Religion keeping others in a box?

reply to post by wildtimes


Please remember it till the end of time. Because it will not stop anything. And you may just be consumed with it. Until it eats at the back of your sub consciousness so much it interferes with your every day life.

reply to post by adjensen


Hey i agree with that, If its true(one of many lol), then if its evident and explained Hows and the Whys, then of course 100% i will say im wrong, and follow the faith(well it wouldn't be faith anymore).

being a contrarian is perspective...

Calling people who don't want to believe in religion anti-religious is using a bad term... similar to calling Islamist.. Anti-Christians.

reply to post by Manunnaki

Please remember it till the end of time. Because it will not stop anything. And you may just be consumed with it. Until it eats at the back of your sub consciousness so much it interferes with your every day life.

Remember 'what' till the end of time, please?

'What' will not stop anything?

'What' may I be consumed with?

I'm not trying to be difficult here, I just don't understand why you think no one (other than an actual "atheist") believes in karma or 'consequences' . No "spiritual seeker" that I have ever run across denies an afterlife, or that there are consequences for our actions.

Personally, I am leaning more and more toward believing that THIS IS HELL. Right here, this existence. To escape it (and we CAN escape it), our soul needs to move forward, learn, grow, and get beyond man-made constructs.

"Religion" is a tool; a construct of men. It does not "by definition" reveal "truth" of the immortal soul/spirit, or the Source.

reply to post by Manunnaki


If i take your view into account, you know what scares me?

A book is the only thing preventing a religious person from going insane and murdering people.

Do you really want to see more of those people born? who needs instruction and scare tactics(hell) to stay sane?

reply to post by Deetermined

You say you don't subscribe to Christianity, yet you're the one who has stated more than once that Christianity is the religion that's closest to the truth. Then, on the flip side, you claim that there are many ways to God.

I do not understand the question. There are many ways to Father, and Christianity is the closest to what is. That is not a contradiction. Christianity has its strong points, but still lacks details.

What is your goal or agenda? Don't tell me that you're only asking questions to get the thoughts of others because you've already asked this question before. Your agenda appears to be to turn people away from religion.

Or, get others to seek Father directly. You are applying my intent on to me, which many here do.

reply to post by Deetermined


Dee, I know you were not asking me, but your question sparked some thought on my part.

Why do you pick on religion? I really must know.

What do you mean "you really must know"? Why?

What is your goal or agenda?

Don't tell me that you're only asking questions to get the thoughts of others because you've already asked this question before.

Your agenda appears to be to turn people away from religion.

Seems to me (though I may be mistaken), that jhill is asking people to think outside the "box" of religion in which they landed.

What is your agenda or goal? To recruit people TOWARD religion?
Why?

Religion has by all accounts caused as much strife in the world (between battling "factions") as any other human conflict. In my view, it has reduced people to being "tools", to excusing their infractions in the name of "God", and to hatred, intolerance, judgment, and homicidal/genocidal mania.

What, in your opinion, would be wrong with having "no religion" - as in the words of John Lennon - if we all just agreed on a secular platform to care for one another?
Religion DIVIDES people. Religion JUDGES people. It gives a "false hope" and a lethargic "fatalistic" attitude.

"Not my problem.
I'm not God.
Not my fault.
God did it.
I couldn't help it.
Satan did it.
Satan made me do it.
I'm going to hell.
You're going to hell."

All escapist fantasy, in my opinion. Remove the shackles of corrupted religious dogma, and HUMANS are HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE WORLD'S ILLS, and have to accept responsibility. I don't see anything wrong with that....

reply to post by adjensen


If the truth is handed to you then how is that seeking it? You do not seek when it is given to you at an early age.

Matthew 7

7 "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.

Christianity promotes teaching their ways to children at an early age. How is the message being given to them equal to seeking it? If they never asked for it then how are they given it? If they never had to knock then the door to destruction was open to them from the very beginning.

The difference between science and religion is that science explains why things happen in detail, religion explains why things happen briefly by saying god did it, no further explanation needed.

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by adjensen

 

If the truth is handed to you then how is that seeking it? You do not seek when it is given to you at an early age.

Where did I say that you shouldn't seek the truth? As you know, I wasn't "born" a Christian, I became one through experiences and realizations that I had when I was studying physics and maths.

What I said was "if you are looking for the truth, and that truth happens to coincide with an established religion, you're an idiot if you reject the truth just because the idea wasn't unique to you."

The difference between science and religion is that science explains why things happen in detail, religion explains why things happen briefly by saying god did it, no further explanation needed.

No, that's not true. There is a small, vocal minority that thinks that religion trumps science, but the vast majority do not see them as being in competition.

The difference between science and philosophy (setting aside the volatile term "religion") is that science attempts to explain how things work the way that they do, and philosophy attempts to explain why things work the way that they do. Though I work both sides of the road, I personally find the study of philosophy to be more interesting.

reply to post by adjensen


The philosophy that you align with promotes not seeking, but having it forced on children. A large portion of Christians (not including you) have been so since shortly after birth and were never given the chance to seek.

They had one version of "truth" shoved down their throat and were told if they rejected it they will go to hell and suffer forever. That threat of eternal suffering completely cuts off their ability to seek for the truth because they already have "truth" and to seek for anything else means hell.

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by adjensen

 

The philosophy that you align with promotes not seeking, but having it forced on children. A large portion of Christians (not including you) have been so since shortly after birth and were never given the chance to seek.

Well, if they're happy with that, who are you to rain on their parade?

This may come as a shock to you, but the vast majority of people don't give a hoot about the majority of topics discussed in this forum, and wouldn't even if you preached the "wake up you stupid sheep" lecture at them 24/7.

That's why I'm not an evangelist -- they are welcome to their beliefs, just as you are welcome to yours, and it's improper for you to imply that they're somehow disadvantaged because they don't care, one iota, for something that you're obsessed with.

reply to post by adjensen


And I never said they should care, did I? They are welcome to their beliefs, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with them or shouldn't point out the inconsistencies within them. Me pointing out their inconsistencies is a lot less worse than being okay with people going to suffer forever for not believing the same thing I do.

ETA: I don't think Christians are "stupid sheep" as you imply, I only believe they are misguided. There's a difference between misguided and stupid you know.

I appreciate all of the responses thus far, it seems as many prefer to reach God not via man, but on their own.

Originally posted by DarknStormy
I agree that if you are willing to learn about the texts off your own accord, you will certainly get more out of religion than letting someone else teach you what its all about. I learnt my way without getting to deep into it but what it allowed me to do was move on to other texts from different cultures. What I learnt was that they all lead to the same thing whether it is for real or just a ridiculous control program.

I agree. Many different sources all lead to the same place.

Originally posted by wildtimes

Seems to me (though I may be mistaken), that jhill is asking people to think outside the "box" of religion in which they landed.

Personally, I feel like jhill is encouraging people to make up whatever they want to believe on one side and then tells everyone that Jesus is the way on the flip side. Giving out contradictory info.

What is your agenda or goal? To recruit people TOWARD religion?
Why?

Frankly, it gives off the idea that religion is bad or limits someone's own thinking ability, when it doesn't. It works for many. It helps to expand their thoughts on the subject of God.

I would hate to think someone who maybe only had the chance to know God from going to a church might be put off on the idea of going to church just because of something that someone else here on ATS had to say about it.

Religion has by all accounts caused as much strife in the world (between battling "factions") as any other human conflict. In my view, it has reduced people to being "tools", to excusing their infractions in the name of "God", and to hatred, intolerance, judgment, and homicidal/genocidal mania.

Your thinking is exactly my point that I made above.

Human conflict is caused by humans, not religion. People will push blame and excuse their own infractions, spread hatred, intolerance and judgement with or without religion.

What, in your opinion, would be wrong with having "no religion" - as in the words of John Lennon - if we all just agreed on a secular platform to care for one another?
Religion DIVIDES people. Religion JUDGES people. It gives a "false hope" and a lethargic "fatalistic" attitude.

People will always divide people and spread false hope. Religion has nothing to do with it.

"Not my problem.
I'm not God.
Not my fault.
God did it.
I couldn't help it.
Satan did it.
Satan made me do it.
I'm going to hell.
You're going to hell."

"Not my problem.
I'm not Dick or Jane.
Not my fault.
Dick or Jane did it.
I couldn't help it because Dick or Jane made me do it."

See where I'm going with this? Regardless of who we blame, we will all still be held responsible for our own decisions, with or without religion.

All escapist fantasy, in my opinion. Remove the shackles of corrupted religious dogma, and HUMANS are HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE WORLD'S ILLS, and have to accept responsibility. I don't see anything wrong with that....

All humans will look for an escape regardless of religion. Humans will be held accountable either way. Remove all religion, tell humans they will be held accountable and it still won't change anything. It will only change who they blame. It's the nature of humanity.

reply to post by Deetermined

First of all, Thanks! for your response.

Human conflict is caused by humans, not religion.

But,
who created RELIGION? Humans. Are religions not in conflict with one another? And why? Humans.

I would hate to think someone who maybe only had the chance to know God from going to a church might be put off on the idea of going to church just because of something that someone else here on ATS had to say about it.

As for this premise, that someone who "maybe only had the chance to know God from going to a church"....

churches are not the only venue that teaches people about "God"! "God", for me, was closest when I was riding my contented horse, with my happy dog tagging along, in the bluffs on the trails beside the river. Under the trees, and the sky, "communing with nature." I felt closer to "God" than in ANY building called a "church."

I think it's better to encourage people to indulge their own curiosity, and I am unaware of ANY CULTURE in the known history of man that didn't have SOME concept of "God."

The message that ATS has for those who might be looking for a "religion" is that there are tens of thousands of different "churches" one might try - but every one of them is a "box"!

Do you honestly think that young minds are incapable of discovering -- comprehending the notion -- or "knowing God" without a "church"?

If so, what "church" is it that, in your opinion, they should (or should not) attend? Do you think any church will do, and that ONLY a church will do? Or do you feel that only the church that you choose to attend (or one that teaches the same lessons in the same order with the same approach) is a 'real' venue to know "God"?

What about libraries? Museums that hold "religious art classics"? University courses?

Suppose the only "introduction" a person had to "God" and "religion" was the ridiculous Jack Chick Tracts ---
would you recommend that those be required reading for every person?

It's called slavery. Its how a small group of weak, wraith like, sniveling losers, keep control over the masses. They are ultra dark hearts that murder their way to the top, and emass armies and wealth via fear and slavery, and create weave a matrix around their prey, the masses. There is nothing weaker and more pathetic than anyone who requires a slave and uses those tactics.

reply to post by wildtimes


I say do it all, but don't lead people to think that going to church (of any kind) will only limit their ability to think for themselves.

reply to post by Unity_99


Uh, you don't need religion to accomplish that.

reply to post by Deetermined

People will always divide people and spread false hope. Religion has nothing to do with it.

Wait.....

What?!!
Dee, people invented religion. It is a known global cause of strife and intolerance. Religion is known (as is readily apparent just from this forum on this site!) to divide, to enable -- if not 'spawn' -- conflict.

reply to post by Deetermined

I say do it all, but don't lead people to think that going to church (of any kind) will only limit their ability to think for themselves.

But....
but churches (of any kind) discourage people from thinking for themselves! They deliver a prepackaged message, the same message to everyone who attends that church - and the "leaders" of churches certainly don't say, "Well, I'm not sure what to think....what do you congregation members think about this?"

No, the leaders TELL people what "God" is; and if a person wants to think for themselves, that person is either "rejected", "excommunicated", "shunned", "condemned", "exorcised," -- dare I go there? -- beheaded, stoned to death, hanged, assassinated.... for asking questions! -- for being "contrary" --

how does this work to build community and to spread goodwill?