Why do Atheists care about religion?

reply to post by spy66

No you get me wrong. What i am implying is that people think that since God made us in his image they think God is a being.

And since God has a name people think God is a being.And because they call God: He. Him. Father and so on. People gets the image of God being a man.

This is what i mean by getting the image wrong.

Its not the image i get of God at all.

You can blame the authors of the bible for those misconceptions. The anthropomorphic depiction of God is an age-old one and the authors were just going on the customs of these things.

reply to post by Welfhard
Because religion has outlived it's usefulness to humanity.

In my opinion, All the world's religions were invented to control and manipulate man.

So many torturings, so many murders, so many wars and crusades all in the many names of "God".

The rest of us that have awaken and come to our senses still have to live with all the primitive mindless sheep and the violence and cruelity they expound all in the name of "God".

Being a spiritual being is quite different than being "religious".

Man is progressing more and more people are awakening from the primitive mindset of there being a heaven and hell and a God that punishes those who refuse "to believe".

The entire God program is just a primitive mindset. Exactly like the radical Muslims the radical Christians just can't see they are woven of the same cloth just different shades of the same old same old.

and the rest us have to live with the craziness religioness brings with it.

From David Icke's Book, Infinite Love Is The Only Truth" Link below is the free on-line book.

One of the major expressions of the Matrix program in this reality is what we call Religion, and that's not only Christianity, Judaism, Islam and the others we associate with that term. I also mean the religions we call money, politics, the pursuit of 'success', television, the cult of celebrity and what has been dubbed the 'New Age'.

Anything, in fact, that dictates your sense of reality and entraps you in the illusion.

The Matrix loves religions. They are the diversions that hold consciousness in the headlights of an oncoming fairytale. Which fairytale you choose to believe doesn't much matter so long as you buy into one of them and, of course, your DNA is always there to guide you. The idea is to keep you focused on one obsession so you don't see the guy at the stove preparing the gravy.

Horses have wide peripheral vision and some wear blinkers to ensure they can only see what's in front of them and not the panorama they would normally see. The blinkers are there to focus the horse on the desired activity - the race - and stop it being distracted by other horses or influences. The religions in all their forms are blinkers for humans.

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

I am a good, kind and moral person not because "I fear going to hell" but because it is the right thing to do.

I also do not claim to "know it all or have all the answers". When I go outside and see the brillant blue sky, touch the soft green grass, feel the wind upon my face, or the smell of Mother Earth, look into my dogs eyes, see a baby smile or show wonderment at something new to them, smell a rose, hug a friend, these indeed all of creation is a part of the whole which some people term God.

Some people are not ready for this next phase of looking at our base reality.

Some people still hold to the mind trap concepts of past generations. Concepts that were created to enslave, control and manipulate us.

Only love is real - EVERYTHING else is an illusion.


[edit on 3-5-2009 by ofhumandescent]

reply to post by Welfhard




When it comes to the Bible i really don't know what to believe lol.

You can go on and on about the Bible and what it is telling us. It will probably make sense to some but i have to agree a lot of it seams like fiction.

In many cases it seam like the Bible is created to ruin everything for god.







[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

reply to post by spy66


This is an historic day for me. I never thought I hear (read) you say those words. Good for you, pal.

Yes the more I got to reading the thing, the more I found myself trying to force meaning and coherency into it.

reply to post by ofhumandescent

Because religion has outlived it's usefulness to humanity.

In my opinion, All the world's religions were invented to control and manipulate man.

Wow. Blunt.

I believe that religion is an evolved social construct that became a system of control as a backlash to people naturally trying to move beyond it.

I am a good, kind and moral person not because "I fear going to hell" but because it is the right thing to do.

It's interesting that you should say that, because...

Only love is real - EVERYTHING else is an illusion.

No offence, but it just sounds like you're trying to be deep here. Love is an abstract concept and so some would say that it is an illusion fabricated in the mind.

Originally posted by WelfhardYes the more I got to reading the thing, the more I found myself trying to force meaning and coherency into it.

The next step would be to realize that you can't. That will be a revelatory moment.

reply to post by Gawdzilla


Yes well I was implying that.

I think that's what drove me away from Christianity, is the lack of acceptance for anything else.

So if God is almighty, all seeing, all knowing, and omnipotent, why doesn't he intervene? I know that would throw it all off, but imagine what would happen if he just reached his omnipotent hand out, and B--ch smacked humanity. All of us would believe in something that we couldn't possibly discount as absolutely powerful.

Originally posted by Welfhard
reply to post by spy66

 

This is an historic day for me. I never thought I hear (read) you say those words. Good for you, pal.

Yes the more I got to reading the thing, the more I found myself trying to force meaning and coherency into it.

Yeah!! But the Bible is one thing and God is another heheh

Man, I think that's the smartest thing that anyone has said this whole time.

Cuz none of the rest of the posts have said anything new, you just did.
[edit on 4-5-2009 by Kiltedninja]

[edit on 4-5-2009 by Kiltedninja]

reply to post by Kiltedninja


Oh really!!! Read the posts again.....more carefully. I' am sure you'll here this concept alliterated many times.

Originally posted by Welfhard
reply to post by spy66

 

No you get me wrong. What i am implying is that people think that since God made us in his image they think God is a being.

And since God has a name people think God is a being.And because they call God: He. Him. Father and so on. People gets the image of God being a man.

This is what i mean by getting the image wrong.

Its not the image i get of God at all.

You can blame the authors of the bible for those misconceptions. The anthropomorphic depiction of God is an age-old one and the authors were just going on the customs of these things.

Any misconceptions are probably minute translation errors in the text. The biggest change I think is giants from fallen ones? How did they mess that up? Everything else is pretty solid.

Ezekiel 8:2
"Then I beheld, and see a likeness as the appearance of fire: from the appearance of his loins even downward, fire; and from his loins even upward, as the appearance of brightness, as the color of amber."

Ezekiel 10:1
"Then I looked, and, behold, in the firmament that was above the head of the cherubim there appeared over them as it were a sapphire stone, as the appearance of the likeness of a throne."

Exodus 24:10 "And they saw the God of Israel; and under His feet there appeared to be a pavement of sapphire, as clear as the sky itself."

Ezekiel 1:26 "Now above the expanse that was over their heads there was something resembling a throne, like lapis lazuli in appearance; and on that which resembled a throne, high up, was a figure with the appearance of a man."

Revelation 4:2 "Immediately I was in the Spirit; and behold, a throne was standing in heaven, and One sitting on the throne."

Revelation 4:3 "And He who was sitting was like a jasper stone and a sardius in appearance; and there was a rainbow around the throne, like an emerald in appearance."

Pretty concise throughout time.

reply to post by watchtheashes


"Any misconceptions are probably minute translation errors in the text. The biggest change I think is giants from fallen ones? How did they mess that up? Everything else is pretty solid."

The stories written by the Bronze Age goat-herders are "pretty solid"? You are easily impressed.

reply to post by Gawdzilla


Those same Bronze-Age goat herders were not fools. You can even look to the Maya and Stonehenge to know that. Those same Bronze Age goat herders predicted Israel re founding itself in 1948 and the temple being recaptured (there was a Tetrad this year I might add in 1967) and also that one day Babylon would raise its high towers again in the latter days and its sins will reach unto heaven. Sounds a lot like our Steel Age skyscrapers. Corporate buildings and Illuminati architecture. They even put an idol that represents a masonic god for our Statue of Liberty. Which is described in Revelations along with America. America is mentioned many times as the country with the symbol of the eagle in the latter days, our national flag, our architecture, our merchants and traders and that we would be with England throughout our history, that we would be founded on virgin soil, and the greatest end times power. Also that we would be the only country to have the moon under its feet. Hmm?

reply to post by watchtheashes


"Those same Bronze-Age goat herders were not fools."

Predictions? Are you channeling Sylvia Browne?

Those goat-herders were not fools, true, but they were appalling ignorant.

reply to post by Gawdzilla


I'm not saying I'm right though. I'm just making a point and clarifying that it's pretty concise and the most historically accurate text we have that dates back.

reply to post by watchtheashes


Historically accurate? Despite the fact that the Egyptians kept very detailed records? And that they never mention the Hebrews? And that the Hebrew story of building the Pyramids must have been a real eye-roller for other tribes of Bedouins who heard it?

reply to post by Gawdzilla


Hey G,

Hope all is well...


Have you seen...

www.bibleandscience.com...

and...

Merneptah Stele
Merneptah pylon at University of Penn Museum
One of the most important discoveries that relate to the time of the Exodus is the Merneptah stele which dates to about 1210 BC. Merneptah, the king of Egypt, boasts that he has destroyed his enemies in Canaan. He states: Plundered is the Canaan with every evil; Carried off is Ashkelon; seized upon is Gezer; Yanoam is made as that which does not exist; Israel is laid waste, his seed is not; (ANET 1969, 378).The word "Israel" here is written in Egyptian with the determinative for people rather than land (ANET 1969, 378 note 18). This implies that Israel did not have a king or kingdom at this time. This would be the time of the judges. The text also implies that Israel was as strong as the other cities mentioned, and not just a small tribe. The south to north order of the three city-states may provide a general location for Israel. There is an interesting place named in Joshua 15:9 and 18:15, "well of waters of Nephtoah," that may be the Hebrew name of Merneptah. The well which is probably anachronistically named after Merneptah would be near Jerusalem. The Egyptian Papyrus Anastasi III contains "The Journal of a Frontier Official" which mentions this well. It says:Year 3, 1st Month of the 3rd Season, Day 17. The Chief of Bowmen of the Wells of Mer-ne-Ptah Hotep-hir-Maat--life, prosperity, health!--which is (on) the mountain range, arrived for a (judicial) investigation in the fortress which is in Sile (ANET 1969, 258).Yurco has recently re-analyzed the Karnak battle reliefs, and has concluded that they should be ascribed to Merneptah and not Ramses II (1990, 21-38). There are four scenes which Yurco correlates with the Merneptah stele. One scene is the battle against the city of Ashkelon which is specifically named. Yurco argues that the other two city scenes are Gezer and Yanoam. He concludes that the open country scene must be Israel. Rainey rejects this view because it shows them with chariots and infantry (1990, 56-60). Lawrence Stager suggests that the small horses pulling the chariot belong to pharaoh's army as in the Ashkelon scene (1985, 58). Rainey thinks the Shasu are Israelites, but others identify the Shasu as Edomites (Stager 1985, 60). Both scholars Yurco and Rainey agree that these battle scenes are from Merneptah's reign (Yurco 1991, 61; Rainey 1992, 73-4; Hess 1993, 134). Before the discovery of the Merneptah stele scholars placed the date of the exodus and entry into Canaan much later. They are now forced to admit that Israel was already in Canaan at the time of Merneptah. Israel was big and strong enough to challenge Egypt in battle. This stele puts a terminus ante quem date of 1210 BC for the exodus (McCarter 1992, 132).

Ancient bowl with curses against their enemies. Metro Museum of Art.

Thoughts?

OT

reply to post by OldThinker


Canannites, true. But only speculation that they were Hebrews.

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
reply to post by watchtheashes

 

Historically accurate? Despite the fact that the Egyptians kept very detailed records?

and....

Is There Evidence of the Hebrews in Egypt?
Every book I have ever read on the subject of Biblical Archeology seems to leave a big gap for the 400 years that the Hebrews were enslaved in Egypt. Most time periods after that seem to be well documented with photos of pottery, tools, and remains of dwellings. However, if the book includes a chapter on Egypt, there will usually be a lot of color photos of the pyramids, mummies, and paintings found on Egyptian tomb walls. There will never be any evidence of the Hebrew culture discussed or pictured. Why is this? Archeology always proves the Bible, doesn’t it? At the present time, the vast majority of Archeologists claim that there is absolutely no evidence of the Jews in Egypt. They claim that the history found in Genesis through Judges was simply made up by Jewish scholars attempting to explain their people’s origins. Some of the so called, “Biblical Minimalists,” don’t believe that Abraham, Joseph, Moses, Joshua, King Saul, King David, or even Solomon ever existed. They put them into the same category of mythological heroes as King Arthur, or Robin Hood.

One of the most respected archeologists of the Palestine region is Dr. William Dever, who has more than 30 years experience and is a professor at the University of Arizona. In a recent interview for the PBS series NOVA, he was directly asked if there is any evidence for Moses and the exodus. His answer was, “We have no direct archeological evidence. …No one has ever found a text or artifact in Egypt itself or even the Sinai that has any direct connection.”

So what is going on here? I believe that the problem with archeology in Egypt is a time-chronology problem. The origin of this problem comes from the Bible itself. The Bible isn’t wrong, it was simply a misinterpretation by Bible scholars of the last century. The verse I am referring to is:
“Therefore they set taskmasters over them to afflict them with burdens. And they built for Pharaoh the supply cities of, Pithom and Raamses.” (Exodus 1:11 NKJV).

The problem is that scholars jumped to a conclusion. They assumed that the city of Raamses must have gotten its name from the great Egyptian ruler, Ramesses II. Assuming that Ramesses II was the Pharaoh of the Exodus, it was dated to about 1200 BC. Ramesses ruled Egypt from about 1279 BC to 1213 BC. This was going against other verses in the Bible which, by counted back the number of years from the founding of the first Temple, placed the Exodus around 1450 BC.

So the real problem was that no matter where the archeologists looked for evidence of the Hebrews, they certainly would NOT find it. They were looking in the wrong time period. It would be as if some future archeologists decided to look for evidence of the American Revolution and they were looking at layers of evidence from the twenty-first century. They certainly would not find any evidence of the American Revolution that occurred in the 1770s if they were off by more than 200 years from the supposed date.

Until recently, the cities mentioned in Exodus 1:11 were lost cities and many from archeology circles believed that they never existed. Then in the later twentieth century, it was discovered that the city of Raamses had an older name. Although it may have had the name changed under the rule of Ramesses the Great, the original Egyptian name was that of Avaris.

The city of Avaris has recently been associated with a site in Nile delta known as Tel el-Dab’a and it is being excavated by Manfred Bietak, who is the head of the Austrian Institute of Archeology. Very little news has leaked out to the press about what they are finding there, but it is obvious that the inhabitants of Tel el-Dab’a were not Egyptian. What they are finding is the foundations of houses built in the failure U-shaped floor plans, which are exactly like the houses of the early Israelites found throughout Palestine. The site is so large that the population could easily be estimated at nearly 30,000 in this one settlement alone. Some of the finds are rumored to be fantastic. One of the finds was an elaborate, destroyed tomb of a high ranking official who was clearly not an Egyptian. Some have speculated that this may be the tomb of Joseph.

So far, there has been no official publication of what is being uncovered there. The official explanation is that they are excavating the dwelling of a group of people known as the “Hyksos,” who were rulers of the northern Kingdom of Egypt during the 18th Dynasty. The Egyptian authorities have closely monitored the dig. They escort the archeologists to the site every day and watch what they uncover. They are only allowed to excavate in one small area at a time. When they are finished with an area, they are forced to re-cover it with dirt.

So, the evidence being collected in the Nile delta region could eventually prove the events of the Exodus actually happened just like the Bible says it did. The ultimate answer that will be released to the world press depends upon how the evidence is interpreted, and the official interpretation is in the hands of Manfred Bietak. Regardless of what that interpretation turns out to be, what really happened cannot be changed. Science is always changing its mind, while the truth of the Bible stands firm

more at... www.thechristianpulse.com...