All Religion Is Fake and While We Are At It

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: burgerbuddy

Yeah and guess what. One group has evidence for their position and the other group has faith. When you get sick do you go to a doctor ? Or does your faith carry you ?

Depends, is my doctor a climate scientist too?

Actually, I rarely have to go to the docs, thank God. My wife makes me.

a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

You don't even know the history behind the rapture ? Even my heathen devil tongue hellbound brain knows. The rapture doctrine was never spoken of until a girl had a dream in 1830 and then told her pastor John Darby

www.bible.ca...

You are arguing about things you know nothing about. Go listen to more Olsteen,Dollar,and Copeland.

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: RepealTheLaw

Climate change has nothing to do with religion or a belief system. what possible reason would scientists have for lying about the hard empirical evidence they have? Use your brain !!!

1 word. Money.

a reply to: burgerbuddy

Just because people believe in a god doesn't make it true. There is no "belief " in climate change. It's solid numbers that have been tracked for decades. Weather it's caused by humans or is a natural part or the earths ebb and flow is up for debate. The change itself however is not up for debate .

a reply to: burgerbuddy

I could say the same about religion. There's plenty of ways to get money. Think how much money is being stored away by all the church organizations of the world.

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: burgerbuddy

Just because people believe in a god doesn't make it true. There is no "belief " in climate change. It's solid numbers that have been tracked for decades. Weather it's caused by humans or is a natural part or the earths ebb and flow is up for debate. The change itself however is not up for debate .

Decades out of how many millions?

We "deniers" only have a problem with human culpability, not that the climate may be or is changing.

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: burgerbuddy

I could say the same about religion. There's plenty of ways to get money. Think how much money is being stored away by all the church organizations of the world.

That money was given freely by adherents to the faiths.

Not imposed and demanded from all people by a few with a couple of graphs.

a reply to: burgerbuddy

As I said the culpability is up in the air. However the effects of man made pollution can be seen in many large cities around the world where smog alerts are issued. If anyone things we shouldn't be taking steps to take care of our environment I would say they should be taxed and thrown in jail. Pollution is horrible and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that we are messing up our home and our food and water and air.

a reply to: burgerbuddy

The money is being given because you are being told you will anger God by not tithing. Or you will face eternal damnation by not doing God's will. Nothing freely given when fear is being used to coerce you. Tithe or spend eternity in hell. Yeah that sounds great.

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: burgerbuddy

As I said the culpability is up in the air. However the effects of man made pollution can be seen in many large cities around the world where smog alerts are issued. If anyone things we shouldn't be taking steps to take care of our environment I would say they should be taxed and thrown in jail. Pollution is horrible and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that we are messing up our home and our food and water and air.

That's pollution, not climate change.

That problem we can actually fix.

Changing the earth's climate is beyond us. You are talking about terraforming.

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: burgerbuddy

The money is being given because you are being told you will anger God by not tithing. Or you will face eternal damnation by not doing God's will. Nothing freely given when fear is being used to coerce you. Tithe or spend eternity in hell. Yeah that sounds great.

Dude! What churches have you been going to?!

And it's funny that you bring up fear, lol.

a reply to: burgerbuddy

Obviously I went to some pretty bad churches. Which I found a lot of. But it was reading the book they use that really turned me away from religion.

originally posted by: SisterDelirium
a reply to: Klassified

Listening to the wrong spirit or not listening because of personal preferences (an inner voice of sorts).

Splitting hairs.

It's just saying this is written to be understood by the people who are open to it and then suggests God helps them be open to it.

Hardly see how that's offensive. It's certainly no worse than telling vast swaths of humanity they're stupid for believing in anything at all.

It seems like you just don't like the idea some people are open to the ideas more than anything.

We'll just have to agree to disagree, then. Have a great evening.

dbl post, nvm

I think, in terms of truth, there is a real, underlying reality of mind/spirit. But, it's a mystery...as in the quote I gave, one that exceeds the human capacity to fully know. In other words, I do believe in spiritual realms, of a sort. The exact dimensions and workings of which remain a mystery. I know it's there, because its presence is revealed in one way or another, but I don't know it the crude physical, concrete way I might know how to ride or fix a bike.

There's also the apophatic knowledge of God through negation, as well...which I find fascinating because it's a theology that explores God by exploring what God isn't.

Well yes who knows what's 'out there'. I'm just trying to work with what we've got available to us as a human being. Some people claim to see angels and whatnot everywhere anytime. I'm not one of them. As for now, I'd settle for finding the 'truth' of my being. But I fully realize that that's not going to be something I can grasp with my mind.

The good news that you already are all of what you'll ever be. There's nothing you have to become or change to be what you are. But the problem is that we have all these concepts of what we are or what we should be, and those concepts neglects to acknowledge what we are already. That's where the whole problem with the human condition starts. Then again, maybe that's part of a setup so we can find out the 'truth' of our being by bouncing around and experiencing the consequences of living in an illusion for a while.

Sooner or later something has to give, and that's when we fall into the truth. It's kindof like trying to fall asleep. You can't make it happen by trying to think yourself asleep. But in this case it's the other way around: we're asleep and caught up in the dream, and somehow we need to wake up to reality. But you can't do that by moving dreamstuff around.

Reality in this case is the fullness of the mystery of what IS, right here right now. If the reports of those to whom that happened mean anything, this is actually liberation.

In Orthodoxy, they tend to say, of the dead "may their memory be eternal" and a chant as part of ceremonies for the dead. There are many, many facets to that concept alone. What is heaven? Where is heaven? In many ways, it's not productive to dwell on it too much. It's enough to know that heaven IS and relax. The rest, even from priests/theologians/monastics or people who've "died" is speculation at best.

True. All those concepts only end up being hindrances anyway. Imagine you're the sky, and you want to experience what it's like to be the sky. In that case doesn't help to focus on clouds (thoughts/concepts). I guess it's a matter of letting go and experience what IS, since you're IT already.

There are a lot of layers to the statement. The Kingdom is a state of being, from my understanding...one that is not limited by time and space. Beyond that, I'm not sure how to comment exactly without thoroughly garbling the theology. I'm no theologian, and, even worse, at the very start of the trail/nowhere near the summit.

I'm no theologian either (Thank God!). Not to be pedantic, but states of being come and go, whereas the Kingdom is permanent and unchanging. In nondual circles that's an important distinction between reality and that which is seen as the dream.

I don't know if I'd go so far as to completely secularize eternity as viewed by the Orthodox. There are still mystical aspects and they come with a belief in existence beyond death, as a reality rather than just part of a story intended to impart wisdom.

Well the way I see it is that myths (such as the ones contained in the bible) point to reality through symbolism/analogy etc. So I don't see those myths as trying to impart wisdom (though that can be a benefit of it), but primarily as pointers to reality (see my previous definition).

From what I understand of the Orthodox concept of Hell... this is also a state of being, but one deprived of union with God/The Divine/The Infinitely Good (an incorporeal being filled with Grace, which is an un-created energy produced by God). The privation creates the suffering, and the privation is a result of freely chosen state of being elected by the individual. Being baptized doesn't (or receiving sacraments doesn't) leave one, by default, "saved" vs. damned. Salvation, as I understand, comes from the continued effort to relate to God, the continued reliance on God for the energy (grace) to remain consistent or pick up and carry on when a fall happens.

That's what I understand as well, from when I was a Christian in a more orthodox sense. The way I see it now is that hell is indeed a state of being that is a result of identifying with the temporal. Going back to my sky analogy: you think you're just the clouds (which come and go) while you're really the entire sky. That's what creates the suffering. It always leaves you empty in the end. But I don't view as a postmortem state per se. It's something you can see happening around you and in yourself as well. The bible refers to it as building your house on loose sand instead of a firm rock.

This continued effort to 'relate to God' implies that there is a 'me' who needs relate to something, when 'sky' (as a whole, including 'clouds') is all there is. So you've already separated yourself from 'God' by default, and that state of being seems to be the cause of all suffering.

It's this identification with 'clouds' that causes the apparent separation. Clouds in this analogy can be anything in the 'external' world as well as ideas/thoughts. Anything that the see-er sees. But we're not the seen, but that which sees all of this.

a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

That interpretation is recent. Older denominations don't hold this belief. As in Orthodox and Catholic don't have any similar teachings on "end times".

Concepts like papal infallibility and the immaculate conception (not to be confused with virgin birth) are also somewhat new, theologically speaking.

I don't personally believe in a rapture. From what I've learned it seems very inconsistent. Also, again, modern evangelical Protestantism differs very notably on thoughts related to human suffering.

But this is what I understand from the tradition to which I am closest.

I have family who view things very differently on opposite ends of the spectrum (theist to atheist), friends from all walks, my husband is agnostic and my mother-in-law practices witchcraft. Which is to say, I've learned to get along as best I can and rarely find total agreement outside the church I attend...although, even there, beliefs/attitudes are not totally homogeneous.

So, my point that it is a new theological concept isn't intended as a slight. It's just an observation.

a reply to: Klassified

Fair enough.

a reply to: SisterDelirium

Yeah but that has nothing to do with religion - that's the human spirit - that's my whole point. You don't need religion or worship any entity to realize these things or get the "privilege" to recognize it.

It's all about self-awareness and that is something that nobody can help you with - not even an all-mighty entity because it's you and yourself.

Now if you choose religion as vehicle for this self-realization so be it but I still stand firm on my opinion religion has corrupted itself.

originally posted by: forthelove
The entire system we live in is based on a big, fat pack of lies and makes it the largest and oldest conspiracy ever.

Indeed you put back the topic discussed all the time and never fully answered or exhausted. I thank you for that opportunity!

As the things are today, seems many people depart from the organized religion, mostly Christian churches, because they see no personal place or any use of it. Those are mostly young people who even if they belong to particular denomination, as the Catholic in Ireland, they already think otherwise (shown clearly by the referendum of gay marriages voted Yes by mostly young Catholics).

Let go back in time. The first religions (not Christianity) were not just some elaborated belief systems in deities. They were establishment of civilizations, writing, agriculture, science, cosmology of the origin. Look at the Sumers (whatever the critics towards Sitchin's work). Their cosmology is much better than that of Genesis. Look at the Egyptians or elsewhere. That changed gradually to reach the lowest point in the Middle Ages when basic knowledge as that the Earth is round was forgotten or better say, concealed (what more is still hidden, we don't even know). That is important, because the cosmological model was basis of religion, science and overall understanding of this world and the world after physical death. Thus, we have hell, purgatory and heaven in Christianity, that reflect the understanding of under-earth, surface, and sky/space/heaven above the clouds. Look at medieval cosmological/theological model of the spheres. Where are the stars in it? Perhaps it is intentional to "forget" the earth is round and the 6,000 or so stars known from Ancient time. Because once you admit the stars are other worlds, then your cosmological/theological model of after life, with imprisoned souls in purgatory or hellish fire inside the earth's core, goes nowhere. You lose the main tool of suppression, much stronger than the flames of fanatic inquisitors and insane crowds that kill only the body (reference to what Jesus said, do not fear those who kill the body). It sounds like that on certain moments of history, although that does not include all those millions believers who sincerely believed in the Good God and His Christ who died for them. Similarly, a good Thai would have prayed equally fervent to whatever name he knew of, and would be granted in the after life accordingly. Here we do not talk about that obviously.

Jesus makes a difference, by establishing new law of Love, although the Love is nothing new but never practiced the way Jesus talks. And what is that way, that the pope recently said again about it, as counterweight to fortunetellers? Do we really know what is the way of Love Jesus taught? It is not just the sacrificial love on the Cross. Because Jesus lived 32 years before that and he did many more things that we barely know if at all.

What happened to Jesus' religion only century after his Ascension "in a cloud to heaven"? We have a dozen of books banned from early centuries, because...they all spoke of events around the central personage of the Christian religion, Jesus Christ, that were unfavorable for the establishment of Late Roman empire and post-Roman political-religious space. We have persecution of people not only of books, right fromt he beginning of establishment of state religion, not only in the Middle ages.

Today newly discovered ancient books surface, and tell us a pretty much similar picture of the real Jesus. It is not only that he was married, that transpires already from everywhere.
If I were a filmmaker, I would enact the scene in the canonical gospel of John with John leaning towards the breast of Jesus. Interpretations?

The power hold is even bigger issue than how the morality of Jesus would be interpreted today. (because it was never interpreted correctly or fully). The power hold should be shifted. The sooner the Roman and other churches do that the better for everyone. Talks of reforms were repeatedly heard for centuries and especially in 20th century. We need real reforms, not talks of them. Not changed altars once more, but change in mentality, and in practice.

It doesn't mean every bishop to be deposed. It means new/old rules based on the Gospels, which never ever defined such structure and power grab as we witness in centuries.

We have to acknowledge much have been done in the last century primarily by popes to reduce that negativity and to accent on the original purpose of the Christian faith, that is of course to know and follow master Jesus, more with every next generation, not less. Practice shows however, those enormous attempts give no satisfying result, not big enough, not soon enough. World Youth Days regardless of how they were intended, turned to be popular rallies with little devotion in them. The idea is good, the implementation is not.

That could be said for many initiatives of the Churches because there are good people among the hierarchy who know all of that and more, and who want to do something better to remain after them. They do not want to remain a ruined Church(es) and a new generation totally abandoning all that is called Holy. But, then they should act more decisively, sooner. Already too much time have been lost. We don't have another 20 years of waiting, prayers, sacrifice and empty hopes. Not because personally speaking, our generation will pass away. But because today's dynamic world wouldn't allow another decade or two to pass by without radical change. Those on top know that much better than I could express in one or two posts. Then, why that delay? Do they want to ruin the Church(es) and Religions with their inaction, or they have something else in mind that we are not told of? Some big defining event that is still pending, that they know of, and we don't? Remember Galileo and Giordano Bruno were judged for what is today scientific truth. Perhaps there is more in the store that is known about and withheld from public.

I will end this post (after writing hundreds in others threads) by going back tot he central religious figure for the last 20 centuries. What if tomorrow we are shown on a movie made from the clouds the entire life of Lord Jesus, not 3 years but 33 years? What if we have to base our religious beliefs but much more important our everyday practice on what we've seen? It will be quite different from today, yes? Only, we don't have that video tape, not yet. Perhaps someone have it and will provide it. Then the excuse of banned books as non-canonical and heretic will not suffice anymore. Because it is clear even from the canonical Gospels that Jesus acted DIFFERENTLY than his followers centuries later. As Gandhi said:

“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

And that is a good quote to address the other non-Abrahamic religions.

Jesus was not "just" married,or "gay" supporter, etc. Jesus was not preaching some arch-form of later Marxism that actually copied something, as pope Francis said.

Jesus preached new way of Love that is new better relations between humans, be it inside a family, or in the larger society. Therefore the Sermon on the Mount makes sense some 2000 years later. As well as all the other sermons. Because we still have hungry and we never reached the beatitudes of peacemakers and meek, as Jesus spoke of. So when he addresses the End times judgment, he cannot be more clear than that: I was hungry and you gave me food " to the righteous who are saved, and "I was hungry and you didn't give me food" to those cursed to be separated from God after the Judgment day.

I am not going to make a doctrine fix here. Other places, offices, should do it. I don't know if they read here. They are LATE. Pope Francis has good words indeed, but the reform is all but dead.

If we have the example of John leaning on the breast of Jesus, we should ask where are the modern Johns. And where is the will to follow Jesus not only under the cross but also in the resurrection. Because he went somewhere and we are still told "at the right side of the Father". That is correct but not quite full explanation for those 1990 years after Ascension, what the Lord did over there. And what we did down here. It doesn't quite match.

Not the aged wise members of cardinals and bishops ranks are the ones who are the problem. Perhaps many of them think in similar terms or even more radical, as the last Synods showed. Unfortunately they bowed down before a minority that had the outdated fanatic doctrine in hand, that is nothing close to a dogma though. It is crazy how the power grab goes always to a selected minority, not even those on top positions, that dictates how to interpret the words of Jesus in daily life. Words that everyone of us knows quite well. Should I follow bishops whose great-grand fathers were probably living in the jungles, how to live the Gospel in 21st century? Because I am insane to read it correctly?

Should I follow fortune-tellers, as the pope recently addressed? Didn't Our Lord speak to us all, didn't Our Lady and the Saints, and also the Angels? Didn't we underestimate the power of God, that will ultimately INTERVENE in the circus of absurd that we witness in religion for quite long? So say innumerable prophecies of saints. God will ultimately act into the history again, especially in Rome as center of world's organized Christianity. Should we wait for that intervention, or should we make straight the ways of the Lord, starting now as He taught us to do? Questions that better start to be answered by people who know very well who they are. We cannot have the luxury of another delay as the centuries after Galileo and Reformation.