Fear of God?

[DarianF]

43 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

 

Yep they want you disempowered and confused so you're easy to control. Any society that makes weakness a virtue is doomed.

 

 

"Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong." - 1 Corinthians 16:13

 

Society won't survive if it's scared to talk about unpleasant truths either.

 

"Don't participate in the fruitless works of darkness, but instead expose them" - Ephesians 5:11

 

Fucking degenerates. If humans of the past were like these pathetic excuses for men, we would never have survived this long as a species. It's against nature (not just religion).

[peter]

41 minutes ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

 

Do you think the religious only do good because of a book? I'm religious, but if you need a book to be a good person you're a wanker.

My point exactly, you don't need a book  and likewise you don't need a god to be a good person,the fact that your religious is neither here nor there when it comes to doing the right thing and morals

Edited April 8, 2022 by peter

[Morpheus]

11 minutes ago, peter said:

they just are

But they're not, they're preordained and no amount of subjectivity or cultural relevance will change that. Me and you don't get decide what is moral or immoral on whatever day we feel like it. Justifying something to be morally correct doesn't make it moral either. Natural law was here before me and you came into being. 

[DarianF]

Here's a couple of interesting talks that shed light on the moral discussion:

 

 

 

[peter]

2 minutes ago, Morpheus said:

But they're not, they're preordained and no amount of subjectivity or cultural relevance will change that.

Preordained by what, some bloke that wrote the bible that professed to know what god was thinking on any given day

[DarianF]

1 minute ago, Morpheus said:

But they're not, they're preordained and no amount of subjectivity or cultural relevance will change that. Me and you don't get decide what is moral or immoral on whatever day we feel like it. Justifying something to be morally correct doesn't make it moral either. Natural law was here before me and you came into being. 

 

Yes, natural law, which predates organised religion and its claims to be a source of morals. I can't speak for @peter but I think that was his original point in essence. He's welcome to correct me if I'm wrong.

 

However speaking from my point of view, I argue that humans developed as a species as social beings. We have no choice. It's essential for survival. Obviously, certain behaviours over time that lead to a better chance of survival are enshrined as what we would now call 'natural law'. To survive as a group over the long term, there are certain behaviours that are favourable and others that are detrimental. We don't need a sky fairy on a mountain to hand it down to us.

[Morpheus]

10 minutes ago, DarianF said:

 

Morals can also be culturally relative. For example, what is perfectly moral or acceptable in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia, etc, may be abhorrent and illegal in the West. But what is considered moral or legal in the West, maybe be morally reprehensible or even illegal in the aforementioned countries.

I disagree, again we don't get to decide what is or is not morally correct and I would argue that the words these people devoutly follow have again have been corrupted, don't take my faith in God as a belief in abrahamic religion, like @EnigmaticWorld said, I don't need a book to be a good person or morally just, I just want to be. I aspire to be, what's so wrong with that?

[Morpheus]

3 minutes ago, peter said:

Preordained by what, some bloke that wrote the bible that professed to know what god was thinking on any given day

If that's what label you want to give god then sure, if you like. 

[DarianF]

1 minute ago, Morpheus said:

I disagree, again we don't get to decide what is or is not morally correct and I would argue that the words these people devoutly follow have again have been corrupted, don't take my faith in God as a belief in abrahamic religion, like @EnigmaticWorld said, I don't need a book to be a good person or morally just, I just want to be. I aspire to be, what's so wrong with that?

 

There's nothing wrong with it, we're just discussing different perspectives. And I'm genuinely curious about your points. But let's take this specific point of different countries with different moral codes...

 

In the west, holding hands with your wife or girlfriend in public is considered fine - a sign of affection and commitment. But in Muslim country, this could land you in serious trouble with the law. Which is right, which is wrong?

 

We here would make the argument for freedom of our people in public to hold hands and that is self-evidently right for us. But they would argue the exact opposite. To them, we are being highly offensive.

 

It's a simple example, but I'm sure we could all think of dozens more.

[DarianF]

4 minutes ago, Morpheus said:

If that's what label you want to give god then sure, if you like. 

 

Perhaps some examples you could list would be helpful. What are some objective laws / natural laws and what is their original source, in your opinion? Furthermore, if you don't get your morals from the Abrahamic texts and that verison of god, then which version of god are you referring to and how does this god communicate the objective morals?

[Morpheus]

36 minutes ago, DarianF said:

 

Of course, it's important to understand. But just because they believe something, doesn't make it true. Maybe they are just crazy.

 

Edit: For example, these Bohemian Grove guys are worshiping the owl god, Moloch, apparently [ https://battleplan.news/watch?id=5ebc5477244ac5001d2386ff ]. Does that mean I believe there is an owl god called Moloch? Of course not. I think they are bat shit crazy, like any religious cult members or fundamentalist sects.

 

But the fact they are a crazy cult and THEY believe it, that makes them dangerous. So just because people worship the devil or god and that makes them take whatever actions based on their religious beliefs, doesn't mean I have to accept their entities are actually real.

 

So yes, understand them. Very important, but as an objective observer.

I'm sorry but I don't think it's that simple, just saying they're nuts doesn't detract from what they do. 

 

You seem to be forgetting that the very people you call nuts have the keys to all knowledge, our history and origins. They've got that information and they use all manner of psyops, data analytics to keep us away from good information. 

 

They're fuckin nuts alright, but do not underestimate the fact that they know way more than us of who we really are and they're trying their damnedest to make sure we never find out. Nuts or not bro, it's my opinion that they've got a far better understanding of where we are and why than we'll ever possibly know. 

[DarianF]

1 minute ago, Morpheus said:

I'm sorry but I don't think it's that simple, just saying they're nuts doesn't detract from what they do. 

 

You seem to be forgetting that the very people you call nuts have the keys to all knowledge, our history and origins. They've got that information and they use all manner of psyops, data analytics to keep us away from good information. 

 

They're fuckin nuts alright, but do not underestimate the fact that they know way more than us of who we really are and they're trying their damnedest to make sure we never find out. Nuts or not bro, it's my opinion that they've got a far better understanding of where we are and why than we'll ever possibly know. 

 

Very good points. Can't argue with that. They are very dangerous for all the reasons you cite. Unfortunately, if they hold all the knowledge we can only do our best with what we have. That's why I'm always willing to admit that I'm wrong, but I do favour evidence based thinking to draw the conclusions. We can only make our conclusions based on the best available evidence we have at the time and if new evidence demonstrates we are mistaken, then we should be willing to be flexible.

 

An the other hand, do they really hold as much secret knowledge as we think they do, or do they just want us to think they have all this super secret shit, so we fear them more? Maybe most of it is a bluff.

[Morpheus]

5 minutes ago, DarianF said:

 

There's nothing wrong with it, we're just discussing different perspectives. And I'm genuinely curious about your points. But let's take this specific point of different countries with different moral codes...

 

In the west, holding hands with your wife or girlfriend in public is considered fine - a sign of affection and commitment. But in Muslim country, this could land you in serious trouble with the law. Which is right, which is wrong?

 

We here would make the argument for freedom of our people in public to hold hands and that is self-evidently right for us. But they would argue the exact opposite. To them, we are being highly offensive.

 

It's a simple example, but I'm sure we could all think of dozens more.

We could, but ask yourself, is there a problem with holding your women's hand in public and do you really think god would have an issue with it? 

 

Or again do you think what's happened is further manipulation to a certain way of thinking? The question you ultimately ask yourself is this, do my actions have consequences and do those consequences have negative impacts upon others? If the answer is yes they will have a negative impact on others then whatever you intend to do is morally wrong, let's not complicate what is very simple. 

[Morpheus]

3 minutes ago, DarianF said:

but I do favour evidence based thinking to draw the conclusions

I'm sorry bud, it's just going to have to take a little bit of faith. 

 

Science doesn't have all the answers, it has some and core principles that explain a lot. When it comes to the supernatural, that's were science has zero answers and because something cannot be explained, it's usually pilloried and laughed at. I'm going way off topic here but I think the world is a little more mystical and mysterious than we think. Just my opinion, but I also believe there's plenty of evidence of that. 

[Guest]

How can I have "Fear" of something which I have no actual knowledge about?

All within this place has been written by man .... I cannot "Fear" what I read or am told unless I chose to!

 

I have always 'acted' in this 'life' by one thought .... I will not risk NOT being truly born for 3 score years and ten!

 

This is a very simple way I see what this 'place' is ....

 

• The only actual reality is Potential (in that "no single thing" .... thus No Thing .... there is/was all that could be) .... there is NO other "real".
• Because there was the Potential for it .... a single awareness became. << you could call this god if you wish but it only has more knowledge than you at this point and didn't create the Potential. It also knew itself to be alone.
• The first awareness knew all of the Potential but as a "whole image" .... so it took the potential of Time and split all the possibilities into "streams"
• These "streams" became the real or 'reel' of which we read/view .... and some can author (or alter) the stories narrative.

 

I have posted before that this 'place' is formed from the 2D potential as a 3D 'bubble' .... and I happened upon some supposed religion of 'Science' today that states:

 

The Universe Is Flat — Now What?

 

snip ....

 

But average all those small-scale effects out and look at the big picture. When we examine very old light — say, the cosmic microwave background — that has been traveling the universe for more than 13.8 billion years, we get a true sense of the universe's shape. And the answer, as far as we can tell, to within an incredibly small margin of uncertainty, is that the universe is flat.

https://www.space.com/34928-the-universe-is-flat-now-what.html

 

Which made me 

[DarianF]

1 minute ago, Morpheus said:

I'm sorry bud, it's just going to have to take a little bit of faith. 

 

Science doesn't have all the answers, it has some and core principles that explain a lot. When it comes to the supernatural, that's were science has zero answers and because something cannot be explained, it's usually pilloried and laughed at. I'm going way off topic here but I think the world is a little more mystical and mysterious than we think. Just my opinion, but I also believe there's plenty of evidence of that. 

 

Evidence based thinking I believe is very important, including skeptical inquiry and rationality. But I would never take it to the extreme where mystical things were not possible. The universe is huge and incredible, so to discount anything completely would be unwise. The other extreme is blind faith, which is dogged belief without evidence. Evidence based thinking, with a healthy level of open mindedness is the way I try to approach things.

[DarianF]

13 minutes ago, Morpheus said:

We could, but ask yourself, is there a problem with holding your women's hand in public and do you really think god would have an issue with it? 

 

Or again do you think what's happened is further manipulation to a certain way of thinking? The question you ultimately ask yourself is this, do my actions have consequences and do those consequences have negative impacts upon others? If the answer is yes they will have a negative impact on others then whatever you intend to do is morally wrong, let's not complicate what is very simple. 

 

This is a great point. This is where I don't think the interjection of god is required at all in this type of moral discussion. Religious or not, we can all agree on these basic things. Don't hurt people, don't take actions that cause harm in society in general, etc. These are basic principles that I don't think you need any type of god to figure out. Any rational and decent human being, religious or non religious, can agree on such things. As I said above, these types of things are natural for a social species to survive on a long term basis. Where I draw the line is people saying morals come from the Bible or the Quran, like these books are an original source. Obviously, human morality that supports social cohesion predates the texts by a very long time. They are survival mechanisms.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, DarianF said:

human morality

 

I consider that a large problem many of the 'mass' miss .... Others are not as you are!

Because we 'feel' something does not mean that 'others' do as well .... we are NOT all one!

There are 'Humans' and there is 'Mankind'.

 

Aspects of 'good' such as empathy are missing from many and so we get the current situation.

 

I wrote a 'thing' about it which you can read here if you wish ....

 

 

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, DarianF said:

Religious or not, we can all agree on these basic things. Don't hurt people, don't take actions that cause harm in society in general, etc. These are basic principles that I don't think you need any type of god to figure out. Any rational and decent human being, religious or non religious, can agree on such things.

 

This is my point .... there are many who do not share your view .... and they are Human!

[Morpheus]

25 minutes ago, DarianF said:

The other extreme is blind faith, which is dogged belief without evidence.

Ok, so do you think because god won't materialise physically that it is blind faith? Why do you think there's no evidence of god when there's evidence everywhere. 

 

 

Edited April 8, 2022 by Morpheus

[DarianF]

5 hours ago, Morpheus said:

Let's be honest, this is your argument full stop. One cannot have any faith in God unless they were indoctrinated and therefore by default, in your opinion, one cannot possibly have a thought of their own as a result because they're indoctrinated by the cult. Absolute bollocks Peter and you know it. The same wanky argument over and again. Your lack of understanding is not other people's issue, it is yours alone. Just because you lack faith in God shouldn't mean anything less for those that do. 

 

Well Peter, I was not brought up in religion, I was a staunch atheist and now, yes I believe in God. So, what now? So I must be stupid and misguided as a result of that belief?  Also, your denigration of religion is exactly why the world is in the mess that it is. Funny the more godless we become, the more selfish, arrogant and despicable we become.

 

Yet it is the people of religion who cause all the world's problems because of their fear of the "RULE book". Absolute nonsense and it is the perpetual yard stick that you constantly use to berate people of faith. 

 

How about your faith? Scientism. Stick there bud, that's your thing. It has all the answers supposedly. 

 

1. "I was a staunch atheist and now, yes I believe in God."

 

That's an unusual transition. I would like to know, if you don't mind, how did you go from atheism to god? What evidence were you presented with as an atheist that changed your mind? Was it sudden or gradual? I'm not taking the piss here, I'd really be interested. Because I have met heaps of religious people who have turned to secularism or atheism and the transition is pretty obvious and standard. But the other way around? That's more rare.

 

2. "Yet it is the people of religion who cause all the world's problems because of their fear of the "RULE book". Absolute nonsense and it is the perpetual yard stick that you constantly use to berate people of faith."

 

Not all things bad caused by religion, but many problems have been and are caused by people with conflicting holy books.

 

3. How about your faith? Scientism. Stick there bud, that's your thing. It has all the answers supposedly.

 

Science does not have all the answers, but that's the whole point of science. It is a way of understanding nature and reality. Without science, there would be many things we wouldn't know. It's a great tool for human advancement. And things we don't know, science is the best bet for finding out. For example, we don't know for sure there are other advanced civilizations out there in the universe, but science allows us to hypothesise, speculate, and formulate a plan for finding out. We understand now about radio waves and how we can build a radio telescope to listen for other civilisations. You're not going to discover another civilization in the universe by reading a religious text written before modern science existed. That's all it is. A way of increasing our knowledge of the universe. Of course we don't know everything, but at least we now have a way of finding out.

[DarianF]

2 minutes ago, Morpheus said:

Ok, so do you think because god won't materialise physically that it is blind faith? Why do you think there's no evidence of god when there's evidence everywhere. 

 

 

 

What is the evidence you are referring to?

[DarianF]

4 minutes ago, ink said:

 

This is my point .... there are many who do not share your view .... and they are Human!

 

Which is why I prefer secular humanism as a model. https://secularhumanism.org/what-is-secular-humanism/

[DarianF]

8 minutes ago, ink said:

 

I consider that a large problem many of the 'mass' miss .... Others are not as you are!

Because we 'feel' something does not mean that 'others' do as well .... we are NOT all one!

There are 'Humans' and there is 'Mankind'.

 

Aspects of 'good' such as empathy are missing from many and so we get the current situation.

 

I wrote a 'thing' about it which you can read here if you wish ....

 

 

 

Thanks Ink, I'll check that out. Sorry if I've missed some of your earlier points.

[Morpheus]

3 minutes ago, DarianF said:

 

What is the evidence you are referring to?

Cymatics for one, it's proof of an intelligent design.