Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Electronic Harassment / Mind Control / Subliminal Programing > The Nature of Matrix Religions and what they mean.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 13-09-2010, 11:05 AM   #1
decode reality
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 24,061
Likes: 4,369 (2,796 Posts)
Cool How does the left/right brain influence religion?



LEFT/RIGHT BRAIN HEMISPHERES AND RELIGIOUS PRACTICE

Religion, as we've come to see it practised, seems to be more of a left side of the brain phenomenon.

My only disagreements with the above diagram are as follows:

1) its placing of 'scientific' on the left side. Science, as a system of knowing, thus has an holistic/bigger picture dimension (and 'unprecedented scientific discovery' is the province of the right brain).

2) The right hemisphere also has a logic of its own. This would be better described as 'holistic logic', considering the whole picture as opposed to the 'syllogism/syllogistic logic' of the left brain (I'll come back to these two terms with explanations of 1 and 2, sorry for throwing in jargon at this stage)

3) It could have added the following (in one word terms): The right brain sees how things connect and unify. The left brain separates realities into air-tight compartments/categories/pigeon-holes.

The left brain has its place of course and in reality, the two sides working together harmoniously would be the unification of science and religion, 'sacred and secular', and dare I say it to the atheists amongst us, the unity between God and humanity, both of which are so rigidly (and artificially) separated in our world.

Religion, by the very semantics of the word, ought to be a system designed to re-unite, re-tie things together. The question that needs to be asked is 'Has the teaching and practice of religion served as a vehicle of unifying or separation?'. If we find it to be the latter, then it would be fair to say that most 'religions' aren't actually religious at all; the unity they speak of is an ostensible one.

Last edited by decode reality; 13-09-2010 at 12:05 PM.
decode reality is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-09-2010, 11:10 AM   #2
decode reality
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 24,061
Likes: 4,369 (2,796 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by decode reality View Post
'Organisation' also isn't a solely left brain attribute, (although it is one of them); How can anything be TRULY organised without the ability to perceive the bigger picture (right brain)?

Last edited by decode reality; 13-09-2010 at 11:57 AM.
decode reality is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-09-2010, 12:58 PM   #3
dedicate
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,322
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Looks more like a walnut than a human brain. Is that what you think the brain and religion look like? The brain having two sides is science's way of observing the genius of God's creation. Some day, maybe, science will admit to the genius behind all this.-- then maybe we will get around to dropping the garbage influencing our day-to day lives. Science dividing the brain up into hemispheres is worship of the natural occuring deity and mostly becomes idol worship in today's material/god civilizations.--like the medical and pharmacutical professions. The thing becomes more important than why it is there.-- a "left brain funtion"

So, we see religious people and science people, really behaving in the same way. Not due to the brain/ Due to the dual nature of reality this is. Which is influencing everything and can be found everywhere, even by science and religion and people. Since most of us don't have the big picture, nor all the details, maybe? -- The big picture needs the details, the details needs the bigg picture; Form is emptiness and emptiness is form; the one within a duality. Balance, unity, harmony,-- and the polarities which make that. AKA the brain

Last edited by dedicate; 13-09-2010 at 02:41 PM.
dedicate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-09-2010, 02:09 PM   #4
decode reality
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 24,061
Likes: 4,369 (2,796 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dedicate View Post
Looks more like a walnut than a human brain. Is that what you think the brain and religion look like? The brain having two sides is science's way of observing the genius of God's creation. Some day, maybe, science will admit to the genius behind all this.-- then maybe we will get around to dropping the garbage influencing our day-to day lives. Science dividing the brain up into hemispheres is worship of the natural occuring deity and mostly becomes idol worship in today's material/god civilizations.--like the medical and pharmacutical professions. The thing becomes more important than why it is there.-- a "right brain funtion"

So, we see religious people and science people, really behaving in the same way. Not due to the brain/ Due to the dual nature of reality this is, which influences everything and can be found everywhere, even by science and religion and people. Since most of us don't have the big picture, nor all the details, maybe? -- The big picture needs the details, the details needs the bigg picture; Form is emptiness and emptiness is form; the one within a duality. Balance, unity, harmony,-- and the polarities which make that. AKA the brain
I personally see no contradiction nor any problem with speaking of 'God's creation' in scientific terms and vice versa, for that matter. This is possibly a difference in our respective view. The source of life (I prefer to phrase it like this than to use the word 'God') expresses itself in infinite modes, one of them being our internal make-up. This is how I see it. For me, it isn't a reduction or diminishing of anything to speak in these terms without a religious style veneration of God. I'm simply seeking to decipher how 'God' works.

There's no reason why religion and science ought not to unify. They operate like two incomplete halves of each other. Well, maybe HALVES is a bit generous, in some instances! Religious teachings (if we strip away some of its cultural/imperialistic baggage) are poetic expressions of science. And the scientific/materialist view is an atheistic, less poetic version of religion.
decode reality is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-09-2010, 02:27 PM   #5
dedicate
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,322
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
I personally see no contradiction nor any problem with speaking of 'God's creation' in scientific terms and vice versa, for that matter.
Could you provide an example of "speaking of 'God's creation' in scientific terms"? and provide the reverse example also?

Quote:
This is possibly a difference in our respective view ---

The source of life (I prefer to phrase it like this than to use the word 'God') expresses itself in infinite modes, one of them being our internal make-up. This is how I see it. For me, it isn't a reduction or diminishing of anything to speak in these terms without a religious style veneration of God. I'm simply seeking to decipher how 'God' works.
"Source of Life" is a fine way of saying it. We don't disagree with that. And we don't diminsh anything thereby.

How does 'God' work?

Quote:
There's no reason why religion and science ought not to unify. They operate like two incomplete halves of each other. Well, maybe HALVES is a bit generous, in some instances! Religious teachings (if we strip away some of its cultural/imperialistic baggage) are poetic expressions of science. And the scientific/materialist view is an atheistic, less poetic version of religion.
Religion and Science are already unified. If one tries to remove the contradictions, one will destroy both the brain and that which the brain is, both religion and that which religion is. Science and Religion are already in agreement. No need to change anything.

This is the true meaning of religion as you say.. to unify. To unify that which is already one? To bring together what?

Last edited by dedicate; 13-09-2010 at 02:31 PM.
dedicate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-09-2010, 03:50 PM   #6
decode reality
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 24,061
Likes: 4,369 (2,796 Posts)
Default

Cheers for your reply, Dedicate. I've been out but was still online. Just to let you know that I'm in the process of responding to your last post.
decode reality is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-09-2010, 04:35 PM   #7
decode reality
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 24,061
Likes: 4,369 (2,796 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dedicate View Post
Could you provide an example of "speaking of 'God's creation' in scientific terms"? and provide the reverse example also?



"Source of Life" is a fine way of saying it. We don't disagree with that. And we don't diminsh anything thereby.

How does 'God' work?



Religion and Science are already unified. If one tries to remove the contradictions, one will destroy both the brain and that which the brain is, both religion and that which religion is. Science and Religion are already in agreement. No need to change anything.

This is the true meaning of religion as you say.. to unify. To unify that which is already one? To bring together what?
OK. First of all, I'd like to attempt to keep the conversation within the realms of the left/right brain topic. This is simply to give the thread some order, although I will of course use analogies and scenarios to illuminate my point.

I'll further point out that my concept of a 'Creator'/source of life is one that I feel shares little affinity (if any) with the God concept I'm accustomed to seeing expressed on the forum. In other words, when I hear or utter the words 'God', 'Allah', 'Jesus', 'Jesus Christ', 'Yeshua' etc, I have no veneration nor need to fawn at their very names. The fabled 'greatness' of these names is largely due to people projecting a hero-worship kind of mentality onto these names, not dissimilar to individuals who "worship" celebrity musicians, actors etc.

To speak about the traits of the brain and its expression in life, takes us into the realm of both science and human behaviour, the latter of course being the domain of religion.

The left/right brain stuff also speaks of the "dualistic" nature of life. That is, how the source of life manifests itself in dual terms. Day and night, hot and cold, wet and dry etc.

If we look at a couple of brain traits: Left brain being 'literal'. Children (and adults) are taught stories such as Adam and Eve, Jonah in the belly of the whale and others, as though they are literal events. There's nothing in the majority of religious instruction that teaches people to appreciate the metaphorical/figurative nature of these and other stories.

The left brain, at least the lower left hemisphere, is also externally oriented. This trait comes into play when some religious teachers chiefly rely upon fear based warnings of what happens if one doesn't embrace and practice a religion ( a) "You'll go to hell because the scriptures said"..."Your family and community will not approve of you")...To follow these kind of external threats is to follow one's fears - fears that are set up on very dubious grounds.

I would dispute that religion and science are unified. Yes, this unity can be perceived by relatively open minded people in the religious and scientific camps, and those outside of both camps. Here's why I doubt that most can 'see the join' between the two.

A friend of mine who works in alternative medicine was recently over in South Africa. She was assigned to help a woman who was really ill. This woman was convinced that only the grace of God could heal her, and was resistant to any alternative methods (which to be fair, weren't that outlandish at all). Well, the woman actually ended up dying, when she just might have been able to prolong her life. This may be a fairly extreme and dramatic example but I use it to show how too much faith in religion, in a dogmatic way, isn't always a good thing.

This was a long reply and I hope that it responds to at least some of your questions!

Last edited by decode reality; 13-09-2010 at 09:36 PM.
decode reality is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-09-2010, 08:30 PM   #8
dedicate
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,322
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Guess not many people are interested enough to help you prove Religion is just another left-brain prison. But go on and believe it if you wish... even believe, sooner-or-later, one would rid the world of this disease.

Everybody has to explain, even to themselves, why it is that religion is here. Some of the theories are pretty interesting and we hear those as much as any other.... "God concept I'm accustomed to seeing expressed on the forum."

Belief in God is a schizophrenia.. Religion is all borrowed from legends and myths... "They" created religion to control us... Religion was created out of pyschodelic and LSD experience of primitive man.. A brainwashing.. Opium of the masses .. due to the funtion of a left-brain predominance... is religion.

All seeming to provide an explanation as to why something exists. I would like to agree with at least one of these either scientific or socialogical views, but here we usually find "The Source" as a rejection of anything spiritual.... Or just another left-brain prison, just another opium, just another brainwashing, just another marxist ideology or fable.


P.S. The right side of the brain, controls the left side of the body and vise verse. Just another example of the genius behind it all.

Last edited by dedicate; 14-09-2010 at 10:44 PM.
dedicate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-09-2010, 06:01 AM   #9
decode reality
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 24,061
Likes: 4,369 (2,796 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dedicate View Post
Guess not many people are interested enough to help you prove Religion is just another left-brain prison. But go on and believe it if you wish... even believe, sooner-or-later, one would rid the world of this disease.

Everybody has to explain, even to themselves, why it is that religion is here. Some of the theories are pretty interesting and we hear those as much as any other.... "God concept I'm accustomed to seeing expressed on the forum."

Belief in God is a schizophrenia.. Religion is all borrowed from legends and myths... "They" created religion to control us... Religion was created out of pyschodelic and LSD experience of primitive man.. A brainwashing.. Opium of the masses .. due to the funtion of a left-brain predominance... is religion.

All seeming to provide an explanation as to why something exists. I would like to agree with at least one of these either scientific or socialogical views, but here we usually find "The Source" as a rejection of anything spiritual.... Or just another left-brain prison, just another opium, just another brainwashing, just another marxist ideology or fable.


P.S. The right side of the brain, controls the left side of the body and vise verse. Just another example of the genius behind it all.
Quick response for now.....will respond to the above fully later.
Yes, I hear you. Although it's not a problem if this topic isn't inundated with replies, as it's more for research and exploring concepts. I'll keep returning to it periodically. I'd prefer the thread to be different from the tirade of arguments that makes up so many other threads.
decode reality is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-09-2010, 02:35 PM   #10
dedicate
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,322
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Before being on this forum, truely it was unknown the measure of anti-religion sentiment which also exist in the world. By that, --- anti-religion, -- meaning the wish or desire to debase religion, to bring it down into the dirt and stamp on it. Pro-religon would do the opposite and hope to lift the subject up.

In normal every day commerse people must be just more polite or respecting of other people's believes. -- not wanting to open the can of worms.-- so when they meet a person with a cross piece of jewelry, it doesn't become a shooting match.. This convention doesn't really exist on a forum, always.

This way it is out in the open and we can see this world is really made of all types and people don't have to hide their true fellings so much.

Why is it that so many people have a real dislike for religion? Lets say, for arguement sake, religion should be removed from society. Is hating it, taring at it, breaking it down and insulting (or even harming) the people who have this disease the way to remove it? Should we make it illegal, like the illegal drugs which continue to plague our streets? How could we remove such a thing without hurting anyone? Is it possible? or can it only be war?

Last edited by dedicate; 15-09-2010 at 02:48 PM.
dedicate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-09-2010, 03:26 PM   #11
decode reality
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 24,061
Likes: 4,369 (2,796 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dedicate View Post
Before being on this forum, truely it was unknown the measure of anti-religion sentiment which also exist in the world. By that, --- anti-religion, -- meaning the wish or desire to debase religion, to bring it down into the dirt and stamp on it. Pro-religon would do the opposite and hope to lift the subject up.

In normal every day commerse people must be just more polite or respecting of other people's believes. -- not wanting to open the can of worms.-- so when they meet a person with a cross piece of jewelry, it doesn't become a shooting match.. This convention doesn't really exist on a forum, always.

This way it is out in the open and we can see this world is really made of all types and people don't have to hide their true fellings so much.

Why is it that so many people have a real dislike for religion? Lets say, for arguement sake, religion should be removed from society. Is hating it, taring at it, breaking it down and insulting (or even harming) the people who have this disease the way to remove it? Should we make it illegal, like the illegal drugs which continue to plague our streets? How could we remove such a thing without hurting anyone? Is it possible? or can it only be war?
Religious institutions have done so much to suppress thought and artificially control people's behaviour. Naturally, the response to that from people outside it is one of anger. It's clear that fear and guilt have been the strategies used by ignorant preachers to keep their 'flock' contained. Keeping them locked into reptilian brain fight/flight mode (to keep this in context with the thread). "Surprisingly", when a person breaks out of that belief system, they find out that thunder won't strike them, nor will they suffer any misfortune brought upon them by "God".

Those who aren't in a religion aren't always necessarily more free thinking, liberated and evolved. But there's a lot to be said for breaking away from religions - systems that portray themselves as the highest expression of human achievement, yet on inspection are at best like jigsaw puzzles with the pieces missing (but believing that they are the complete picture).
decode reality is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-09-2010, 05:01 PM   #12
dedicate
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,322
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Religious institutions have done so much to suppress thought and artificially control people's behaviour. Naturally, the response to that from people outside it is one of anger. It's clear that fear and guilt have been the strategies used by ignorant preachers to keep their 'flock' contained. Keeping them locked into reptilian brain fight/flight mode (to keep this in context with the thread).
What's wrong with suppression of thought and control of behaviour? Every aspect of our lives is suppression of thought and control over behaviour. I thought that was a good thing?

I mean, those damn Marxists! They shouldn't even be allowed to speak freely (And in some circles, they aren't). We should round them up like Hitler did. The Marxist philosophy is behind the death of and imprisonment of millions and millions innocent people.. and maybe a couple minor wars to boot.

Is that anger enough? Is the solution appropriate? Or maybe we should be saying, "Marxism is a social disease and needs treatment."? It's an inapropriate use of the left-brain funtion.. to keep things within the context of the thread.

Or smokers.. we all know how wrong and bad it is for our heath. Millions of people suffer as a result. We should make it our mission in life to stop this menace! Get really angry. .. We should start posts on the dangers of smoking and discourage it at every turn! We willl Make it illegal,, and a sin!.. something else to hate.

Last edited by dedicate; 15-09-2010 at 05:31 PM.
dedicate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-09-2010, 05:31 PM   #13
decode reality
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 24,061
Likes: 4,369 (2,796 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dedicate View Post
What's wrong with suppression of thought and control of behaviour? Every aspect of our lives has suppression of thought and control over behaviour. I thought that was a good thing?

I mean, those damn Marxists! They shouldn't even be allowed to speak freely (And in some circles, they aren't). We should round them up like Hitler did. The Marxist philosophy is behind the death of and imprisonment of millions and millions innocent people.. and maybe a couple minor wars to boot.

Is that anger enough? Is the solution appropriate? Or maybe we should be saying, "Marxism is a social disease and needs treatment."? It's an inapropriate use of the left-brain funtion.. to keep things within the context of the thread.

Or smokers.. we all know how wrong and bad it is for our heath. Millions of people suffer as a result. We should make it our mission in life to stop this menace! Get really angry. .. We should start posts on the dangers of smoking and discourage it at every turn! We willl Make it illegal,, and a sin!.. something else to hate.
OK, for the sake of clarity...Sometimes it's possible to take a statement ("suppression of thought/"control of behaviour") that was apparently a generalisation, and take it to mean something specific. So, when I said 'suppression of thoughts', I was hinting towards thoughts such as "I disagree with that teaching", "That teaching is a lie" and behaviours such as deciding to up and leave the religion.

If 'freedom' is the freedom to give yourself lung cancer with cigs or make yourself ill with too much booze, by definition, that isn't really freedom, is it? It's nothing but the superficial 'trickster' in the lower left brain, deluding us with words and surface definitions - and the reality behind the word is quite different from what the word appears to be.

Last edited by decode reality; 15-09-2010 at 05:35 PM.
decode reality is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-09-2010, 05:54 PM   #14
dedicate
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,322
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
If 'freedom' is the freedom to give yourself lung cancer with cigs or make yourself ill with too much booze, by definition, that isn't really freedom, is it?
It is freedom to do as you like. What "really freedom" is, is allowing others to do as they like. That's freedom.

It is telling of what degree of "controled society" we have,... when a person asks to die where and when or how they wish.

Last edited by dedicate; 15-09-2010 at 06:05 PM.
dedicate is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:05 PM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.