Thoughts on Organized Religion

a reply to: Astyanax

No conspiracy. I note a lack of education as a problem in society.

Besides, they did a good job discrediting themselves. It was why I walked away. No help needed on my part.

I believe in education. I think we should also start working on a common language too. Sooner the better.

a reply to: pheonix358

Good point, I will need to consider this.

My thought was that said hellfire is a core of two religions. Wouldn't limiting discussion of the religion be contrary to freedom of religion and speech? I would have difficulty with accepting this. I do see the reasoning.

I figure change in public acceptance of said fables via education a much better path. It allows for slow dissolution of the fiction, without stepping on anyone's toes. Eg, it fades away on its own.

Example, The Flying Spaghetti Monster making its way into public discussion. And that was just an early internet meme.

a reply to: Not Authorized

Seems to me that Orwell and Ghandi were both right...

a reply to: Murgatroid
Note they both said: "The Truth".

NOT: What you believe to be the truth, or your version of the truth.

a reply to: Murgatroid

I agree with your pictures of the quotes. They seem, how shall we say, applicable to my posts.

Thanks for sharing.

I was indoctrinated into the Christian church at a very young age, probably around five or so.
As I got older, I started to have doubts about everything that has to do with religion of any kind.
I was very into sciences of all kinds and asked a lot of questions.
When I joined the military, I found many other like minded individuals who didn't believe in a god or anything.
They only believed what they could observe, and things that had concrete evidence to it.
I realized that was how I felt all along.
I feel like we need to raise our children to only believe what they can see, touch, smell, etc.
They need to question everything, and not just accept everything they are taught/told.
The day we stop questioning is the day humanity truly dies.
Unfortunately all religions are poison, in my eyes.
It makes people numb and never think for themselves. They believe what they are told, and if they don't they are punished.
Religious people are set in their ways, and will not likely change.
It was very hard for me to break out of the habits and beliefs, and leave it behind.
Without trying to sound overly dramatic, I consider myself one of the lucky ones.
In order to get to a secular society, it will be how we raise our children and they raise their children...
It will not come overnight or through throwing facts everywhere.
It will happen over generations of people being taught to think for themselves and question questionable things.
Religion will always exist. It's how it gets dealt with that is key. If it can be ignored and set aside, it could happen...

originally posted by: Not Authorized
a reply to: pheonix358

I like most of these ideas. 503c status needs to go. We could come up with plenty of reasons as to why. No reason to go into it here.

As for hate speech and eternal damnation. How do you reconcile that and freedom of speech? I don't agree with content, but, it is a right.

I would think a paradigm shift surrounding public perception of said talk, would be more beneficial and not limit freedoms. This is where I feel education is important. It is hard to talk doomfire to someone, if the person is educated and knows how to point out it is fiction before that point is even reached.

I absolutely agree that churches should not be given tax exempt status. On a personal level, I always speak up when someone proselytizes, no matter where I am and I encourage others to do so, too. The proselytizers are always shocked that someone dares to counter them. It's time they start expecting it.

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: Metallicus

I am not part of an organized religion, but I find this sort of thinking to be frightening. When you begin to take a section of the population and try to 'exterminate' them because you disagree with them I will be drawing a line in the sand against you and your planned persecution.

Exactly. The OP is proposing a conspiracy to discredit religion.

Speaking as an atheist and a liberal, I call the proposal obnoxious.

Religion discredits itself. She's pointing it out. There's a difference.

originally posted by: pheonix358
a reply to: Not Authorized

As for hate speech and eternal damnation. How do you reconcile that and freedom of speech? I don't agree with content, but, it is a right.

Answer this please, do you have right to tell your neighbor to turn down the music or you will burn down his house in an effort to burn his family alive.

Is that free speech or is that threatening life?

Try sending the President a threat to burn him over a fire and see how far the concept of free speech goes.

It seems to me that Religion has a free pass to threaten harm for an eternity if you don't join my club. This is usually referred to as stand over tactics.

P

You make an excellent point. Many fundamentalist groups use deception and talk of love to recruit and threats and intimidation to retain members. That's what cults do and that's what they are. The threats and intimidation they use against members, in addition to disfellowship and shunning, include threats of separation from The Father and torture (the eternal kind). I wonder what would happen if someone threatened a child with separation from his father and promised that he would be tortured if he didn't follow a set of rules. Hm. Interesting legal question.

a reply to: Murgatroid

The religions more or less miss represent the divine and therefor fail in knowing it creating an idol of the real deal. Fear of the unknown is the tool used to keep humanity spiritually uninformed. When there is understanding on both sides of "the veil" there is suddenly understanding and symbiosis.

Those who do not have fear can test different spiritual practices and know by what gives you the connection/love feeling experience. Like using scientific try test methods to see what works and not.

But if you are not omniscient (I assume you are not like me) there is the difference between subjective(ego) view and "objective all knowing truth that includes knowledge of all subjective(ego) view". Some try to achieve the most "objective all knowing truth" they can while minimizing the subjective view.

Is humanity ready for a psychic/telepathic/empath era where synchronicity/entanglement is understood and experienced by all? People like Richard Dawkins are clearly not ready for it.

And what is the first step in this if humans are ready for it? Kundalini/Chi/light flowing thru all human bodies? Will humanity accept it or reject it? Can people handle the change in their consciousness not having the taught indoctrination to guide them?

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: Murgatroid
Note they both said: "The Truth".

NOT: What you believe to be the truth, or your version of the truth.

We CAN'T solve it. The only one who can is God. He hates religion even more than we do. When he gets done, there will be no more religion... PERIOD.

But if I do bring this up to Meta level understanding he is correct from my point of view.

If a person cannot achieve symbiosis with the divine the person cannot know symbiosis with the divine and both parties must be seeking symbiosis to achieve it. Human seeking divinity "god" and divine seeking unity with humanity.

If you do have objective truth on how to achieve highest level of symbiosis then religion (being subjective view) become unnecessary as a guide to anything since you already know the path.

a reply to: Not Authorized

Religion Isn't The Problem It's The People That Believe In Said Religion. So Even If You Get Rid Of Religion Your Still Left With The Problem.

originally posted by: LittleByLittle
a reply to: Murgatroid

The religions more or less miss represent the divine and therefor fail in knowing it creating an idol of the real deal. Fear of the unknown is the tool used to keep humanity spiritually uninformed. When there is understanding on both sides of "the veil" there is suddenly understanding and symbiosis.

Those who do not have fear can test different spiritual practices and know by what gives you the connection/love feeling experience. Like using scientific try test methods to see what works and not.

But if you are not omniscient (I assume you are not like me) there is the difference between subjective(ego) view and "objective all knowing truth that includes knowledge of all subjective(ego) view". Some try to achieve the most "objective all knowing truth" they can while minimizing the subjective view.

Is humanity ready for a psychic/telepathic/empath era where synchronicity/entanglement is understood and experienced by all? People like Richard Dawkins are clearly not ready for it.

And what is the first step in this if humans are ready for it? Kundalini/Chi/light flowing thru all human bodies? Will humanity accept it or reject it? Can people handle the change in their consciousness not having the taught indoctrination to guide them?

"(t)he divine"? "(t)he real deal"? It would appear that you are in possession of the facts regarding this alleged divine real deal. Can you share these facts and the testable evidence upon which the facts are based?

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: LittleByLittle
a reply to: Murgatroid

The religions more or less miss represent the divine and therefor fail in knowing it creating an idol of the real deal. Fear of the unknown is the tool used to keep humanity spiritually uninformed. When there is understanding on both sides of "the veil" there is suddenly understanding and symbiosis.

Those who do not have fear can test different spiritual practices and know by what gives you the connection/love feeling experience. Like using scientific try test methods to see what works and not.

But if you are not omniscient (I assume you are not like me) there is the difference between subjective(ego) view and "objective all knowing truth that includes knowledge of all subjective(ego) view". Some try to achieve the most "objective all knowing truth" they can while minimizing the subjective view.

Is humanity ready for a psychic/telepathic/empath era where synchronicity/entanglement is understood and experienced by all? People like Richard Dawkins are clearly not ready for it.

And what is the first step in this if humans are ready for it? Kundalini/Chi/light flowing thru all human bodies? Will humanity accept it or reject it? Can people handle the change in their consciousness not having the taught indoctrination to guide them?

"(t)he divine"? "(t)he real deal"? It would appear that you are in possession of the facts regarding this alleged divine real deal. Can you share these facts and the testable evidence upon which the facts are based?

It is already in the post revealed of what I perceive as the a first step in a symbiosis with something across "the veil". Kundalini/Chi/light energized state flowing thru the body. Knowing and experiencing that the world is not what we are told it is. From my point of view something with that kind of loving feeling is the real deal. But then I am one of the souls who have a big problem of not feeling happy and very disconnected in a human body that is not energized. It is only in energized state that my body feels like it is supposed to do from my point of view.

But since I am subjective I will not know higher leveled experiences that exists elsewhere in the "objective all knowing truth" that I have not yet experienced. I can only talk and know about what I have myself experienced.

"To much confusion"

Its not FAITH thats in trouble...
Its ORGANIZED maffiabeaviour.
If you wanna belive in a rock, fine...
Just dont try to FORCE me into that
belief...

Organized Religion should be banned

originally posted by: LittleByLittle

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: LittleByLittle
a reply to: Murgatroid

The religions more or less miss represent the divine and therefor fail in knowing it creating an idol of the real deal. Fear of the unknown is the tool used to keep humanity spiritually uninformed. When there is understanding on both sides of "the veil" there is suddenly understanding and symbiosis.

Those who do not have fear can test different spiritual practices and know by what gives you the connection/love feeling experience. Like using scientific try test methods to see what works and not.

But if you are not omniscient (I assume you are not like me) there is the difference between subjective(ego) view and "objective all knowing truth that includes knowledge of all subjective(ego) view". Some try to achieve the most "objective all knowing truth" they can while minimizing the subjective view.

Is humanity ready for a psychic/telepathic/empath era where synchronicity/entanglement is understood and experienced by all? People like Richard Dawkins are clearly not ready for it.

And what is the first step in this if humans are ready for it? Kundalini/Chi/light flowing thru all human bodies? Will humanity accept it or reject it? Can people handle the change in their consciousness not having the taught indoctrination to guide them?

"(t)he divine"? "(t)he real deal"? It would appear that you are in possession of the facts regarding this alleged divine real deal. Can you share these facts and the testable evidence upon which the facts are based?

It is already in the post revealed of what I perceive as the a first step in a symbiosis with something across "the veil". Kundalini/Chi/light energized state flowing thru the body. Knowing and experiencing that the world is not what we are told it is. From my point of view something with that kind of loving feeling is the real deal. But then I am one of the souls who have a big problem of not feeling happy and very disconnected in a human body that is not energized. It is only in energized state that my body feels like it is supposed to do from my point of view.

But since I am subjective I will not know higher leveled experiences that exists elsewhere in the "objective all knowing truth" that I have not yet experienced. I can only talk and know about what I have myself experienced.

The topic under discussion is organized religion and the problems that many people have with it. Those problems result when organized religions insist that they are in possession of absolute fact and you'd damn well better agree with them or else. Don't mimic the worst of organized religion by insisting that you are in possession of absolute fact. Your modified presentation (ie. what you "perceive") is more palatable.

originally posted by: Tangerine

The topic under discussion is organized religion and the problems that many people have with it. Those problems result when organized religions insist that they are in possession of absolute fact and you'd damn well better agree with them or else. Don't mimic the worst of organized religion by insisting that you are in possession of absolute fact. Your modified presentation (ie. what you "perceive") is more palatable.

I get your point but at the same time if you are not allowing people to explain their experience you will never get the spiritual explained and therefor religion will be the source that can claim it is objective truth even if it is subjective.

a reply to: Not Authorized

There's a critical feature about the birth of our Top 3 organised religions that people pay no attention to. It's the fact that the major figures experienced auditory and visual hallucinations that we'd dismiss out-of-hand at any other time in the past 2 centuries.

Not many people are willing to lift up that particular rock.

Here we are in 2014 and the Middle East is at war with itself, with Israel, with us in the West. We in the West have been in a Christian-based ideological war with the Middle East since at least 1998. We've fought Catholic against Protestant during the Renaissance and again in Ireland in the 20th Century.

Isn't that a lot of disorder, conflict and lives lost over the private whisperings of hallucinations so long ago?

I'm agnostic myself and not beyond appreciating that there's more to existence than we know right now. But wow, we humans put a lot of store in commentaries from sources we can't confirm or check up on.

a reply to: Not Authorized

Well I am of the opinion that organized religion is the greatest blight on humanity in history.

Your mileage may vary, however.

a reply to: Tangerine

Religion discredits itself. She's pointing it out. There's a difference.

Pointing it out is the problem. Get a group together in order to proclaim the true light of rationality to the god-trodden masses through education and reasoned persuasion and what do you have? A conspiracy to disredit religion, that's what.

You can try this stuff with the tamed and secularized peoples of Europe, and perhaps with North Americans above the Bible Belt, and you'll probably get away with it. Try it anywhere else on the planet and you'd have a religious riot on your hands, and if you keep it up you'll have a full-scale religious war.