. and you seem to think that a bad thing.

How about Rosa parks?
Did her negative energy against segregation lead her the wrong way?

Therefore, you should choose not to hate anything or anyone; and just disregard it. — Seneca Advocate

No thanks.

For evil to grow, all we all need do is as you suggest, and not hate evil.

If you think you should live by the Golden Rule, change the labels in this quote to women, minorities, gays or children being brainwashed by religions and it shows what we should be thinking and doing for each other.

"First they came for the Jews, but I did nothing because I'm not a Jew. Then they came for the socialists, but I did nothing because I'm not a socialist. Then they came for the Catholics, but I did nothing because I'm not a Catholic. Finally, they came for me, but by then there was no one left to help me." – Pastor Father Niemoller (1946)”

Regards
DL

When we have the courage to risk loss, lack, pain or humiliation, there is no need to hate - that’s just fear talking. — Possibility

Hate, like evil, has a good and an evil side and like Yin and Yang, compliment each other. They are not in opposition.

If you look around, you will see a lot more good going on than evil and a lot more love than hate being expressed. In fact, we are too good to each other.

As the Christian hymn says, Adam's sin was a happy fault and necessary to god's plan.

Strange that Christians call furthering god's plan as a fall.

You seem to be doing the same with nature.

Regards
DL

In a very loose sense what we hate are morally prohibited. — TheMadFool

??

Too loose for me. Tighten it up with a couple of examples please.

Regards
DL

By 'nutters' I mean the brainwashed persons who vote against their own interest to benefit a very few, very nasty capitalists. — iolo

In oligarchies, that is the way of things.

Regards
DL

You hate only because something bad's been done to you. — TheMadFool

Not if, like me, you try to live by the Golden Rule. I do accept that if done to me, I would likely have a higher degree of hate.

Regards
DL

Hate is, it seems, either silly or foolish. — TheMadFool

If you walk in on your wife being raped, is it silly and foolish for you to hate the rapist?

Regards
DL

I think that the quoted statement is a sign of hatred and intolerance of a class of people based on your personal prejudice. — T Clark

Absolutely and I proudly plead guilty as charged.

If you think it moral to tolerate those who do not tolerate gays, women and other religions as equal, and refuse to grant all equality, then you are showing a corrupted moral sense.

Give this a listen if you have the time.

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1zqvjy

Regards
DL

You wrote that you "love a lot." I just commented that I have not seen evidence of that in your time here on the forum. — T Clark

Perhaps you just are not looking the right way.

Love gives birth to hate.

Where does hate come from if not born of love?

Regards
DL

I also think it is wrong. — T Clark

Do you see anything wrong or inaccurate in the following. Sure, some of it is pure opinion, but I can back it up all you want.

Both Christianity and Islam, slave holding ideologies, have basically developed into intolerant, homophobic and misogynous religions. Both religions have grown themselves by the sword instead of good deeds and continue with their immoral ways in spite of secular law showing them the moral ways.

Jesus said we would know his people by their works and deeds. That means Jesus would not recognize Christians and Muslims as his people, and neither do I. Jesus would call Christianity and Islam abominations.

Gnostic Christians did in the past, and I am proudly continuing that tradition and honest irrefutable evaluation based on morality.

https://topdocumentaryfilms.com/theft-values/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxoxPapPxXk

Humanity centered religions, good? Yes. Esoteric ecumenist Gnostic Christianity being the best of these.

Supernaturally based religions, evil? Yes. Islam and Christianity being the worst of these.

Regards
DL

Well if evil is NOT evil, then what evils are we blaming (or not) on god (imaginary or not)? — ZhouBoTong

I did not say that evil was not evil. It is, obviously.
I said that the evils in our evolution are required if we are to not go extinct.
Compare the evil in our extinction with the evils we produce to maintain our evolution and you will see why we have to tolerate the evils that our evolution forces upon us in our seeking the fittest.

then what evils are we blaming (or not) on god (imaginary or not)? — ZhouBoTong

Some people blame god for all evil while others blame anything but god. In the way I think, there is no conflict between god and nature/evolution.

We are evolving perfection and the best we can all be at any given point in time given entropy. That is why it is true that we live in the best of all possible worlds, given that it is the only possible world.

I can't help but pick on any minor contradictions that I see (I am not even saying the contradictions definitely exist, but they stand out to me). — ZhouBoTong

Been there and done that. Then I became more of an esoteric ecumenist and boosted my analogical thinking so as to try to keep my knit picking to a minimum.

Regards
DL

Who cares about the nutters? It's our families the sane are worried about. Why should we let a drunken mob destroy their futures? — iolo

I don't know who you are referring to with your "nutters" and "drunken mob".

At present, in both the U.S. and England, I see all sides as nutters who put their affiliations ahead of their moral and social responsibilities.

I believe in a unified world but it has to be so voluntarily and without pressure.

Regards
DL

Scripture is the interpretation of mans interaction with said "GOD" but GOD is neither good nor bad. God is unfathomable. God is All. — Shelley Robinson

Most religions and lying preachers star from that point, I agree. Unknowable, unfathomable and works in mysterious ways is what I hear.

Then the same lying preachers start rhyming off what they know of the unknowable, fathom of the unfathomable and can somehow take the mystery out of god.

Obviously all the preachers for the supernatural gods are lying preachers.

Right?

Regards
DL

You say "Christians are always trying to absolve God of moral culpability" then claim that "Without us doing some of both [good AND evil], we would likely go extinct.". This is clearly self-refuting isn't it? On one hand God is culpable and on the other hand you say evil is necessary for evolution which is letting god off the hook. — TheMadFool

I do not see anything that self-refutes.
I will speak to what you might be seeing a bit but you might have to point it out more clearly.

God is not let off the hook if one believes in such an imaginary entity. He would have created evolution and would be culpable for that formula being good or evil. Most religious blame us while ignoring that we can only be and do what a god would have put into our natures.

[deleted]

Regards
DL

looming disaster. — iolo

Not to the Brexit crowd who voted to take the hit for the benefits of having control of their borders, immigration and governance unhampered by yet another one of our way too many controlling body.

We all already pay too much for the garbage governance that our politicians are producing.

Regards
DL

The whole idea being to switch the role of emotions from controlling us to us controlling them. — TheMadFool

Emotions are responses to stimuli.
Usually intelligent responses, although they can produce irrational responses as well.

We do need self control, but, for instance, with our eco system, our lack of emotion for the Earth, has likely doomed us to extinction, if the U.N. stats are sound.

Most emotions are spontaneous. Can you control your thinking enough to control your emotions?

I don't think I can.
When I see one of the kids heading for a fall, I cannot help but have my emotions feel for him.

Empathy and altruism are instincts.
I do not think we can control our empathy and altruism as well as we would like. In fact, our lack of control might have let our emotions go too far to the point that we should tone it down to help save the planet. We may be too nice to each other and go for nice instead of practical. That is not intelligent.

Regards
DL

“the kingdom of God is within you” & “I AM THAT I AM” which suggests God is not something outside you but within you. — Amore

The vast majority in the West, where I live, are Christian and Muslim.

What gender do you give to Yahweh and Allah?

Regards
DL

this is a concern.... — 3017amen

[deleted]

You are right that I have an agenda.

Both Christianity and Islam, slave holding ideologies, have basically developed into intolerant, homophobic and misogynous religions. Both religions have grown themselves by the sword instead of good deeds and continue with their immoral ways in spite of secular law showing them the moral ways.

Jesus said we would know his people by their works and deeds. That means Jesus would not recognize Christians and Muslims as his people, and neither do I. Jesus would call Christianity and Islam abominations.

Gnostic Christians did in the past, and I am proudly continuing that tradition and honest irrefutable evaluation based on morality.

https://topdocumentaryfilms.com/theft-values/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxoxPapPxXk

Humanity centered religions, good? Yes. Esoteric ecumenist Gnostic Christianity being the best of these.

Supernaturally based religions, evil? Yes. Islam and Christianity being the worst of these.

Regards
DL

First – an objection to the inference in premise 1. You are claiming that the reason that God does not show himself is out of fear. You have not offered any evidence to support this claim. — philorelkook

Evidence on any supernatural god is impossible to have, unless you have a way of accessing some supernatural realm.

Do you have such a way?

6. God shows himself subtly. — philorelkook

Show when and where.

Regards
DL

We’ve established that if you believe mankind should have free will, then God cannot clearly show himself to the extent that the evidence would be insurmountable. — philorelkook

Reality has a way of being reality and yes, it has evidence.

Do you have something against knowing the truth?

We, --- have not established that. Our free will has nothing to do with god showing himself or not.
This question is more about his free will.

Regards
DL

I am interested in understanding how others understand 'sin'. What is 'sin'? What criteria is used to designate an act, body etc. as 'sinful'? Is ones idea of 'sin' in accordance with a "belief" system (ie. a religion)? Or is it derived and/or arrived at internally? — A Gnostic Agnostic

I see theology and philosophy as basically the same as they both seek the best rules and laws to believe and live by. Having said that ---

I see the word sin as synonymous with crime.

Without a victim or someone who has a complaint against certain acts, then there is no sin or crime.

Many say that when we sin against someone, we also sin against god. This is garbage thinking.

No one can make a victim out of god and that is why he does not have the right to forgive before a victim does.

Further, if you or I forgive a sin or crime, god nor the government has a further role to play.

Regards
DL

TheMadFool — TheMadFool

I do not have a POE problem.

I think the little bit of evil we do to each other is overshadowed by our need to continue evolving.

Let me give a slightly longer version that I wrote for Christians.
They tend to run from it.
I am not always sure if it is because they are such poor apologists or that they just cannot break the logic trail and give up on me.

Perhaps you can tell me why Christians run from it.

===========
Can you help but do evil? I do not see how. Do you?
And if you cannot, why would God punish you?

Christians are always trying to absolve God of moral culpability in the fall by putting forward their free will argument and placing all the blame on mankind.
That usually sounds like ----God gave us free will and it was our free willed choices that caused our fall. Hence God is not blameworthy. Such statements simply avoid God's culpability as the author and creator of human nature.

Free will is only the ability to choose. It is not an explanation why anyone would want to choose "A" or "B" (bad or good action). An explanation for why Eve would even have the nature of "being vulnerable to being easily swayed by a serpent" and "desiring to eat a forbidden fruit" must lie in the nature God gave Eve in the first place. Hence God is culpable for deliberately making humans with a nature-inclined-to-fall, and "free will" means nothing as a response to this problem.

If all do evil/sin by nature then, the evil/sin nature is dominant. If not, we would have at least some who would not do evil/sin. Can we then help but do evil? I do not see how. Do you?

Having said the above for the God that I do not believe in, I am a Gnostic Christian naturalist, let me tell you that evil and sin is all human generated and in this sense, I agree with Christians, but for completely different reasons. Evil is mankind’s responsibility and not some imaginary God’s. Free will is something that can only be taken. Free will cannot be given not even by a God unless it has been forcibly withheld.

Much has been written to explain evil and sin but I see as a natural part of evolution.

Consider.
First, let us eliminate what some see as evil. Natural disasters. These are unthinking occurrences and are neither good nor evil. There is no intent to do evil even as victims are created. Without intent to do evil, no act should be called evil.
In secular courts, this is called mens rea. Latin for an evil mind or intent and without it, the court will not find someone guilty even if they know that they are the perpetrator of the act.

Evil then is only human to human when they know they are doing evil and intend harm.

As evolving creatures, all we ever do, and ever can do, is compete or cooperate.
Cooperation we would see as good as there are no victims created. Competition would be seen as evil as it creates a victim. We all are either cooperating, doing good, or competing, doing evil, at all times.

Without us doing some of both, we would likely go extinct.

This, to me, explains why there is evil in the world quite well.

Be you a believer in nature, evolution or God, you should see that what Christians see as something to blame, evil, we should see that what we have, competition, deserves a huge thanks for being available to us. Wherever it came from, God or nature, without evolution we would go extinct. We must do good and evil.

There is no conflict between nature and God on this issue. This is how things are and should be. We all must do what some will think is evil as we compete and create losers to this competition.

This link speak to theistic evolution.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/pope-would-you-accept-evolution-and-big-bang-180953166/?no-ist

If theistic evolution is true, then the myth of Eden should be read as a myth and there is not really any original sin.

Doing evil then is actually forced on us by evolution and the need to survive. Our default position is to cooperate or to do good. I offer this clip as proof of this. You will note that we default to good as it is better for survival.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBW5vdhr_PA

Can you help but do evil? I do not see how. Do you?
And if you cannot, why would God punish you?

Regards
DL

You certainly don't come across that way. My understanding of the Gnostics is that they endorsed Love and Spirituality.... — 3017amen

Absolutely.

I try hard to show Christians how to love and express their spirituality by showing them why they should not be homophobic and misogynous not believe that a genocidal god is good.

I hope you have the moral sense to do the same. It is the Christian thing to do even if they have forgotten Jesus' teachings.

Proverbs 3:12 For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.

I love a lot and that brings out my hate against the misguided causes of Christian hate.

Regards
DL

Oh I think I'm understanding now. Are you an angry Atheist? — 3017amen

You show a poor understanding.

The Gnostic Christian ideology is superior to atheism, although they are doing better now that they have started opening atheist churches.

It took atheists long enough to start understanding why religions form in the first place and they have finally started thinking of their children above themselves.

Now if we would all do that in terms of the eco system we are passing down to them. All we are doing is insuring that our children will go extinct or face greater challenges than we have.

Regards
DL

Bridget Eagles — Bridget Eagles

Christianity has worked hard to take the feminine out of god right from the time they usurped the Jewish god and made him theirs, even though Yahweh was seen by the Jews to be androgynous, just like most of the Eastern gods.

We created them in our image and called them adam. adam, not capitalized means society or the tribe.

Note how in this version, women are called adam.

I also have a link that shows that the grammatical breakdown of Elohim, Yahweh to me, shows god as androgynous.

Start at th3 9.3 mark.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TndLzFZI9A

Regards
DL

Christianity doesn't endorse oppressing women, but treats them fairly. — Shamshir

You do know that Christianity, primarily, kept women from voting for centuries. in the West, right?

Why would you think Christians thought women equal when in reality they were thought too inferior to vote?

Regards
DL

Unless one equates hate to a mere dislike of something, but this denotation doesn't seem right to me. — javra

Ditto as well as with like versus love.

But this bias can be maintained in the absence of hate for other - and none of the babies or children exhibited signs of hatred in their choices. — javra

They do indeed by not liking the evil puppets.

In duality, Yin does not exist without Yang.

Regards
DL

Are you a Christian? LOL — 3017amen

No. Hell no.

Please do not insult me. [deleted]

Regards
DL

Dude, with all due respect, get over it man. — 3017amen

I will get over it when the mainstream religions are no longer homophobic and misogynous and stop denying half of the worlds population equality.

You go ahead and ignore that much evil if you like. I will not.

[deleted]

Regards
DL

Of course you mean far-right Fundamentalist's, no? At least that seems to be the target of your interminable axe to grind... . — 3017amen

Yes. The more to the right you are, the less of a decent human being you will likely be. IMO.

If you do not have the same axe to grind, you are not living by the Golden Rule.

If you think you should live by the Golden Rule, change the labels in this quote to women, minorities, gays or children being brainwashed by religions and it shows what we should be thinking and doing for each other.

"First they came for the Jews, but I did nothing because I'm not a Jew. Then they came for the socialists, but I did nothing because I'm not a socialist. Then they came for the Catholics, but I did nothing because I'm not a Catholic. Finally, they came for me, but by then there was no one left to help me." – Pastor Father Niemoller (1946)”
— 3017amen

Free yourself, become a Christian Existentialist like me! (In layman's terms: Spirituality.) — 3017amen

I have passed that stage thanks to my apotheosis. Spirituality is a two sided sword and mine swings both ways while yours only seems to have on cutting side.

Regards
DL

The idea of Hell is another Bible translation error. So you're okay! — 3017amen

Not to the church's lying preachers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF6I5VSZVqc

Regards
DL