tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-46732514040048258052024-03-12T17:37:51.749-07:00Los Angeles Secular Humanistsaving minds, not soulsL.A.S.H.http://www.blogger.com/profile/03232903538937971137noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4673251404004825805.post-80774884267685270632014-12-17T09:13:00.000-08:002014-12-17T09:13:19.678-08:00thought for the day<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XGZrNFxRxxE/VJG5gX_bYNI/AAAAAAAAAG0/0i8QAqBVqFk/s1600/Harris_001.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XGZrNFxRxxE/VJG5gX_bYNI/AAAAAAAAAG0/0i8QAqBVqFk/s1600/Harris_001.jpg" height="582" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />L.A.S.H.http://www.blogger.com/profile/03232903538937971137noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4673251404004825805.post-92163621125123115382014-12-10T09:49:00.000-08:002014-12-10T09:49:03.954-08:00thought for the day<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-xgaBbItfx70/VIdBRbKxVUI/AAAAAAAAAGk/zhmH99XT8Hc/s1600/1442669_22971580_sciVcre.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-xgaBbItfx70/VIdBRbKxVUI/AAAAAAAAAGk/zhmH99XT8Hc/s1600/1442669_22971580_sciVcre.jpg" height="394" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />L.A.S.H.http://www.blogger.com/profile/03232903538937971137noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4673251404004825805.post-87968560114270495652014-12-09T09:33:00.002-08:002014-12-09T09:33:51.761-08:00thought for the day<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-yDlPAproQ7k/VIcxZLv40tI/AAAAAAAAAGU/DubBvQC1Pek/s1600/1433161_12797566_cult.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-yDlPAproQ7k/VIcxZLv40tI/AAAAAAAAAGU/DubBvQC1Pek/s1600/1433161_12797566_cult.jpg" height="441" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />L.A.S.H.http://www.blogger.com/profile/03232903538937971137noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4673251404004825805.post-16209888984405930842014-12-03T10:13:00.000-08:002014-12-11T13:38:47.429-08:00Responding to an Angry Creationist<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-0U6xFrhE7fE/VH9PL_gA0SI/AAAAAAAAAGE/VvCTWcZVuCA/s1600/Creationism.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-0U6xFrhE7fE/VH9PL_gA0SI/AAAAAAAAAGE/VvCTWcZVuCA/s1600/Creationism.JPG" height="320" width="256" /></a></div>
<h3 dir="ltr" id="docs-internal-guid-81e237ec-1149-8e15-a294-f965bcd8c2b1" style="line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: small;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-size: large;">When it comes down to the basic element</span> of the laws of physics, it can be hard to understand how and why everything comes into play. You ask, “who set those laws?” But complexity doesn’t equate to supernaturalism. Science doesn’t claim to know everything but it has made some pretty good logical conclusions about the things we are a little hazy about. It is also open to further discovery and amendment if need be, something that religion refuses to do.</span></span></h3>
<h3>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></h3>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: justify;">
<h3>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">I apologize if my tone may seem rather pithy but I must be blunt to get my point across quickly. I couldn't necessarily agree that you're talking science because your motive is religion. As a Young-Earth Creationist you disagree with the consensus of modern science! The concepts you discredit are not mere theories but established facts that have withstood the processes of scientific scrutiny. Additionally, it is evident that you’re knowledge base is severely outdated (as I’ve pointed out many times before) and your worldview is heavily biased by religion (two things that do not mix). You poke and stick god in holes in cosmological and biological data because they are contrary to a 2,500-1500 year old collection of allegorical literature. Is it coincidence that you accept the rest of the scientific claim? If you believe that the earth is six thousand years old and that man was supernaturally assembled from mud and woman from man’s rib then either your education took you nowhere or you took your education nowhere. As you are a science-denier your credentials hold no credibility to me because you choose blind belief over freedom of thought. There is CERTAINLY much more evidence supporting the current scientific model than there is for talking snakes, tower of Babel, and virgin births. In comparison, this is not only embarrassing, this is mythology.</span></span></span></h3>
</div>
<h3>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></h3>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: justify;">
<h3>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Secondly you need to be aware that this is not a polemic argument. Simply because you find the current scientific deductions faulty does not mean that your side of the argument is proven true by default. This is a multifaceted investigation on a multitude of events and not a court hearing to render a simple guilty or not guilty on the whole. You may not subscribe to the current ideas at hand but you don’t have the benefit of the doubt either. You have yet to present any evidence supporting spiritualism and supernatural events.</span></span></span></h3>
</div>
<h3>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></h3>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: justify;">
<h3>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Lastly, in our past debates I have taken only one perspective of this argument and that is in the defense of science. There are other schools of thought which I have yet open to refute your position by way of religious history in the etic perspective, philosophy, and a plain old-fashioned objective analysis. The absurdities, dictatorship and hypocrisies (not to mention the horrific crimes committed in the name of god) claimed not only by your religion but by many around the world can and have been reduced to man’s rudimentary attempts at understanding our surrounding world. How poorly man lived and struggled until the era of modern science paved the way for progress and unparalleled growth for the benefit of humanity.</span></span></span></h3>
</div>
<h3>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></h3>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.15; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: justify;">
<h3>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">At some point in time one must let go of mythology and exert one’s own volition in coping with the whole of the world. Faith may be a heightened sense of hope and inspiration but it does not render medical attention, psychiatric treatment, epidemiology, tactical response to catastrophes, design of high-yielding crops, connecting the world with travel and information, assert higher thinking of ethics and morality, and last I checked it doesn’t land man on the moon either. I submit to you that this is not an arrogant view but of a realistic one. You may keep you talking snakes but as for myself I will resort to the old Polish Proverb: Not my circus, not my monkeys.</span></span></span></h3>
</div>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span>L.A.S.H.http://www.blogger.com/profile/03232903538937971137noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4673251404004825805.post-30700309919807252402014-10-22T22:26:00.000-07:002014-12-17T08:50:31.074-08:00<div style="text-align: justify;">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style>
<![endif]-->
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-tBVTQaFbZKo/VEh_reMNdoI/AAAAAAAAAEQ/ZgsOOTj0MAg/s1600/This_is_not_a_pipe_by_kaciukas.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-tBVTQaFbZKo/VEh_reMNdoI/AAAAAAAAAEQ/ZgsOOTj0MAg/s1600/This_is_not_a_pipe_by_kaciukas.jpg" height="225" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<h3 style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: large;"> </span></h3>
<h3 style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">“…but
Christianity </span></span></h3>
<h3 style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">is NOT a religion!"</span></span></h3>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">The
first time I heard this I stopped dead in my tracks and thought, “What the hell
are you talking about?” Come to find out there is an entire movement where
Christian believers are redefining Christianity…again! </span></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">I
had found a <a href="http://philippians1v21.wordpress.com/why-believe-in-jesus/why-christianity-is-not-a-religion/">site</a>
where I was able to find an explanation of <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">how</i>
someone attempts to reason this notion. The site, if you follow the
link, shares with you a standard-issue sermon on the idea as well as a
long-winded and convoluted explanation of, well…deluded convolution. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">I
will spare you the misery of reading the entire rationalization train-wreck and it's default prayer for salvation at the end so I
will simplify this notion for you. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">As
most religions require a belief in a god along with good deeds to qualify for passage to heaven, this new notion of Christianity
claims that it doesn’t require anything. By this they mean that “God seeks man rather than man seeks God” by way of sending Jesus and making mans' passage to heaven instantaneous and “free”: no works, deeds or
actions required.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">However,
I think of religion as it is defined in the dictionary. I don’t think a religion can
neither be over-sophisticated nor over-simplified in order to exclude
itself from the group of which belongs.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">So
below is e-mail debate I held with the author of this blog in attempts
to…well, you’ll see. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lCcFhHH--Lg/VEh_rh-u6vI/AAAAAAAAAEU/k1W-IJ-FoBM/s1600/christian_not_religion2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lCcFhHH--Lg/VEh_rh-u6vI/AAAAAAAAAEU/k1W-IJ-FoBM/s1600/christian_not_religion2.jpg" height="100" width="320" /></a></span></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">I wrote: </b>“…I’d
like to complement your enthusiasm on the catchy notion that “Christianity is
not a religion.” It certainly is a new perspective to spark interest in the new
and old believers alike. Whether or not you coined the idea I do not know but I
can’t help to think that it is merely a “selling gimmick” rather than an honest
expression of logical thinking or even in consensus on what we, as a society,
define as religion. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Now
mind you, this is not a theological discussion, this is a <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">logical</i> discussion on which I base this contention. Allow me to
explain myself. My contention starts with your definition itself. The
definition you used is:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Religion is a system of beliefs or a code of moral conduct that judges
(qualifies or disqualifies)</i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>a person based on their
adherence and obedience to certain codes,</i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> rules, laws, traditions, or the performance of required acts.</i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">True,
this is a valid definition of the word “religion”. But you base your entire
“philosophy”, if you will, on one of <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">hundreds
</i>of valid, if not even more applicable, definitions of the word “religion”. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">You
see, most definitions of religion come up like these: </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">“</i><b><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">1.</span></i></b><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">
<b>a. </b>Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded
as creator and governor of the universe.</span></i><b><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;"> </span></i></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><b><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">b. </span></i></b><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">A
personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.</span></i><b><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;"> </span></i></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><b><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">2. </span></i></b><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">The
life or condition of a person in a religious order.</span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><b><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">3. </span></i></b><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">A
set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual
leader.</span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><b><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">4. </span></i></b><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">A
cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.”</span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">…<a href="http://www.thefreedictionary.com/">www.thefreedictionary.com</a></span></span></div>
</blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">or</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">"<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Belief in and reverence for a supernatural
power recognized as the creator and governor of the universe;</i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> A particular integrated system of this expression; The spiritual or emotional attitude of one who recognizes the existence
of a superhuman power or powers."</i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">….<a href="http://web.pdx.edu/~tothm/religion/Definitions.htm">http://web.pdx.edu/~tothm/religion/Definitions.htm</a></span></div>
</blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">But I’ve found, out of several definitions, one <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">similar</i> to your own. That is:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">“<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">1.
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and <span style="color: #333333;">purpose</span> of <span style="color: #333333;">the</span> <span style="color: #333333;">universe,</span></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">especially
when considered as the <span style="color: #333333;">creation</span> of a
superhuman <span style="color: #333333;">agency</span> <span style="color: #333333;">or</span>
<span style="color: #333333;">agencies,</span></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">usually
involving <span style="color: #333333;">devotional</span> and ritual observances,</span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">and
<span style="color: #333333;">often</span> <span style="color: #333333;">containing</span>
<span style="color: #333333;">a</span> <span style="color: #333333;">moral</span>
code governing the conduct of human affairs.”</span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">…<a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion">http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion</a></span></span></div>
</blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Here, it says
“and often”, meaning, sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn’t include the
“conduct of human affairs”. The truth of the matter, Pastor </span>Driscoll<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">, is that
there are literally hundreds of ways to describe one thing. They more or less
say the same thing. But you’ve chosen one that illustrates the idea that fits
your gimmick. What bothers me is that the idea of Christianity not being a
religion is contingent, for you only, on that one single phrase. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">My</span></i><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;"> point being, is that, based on all these
definitions above, Christianity is <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">still</i>
a religion. One might say, “But considering the latter of the three,
Christianity still does not require one to perform certain actions to receive
the forgiveness that Christ has given us as a result of his resurrection.” I
say, absolutely not. Regardless of which definition you use, including your
own, Christianity still maintains the full criteria of a religion, as clearly
illustrated in <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">all </i>the definitions above
because it’s still belief in the supernatural; it’s still a personal or
institutionalized system grounded in such belief; it still has a set of beliefs
values and practices based on the teachings of a certain leader. So, here’s the
punch line: if Christianity DOES NOT qualify for <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">any</i> of those, then Christianity is not a religion. The final
result: <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Christianity is a religion!</i></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">So this is
why: you cannot negate the application of these other definitions of religion
even <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">if</i> Christianity does not require
one to regulate ones behavior in the way the old Testament does. These are
merely definitions which are subject to the normal variance of society,
culture, etc: these are not Federal Regulations where one has to obey one
verbatim just as you do when you interpret the scriptures. Even with your
definition, Christianity still fulfills <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">all</i>
these criteria as given above as well as the hundreds of other definitions on
religion which you will find online. Pastor, I implore you, this is not merely
my opinion, but simple logical reasoning. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">You say you
“hate religion” in hopes to make an appeal not only to people of religion but
also of the non-religious, but clearly you, an apologist by example, are merely
advertising the religion which you believe and chose to view differently when
in fact it’s the same two-thousand year old thing that it always has been. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Should you
decide to reply, simply remember that I said this is not a theological
discussion, this is a logical discussion. NO bible verses at play here in any way,
please.”</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RRdoX02fXBg/VEh_rkg70cI/AAAAAAAAAEY/KSSFWlWmE8Q/s1600/Nixon-not-a-crook.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RRdoX02fXBg/VEh_rkg70cI/AAAAAAAAAEY/KSSFWlWmE8Q/s1600/Nixon-not-a-crook.jpg" height="216" width="320" /></a></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">The blogger responds:</b> “<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">I do not intend what I am saying about Christianity not being a religion
to be a “<i>selling gimmick</i>”. Far from it! It is something I wholeheartedly
believe. I am being very sincere here. There is a VERY profound and significant
difference between what Jesus taught and all the world religions. Jesus’
teachings stand alone in a very real way, and are drastically different than
any other way to God offered by any religion. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">I really
don’t care if you want to call Christianity a “religion” or not. This is a
pointless debate that I will not enter into again. I have previously listed
several sources that list among their definitions ones that agree with my use
here (See my response to Amanda above, comment 48). I have even pointed out
that the origin of the word “religion” is from the Latin meaning “obligation or
bond”. In your response you even made the point that there are many definitions
for this word (and even quoted one that agrees with mine). You also overlooked
your definition 3 from the freedictionary.com that you quoted which includes “<i>practices</i>”.
Elsewhere from your list: “<i>A particular integrated system of this expression</i>”.
All of these are getting at the idea and way I am using the word here. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">What I take
away from this is that the word “religion” is a very loaded word that means a
lot of different things to different people. I have no issue if you want to use
this word to mean something different than I do. All I ask from you is the same
freedom. I think the diversity of definitions for this word provide for that.
My use is certainly within the scope of how people use this word. If you want
me to illustrate this point consider this usage: a dentist saying to a patient,
“I want you to brush your teeth and floss every morning, religiously.”
Obviously the dentist doesn’t mean the person is to believe their tooth brush
is the creator of the universe, should pray to it, that their floss is holy, or
have an emotional attitude about it. He means that he wants the person to be
devoted to this practice. He wants the person to see it as an obligation
required to achieve his goal of having healthy teeth. He wants them to perform
the acts required to gain this goal. This is the same meaning I am using. This is
simply “logical reasoning”. No bible verses are needed. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">The word you
use to describe Christianity isn’t that important. What I am trying to point
out is there is something drastically different (at its very fiber) about
Christianity from anything else. It is truly alone as the only faith that says
that God Himself came down to man instead of telling man what we must do to
come to God. It is the only faith where God Himself does all the work required
(not us). This is a huge difference! Whether or not you agree it is true or
not, you must admit that there is something very unique about what Jesus taught
on this. We can argue all day about whether Christianity should be considered a
religion or not, but I would much rather talk about this clear difference. You
are missing the forest for the trees here. A raft made of logs may have some
similarities to an aircraft carrier, but what best characterizes the two is
their vast differences, not their few similarities. Give the difference between
Christianity and the other religions whatever name you want, let’s talk about
the amazing difference! </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">At the heart
of Christianity is the profound idea that it is only God who can fix the
problem of sin and restore us to a right relationship with Him. No other faith
actually has a solution to the problem of evil. They all teach some form of the
idea that man must become better on our own, work harder, make up for evil they
we’ve done, and earn good standing before God. But how can a man, who could not
keep from doing this evil in the first place, completely stop committing it in
the future? And even if he could, not doing evil in the future does not negate
or erase evil already done in the past. We all know this is true. I am found
guilty of murder by a jury and I stand up to give my last remarks before I am
sentenced and I tell the judge, “Yes I did it, but I have been so good since
then. I have walked old ladies across the street and worked at the local food
bank”, what do you think the judge would say? He would respond, “Yes, but that
doesn’t change the fact that you committed this crime. You must pay the penalty
for it.”</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">If God is
good and just, He cannot simply overlook evil. If He doesn’t punish Hitler He
is an unjust judge. But, if He doesn’t punish my sin of hurting my wife with
unkind words He would also be unjust. Yours too. No other faith addresses this
problem. They expect a holy and just god to be unholy and unjust and simply
tolerate evil or to continue to allow flawed, imperfect, frequently
wrong-motivated people to attempt to better themselves. The problem of sin and
evil remains. This is a logical problem with these religions. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">This is why
these religions cannot offer salvation. They do not successfully deal with the
problem of our sin. The only way God can remain just and we can go free is for
someone to pay our penalty for us. This allows God to remain just by not
failing to punish evil, but it also allows Him to let us go free. Other
religions have no one who is qualified to pay the debt caused by our sin. It is
only Jesus, the God-man, who can step in between you and God and pay this
penalty. No other person can do this. They aren’t qualified. They have their
own sin. No, the only way would be for God, Himself, to pay it for us. He is
the only one who is qualified. He alone is perfect and without His own sin. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">The amazing
result of this is that it is not our effort and works that earn us salvation in
Christianity, it is God’s work substituted in our place. Jesus did all the work
for us. He lived the perfect, sinless life. He died the death and took all my
sin upon Him. As a result the teaching of Christianity is that anyone who
accepts this gift is immediately righteous in God’s eyes! The righteousness of
Jesus blankets and covers them. When God looks at them He sees Jesus’ goodness.
It has nothing to do with anything they did. They can never do anything to make
themselves more or less righteous in God’s eyes. Therefore it has absolutely
NOTHING to do with their own effort and work.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">This is a
gigantic and fundamental difference! It is not semantics. It is not a sales
gimmick. The very nature of this faith is grounded in an act of God completely
alien to all the others. God dying for human beings? God sacrificing Himself to
fix our problem? God becoming a human and experiencing evil and pain like us?
God being murdered in our place? What religion is like this?!”</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PSHyPAukf6c/VEiQlMq-rhI/AAAAAAAAAFY/uHvsklrePR8/s1600/waitwhat-idontevenknow_23988f_3996414.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PSHyPAukf6c/VEiQlMq-rhI/AAAAAAAAAFY/uHvsklrePR8/s1600/waitwhat-idontevenknow_23988f_3996414.png" height="148" width="200" /></a></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">I responded:</b> “First
allow me to thank you for your response. My reason for being here is to gain
clarity in this discussion and you have taken your personal time to help those
with questions and for this I am graciously appreciative. Unlike some people I
do not see anything wrong with asking questions or having a constructive
conversation for that matter. If it wasn’t for open platforms for discussion
such as the one you provide we’d probably still be paying heavy premiums for <i><span style="font-style: normal; mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">plenary</span> </i>indulgences
and liberation from our iniquities from “His Grace” of the Holy Roman Catholic
Church…a time which I’m confident to say we would all abhor living in. A wise
man once said, “Within understanding lays freedom.” To discuss merely to argue
is worthless but to not discuss is even worse. Knowledge is priceless, let us
discuss, share and grow. </span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">In
response to what you so kindly wrote me, I have a better understanding of where
you are coming from. And though you have stated, “<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">I really don’t care if you want to call
Christianity a “religion” or not. This is a pointless debate that I will not
enter into again” I can certainly understand that you wouldn’t want to repeat
yourself but I would have thought that for a blog entitled “Why Christianity is
NOT a religion” this would be of utmost importance. So pardon me please if I’m
in the wrong forum but I have already taken the liberty to voice my idea, ask
your review and so I shall then now make my final rebuttal if you please. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">When
seeing that you are relying moreso on the etymology of the word “religion”,
which is often rooted in the terms as an “obligation” or “bond” (up through the
times of Lactantius or Cicero although it varies a bit in Jewish thought) it
makes a little more sense why you would not classify Christianity as a
religion. I still, however, don’t think that this is correct for this reason:
if Christianity has no bond or obligation, and I find no bond or obligation to
follow its credence, I will still be sentenced to eternal torture in hellfire
after I pass away; something I have absolutely no say or choice in MAKING a
choice; I am going to participate in this heaven or hell feud regardless of my
wish: I have NO choice. It literally is ‘an offer I cannot refuse’ in the worse
sense of the phrase. So, by this it would seem that there really IS<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> </i>a bond or obligation in order for me to
avoid torture which would be to mentally acknowledge the propositional
criteria; that being the few components of the Jesus story; and not just a one
time acceptance –a life long effort to live a life slightly acceptable to the
divine. But to me, a creed of ‘no bond or obligation’ would be,
“congratulations, you’re ALL going to heaven!” or a “Get out of hell FREE
card”. But this is not the case. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Additionally,
I feel that perhaps I didn’t quite illustrate my point very clearly regarding
the definition part of this topic. You wrote to Amanda, </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">“I appreciate your point that many
dictionaries and other sources do not define religion as I have done here. I
know and understand this.</span></i><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;"> The truth is that there is not great
agreement on the actual definition.”</span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Now,
I’m not going to talk about “truth” because most general public and pastors
included haven’t studied epistemology so I will utilize a different avenue to
express my point. Now, I wouldn’t quite go so far as to say that there isn’t a
great agreement on the actual definition; yet, I also wouldn’t quite say that
there is a disagreement either. I feel that it would be correct to say that
there is a vast area of which religion, or religions, fall into: meaning that,
all the different definitions we’ve come across are all <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">agreeable </i>and, here is my point, are widely accepted in consensus
in our society as to “what” religion is. Because these are merely
descriptions, not crucial qualifying criteria, one CANNOT discard the
definition as a whole simply because a religion doesn’t fall under one minor
particular part of the description.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">So,
said more simply, you wrote me, </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">“I have no issue if you want to use this
word to mean something different than I do. All I ask from you is the same
freedom.”</span></i></span></div>
</blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">I, nor others
here in agreement with my argument, are asking or using ANY freedom to use a
definition my way, your way or another persons way. We are saying that one must
need to use the definitions in the CORRECT way: that there are still the
majority of definitions of religion which Christianity DOES falls into. We
cannot pick and choose when it comes to definitions even in a vast variety. If
somehow, some way, it falls into the bucket, it’s a religion and Christianity
certainly is that. </span>Allow me to illustrate-</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">I
LOVE Mexican food. One of the many things I like to eat are taquitos. Now, when
I looked up the definition of a taquito it is given: </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"></span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">“a Mexican dish consisting of a small tortilla
rolled around a filling of meat and cheese and deep-fried.”</span></i></span></div>
</blockquote>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 52.75pt; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Now, I’m 35 years old and I have NEVER had a
taquito filled with meat AND cheese; none of them had cheese in them! Now I
wouldn’t be opposed to a taquito with meat AND cheese but that’s just not a
taquito to me; more like a fried enchilada! Now, CAN I SAY that a taquito
without cheese is NOT a taquito??? NO! It is just a different type. And so this
is how I argue the proper use of a definition.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Now, don’t
get me wrong. You say that Christianity is god coming to us and not us going to
god. Broadly speaking, I’ll give that to you. I’m certainly not contesting this
part of the idea. There <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">is</i> something
different about Christianity than there is comparatively with some of the other
major (existing) world religions. Some dead religions identical to Christianity
I can name at least a dozen of them but that’s for another blog! But it is
still looking up to someone or some thing of greater intelligence than us,
something of inspiration, something of reverence, something of which we love,
adore, sing praises too, build buildings for or in the name of, write songs,
have services, gatherings, and rituals (even if not obligatory but done purely
out of love) in the name of said deity. All those things I am talking about god
and all those things are of religion and yet again, Christianity is certainly
part of it…or at least a quasi-religion if you insist that it is different than
all other religions. THIS is how we use definitions.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Now you told me in so many words that it’s not so much the definition as
it is the concept. I understand very well where you are trying to get at. I
argued my case and honestly feel that I have definitively demonstrated that
Christianity is indeed a religion. So what is “Christianity is NOT a religion”
when it actually IS a religion? Religions, not just Christianity, have thrived
for thousands of years and SURVIVED because they adapt and modernize their structures
to accommodate themselves with the religious man in a progressive society. This
is a historically accredited and proven fact. It’s just a way of reinventing
itself. Now, its okay, they all do that. But it really isn’t much more than a
slogan or a way of raising an eyebrow. I have seen the modern movements of
younger generations following their new ideas in Christianity; but it is merely
perspective and not realistic difference as far as definition goes. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">So I submit to you, when there is “us” and then there is a “god”, in the
simplest sense of the term, it’s a religion regardless of the mechanics of how
the philosophy works. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Thank you for your time, patience and understanding…whether we agree or
not. Your friend in critical thinking, Eric.” </span></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-dTt7fN6FCE4/VEh_tt6Co-I/AAAAAAAAAE8/OvMPRIlH404/s1600/religion-religion-christianity-morm.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-dTt7fN6FCE4/VEh_tt6Co-I/AAAAAAAAAE8/OvMPRIlH404/s1600/religion-religion-christianity-morm.jpeg" height="251" width="320" /></a></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">The blogger responds: </b></span>"Eric, Thanks for listening to what I said and
responding. </span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">I want you to know that I did not post your
“rebuttal” on my blog page because, as I have already clearly said, I do NOT
wish to continue what I consider a pointless debate (what the word “religion”
means) on that page. Arguing over the semantics of which definition you
or I chose for a word distracts from the point I am trying to make on that page.
You said, “<i>I can certainly understand that you wouldn’t want to repeat
yourself but I would have thought that for a blog entitled “Why Christianity is
NOT a religion” this would be of utmost importance.”</i> But, you again,
misunderstand that there is an idea I am trying to convey here. You are
hung up on the word “religion”, I get that. I meant it when I said I
don’t care if you want to call Christianity a religion. Go ahead.
Peace. What you don’t seem to understand is that I have something to say
with this page. I am trying to show the powerful and amazing way in which
Christianity is different. What word you use to describe that difference
isn’t the point at all. The point is the difference! The page is to
discuss the difference, not debate over word choice. I am not posting
your “rebuttal” because you are not rebutting my POINT at all. You are
critiquing my word choice which is taking the focus off what I intended to
say. </span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">
</span></span>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;"><br /></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">
</span></span>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">By doing so, you are missing the forest for
the trees. It’s like a person who has been bitten by a poisonous snake
arguing with the doctor trying to save them, saying “the shot is really called
an antidote, not a serum”. Who cares what you call it!? Just take
it. What word you choose to call it is totally beside the point.</span></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">I think your acknowledgment that the blog
comments might be the wrong forum is correct. However, I would be happy
to continue the discussion via email since I agree with you that, as long as it
is respectful and fruitful, both parties are benefited. I also enjoy a
good discussion and particularly when it relates to this topic. I agree
with you that there is nothing wrong with asking questions and having good
constructive conversations (even if we disagree). This is how we
grow. It is ok to not agree. It is ok to be wrong too, as long as
we can learn from it and move on. I am certain that I am wrong about a
great many things. The trouble is, I don’t know which ones they
are. If I did, I’d change my opinion and be right again :).</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">As a side note, I just wanted to let you
know that I have studied epistemology. I am quite comfortable discussing
what knowledge is and how it is obtained. Just so you know a little about
me, I am not just a pastor. That isn’t actually what I do for a living.
I am actually an engineer. I work at Boeing designing passenger
aircraft. I am a scientist and engineer that has studied the Bible, the
Christian faith and philosophy in depth. I also know a great deal about
apologetics and making arguments for Christianity from the evidence.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Since you seem very determined to discuss my
use of the word “religion” in this blog, I will humor you once more (even
though as I have already said, I think this is a red herring). This will
be my last attempt to explain why I think my use is actually a correct usage of
the word, in the context I provided. If I am not able to show you how
this is a valid usage in this response, we will have to agree to disagree on
it. It isn’t that important anyway. The point I was making in the
blog is much more important and I would much rather discuss that. I am
fine if you call Christianity a religion.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">I find it interesting that in your last
response first you agree with me that there isn’t great agreement on the
definition of the word “religion”, and then you proceed to lecture me on my
incorrect use of the word. What disagreement means is that there is not
universal consensus. If there is disagreement, then it means religion can
mean more than one thing. As long as my usage is within the sphere of possible
definitions for the word, I am not wrong in my statement. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">At one point you say there is a “<i>widely
accepted consensus in our society as to "what" religion is</i>.”
However, this is plainly untrue. It is shown to be untrue by the
very fact that you and I are having a disagreement on the definition. I
am certain that you are not alone in your view of the meaning of the
word. I know I am not. I know many people who use it in the same
context to mean the same thing I am saying here. In fact, several notable
people have remarked on religion’s allusiveness to define and nail down. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Consider these examples: </span><br />
</div>
</span></span><span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;"><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">“Most of us know perfectly well what
religion is - until someone asks us to define it.” ~ </span></i><i><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">St.
Augustine</span></i></blockquote>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Consider this source: <a href="http://www.religioustolerance.org/rel_defn.htm" target="_blank">http://www.religioustolerance.org/rel_defn.htm</a>
that begs off trying to provide an all encompassing definition.
They say…</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
</span></span><blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;"><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<i><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">“Many people have their personal favorite
definition which they know to be the correct one, to the exclusion of all
others. Unfortunately, there does not exist anything approaching a consensus.”</span></i></div>
</span></span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">This is why I would not attempt to provide
an all inclusive definition for the word. Instead I opted for its use in
a narrow context. I clarified exactly how I was using the word and in
what context I was applying it. I feel I was very fair and clear on
this. I am not saying this is the only context or only definition for the
word. It is merely the one I chose here. That should be clear.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">I find your view of how to use definitions
curious. Are you actually claiming that whenever a person uses a word
they must mean every definition for that word at the same time? If I say
Christianity is not a religion that I can’t be talking about how it isn’t a
religion according to ONE definition, but that I have to be saying it isn’t a
religion by ALL definitions? I would never try to claim that. That
is NOT my position at all. If that is what you are arguing against you
are attacking a straw man.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Let’s take an example. The word cow as
two definitions according to Merriam-Webster:</span><br />
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 33.5pt; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">1: the mature female of cattle (genus <i>Bos</i>)
</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 33.5pt; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">2: a domestic bovine animal
regardless of sex or age </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 33.5pt; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Now, if I were to say “milk comes from cows”
it would be very clear that my usage only applies one of the two definitions
above. Milk only comes from mature females of the species. So it is
clear I mean the first definition above. You could not tell me I was
wrong because milk doesn’t come from male cows and there is a definition that
defines the word “cow” to include males. That’s absurd. Clearly,
only the one definition intended in the usage can be applied to the
statement. The statement must be judged as true or false based on the
single definition intended.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">For example, the word “set” has at least 464
definitions in the </span><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Oxford</span><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">
dictionary! Clearly when someone uses this word in a sentence they cannot
be expected to be meaning all of these at once. How absurd. No,
they mean just one. If they say, “The table is set”, they do not mean the
table is placed on top of something or that the table is the stage for some
play. The mean just one definition: the table is arranged for a
meal. </span><br />
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Similarly, one CANNOT say that I am wrong
when I use the word religion to mean just one of its many dictionary
definitions. I have already clearly shown (and you have even agreed) that
there are definitions for religion that are how I am using it here. I am
NOT arguing that there are NO definitions of the word religion that may
describe Christianity. I have already agreed this is the case. But,
this fact has nothing to do with what I am saying in this article. I am
not using those definitions. I am using the word in just one of its
established definitions and showing that Christianity (unlike all the others)
does not fit. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">And, that is completely fair and
reasonable. This is what everyone does every time they use any
word! If you were to write an article titled “Why the </span><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Seattle</span><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;"> Seahawks
Will Beat the Minnesota Vikings in this Sunday’s Football Game”, I would
not write a comment to it saying that you are wrong because the Seahawk players
would never physically assault the other team’s players (because they would go
to jail). Perhaps when I read the word “beat”, I thought you meant one of
the word’s other definitions. But, I would imagine the rest of the
article would make it clear which definition you meant. I even went
out of my way in my article on Christianity to clarify, up front, which
definition I was using!</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">It would be absolutely ridiculous of me to
assume you must mean ALL the definitions of the word “beat” at once (or even a
majority of the definitions). But, this is exactly what you are trying to
do to me. You say, “…there are still the majority of definitions of
religion which Christianity DOES falls into. We cannot pick and choose when it
comes to definitions even in a vast variety.” But this is exactly what
every single one of us does whenever we use any word. We select a single
definition (from multiple legitimate ones) that means what we are trying to say
in that context and we use the word. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">You said, “I argued my case and honestly
feel that I have definitively demonstrated that Christianity is indeed a
religion.” Not that it really matters at all, but I actually do not think
you succeeded in demonstrating that at all. If I understand your point
correctly, you are essentially saying that if Christianity can be considered a
religion by ANY definition then it must be called a religion in EVERY context.
However, this completely ignores the other definitions and their
usage. There would not be other definitions for a word unless the word
could be used in a different context to mean a different thing. If the
same word can have a different meaning, then when it is used to mean that other
meaning, it no longer has the first meaning. It seems obvious to me, but
apparently it isn’t. If the word “beat” can mean “the tempo of a song”
and also “hitting something”, when I say “I beat the rug to remove dust” I am
meaning something different than when I say “this song has a great beat”. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Yes, Christianity may be a religion when
someone uses the word in one context, but it is NOT a religion in the context I
used the word. That is what I meant when I said, “I have no issue if you want
to use this word to mean something different than I do. All I ask from you is
the same freedom.” I ask for the freedom to use another one of its
definitions. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Additionally, you failed to address several
of the valid points I made in my last response, including when I pointed out
that some of the very definitions you cited DID include practices and
rituals. You also didn’t address my example of the dentist asking the
patient to brush their teeth “religiously”. Would you stop and correct
the dentist, telling him not to push his spiritual beliefs on his
patient? Of course not, you understand very well that he is using that
same word in a different context to mean something different. This is all
I am doing.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">I have no idea what point you were trying to
make with the Mexican taquito story. I do not see how that applies here
at all. You didn’t tie it into the discussion we are having. I like
taquitos too, with cheese or without.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">You said of Christianity . . .</span><br />
</div>
</span></span><blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;"><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<i><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">“But it is still looking up to someone or
some thing of greater intelligence than us, something of inspiration, something
of reverence, something of which we love, adore, sing praises too, build
buildings for or in the name of, write songs, have services, gatherings, and
rituals (even if not obligatory but done purely out of love) in the name of
said deity. All those things I am talking about god and all those things are of
religion and yet again, Christianity is certainly part of it…or at least a
quasi-religion if you insist that it is different than all other religions.
THIS is how we use definitions.”</span></i></div>
</span></span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">But this is where you fail to grasp how
Christianity is fundamentally different. You can strip away all that and
you still have Christianity! This is not so with the other
religions. You need none of the things you mention above to be a
Christian. Remember that I have never made the argument that Christianity
hasn’t been <i>expressed</i> in religious ways. I am simply saying that
Christianity at its core is NOT any of these things or the combination of
them. They are peripheral and superfluous to Christianity.
Christianity is at its most simple expression: “Christ in me, the hope of
glory!” (</span><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Col</span><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;"> 1:27)
Christianity is Jesus Christ. It is knowing the person of Jesus
Christ. It is not a list of rules, a place to meet, a way to sing, a
ritual to perform, or even creeds to affirm. It is all about a person:
Jesus the Christ. If you have Jesus and one other person who believes in
Him and they are in a mud hut somewhere…you have Christianity. If
you have believer in Jesus alone in a prison cell, chained to a wall, whose
tongue has been cut out and who cannot speak or do anything…you have
Christianity. THIS is what we mean when we say Christianity is NOT
a Religion. No actions must be performed, no rituals are necessary, not
rules must be followed, no works are needed to earn anything.
Christianity is a condition of the mind and heart. It is a state of
BEING…not of DOING. In this, it is fundamentally different.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-2GZ21UxslWM/VEh_tCbKINI/AAAAAAAAAFE/k_guSODeZAU/s1600/not%2Ba%2Breligion546.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-2GZ21UxslWM/VEh_tCbKINI/AAAAAAAAAFE/k_guSODeZAU/s1600/not%2Ba%2Breligion546.jpg" /></a></div>
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">You say, “<i>if Christianity has no bond or
obligation, and I find no bond or obligation to follow its credence.”</i>
Yes! That’s it, exactly. That’s my very point. You aren’t
bound to follow any credence. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">You then say, “<i>I am going to participate
in this heaven or hell feud regardless of my wish: I have NO choice</i>.”
However, this is a straw man. Christians do not believe that.
Christianity holds that the person who goes to hell chose to go there. No
one will go to hell that didn’t choose to. Christianity holds that you
are currently in rebellion to God and choosing to reject His way and go your
own way. That’s a choice. You are culpable. You are a
responsible party, capable of making your own choice. You will be held
accountable for it. Can you really deny you are choosing to reject Jesus
as God?</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">This does not equal an obligation.
Perhaps it would be helpful to use an example. Let say you are flying on
an airplane over the mountains and both engines suddenly fail (perhaps the
plane flew through a flock of birds or something). You were sleeping and
didn’t realize anything had happened. You are just sitting there going
about your nap, completely oblivious to your imminent peril. Then the
stewardess comes to you, wakes you up and says, “I’m sorry to inform you sir,
but the airplane is doomed. We are going to crash in the
mountains.” This is some very bad news. You would most likely begin
to feel fear and possibly panic. But then she says this…”fortunately, we
happen to be carrying a couple of pallets of parachutes in the cargo compartment.
There is a team of skydivers aboard and they are transporting 350 parachutes to
the city we are traveling to. We have enough chutes for you, if you would
like to take one.” You, of course are not OBLIGATED to take one. It
is simply being offered to you. Would you lash out at the stewardess or
the skydiving team for offering it to you and call it an obligation? The
fact that you were unaware that the airplane was already crashing isn’t somehow
the fault of those who bring that message to you. You can certainly
choose to remain on the plane and go down with it. That is your
choice. No one will force you to take the parachute. You are under
no obligation.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">This is an excellent picture of what
Christianity teaches. Like the example of the plane crash, those who
choose to reject God and stay with their plan will face the consequences…and
they are severe. That is absolutely correct. However, they have
been offered the gift of the parachute to escape them. They have chosen
to reject it. You don’t have to do anything to deserve or earn the
parachute. It is free. All you must do is trust the one giving it
to you enough to put it on and jump. No one is obligated. You said,
“to me, a creed of ‘no bond or obligation’ would be, “congratulations, you’re
ALL going to heaven!” But, this is exactly what is being offered.
The stewardess is offering to save everyone on the plane. But if you
refuse the means by which she is providing this salvation (namely the
parachute) how can you accuse her of putting an obligation on you? She
neither forced you to stay on the plane or to jump. She simply offered
you the choice. This is what you said you wanted and didn’t have…a
choice.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">You say that Christianity requires “<i>not
just a one time acceptance –a life long effort to live a life slightly
acceptable to the divine.</i>” However, that is also not what
Christianity teaches. It’s another straw man. That is what I am
writing AGAINST in this blog article! If you paid more attention to the
point I was trying to make instead of my word choice, you would have realized
that. The idea that you can make yourself acceptable to God by ANYTHING
you do it totally foreign to Christianity. Rather, Christianity teaches
that Christ has already lived a life totally perfect and righteous in your
place. All that is needed is for you to stop trying to earn it yourself,
admit you can’t, and place your trust in Him to do it for you. Stop
trying to earn the parachute. When this happens, it is NOT true that you
then have to live a life trying to be a good person to win His favor. You
already have it. Instead, God starts to change you. He gives you
new desires and you have a new power to carry them out. Any improvement
in your action is actually the work of God in you, not your own human
effort. That’s why it’s so completely different than the other
religions. It’s not about what you do…it’s about what God does for you
(both before and after you are saved).</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">It’s fine if you don’t believe this or agree
it is true. But, don’t claim that we believe something we don’t.
Your characterization of what “Christians believe” in your last response is not
accurate. If this is what you think we believe, it’s no wonder you think
we fall into the same category as the other religions. The problem is,
that’s NOT what we believe. We believe something much more incredible and
grandiose.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">You said . . .</span><br />
</div>
</span></span><blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;"><div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">“<i>Religions, not just Christianity, have
thrived for thousands of years and SURVIVED because they adapt and modernize
their structures to accommodate themselves with the religious man in a
progressive society. This is a historically accredited and proven fact. It’s
just a way of reinventing itself.”</i></span></div>
</span></span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">I am intrigued by this statement. I do
not believe Christianity has changed any doctrine in 2000+ years (the whole of
its existence). That is quite a bold statement, without being accompanied
by any example or evidence to substantiate it. What, pray tell, has
Christianity changed to accommodate progressive society? Everything I have said
here goes directly back to the very words of Jesus Christ Himself and His
Apostles over 2000 years ago. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Thanks again for your continued
discussion. I would love to continue discussing the ways Christianity is
vastly different, any questions you have about Christianity, or any items that
impede your belief in it. You said that there are “<i>Some dead religions
identical to Christianity I can name at least a dozen of them but that’s for
another blog!”</i> I would certainly be most interested in what
dead religions are “identical” to Christianity. I find this assertion
quite fantastic (in an unbelievable sense) to say the least. I have spent
a great deal of time studying ancient religions and I am not aware of any that
is even close (much less identical) to Christianity. There are a few with
a couple of vague similarities. But, even these are more explicitly
described by their stark and numerous differences to Christianity, not their
few and minor similarities. I actually already addressed one of these
claims on the <a href="https://philippians1v21.wordpress.com/why-believe-in-jesus/why-christianity-is-not-a-religion/" target="_blank">blog page</a> you commented on. Consider my response to
DS in comment 76. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-E844YON9L-4/VEh_seyLl3I/AAAAAAAAAEo/7dMK-U9XEbE/s1600/jesushatesreligion.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-E844YON9L-4/VEh_seyLl3I/AAAAAAAAAEo/7dMK-U9XEbE/s1600/jesushatesreligion.jpg" height="175" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Thanks again for your thoughts and response.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">God bless,</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Jake"</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<b><span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">I wrote:</span></span></b><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;"> "Hello again,
Jake, </span>
</div>
</span></span><span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;"><div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Thank you
again for taking your time to further explain your point one last time. I am
afraid, however, that we will have to agree to disagree. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Some how I
feel that either I didn’t argue my point well or that it was not thoroughly
read; the fact that you didn’t connect how my silly “taquito” demonstration was
identical to the way you use the word “religion” raises this notion. And I
certainly wasn’t trying to argue on something as simple as using homonyms <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>or synonyms (excluding your “cow” example) but
of using words of the same or similar definition with the same origin and then
excluding itself of that. In fact, at one point you have even used my own
argument to agree with your own and this didn’t make any sense to me. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Please know,
I’m not trying to be mean or put you down in any way, that’s not how I am.
Quite frankly I actually admire you, not as a pastor, but as an aeronautical
engineer as I myself am an engineer of a different kind and I know what kind of
“brains” it takes to do what you do. But getting back to what I was talking
about: I’m simply trying to illustrate where my frustrations are so we’re on
the same page as to why I choose to resign my argument. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">You see, in a
way, it feels as if we are looking at the same thing and I am calling it a “</span><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">4-8-4</span><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;"> Northern”, for example, and you are calling
it a “B-29”. I honestly feel sympathetic for those whom I have so often seen
who are reasonable and logical in every aspect of their life except when it
comes to religion- because, in my observation, it is within religion where
things have to be extrapolated for it to make any sense in this modern world
and religion has enough emotional investment for people that they are willing
to go to this extent. This discussion of defining religion is only a small
example. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Furthermore,
I know the point you are trying to make in speaking to me of the true meaning
behind Christianity (and not the definition) and you say that I have missed
your point or missed “the forest for the trees”. But in deed I haven’t missed
it and haven’t commented on it because that side of the discussion I have no
interest in. As you know, my topic is WHY people say Christianity is not a
religion and I later illustrated why I believe people do that. You called my argument
a “red herring”, I called yours “bait”. I do not think that we will meet
agreement in the near future so that is all I have to say.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I welcome any final remarks you’d like to
make. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">I know you
believe what you believe and I know that you honestly feel that you are doing
the right thing and I hope that you understand the same of me. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Many thanks, </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: SimSun; mso-fareast-language: ZH-CN;">Eric"</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">
</b></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">I've debated on and off whether or not I should write a epilogue to this. To be honest I still cannot decide and so this clearly a contemplative text and that shall stand in place as that. What else can I say but that this is a typical argument?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">The comparison of science and religion is like physics and magic, study and hearsay, logic and fantasy. The reason why this debate, not just mine, goes on unending is because the two are not a cohesive collaboration together. When the highly religious decides to bite the bullet and step down from the all-knowing assumption, only then can the two sides begin to debate on an even playing field.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">What is there to say but this? If you've ever been in such a debate or have watched debates you start to recognize the primary fallacy of the religious persons' reasoning. I am not being unfair in saying that because the square root of 25 will always be 5 no matter how you argue it, not the square root of 25 is zero because you are no longer required to crunch numbers anymore because you've graduated from school.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">There is a difference between logic and philosophizing. Until someone truly breaks down to analyze their situation, there will not be a coherent analysis. The "truth" is honestly in the eyes of the beholder. I argue logic. </span></div>
L.A.S.H.http://www.blogger.com/profile/03232903538937971137noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4673251404004825805.post-23441467758700468022013-08-26T21:59:00.000-07:002013-08-27T21:14:18.357-07:00...coming soon: the scientific method........<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><br />
<!--[if !mso]><img src="//img2.blogblog.com/img/video_object.png" style="background-color: #b2b2b2; " class="BLOGGER-object-element tr_noresize tr_placeholder" id="ieooui" data-original-id="ieooui" />
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mXKmjWMw7f0/UhwnjbbHD1I/AAAAAAAAAD8/0aekQZ6GxZc/s1600/CreationismWitchDoctor.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="238" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mXKmjWMw7f0/UhwnjbbHD1I/AAAAAAAAAD8/0aekQZ6GxZc/s400/CreationismWitchDoctor.gif" width="400" /></a></span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">While asking me about my religious standing, a young lady
asked me, “So do you believe in evolution?” </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">“Yes,” I answered. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">“I don’t see how we came from apes” she started <b>“and I just
don’t see why people believe something just because someone said it or wrote it.”
She remarked.</b></span></span></div>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>
</b></span></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>“Me neither” I said strongly. “But isn’t that what people do
with religion?” I asked.</b></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">She remained quite.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">“Well,” I said, “it’s not that I just <i>believe</i>: I have been <i>convinced</i>.”
</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">“What’s the difference?” She asked. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">“I didn’t just choose to believe something because I liked
the way it sounded, or felt obligated to believe it because others did” I
replied, “I have actually <i>read</i> The
Origin of Species<i> </i>and The
Descent of Man by Charles Darwin. And I used discretion and critical thinking to
make up my mind!”</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">“Oh”, she said looking up to me with a bit of surprise.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">So, I asked her, “How many people do you know say they do
not subscribe to biological evolution and yet have never read any of the
scientific literature on it?”</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">“Hmm” she said quietly while looking down in thought. “I’d
say about...<i>all</i> of them” she said with a rising intonation as if asking a question.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">I said, “As I started reading these big works I was astounded
with the amount of time, research and evidence that Darwin
presented in his writing. He clearly had the ‘stuff’ to lay the foundation with
and it wasn’t just a bunch of ideas he was throwing against the wall. It was such
a flood of information that it was so simple to just connect the dots. Given
this information and being that it is still in consensus with modern science,
which has since presented even <i>more</i>
evidence of Darwin’s theory, how
could I deny it? I’m a reasonable person and I’d be lying to myself if I did.
And you’d do the same.”</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">“I didn’t realize that it was that serious of a work. I
thought it was just...random theories” she said. “But I’ve never read it so I
guess I just don’t know.”</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-align: justify;">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-align: justify;">
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style>
<![endif]--><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">“A lot of people think that…but they forget or had <i>never even known </i>that
science doesn’t work that way. It utilizes <b>the
scientific method</b>. And <i>that</i> is
what set’s it apart from religion.” </span></span></div>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"></span></span><!--[if !mso]><img src="//img2.blogblog.com/img/video_object.png" style="background-color: #b2b2b2; " class="BLOGGER-object-element tr_noresize tr_placeholder" id="ieooui" data-original-id="ieooui" />
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style>
<![endif]--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<!--[if !mso]><img src="//img2.blogblog.com/img/video_object.png" style="background-color: #b2b2b2; " class="BLOGGER-object-element tr_noresize tr_placeholder" id="ieooui" data-original-id="ieooui" />
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style>
<![endif]-->
</div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><img src="//img2.blogblog.com/img/video_object.png" style="background-color: #b2b2b2; " class="BLOGGER-object-element tr_noresize tr_placeholder" id="ieooui" data-original-id="ieooui" />
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style>
<![endif]--><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span id="goog_120626915"></span><span id="goog_120626916"></span></span></span>L.A.S.H.http://www.blogger.com/profile/03232903538937971137noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4673251404004825805.post-17848275788548702432013-02-05T19:41:00.003-08:002013-02-05T19:47:07.788-08:00Free Will: Comply or Die<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-YWV4SLdWE8o/UADLrfH9onI/AAAAAAAAACA/RKxBrPTLD38/s1600/Comply_Or_Die_1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="286" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-YWV4SLdWE8o/UADLrfH9onI/AAAAAAAAACA/RKxBrPTLD38/s400/Comply_Or_Die_1.jpg" width="400" /></a></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: x-large;">I</span>magine receiving in the mail a birthday party invitation from a close friend. As you open it you find the usual stuff: </span><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;">“I’d like to invite you guys to my birthday party, Saturday! There’s going to be great food, great people and great music! You’ll never regret it! If you can’t make it it’s okay but please RSVP if you can.” As you scroll down to the bottom you find a post script, “BUT come Saturday night and I don’t see you I’m going to hunt each and every one of you down, strap you up in my basement and inflict upon you a life-long vengeance of unremitting pain! Hope to see you guys there! :-D” </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;">A little passive aggressive isn’t it? But I would like, however, to pose this question to the religious: if this scenario is not acceptable to you, or even slightly objectionable within your every day life, then why do you allow this to thrive in your religion? You see, the scary truth about this is that one can <i>identically</i> equate god’s “free will” choice to this tasteless but fitting example.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><i><b>The Deal</b></i></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">A lot has been discussed about the many quirks in religion systems but it seems to me that many tend to skip over the sore thumb: the fallacious notion of free will. </span><span style="font-size: small;">Now beside the obvious flaws we can pick at such as: if god knows everything including the end result then why go through the whole creation, test and judgement deal-e-o; there is a lot of debate in philosophy on the notion of free such as <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufkrJkVqems" target="_blank">determinism, predeterminism</a>, incapatibilism, and much more. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRIcbsRXQ0o" target="_blank">Sam Harris</a>, whose work I greatly admire, wrote on the subject in this respect but with a twist of his own expertise in neuroscience. This is all great and wonderfully complex stuff but what I've chosen to talk about here is the step right before that: the very simple aspect of religion which <i>opens </i>the deal, why we <i>have</i> to choose to begin with and take an offer we <i>can't</i> refuse.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Religion, particularly in Christianity, boasts that its idea of free choice is one of the most painfully beautiful and selfless philosophies in its doctrine, aside from the crusifiction of course.</span><span style="font-size: small;"> In an askew way it can seem so: god is claimed to have created the multitudes with their own free choice of direction in life and offers them eternal love and reward to those who want it. What a generous guy, huh? It's as sweet as grandma baking cookies for you as a kid for an after-school treat. But that's not quite the truth because there's more to the story. In the end it seems that god's desire for his people to have free choice is greater than his love for their ultimate survival as he will not only kill the non-believers and "lukewarm" believers on judgement day, he will sentence them to eternal torture. It seems as though god places his importance on the interim of choice rather than the end result. Eternal torture for not accepting god's part of the deal is like grandma blowing you away with a shotgun for getting a "B" in science! This sounds more like a control issue rather than a love issue. If this is really all god's design then why set the playing field up that way?</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">To me free will would mean that you may choose to live your life in any reasonable way without any punishment or reward for either direction- just a different way of life. </span><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;">Punishment and reward are objects of coaxing when used between the two parties. But with the biblical view, when looking at what is actually a clear and immanent threat, one realizes that there isn't much room for a choice, is there? </span><span style="font-size: small;">Would you go to my "killer" party as described up top? You'd have to! And what kind of vibe would it have? It would be a group of scared and angry people amongst one victorious dictator. Having <i>forced</i> a person into a particular type of lifestyle under threat of torture for ones own benefit is far from a <i>choice of free will</i>. It's actually an ultimatum.</span><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;"> In fact; free will changes its color to a big red flag: <i>duress</i>. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Just to be clear on what were talking about here; duress is defined as “</span><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;">a situation whereby a person performs an act as a result of violence, threat or other pressure against the person.” In Tort Law contracts made under duress can be legally breached and voided because of the obvious bias, unethical practice and undue burden put upon the victim. In this day and age we understand this as logical because we've grown and progressed as a society and we know better than our ancestors did. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;">The victim of a mugging isn’t going to argue the moral failure of the perpetrator while he has a gun pointed in his face. He’s going to give the perpetrator his wallet regardless of the situation. This is why “God-fearing” people didn't question their religion in the days-of-old and those who perpetrate religion were and still are very much aware of this. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">But nowadays the more logically-oriented religious people have started questioning their beliefs because we know so much more about our world through the avenues of science and logical thinking. It has become acceptable or even normal to be non-religious. Illustrating the fact that religion survives by duress doesn’t directly negate the existence of a god obviously (that’s not part of my current argument) but it clearly illustrates the fact that we need to <i>start thinking differently about an ancient way of thinking</i>. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; text-align: left;"><tbody></tbody></table>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NrAYNmfwvFc/UADQvUlG00I/AAAAAAAAACM/ImPbmfMOyqw/s1600/heaven_hell-300x299.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="198" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NrAYNmfwvFc/UADQvUlG00I/AAAAAAAAACM/ImPbmfMOyqw/s200/heaven_hell-300x299.jpg" width="200" /></a></span></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; text-align: left;"><tbody></tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><i><b>The Weapon</b></i></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;">So where is the proverbial gun? It takes no detective to find it. It's pretty easy to open a bible and find some sort of verse speaking of a revengeful act against non-believers. For example, Paul, who founded part of the early Christian church wrote to them, </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><i><span lang="EN">“And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord; and from the glory of his power; when he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.”</span></i><span lang="EN"> </span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><i><span lang="EN"><a href="http://www.bibleserver.com/text/KJV/2Thessalonians1%3A9#/text/KJV/2%20Thessalonians1">...1 Thessalonias 1:7-10</a></span></i></span></span></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;">But that’s God talking through Paul to each and every one of us…or is it? Without reiterating what I've already said in the above paragraphs, I ask: can this be justified by a “God of love”? By merely reading the bible it becomes evident that it was not entirely inspired by eternal love from god but by the old brutal mentality of primitive man; the same brutal primitive mentality which prides its tribalism and promotes negative otherism. Kinds like those engage in car bombings and suicide attacks today. When this clear and evident fingerprint of man becomes prevalent, we then have to question the remaining validity of the subject. Knowing the history of religious scriptures or just religion in general confirms this and so I will not go into detail about this here. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;"><span lang="EN">Verses depicting god's
wrath toward the unbeliever like the one quoted above is merely one out
of thousands, if not tens of thousands. </span>It bothers me tremendously to know that there are so many people who claim they are all about god's love but yet take even more pride in the violent destruction and ultimate demise of <i>anyone </i>who thinks differently than themselves. I think those who fit that description indeed reflect a lot about their psychology and they themselves are often ignorant of <i>their own</i> psychology. I despise hearing messages like Preacher <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gub5uaiT3fo" target="_blank">Al Martin's</a> which is emphasized with visual and audio effects by a bible-belt church in order to aid in the anger and the fear they want to inflict upon people. With the unmistakable intonation of a condemning preacher, they always leave </span><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;">their flock feeling that if they think they've been good, they haven't been good enough. </span><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;">Every time I hear it I expect to hear a </span><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;"><span lang="EN"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmvnXKRfdb8" target="_blank">gunshot</a> </span>at the end. </span><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;">It just makes me realize that no matter who they are, more or less crazy than the next, they're just portraying the same <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16YGYVEuWRs" target="_blank">condescending and demeaning message</a>. What's the difference?</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><b><i><span lang="EN">Where there's smoke there's....hydrothermal vents?</span></i></b></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;">To help better understand god's reasons for threat of torture I thought it would be interesting to find out what believers propose as the authoritative description of hell other than the usual description we've all heard. I then thought the authors of the <u>Left Behind</u> series would be good for this research as I'm sure their ideas are probably widely accepted by the Christian public but I decided that they get enough publicity as it is so I flushed that idea. </span><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;"><span lang="EN">So when running a simple Google search I was astounded to see the amount of people devoted to illustrating </span><span lang="EN">and </span><span lang="EN">reiterating
</span>those horrid descriptions in the bible. I didn't really find much more than the usual </span><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;"><span lang="EN">cave-like landscape with fire, brimstone and torture which we're used to hearing </span>but there were a couple ideas I found <i>particularly </i>interesting...</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-DtYIZhCBq9k/UADUYxkvmJI/AAAAAAAAACY/MMXGTodT-qo/s1600/Xearth2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-DtYIZhCBq9k/UADUYxkvmJI/AAAAAAAAACY/MMXGTodT-qo/s1600/Xearth2.jpg" /></a><span lang="EN">As we know our ancestors devised the notion that hell is down below us in the ground. Though we know now through Earth science that the inner core of the Earth is merely a tumultuous convection of magma at insane degrees of heat and pressure, Terry Watkins, of the Dial-the-Truth-Ministries, amends this fact. After doing the "research" he has exclaimed in the typical professing-Christian all-capitol letters that “YES! THERE IS </span><span lang="EN">A PLACE</span><span lang="EN"> CALLED HELL!” (This picture is from his website.) </span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;">Terry explains that screams have been heard near erupting volcanoes and concludes that they are from people burning in hell heard <i>through</i> the volcano. I don't know whether or not he ever considered them being from people living <i>in </i>the communities <i>around </i>the erupting volcanoes. Either way, he concludes that hell is indeed underground. He proposed that for one to physically penetrate the surface of the earth on the way to hell one turns into a giant worm, swims down through the hydrothermal vents deep in the </span><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;">Pacific Ocean</span><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;"> and <i>then</i> die. The <i>Riftia pachyptila</i>, or tube worms, as he’s referring to are invertebrates that live near those hydrothermal vents and in his eyes are physically metamorphosed hell-bound human beings. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody></tbody></table>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-PjObu7OFrnc/URGX5gXIGgI/AAAAAAAAADY/mdbzlsSJj2k/s1600/stair2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="190" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-PjObu7OFrnc/URGX5gXIGgI/AAAAAAAAADY/mdbzlsSJj2k/s200/stair2.jpg" width="200" /></a></span></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody></tbody></table>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;">I happened to have found more "scientific" descriptions of heaven rather than of hell as the bible paints a mysterious picture which <i>strangely </i>doesn't consider <i>all</i> the laws of thermodynamics</span><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;">. </span><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;">Rich Deem, wrote </span><span lang="EN" style="font-size: small;"><span lang="EN">on his website</span>, </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 63.35pt 0in 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><i><span lang="EN">“</span></i><i>The characteristics of the new creation tell us that it will be vastly different from what we are used to on earth. Probably most noticeable difference will be the lack of gravity. The New Jerusalem is described as a 1,500 mile cube. Structures of this size would automatically become a sphere in this universe, because of gravity.<sup> </sup>Therefore gravity will either be absent or significantly reduced in the new creation. There will be no Sun or moon. This makes sense, since there will be little or no gravity. Without gravity, the new creation would not be bound to its source of heat and light. The lack of the Sun is not a problem for the new creation, since the Bible tells us that the glory of God Himself will provide illumination.<sup> </sup>The illumination provided by God<sup> </sup>is probably not the same kind of electromagnetic radiation (photons) that we call light. The illumination provided by God certainly involves the wisdom and knowledge that He possesses. With this kind of light, there would be no need to visually see things, since this would severely restrict our ability to "see" everything as God sees them. There will be no oceans, which means that there will be no water cycle. It would be difficult for a water cycle to operate without gravity. There will be the river of the water of life, which flows from the throne of God.<sup> </sup>Given its source, it seems likely that it may not be liquid water as we know it.</i></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 63.35pt 0in 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 63.35pt 0in 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><i>“The laws of thermodynamics seem to be absent from the new creation, since the Bible tells us that there will be no heat.<sup> </sup>In this universe, the second law of thermodynamics controls virtually everything that happens. The law states that heat flows from hot bodies to cold bodies. Stars cannot shine, animals cannot consume food to produce energy to move, and chemical reactions cannot occur, since all these processes require the exchange of heat.”</i></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 63.35pt 0pt 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">It seemed to me that there are also people who just cannot wait to die in order to experience these great things. They would claim to be lucky if they just might be able to experience the end of the world. <a href="http://www.endoftheworld2012.net/">This site</a> provides a counter!* Though they are not sure how the world will end they provide a good list of ideas from aliens to mad scientists and of course my personal favorite: Planet X. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 63pt 10pt 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><i>“Others believe that a mysterious red planet, <b><u><a href="http://www.endoftheworld2012.net/nibiru2012.htm">PLANET X: NIBIRU</a>,</u></b> two thirds earth's size, is heading towards earth right now and will pass through our solar system around 2012 causing polar axis shifts on earth. Some say that polar shift takes thousands of years. Others say that Nibiru's presence will cause polar shift to happen quickly. </i></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 63pt 10pt 0.5in;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><i>“Nibiru (Planet X - the red planet) is one of the biggest December 21 end of the world 2012 predictions. Some claim that Nibiru is one of twelve planets in our solar system and that it cannot be seen at the moment because it is hidden by other planets. To find out more about Nibiru and whether it will come near or strike earth in 2012, <a href="http://www.endoftheworld2012.net/nibiru2012.htm"><b>CLICK HERE</b></a> (text version - scroll down to see the section on Nibiru) or <a href="http://www.endoftheworld2012.net/2012movie.htm">CLICK HERE</a> to watch a video about Nibiru.” </i></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span><span style="font-size: small;"><b><i> </i></b></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><b><i>Clearing the Smoke </i></b></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">So god is “green”, will save you money on your electrical bill and there will be no more need for the Sci-Fi Channel!
Of course </span><span style="font-size: small;">it would be a waste of
time debunking these things as anyone with a basic college education
and experience in critical thinking can spot the "hiccups" in what we
just read. </span><span style="font-size: small;">One would
think that a powerful omniscient god who created the universe,
floods the world or parts the seas would have provided a clearer understanding
as to where we are going and how we will get there.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">I honestly didn't want to promote the authors by
posting four whole paragraphs of this stuff but I still had to illustrate the
fact that people are willing to put so much
time and esoteric thought into this stuff without even analyzing the basic
structure or foundation of their embellishments.<i><b> </b></i>But the strangest fact here is that what seem to be </span><span style="font-size: small;">religious fanatics are actually what I would call religious preservationists: </span><span style="font-size: small;">they are not only perpetuating fantasy but they are perpetuating the </span><span style="font-size: small;">prolonged intentions </span><span style="font-size: small;">of belief that religion first held in its heyday. What I mean is that these are not clinically insane people doodling in the sky with these crazy ideas; these are real adults investing their time and research into what many people really believe...or <i>want </i>to believe. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">I can understand that some of
these people are just pretending to be research assistants for Indiana
Jones’ and they probably have fun doing it too. </span><span style="font-size: small;">But researching these fantastic
concepts is just as futile as researching the end of the world according
to Jupiter, Poseidon or G.I. Joe!</span><span style="font-size: small;"> As we know, there is a lot more confusion that could use clarification in this realm rather than deepening the ambiguous fantasy. To paraphrase Michael Schermer, </span>most people are more interested in chasing a fantasy or controversy rather than a simple logical explanation.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0Usta_0RP0A/UQiE81VGk-I/AAAAAAAAADI/wGwzO18oHmg/s1600/135-A-history-of-religion.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0Usta_0RP0A/UQiE81VGk-I/AAAAAAAAADI/wGwzO18oHmg/s320/135-A-history-of-religion.jpg" width="278" /></a><i><b>So Why the Gun?</b></i></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">We've already seen the fact that there is no free choice in religion because of the duress seemingly impinged upon us by god. Taking it a step further back, to the point before god needed to draw his weapon toward us, we would ask why a graceful god of love needs to use a "gun of torment" to <i>force </i>everyone into his final paradisal destination? Why would he need us to be there? To </span><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5x0BSgLKnSk">serve</a> <i>us </i>for a change? </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">If there was a man who walked into a dog park and placed down two bowls of food and then shot down the ones who randomly chose to eat from the bowl on the left, took home and cuddled the ones who ate from the right, ultimately what is his benefit? What would be the benefit of this entire filtering-process that a god couldn’t achieve without us? Why create so much life when he knew he would painfully waste so much in the end?</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">I fail to see the logic and reason, or even the love,
in this idea of religion. Torture, within the realm of eternal love and
trust, just sets the scale toppling over like Kim Jong-Il, David Koresh, the <a href="http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/the-most-hated-family-in-america/">Phelps</a>, and the father of "drinking the Kool-Aid" <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQYoHiM-Uko">Jim Jones of Jamestown</a>. </span><span style="font-size: small;">What's the difference between a cult and a religion besides the number of people who follow it? It may seem like a harsh comparison but it is indeed accurate. It illustrates that we are human and so were the creators of world religions. It is part of our inherent nature to be tribal, to group up, to yearn for belonging, to fight for a place and fight to hold that place; but so are the ways of religions as they are "our" creations. Looking at the structure we see in religions we start to see the imperfect tendencies of our <i>own </i>selves surfacing through the eyes of anthropology. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">My point being is this: if this is really all
god's design then why set the playing field up that way <i>to begin with</i>? <i>We </i>in
our sophisticated societies don't even operate this way anymore except in religion. </span><span style="font-size: small;">It's like executing the football players of the
team who didn't win the Super Bowl! I guarantee you there'd never be a
football game again if this was the way it was. </span><span style="font-size: small;">Are we
now better than god or better than our previous selves? What would be the </span><span style="font-size: small;">difference between the god of the bible and "Jimmy" from <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_C34g5mz1ZQ">The Twilight Zone</a>? Jimmy had fun by keeping around him only the people who worshiped him in his
utter tyranny, created and destroying strange creatures, </span><span style="font-size: small;">banishing free-thinkers to the corn-field,</span><span style="font-size: small;"> and turning poor uncle Jack into a twisted children's toy for questioning Jimmy's wretched dictation. If this isn't the structure of the "gun" in religion, I don't know what is. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">These may seem like silly questions but they all have serious implications. There may be no real answers to them but they </span><span style="font-size: small;">stronger as tools of logic and philosophy to help bring to light the flaws that are in the woodwork of our thinking. So why should we allow a
dissonant way of thinking continue to exist in our modern world? Logic and rational thinking were the first monkey wrenches jamming up the gears in <i>my </i>past religious beliefs. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">So why the gun? It's because one religion thinks it's better than another religion. It's because of the lingering competition through tribalism or clans which were part of our ignorant past. It's because it <i>was</i> the only seeming possibility of hope and boost in morale for those who would ultimately never get it during their life times like the slaves, the terminally ill and the impoverished. So in the end what we’re dealing with is not a controversial divine authority, ignorant and insubordinate man blinded by gods great glory, riddles in philosophy never to be deciphered, but of authors from times of old. At least in a first world country we no longer need to function in this archaic manner.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-c_jHHVhWvDA/UN33H2hSb_I/AAAAAAAAACo/1YYwh3gO-8I/s1600/images.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-c_jHHVhWvDA/UN33H2hSb_I/AAAAAAAAACo/1YYwh3gO-8I/s200/images.jpg" width="200" /></a><i><b>Freedom of <strike>Choice</strike> Operating System</b></i><i><b> </b></i></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">One last point that I wanted to make is this: religion is a mode of thinking. There is no more certainty in the life of the religious than that of the non-religious except for blind self-reassuring thoughts. I'll illustrate this fact. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-uFKeIXYwB6I/UQiDueHF4EI/AAAAAAAAAC4/mCgovEv0YQM/s1600/16_ReligiousSymbols_iStock_node.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-uFKeIXYwB6I/UQiDueHF4EI/AAAAAAAAAC4/mCgovEv0YQM/s200/16_ReligiousSymbols_iStock_node.jpg" width="154" /></a>I recently encountered a life-changing career move. It was something I thought I really wanted. A Christian friend of mine told me, "Have faith in Him. He wouldn't have taken you this far if he didn't intend on bringing you all the way." It was a nice thing to say and it's a nice thing to hear. But the fact of the matter is, that's the extent of it. My friend didn't <i>actually know</i> that I was going to get the job, right? It was a process of a semi-reasonable deduction.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Well I actually did finally achieve the goal I was aiming for but shortly realized that it was more of a burden than a pleasure- I regret the entire ordeal. </span><span style="font-size: small;">Achieving my goal my Christian friend remarked, "You see! God wanted to bless your life and made it happen!" But my religious friend, an abstinent and highly-devoted Christian, couldn't have foreseen the outcome any more than I could, right? </span><span style="font-size: small;">Now knowing my current predicament
she says, "The LORD was testing you to show you that life
was really better the other way around. Be careful what you wish for." Wouldn't those who are "in-tune" with god be able to foresee things that this atheist couldn't? </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">If I hadn't achieve my goal to begin with she would have said, 'The timing just wasn't right for God. Sorry.' On the outset a Buddhist friend of mine would say, 'It all depends on your karma and if you put good energy into your
efforts' and another who is an atheist would say, 'so far so good but
we'll just have to wait and see what happens.' </span><span style="font-size: small;">My Christian friend forgot that I <i>used</i>
to be a Christian and I know these types of memorized phrases and self-soothing ways of thinking. </span><span style="font-size: small;">With any situation there is a prescribed statement that anyone from any religion would profess. We see through unbiased statistics that religious people have no more a successful life than the non-religious. I asked this once before and I'll ask it again, have you ever seen a psychic win the lotto? Me neither. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><i><b>Case Closed</b></i></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Religious or not there is NO certainty. </span><span style="font-size: small;">Some people like Windows, some like Unix. Some prefer paper some prefer plastic. Some prefer hot dogs and some prefer tacos. Quite frankly I take comfort in knowing the reality of the situation rather than fool myself into believing something that just might or might not happen. Being cognizant of reality allows me to strategically plan and be active in my life rather than waste time and energy, praying and thinking I'm actually doing something. This is one reason why I am an atheist. </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">We get told, “God’s ways are
higher than ours” and “there are some things that we are not supposed to
know or understand right now”. My advise to those who say these things is: save it! Those are old phrases used to
quite logical minds and to keep curious people compliant.
I’m sure a lot of believers find themselves saying it without realizing
what they’re doing. But why would any even-minded person
utilize logic, reason and critical thinking in every aspect of their lives except religion? People need to stop going to church while leaving their brains in the parking lot! </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Atheists are not people who want to be immoral, violent or treacherous. We don’t condone killing, lying or stealing. We know it's wrong to <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+20%3A17&version=KJV">covet thy neighbors ass or thy neighbors wife’s ass</a>! Atheists are atheists because we know that there is room for good people of free thought in the world and we know that we are not going to be punished for it. </span><span style="font-size: small;">There is no hell; no proverbial smoking gun. Religions’ role as a social control system prohibited peoples <i>natural-right </i>to experience life <i>freely</i>, but not any more. It is okay to live a life of intellectual and personal freedom! There is an undiscovered universe for each of us to experience through the senses and the keen perception of our intellect. </span><span style="font-size: small;">What you're going to perceive depends on what program you're going to run. The fact is you <i>can</i> question <i>what </i>you believe. You <i>can </i>question <i>why </i>you believe and you <i>can</i> “test the LORD thy God.”</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Only an open mind is wide enough to take in the beauty of this universe. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span>
</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Other Sites not noted above: </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://bible.org/article/what-bible-says-about-hell">http://bible.org/article/what-bible-says-about-hell</a></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.insitelawmagazine.com/ch16duress.htm">http://www.insitelawmagazine.com/ch16duress.htm</a> - duress</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/index.htm">http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/index.htm</a></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.av1611.org/hell.html-">http://www.av1611.org/hell.html- </a></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/heaven.htm">http://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/heaven.htm</a>l</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.atheistmemebase.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/135-A-history-of-religion.jpg">http://www.atheistmemebase.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/135-A-history-of-religion.jpg </a></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">* This article was written before but published <i>after</i> 12/21/12. It was quite a kick to see the racing numbers counting down to the <i>"end".</i></span></span></div>
</div>
L.A.S.H.http://www.blogger.com/profile/03232903538937971137noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4673251404004825805.post-48479902073270530172012-04-02T20:10:00.003-07:002015-03-15T23:45:22.314-07:00All You Need Is Love<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4SaGe_UL3d4/VQZ21YfLNMI/AAAAAAAAAHU/-L2Yod7iFJw/s1600/LASH%2BLOVE_4%2Bcopy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4SaGe_UL3d4/VQZ21YfLNMI/AAAAAAAAAHU/-L2Yod7iFJw/s1600/LASH%2BLOVE_4%2Bcopy.jpg" height="267" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: x-large;">I</span>n the Christian bible 1<sup>st</sup> John 4:8 states, “Whoever does not <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">love</i> does not know <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">G<span style="font-size: small;">od</span></i><span style="font-size: small;">, because </span>God is love.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: grey;">Spirituality</span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
In my religious days that verse was one of the cornerstones in my life. Even as a child before taking religion seriously I had always felt a strong connection with nature and had a deeply passionate feeling for life. It felt deeply meaningful to me like a pure natural love and I felt it everywhere and in all people. It gave me a sense of confidence in where I was in my known world. Later, whether in my Christian years or my meditation years it was still by use of this feeling where I was able to discern that I was in the right place.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
When I was a kid we went to church on Sundays. But I couldn’t seem to associate the sense of spirituality I experienced in my life with the biblical god whom I was taught about. It wasn’t deliberate it just didn’t feel like it was the same thing even though my experiences could be classified as spiritual. It was of course promoted during those years by good parents, kind friends, and good experiences. Back then one could have called it “spirituality” but it is now what I call a <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">natural sense of unity.</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
In my mid teens I took Christianity quite seriously and in my early twenties I left that and started practicing ancient yoga meditation to which I became deeply devoted. Though I had profound experiences in meditation I think most lasting was that same natural sense of unity I had as a child but only magnified. Funny enough in my late twenties I became an atheist because of significant lingering issues that neither god nor religion could address. But yet as an atheist I could still experience the benefits of meditation, closeness with nature and a deep sense of humanity, just in a more sophisticated sense. How could this “spiritual” sense still exist if I no longer subscribed to the idea of god or religion?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: grey;">Atheism</span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
Now I wouldn’t want to misrepresent myself and say that everything was the same one way as a religious person and continued feeling the same way as an atheist. There was a change, a transition. I lost something I never had but I gained a new understanding of something I always had. Part of this was that natural sense of unity which was eclipsed during this change but later shined again within a new understanding. For more details about this transition please see my previous articles.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
I honestly believe that had religion not been introduced to my life I would have become roughly the same man that I am today. Christianity was an unfortunate loss of time with a lot of hard work and very little reward. The heavy discipline of original yoga meditation, though relaxing, I found still damaging to the ego by surrendering the self just as in Christianity (see my article on “<a href="http://l-a-s-h.blogspot.com/2011/12/virus-in-religion.html" target="_blank">The Virus in Religion</a>”). It was now clear to me that those passionate feelings I experienced as a child were not from god because they were still able to survive in one form or another throughout my transitions. “How could spirituality exist if there is no spirit?” I wondered. It’s quite simple: it came from within <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">me</i>. It is not a spirit in the supernatural sense but spirit meaning the psychological seat of emotions and character. This can still be an important part of who we are but ultimately it is of an emotional origin.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
Now I don’t like to refer to life stories as a way of proving a point because science doesn’t utilize anecdotal evidence; rightfully so. But I try to provide relevant experiences for which scientific and historical evidence already exists. This is to encourage free-thought in readers who are “on the fence” who have newly embarked on this area which is otherwise forbidden by religion. It may seem audacious for me to suggest that spirituality is merely a psychologically based experience but there is more of a consensus than some may think. Next time you or someone you know is experiencing something spiritual, whether it is praying, yearning for comfort or feeling the presence of god, try to find out what they’re <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">really</i> feeling rather than what they were <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">told</i> what they are feeling.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
One of the most common false conclusions religious people make when asked about their most convincing proof of god is, “I can <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">feel</i> Him. Therefore I <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">know</i>.” Christians often claim that it is their “personal experience” of god which renders proof. We know it would be incorrect to say that what they feel is not real. Those feelings are <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">very much</i> real. But it is the attribution of these feelings which is incorrect and has been done so almost traditionally. The religious have neither had a better explanation for it nor have they the reason to look for one. For the religious, they label it the way they were taught to: they are told that it is god. This is <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">true</i> in the emic perspective. But as scientific facts started emerging we started to see that those feelings are <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">not</i> god. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: grey;">Contemplation and Expressed Desires</span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
Our genes have a lot to do with our intelligence, our character as well as our <a href="http://www.samharris.org/site/full_text/the-moral-landscape/">moral inclinations</a>. Though this amazing and complex subject certainly has some ties to ideas behind spirituality it is something which we will leave, however, for a future article. For the purpose of staying on topic we will continue on the idea of spirituality as an emotional byproduct. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
When it comes to spirituality, the brain’s complex laboratory of neurochemicals, cognitive mechanisms and emotions all play the leading role. For starters, Sigmund Freud wrote in depth on his theories of the psychological development of god. An article from <a href="http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/arguments-for-atheism/the-psychogenesis-of-religion/sigmund-freud-religion-as-wish-fulfilment/" target="_blank">Philosophy of Religion</a> sums it up well by stating, “For Freud, as for [Ludwig] Feuerbach, religion is wish-fulfillment. Freud adds the explanation that the adoption of religion is a reversion to childish patterns of thought in response to feelings of helplessness and guilt. We feel a need for security and forgiveness, and so invent a source of security and forgiveness: God. Religion is thus seen as a childish delusion and atheism as a grown-up realism.” </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
It may seem a little far fetched but there is a lot of psychological investment in what we intrinsically feel toward parents and inherently in a psycho-social sense toward a loving god. Many of the emotional needs that people seek from their “heavenly father” are the same as some needs sought by children from their parents. But the psychological need that religion tries to fulfill is only a small part of the picture and isn’t so much regarded in this area of study anymore. It does however provide a platform for us to examine <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">what</i> we vainly seek for our selves through the avenue of religion. I might even add that as the origins of religion are highly emotional so are the resulting scriptures. It follows that as a passionate species we still feel a sympathetic resonance with it. I argue that as emotions are often irrational or illogical, so too are the many “quirks” we find in religion.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
I might even go on to speculate on my natural sense of unity by saying that this form of spirituality is a yearning to return to the pureness of childhood: if one is fortunate to live in a family where a healthy childhood was promoted, a child’s early mind, which is unhampered by adult struggles in life, is relatively “perfect” or sets the standard thereof. In this sense ignorance is not just bliss but it is simplicity and retrospectively speaking a reformatted version of our fundamental selves. It can simply be a refreshing way to decompress from the pressures we accumulate throughout life. In this ideal is the purity we seek; it is a <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rk_sAHh9s08" target="_blank">return to innocence</a>. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
This is in part spoken in a theoretical sense but by this we begin to understand that what we seek in the form of spirituality, quite possibly an introspective mirror, reveal the desires we seek for our personal selves. Having fulfilled those emotional needs fills the “god-sized hole” we have in our hearts. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: grey;">Evolutionary Cognitive Neuroscience of Religion</span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
In more recent studies in the area of cognitive neuroscience we’ve been able to gain more of an insightful understanding as to why our minds tend to render the notion of the supernatural. Freud almost hit the nail on the head with his idea of transference: continuing the desires for a caretaker or parent into the adult age by conceptualizing god(s). I wouldn’t deny this exists in some form or another but the whole of spirituality is much deeper than this. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
Since the days of our early ancestors, or even primates for that matter, instinctive and cognitive mechanisms evolved along side of their behavior to assist them in meeting the challenges they encountered in life. These are the demands of daily living such as care taking, avoiding predators, hunting, migrating, etc. These developed as instincts or traits which made these tasks easier and more efficient. This is analogous to the reason why you don’t have to learn to ride a bike each time you set-out on one! But some of these mechanisms can interplay and indirectly create “quirks” on which we then derive strange explanations for. I hope I’m not bursting anyone’s bubble but in contrast to the religious mentality, our brains are <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><a href="http://www.brainbugs.org/demos.html" target="_blank">not<span style="font-style: normal;"> perfect</span></a></i>. There, I said it! <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">(Wink) </i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
Ancient times or modern, we have always been a social species. Hunter/ gatherer societies lived and flocked in groups as it was advantageous for things like hunting and protecting their selves and their young from predators. As living in groups deemed advantageous it became inherent in the brain to provide positive chemical feedback to infer “this is good” and to “keep doing it”. Thusly they continued this behavior. So derivatively speaking it’s easy to understand why going to church can feel spiritually beneficial to us because we naturally feel comforted and encouraged while in the company of like minded people. It is a sense of comm<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">unity</b>. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
Church services themselves, particularly those with rigorous worship rituals like the Baptists, the Evangelicals and especially indigenous tribal groups can be tremendously moving. In their worship rituals they reproduce the rush of adrenaline much like how one instinctively experiences through running or even like being pursued by a predator (experiencing urgency, enhanced strength and <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">hopefully</i> achievement). As a matter of fact the good old Boogie Man, that monster lurking in the dark that we as children have all feared, is an instinctive survival trait from our ancient past. Remember, before our early ancestors learned how to build shelter they lived in the midst of nature and they were well aware of the fact that there were nocturnal predators out hunting for food. Waking up to a Bengal tiger licking your foot tickled only for a moment! </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
Aside from instincts there are also cognitive factors which we often attribute to the supernatural. The notion that the mind or spirit could conceptually continue after physical death is largely a result of us being unable to conceive cessation of consciousness. We encounter a paradox when attempting to imagine non-existence because doing so requires one to be receptive to even perceive this notion. This is, in part, a side effect of what is known as the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">mind body split.</i> The mind body split in cognitive neuroscience is responsible for the introspective part of our selves: the internal self as opposed to the physical self. Most people claim this suggests that the mind actually <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">does</i> continue beyond mortality but this is fallacious. We know a lot about the mind now days and that includes its idiosyncrasies. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
Another aspect that plays a very important role in spirituality is in peoples claimed ability to perceive the will or direction of god. It is spurred from <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">decoupled cognition<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">. </b></i>Its intended purpose serves us the function of being able to hypothesize what a known person might think or act in a given situation. It is useful in guiding ourselves socially especially in accordance with a parent or a boss for example. Similarly this function acts in the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">extra</i>ordinary feature of postulating “What would Jesus do?” or “I hope my dearly-departed grandparents aren’t watching me!”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
Interestingly enough neuroscientists found that the frontal temporal lobe, which houses our sense of self, is also the <a href="http://www.maps.org/media/vedantam.html" target="_blank">same part</a> of the brain in which we associate our sense of god. This doesn’t mean that there really is a “god part of the brain”, it’s “our” part of the brain but the notion of god is often so personal that it becomes part of our identity. This also explains why some religious people could be personally offended by reading my articles!<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"> </b>To add to the experience, the activity in the parietal lobe, which is responsible for our physical sense of orientation, can decrease during meditation rendering the illusion of being “larger than life” or an expanded consciousness. We can clearly see that, as I’ve mentioned throughout this article, spiritual experiences come from directly <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">within</i> us.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
By seeing that there is this mental mixture of god and self we can deduce that those who claim to perceive the “voice” or “will” of god are literally speaking of themselves- not god. When they say “God told me to run for president.” as a few of the 2012 Republican Primary candidates stated, they were subconsciously saying, “I really want to run for president!” Like talking about ones self in the third-person perspective, the little voice of god is really an extension of the self. It is only misattributed to their identity and association with god. But of course<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"> </b>I would be proven wrong if we elect three Presidents of the United States this year! </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
As we can see this conflicting sense of self and god can be troublesome if not totally disastrous. As devoted believers speak not only as themselves they often also speak from what they believe is the infallible and monumental standpoint of god which is seemingly exempt from any or all criticism. This can result in ideas from “God has asked me to tithe to the church” to “God has asked me to kill the infidels.” This cynical result brings a sobering awareness to those critical of religion and hopefully to those <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">in </i>religion because it reveals the necessity of understanding where spiritual impulses comes from and how it can affect <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">each and every</i> one of our lives. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
People who were unfortunate to have incurred brain injuries can also experience spiritual-like side effects. We understand now that these types of experiences are injurious manipulations of the neuroanatomy in the brain. <a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/jill_bolte_taylor_s_powerful_stroke_of_insight.html" target="_blank">Jill Bolte Taylor</a>, a neuroanatomist, had an experience unparalleled by other researchers in her field. Jill suffered a major stroke and a brain hemorrhage. After eight years and a full recovery Jill’s description of the onset of her injury provides a real and tremendously moving account of her phenomenal experiences as a byproduct of the brain. Both the detail and significance of this is so great I cannot afford the room herein and so I refer you to this <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">must see </i>video link I’ve attached above which applies perfectly to this point.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
Those who incur life changing brain injuries are often not as fortunate to have the extensive recovery as Jill did. They are sometimes incapable of willful direction of their post-injury behavior such as in the classic example of <a href="http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/Phineas-Gage-Neurosciences-Most-Famous-Patient.html" target="_blank">Phineas Gage</a>; the brain is responsible not only for the notion of spirituality but behavior as well. It is the same misfortune for those who are born with the psychological predisposition of a sociopath or other negative social dysfunctions rooted in the brain. When the brain is damaged or defective are they exempt from gods “laws” when the men who wrote the bible weren’t even aware that this possibility could exist? What is the religious people’s explanation for the purpose and destiny of one who was born with a defective brain? </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
There are volumes written and volumes to be written on this area of evolutionary cognitive neuroscience of religion and it is incredibly fascinating. I’m certainly no expert in the field but I encourage everyone to read Dr. J. Anderson Thompson’s general audience-friendly book, <u><span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://www.jandersonthomson.com/why-we-believe-in-gods/" target="_blank">why people believe in god(s)</a></span></u> for an incredible tour through our early human behavior and modern psyche. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: grey;">Mis-Belief</span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
Here are a few more real claims to the supernatural of which we now know have their origin in neuroscience. We all know that there are people out there who honestly believe that they are psychic. In an <a href="http://www.iigwest.org/" target="_blank">experiment</a> some of these people were tested as they claimed that they can psychically perceive, with high accuracy, the shapes on the back of Zener cards hidden from view. But in the scientifically controlled setting where the results are statistically analyzed we see that they are the same to that of a random draw. Have you ever seen a psychic win the lotto? Neither have I. The cause: self delusion. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
Another example is the Ouija Board. Legend has it that they can be used to talk to the dead. Understandably so! Years ago back in my paranormal investigations I’ve tried it on several occasions and the planchette actually moves! But what’s moving it is far from dead. It’s very much alive and it’s us! It is what is known in psychology as an ideomotor response. It is unconscious movement made by the body such as salivating while only <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">thinking</i> about the sourness of a lemon, the suggestive forces in hypnosis, reflexes and even the shedding of tears while crying. It is commonly explained as the driving force in many other supernatural tools such as pendulums, divining rods and automatic writing. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
Another claim of spirituality is where the consciousness seems to leaves the body during a near-death experience. Though it is often a tremendous and unforgettable experience we have learned that it is a type of survival mechanism that is triggered within the brain when it is undergoing severe trauma or stress. It removes the conscious mind from the current of pain <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">neurally</i> and into tranquility or euphoria at which point pleasant hallucinations may occur. It does this as simply as flipping a switch. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
We cannot deny that these experiences mentioned in the paragraphs above, especially the ladder, may be deep and meaningful but once again, these are experiences which come from inside of us and not from outside of us. We can now see that these are all fine examples of how natural physiology can create “quirks” on which we then draw the erroneous conclusion of “something else”. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="color: grey;">Let My People Go</span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
We’ve already shown here and in past articles that these experiences are not a result of a god and religion; god and religion were the initial resulting explanation <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">for</i> <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">these experiences</i>. Religion throughout the world is as varied in the cultural sense as music, food, dance, clothing and superstition. Cross culturally, however, children learn to believe without question because their parents believe as did theirs. In that tight constraint they do not have a world view of the myriad of ‘competing’ religions and the logical contentions against them. Consequently, in the cyclical sense, society attempted to do the same to myself but I broke the cycle. In light of this fact it doesn’t mean that these feelings are no longer meaningful; they can be but understand them for what they are. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
I find it frustrating that churches perpetuate ignorance by not teaching the accredited historical facts in how their religion was developed and spread but they also blatantly ignore science which is the foundation of the developing world around them. Developing science utilizes critical processes in testing and validating points before professing them, something that religion seems to be exempt from. My point here is that there are several reasons why people take refuge in religion but in the wake of the progressing world around them it is the responsibility of their churches to inform and educate them. Certainly the church is worried about one day becoming obsolete but by not confronting reality they are doing themselves and their followers the disservice of misleading them. This is the height of irresponsibility. Someone once said, “By standing still as time goes forward you move backward.” </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
Spirituality or the natural sense of unity is different for everyone. As spirituality has its complex roots in our emotions let us utilize this knowledge to seek within ourselves, or other qualified humane resources, aid in the fulfillment that we desire while utilizing common sense, critical thinking and a loving sense of self-betterment. We all have different feelings and connections to our surroundings and we all have different ideas of the purity of mind we may seek in our efforts to mentally reclaim or revitalize our worn selves. Dependent or liberating they are all part of us in which we need to learn to understand without having a casting of religion embedded in it. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align: justify;">
I feel fortunate to have been able to experience the passionate view of life that I had as a child prior to indoctrination. I’m glad that what I felt was only a passion for the beauty in life rather than a dependency plaguing me for a lifetime. It’s a lot easier looking at things the way they are rather than being inflicted with so many archaic dogmas that so clearly go against the flow of human nature. Once we have brought it down to this basic level I think that John Lennon had the right idea in mind when he sang the words, “<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7NmUS7UWNQhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7NmUS7UWNQ" target="_blank">All you need is love</a>.” Does it really need to be more complicated than that? </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
Site:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
• Thagard, Paul. <a href="http://cogsci.uwaterloo.ca/Articles/religion.pdf" target="_blank">The Emotional Coherence of Religion</a>. Journal of Cognition and Culture 5.1-2, Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden 2005.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
• Alcorta, Candace S. and Sosis, Richard. <a href="http://www.anth.uconn.edu/faculty/sosis/publications/ritualalcortasosis5.pdf" target="_blank">Ritual,Emotion, and Sacred Symbols: the Evolution of Religion as an Adaptive Complex</a>. Department of Anthropology, University of Connecticut, 2005.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
• Bocock, Robert. <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=auGqE6D5bDsC&pg=PA86&dq=what+sigmund+freud+says+about+religion&hl=en&sa=X&ei=fo8xT8PICbPr0QG0kaD_Bw&ved=0CE4Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=what%20sigmund%20freud%20says%20about%20religion&f=false">Sigmund Freud</a>,-pg 86. Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
• Thomson, Jr., MD, J. Anderson and Aukofer, Clare. why we believe in god(s). Forward by Dawkins, Richard, Pitchstone Publishing, 2011.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
• Hudson, Janice and Tanner, Meredith. <i>Bunkbed Positions</i>. Toronto: Room Publishing, 2006.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
• Holt, Tim. Sigmund Freud: <a href="http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/arguments-for-atheism/the-psychogenesis-of-religion/sigmund-freud-religion-as-wish-fulfilment/" target="_blank">Religion as Wish-Fulfillment</a>. Philosophy of Religion, 2008</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
• Lawson, Willow. <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=98580&page=1" target="_blank">Brain Area Affects Sense of ‘Self’</a>. ABC News. (year not given)</div>
<div style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">
<span id="goog_83746571"></span><span id="goog_83746572"></span></div>
L.A.S.H.http://www.blogger.com/profile/03232903538937971137noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4673251404004825805.post-26902328101387436652012-02-23T15:48:00.002-08:002012-03-12T16:36:06.203-07:00What I'm Reading....<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-S3H15UiM6ew/T0bJF3-sHGI/AAAAAAAAAA4/x-YRr4IpjYY/s1600/why+we+believe+in+gods.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" lda="true" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-S3H15UiM6ew/T0bJF3-sHGI/AAAAAAAAAA4/x-YRr4IpjYY/s1600/why+we+believe+in+gods.png" /></a></div>
<a href="http://www.jandersonthomson.com/why-we-believe-in-gods/" target="_blank">why we believe in god(s)</a><br />
By: J. Anderson Thomson, Jr., MD <br />
with Clare Aukofer<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Why-We-Believe-God-Concise/dp/0984493212/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1303829866&sr=8-1" target="_blank">BUY NOW</a><br />
<br />
<b>ISBN: </b>978-098449321-0<br />
<br />
<br />
Thanks to the <a href="http://www.skeptic.com/" target="_blank">Skeptic Society</a> I had the privilege of meeting Dr. J. "Andy" Thomson and had my book signed at his Cal Tech lecture. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Description from back of book:</b> In this groundbreaking volume, J. Anderson Thomson, Jr., MD, with Clare Aukofer, offers a succinct yet comprehensive study of how and why the human mind generates religious belief. Dr. Thomson, a highly respected practicing psychiatrist with credentials in forensic psychiatry and evolutionary psychology, methodically investigates the components and causes of religious belief in the same way any scientist would investigate the movement of astronomical bodies or the evolution of life over time - that is, as a purely natural phenomenon. Providing compelling evidence from psychology, the cognitive neurosciences, and related fields, he, with Ms. Aukofer, presents an easily accessible and exceptionally convincing case that god(s) were created by man - not vice versa. With this slim volume, Dr. Thomson establishes himself as a must-read thinker and leading voice on the primacy of reason and science over superstition and religion. <br />
<br />
<b>J. Anderson "Andy" Thomson, Jr., MD</b>, is a staff psychiatrist at the University of Virginia's Student Health Center and Institute of Law, Psychiatry and Public Policy, and maintains a private practice of adult and forensic psychiatry. He serves as a trustee of the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science. <b>Clare Aukofer</b> is a medical writer who has collaborated with Dr. Thomson on several projects. <br />
<br />
<br />
....<b>and another...</b><br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-bCsvN-2Dung/T0bMXwbvY4I/AAAAAAAAABA/1iw2kGnacpQ/s1600/QED.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" lda="true" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-bCsvN-2Dung/T0bMXwbvY4I/AAAAAAAAABA/1iw2kGnacpQ/s1600/QED.jpg" /></a></div>
<u>QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter</u><br />
By: Richard Feynman<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/QED-Strange-Theory-Light-Matter/dp/0691024170" target="_blank">BUY NOW</a><br />
<br />
<b>ISBN-10:</b><span style="font-weight: bold;"> 0691024170 </span><br />
<span style="font-weight: bold;">ISBN-13:<span style="font-weight: bold;"> 978-0691024172</span> </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Book description from Amazon.com: </b>Famous the world over for the creative brilliance of his insights into the physical world, Nobel Prize-winning physicist Richard Feynman also possessed an extraordinary talent for explaining difficult concepts to the nonscientist. QED--the edited version of four lectures on quantum electrodynamics that Feynman gave to the general public at UCLA as part of the Alix G. Mautner Memorial Lecture series--is perhaps the best example of his ability to communicate both the substance and the spirit of science to the layperson.<br />
The focus, as the title suggests, is quantum electrodynamics (QED), the part of the quantum theory of fields that describes the interactions of the quanta of the electromagnetic field-light, X rays, gamma rays--with matter and those of charged particles with one another. By extending the formalism developed by Dirac in 1933, which related quantum and classical descriptions of the motion of particles, Feynman revolutionized the quantum mechanical understanding of the nature of particles and waves. And, by incorporating his own readily visualizable formulation of quantum mechanics, Feynman created a diagrammatic version of QED that made calculations much simpler and also provided visual insights into the mechanisms of quantum electrodynamic processes.L.A.S.H.http://www.blogger.com/profile/03232903538937971137noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4673251404004825805.post-73838278849654567952012-02-14T23:20:00.000-08:002012-03-12T16:35:01.039-07:00Just a little something I try to keep in mind as I go through the actions of the day....<br />
<br />
This is narrated by the late great Alen Watts and animated by Trey Parker and Matt Stone. Thanks to <a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/OurTVproductions" target="_blank">OurTVproductions</a> for posting this video on YouTube.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/TCm1qNilpBM?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>L.A.S.H.http://www.blogger.com/profile/03232903538937971137noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4673251404004825805.post-60561805247324205792012-01-24T19:25:00.000-08:002012-03-12T16:34:38.043-07:00What I'm Reading.....<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-s1VY4oAYv1k/Tx9zong9YeI/AAAAAAAAAAw/9uD2jaSM3vo/s1600/GOD%252C+NO.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-s1VY4oAYv1k/Tx9zong9YeI/AAAAAAAAAAw/9uD2jaSM3vo/s1600/GOD%252C+NO.jpg" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<u>GOD, NO! Signs You May Already Be An Atheist AND Other Magical Tales</u></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
By: Penn Jillette</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<a href="http://www.vromansbookstore.com/book/9781451610369" target="_blank">BUY NOW</a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b>ISBN-10:</b> 145161036X</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br />
<b>Thanks to the Center for Inquiry - Los Angeles I had the opportunity to meet with Penn Jillette in Beverly Hills for a book signing.....I regret I couldn't make it..... </b><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Book description from the inside flap: </b><br />
<b>Not only can the man rant, he can write.</b> </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
From the larger, louder half of the world-famous magic duo Penn & Teller comes a scathingly funny reinterpretation of The Ten Commandments. They are The Penn Commandments, and they reveal one outrageous and opinionated atheist's experience in the world. In this rollicking yet honest account of a godless existence, Penn takes readers on a roller coaster of exploration and flips conventional religious wisdom on its ear to reveal that doubt, skepticism, and wonder -- all signs of a general feeling of disbelief -- are to be celebrated and cherished, rather than suppressed. And he tells some pretty damn funny stories along the way. From performing blockbuster shows on the Vegas Strip to the adventures of fatherhood, from an on-going dialogue with proselytizers of the Christian Right to the joys of sex while scuba diving, Jillette's self-created Decalogue invites his reader on a journey of discovery that is equal parts wise and wisecracking.<br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>L.A.S.H.http://www.blogger.com/profile/03232903538937971137noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4673251404004825805.post-59057513243525799682012-01-24T19:08:00.000-08:002012-03-12T16:34:14.779-07:00What I'm Reading.....<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-muzhcF1wgT8/Tx9twoWANzI/AAAAAAAAAAo/GAIurNLiawM/s1600/A+Universe+from+Nothing.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-muzhcF1wgT8/Tx9twoWANzI/AAAAAAAAAAo/GAIurNLiawM/s1600/A+Universe+from+Nothing.jpg" /></a></div>
<u>A UNIVERSE FROM NOTHING: Why There is Something Rather Than Nothing </u><br />
by Lawrence M. Krauss<br />
(Afterword by Richard Dawkins)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.vromansbookstore.com/book/9781451624458" target="_blank">BUY NOW</a><br />
<br />
<span class="byLinePipe">ISBN-10:</span><span style="font-weight: bold;"> 145162445X</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-weight: bold;">Thanks to the Skeptics Society I had my copy signed by Dr. Krauss at his lecture at CalTech.</span><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Book description from inside flap: </b><br />
<b>“WHERE DID THE UNIVERSE COME FROM? WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE IT? WHAT WILL THE FUTURE BRING? AND FINALLY, WHY IS THERE SOMETHING RATHER THAN NOTHING?”</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b> </b> </div>
Lawrence Krauss’s provocative answers to these and other timeless questions in a wildly popular lecture now on YouTube have attracted almost a million viewers. The last of these questions in particular has been at the center of religious and philosophical debates about the existence of God, and it’s the supposed counterargument to anyone who questions the need for God. As Krauss argues, scientists have, however, historically focused on other, more pressing issues—such as figuring out how the universe actually functions, which can ultimately help us to improve the quality of our lives.<br />
<br />
Now, in a cosmological story that rivets as it enlightens, pioneering theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss explains the groundbreaking new scientific advances that turn the most basic philosophical questions on their heads. One of the few prominent scientists today to have actively crossed the chasm between science and popular culture, Krauss reveals that modern science <i>is </i>addressing the question of why there is something rather than nothing, with surprising and fascinating results. The staggeringly beautiful experimental observations and mind-bending new theories are all described accessibly in <i>A Universe from Nothing, </i>and they suggest that not only <i>can </i>something arise from nothing, something will <i>always </i>arise from nothing.<br />
<br />
With his characteristic wry humor and wonderfully clear explanations, Krauss takes us back to the beginning of the beginning<i>, </i>presenting the most recent evidence for how our universe evolved—and the implications for how it’s going to end. It will provoke, challenge, and delight readers as it looks at the most basic underpinnings of existence in a whole new way. And this knowledge that our universe will be quite different in the future from today has profound implications and directly affects how we live in the present. As Richard Dawkins has described it: This could potentially be the most important scientific book with implications for supernaturalism since Darwin.<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
A fascinating antidote to outmoded philosophical and religious thinking, <i>A Universe from Nothing </i>is a provocative, game-changing entry into the debate about the existence of God and everything that exists. “Forget Jesus,” Krauss has argued, “the stars died so you could be born.”</div>L.A.S.H.http://www.blogger.com/profile/03232903538937971137noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4673251404004825805.post-8792112494009335602011-12-25T23:33:00.000-08:002012-04-18T19:14:13.939-07:00The Virus in Religion<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-YFsdUWmNOT8/TvgiAfpEQhI/AAAAAAAAAAU/eFRYCeAKkIk/s1600/The+Virus+in+ReligionFINAL+copy.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" height="336" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-YFsdUWmNOT8/TvgiAfpEQhI/AAAAAAAAAAU/eFRYCeAKkIk/s640/The+Virus+in+ReligionFINAL+copy.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
<br />
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Introduction</i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
In looking at how society has changed over the past few thousand years I often wondered why organized religion has lasted as long as it has. Though I was religious for many years of my life I no longer hold any religious beliefs as I finally gave in to the logic and reason which was pressing me from the beginning. As the world looks very much different from outside of the box it seems almost clear as day that eventually the rest of the world would follow. From ancient times to this age of science and education and with a noticeable increase in secular ideals it appears that religion still seems to linger on. And so I wondered <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">why</i>. This question made me look closer into the workings of religion to help understand why it perpetuates in this modern, competent and intellectual society.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
It’s no task at all to search where religion thrives on this planet. From the top of the Himalayas to the bottom of the city basins to the hearts and minds of modern man it lives and survives in many different forms. Studies have reflected that in the variance of our societies it becomes easier to see that religion is more predominant in places that are more economically challenged. It goes without mention that atheism is almost nowhere to be seen in those places. For people who are living in poverty life is but a strain and in those situations people need a rock to stand upon. What is it over all that the followers benefit from their religion? The answer in its most basic form is rooted in social and psychological consolation. Though there are some benefits that religion can offer it may be more indirect or passive in coping with matters in the real world rather than working for an actual cure. The sense of community for example is a stronghold for a growing society but its success is given a false sense of prosperity if it gathers in the name of false doctrines. Let us see how and why that is.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
In the distant past, aside from social and psychological matters, religion much like mythology had attempted to explain the mysteries of our great universe. Today however, the mysteries of how we got here and how our expansive universe was created have clearly been discovered and explained in the realm of modern science. And the matters of who we are and where we came from have also been meticulously deciphered by way of history and biological science. Though they are ever beautiful those things no longer remain a mystery. But in early times religion provided the explanation. It addressed something that we as citizens of this universe desired answers for and….well….we created them. That’s excusable as long as we acknowledge the systems of science and knowledge that came along after those archaic notions phased out. But they didn’t and it fascinated me now more then ever: <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">why?</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
Like many Americans I grew up culturally Christian. Our family went to church on Sundays and Christianity was enforced without flaw in the household. But in my early teenage years I started to question our beliefs. I started addressing matters in religion which we contrary to logic and history. Not everyone has questioned their beliefs but I say with confidence that we all have had encountered matters contrary to logic. Unfortunately when talking about these things with a parent I was scolded and had no choice but to retreat to the shores of uncertainty and blind belief. From countless people I had been told, “There are some things that we are not supposed to know.” As time passed I started to feel that this answer was merely an insult to our intelligence. It was only after thinking about this fact when it finally hit me: it was the thinking that was the problem. It was the operating system itself within religion and it was a notion that frightened me. Its simple infrastructure was responsible for keeping billions of people intellectually captive for centuries! From what I can now see it had the caliber of a major epidemic: it was the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">virus in religion.</i> </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Description of the System</i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
To my surprise the “system” as I will call it is quite simple but brilliantly designed and it very clearly achieved what it was intended to do. To see it one has to strip down the ‘fluff’ to isolate the working components; the engine of this vehicle. Take away the material data such as god, divinity, morality, etc the remaining skeleton is similar to a social design implemented by nothing less then a tyrant. It takes a given group of people and applies a small but strict set of demeaning rules. It repressed education and self-exploration. It propels itself with a work and reward modus operandi. It has an internal support system which keeps its leader in charge and financially solvent. It has a crime and punishment system and just to top it off it has a big finale at the end of the show. It’s a monster of an idea and it’s been functioning this way for centuries. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Application of the System in Older Times</i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
To show that I am simply not fabricating or exaggerating such a heinous idea I decided to find a similar system which operates under the same set of principles. Take for example the slave labor over a century and a half ago in our own United States. Slave labor was terribly oppressive and having not even basic human rights the opportunity to get an education was out of the question. The slave owners were well aware of the fact that if slaves became able to read and write their minds would develop. The more they learned the more they would be likely to question their decadent status and attempt a rebellion. So keeping the slaves uneducated aided in keeping their spirits down and compliant. When offering simple necessities like food and shelter as form of pay kept the slaves moving barely enough to continue fulfilling their duties and their masters’ desires. Religion uses a similar design. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
Ironically religion was very prominent in these circumstances because people in this lowly place needed a rock to stand on; to sooth the broken spirit. I have no doubt that religion played a monumental role in keeping countless people strong when they had no other source of strength. It would be wrong of me to argue that it would have been inappropriate for them to resort to religion under these circumstances because at that time, it was the way of life. There was no other form of liberation available to them at the time until true morale combined to make a change. What I mean by this is that modern science was still an adolescent in that day and wasn’t readily available to nearly everyone as it is now. In today’s life modern science is blaring at us from every angle; so great that it contradicts the biblical explanation we talked about earlier with minimal effort. However, even if one is not so well read in the sciences just applying simple logic independently to the ideas in religion starts to extinguish its seemingly eternal fire. Back in the days of slavery, it was much different. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
This is why I decided to write this article: <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">because this time has already come<sup>1</sup>.</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Core Structure and Rules</i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
Looking closer now at this system we can start to see its anatomy. At the center of this system is the core set of parameters: the holy bible. Though the bible is believed by the Christians as the ‘given word of god’ history now reveals that it is a collection of motivational proverbs, liturgical material, allegorical literature and scantly history combined in a single volume by the biblical committee in the early Christian era. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
In this social system the bible plays two important parts: one, it has a set of rules by which each and every follower must intently obey. Second, the follower is required to believe everything that it has to say about life and the universe no questions asked. In fact, doubting the holy spirit or divine origin equates to eternal damnation. The same for those who are even slightly skeptical or “lukewarm” are described as being “spewed from the mouth of god.” Even though there is no solid evidence of a god it cannot be questioned or doubted. If you do, you’re out of the club. So here, for structural purposes this is the authority and framework.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Repress Education and Self-Exploration</i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
With the bible setting the core structure and parameters comes now the people for which it was made for. Within these walls come the unfortunate ceiling of repression of education and self-exploration. It is accomplished in the way like one puts blinders on a horse to narrow its view to a desired perspective. And with human beings, it promotes ignorance. This notion occurred to me when I was in college and I had the liberty to take courses on world religions. The world then seemed backward to me in the way that people should first be taught about the origin and history of different religions before devoting their lives to it. In my opinion it seemed that if this were to occur people would have more control of their lives for the benefit of themselves and for the goodness of humanity. But unfortunately the world doesn’t work in this way and for those who are born into a religion often do not see that there is an outside reality of virtue. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
A strange quirk that I noticed about religion, which isn’t just part of Christianity, but is an integral component in most religions is the incessant fixation to their religious scripture: in this case the bible. Well it makes perfect sense that this is the chosen doctrine that their world revolves around. But if I may go out on a limb I might even be able to propose that this in itself is evidence of not strength but of weakness. It was back in my Christian days I noticed how people revolved their daily lives around the bible and nothing else. I actually was well read in the bible but felt that, like any book, I had the notion and ‘spirit’ now I can go forward and apply it to my life. I didn’t need to constantly resort to it because its essence lived within me. Metaphorically speaking, once a person lights the match of knowledge it gets put to bigger and greater things. One doesn’t continue to keep igniting it once it’s already lit. But the mentality of revolving the world around one book means one thing: shaping the mind with repetitive indoctrination. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
And so, it is this closed-mindedness which shows there is no growth except for what level of self-betterment one can obtain in a repressed environment. In fact I know of no church which teaches the history of their religion as it is seen in full view of accredited historians. How many of the followers know of how the book was assembled, how their ideas were spread across the lands, e.g. the Spanish Inquisition, and the fact that Christianity has a history as black and as bloody as any other primitive religion. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
Furthermore the institutionalization of children within these walls often leaves them ill prepared for the real world that awaits them. I must say that I did have a relatively happy childhood up until I was about ten. I thought the world was all kind hearted and pure. The ideals I was taught in Sunday school weren’t there to teach me how the world was but to teach me how to behave. Aside from basic human morale people need to be taught about the world. Non-Christian friends of mine talked the same way, played the same way but I always knew that they knew something that I didn’t. So when it comes to censoring things around children I have to say that the goal is not to protect them by shielding them from the world but to protect them by teaching them about the world. Extreme censorship in this context is not a mark of noble quality but of systematic configuration in this perpetuating system. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
As inferred earlier the repression of education and religious indoctrination go hand in hand. I honestly feel that this is a bigger problem than most people really know. It is not the matter of just not believing and living ones own life; it is the fact that religion hits the foundation and affects the development of the person inside religion. The history of world religions and the sciences of astronomy and biological evolution are integral components such as earth science, physics, chemistry, quantum mechanics, etc. However, the first three subjects are repressed in our society and the others taught without hesitation. But being that the aforementioned are so prominent in whom we are and where we came from affects the meaning and direction of our individual lives to a significant degree. Knowing how this universe came about is an integral part of being human and an important factor in the direction of our lives!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
The astounding dynamics of the creation of our known universe is much more fascinating and extraordinary than the mythical story as depicted in the Christian bible. It never ceases to amaze me how people attempt to evoke scientific and historical axioms from the bible being that it came into existence centuries upon centuries before the era of modern science and that a number of its historical incorporations are not flush with accepted historical facts. This common practice demonstrates the ignorant zeal and confidence believers maintain in supporting what is most important to them. Take for example Archbishop Ussher of Armgah. In the year 1650 the archbishop <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">assumed</i> that the bible was a year by year chronology of our Earth’s history and quantified it to be that of six to ten thousand years of age. This as we know did not become a mere rule of thumb of ecumenical thought but it became the leading figure that many churches still support. It is needless to say that this “scientific” submission is clearly contradictory to any earth science which has been logically deduced. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
Proposing the absurd period of the Earth’s age as six thousand years eclipses also form both believers and non-believers the beautiful and complex story of biological evolution. The wonder and beauty of all life clearly wasn’t something that was created instantaneously as depicted in the dull story of Genesis. Of course back then it was a satisfactory explanation before man had any ability to research such things. But now, we know differently. Seeing how single celled organisms were created from the depths of the ocean and changed into more complex beings like man <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">millions upon millions </i>of years later is truly one of the most breathtaking processes science has ever revealed to us.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
Adding more insult to injury is yet another area of life which is highly regulated in the system of religion. Human sexuality is another prime aspect of who we are but it is, to say the least, a taboo in religion. Thank goodness that we’re able to at least provide sexual education in middle schools as without that, only for a competent parent, education in sexuality and reproduction probably wouldn’t even exist. I’ve personally known parents who feel conflicted about the idea of sex, who are uncertain what role it should play in even their own lives and neglect to teach it to their own children. Once human nature takes course it quickly results in pregnancy. The fact that parts of the Catholic Church condone abstinence and condemn preventative factors like condoms couldn’t be more contrary to any living specie. Additionally, telling people to wait before they’re married before engaging in sex can in some ways be seen as a wise policy but really doesn’t flow with the nature of man; allowing people to know themselves and each other on a deeper level is part of being a progressive society. Having knowledge of how to protect themselves not only in sex but in relationships would yield a wiser policy. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
As stated above seeing where we came from and where we’re going allows within us a feeling of oneness with nature; a satisfaction comparable to a religious sense of belonging. One can say it is the original intent of human spirituality and it pains me just knowing how many people are denied their human right to know<sup>2</sup>. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Work and Reward </i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
Continuing on our anatomical analysis of the religious system we now take a look at how the work and reward system operates. Let us suppose that a believer is a “good” person who does good things and when good things happen to that person it follows that that person is being rewarded. There can also be a good person who does good things and when bad things happen it <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">can </i>be considered a punishment, but not always. When a logical explanation cannot be found it is said that the person is being <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">tested.</i> Funny enough, you can have a non-believer to whom good things happen and the conclusion is that god is just letting him know that he loves him. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
It seems to me that this illogical idea attempts to explain how and why things happen in life on the premise of proving the existence of god and his active role in peoples lives. In reality things happen. We cannot logically conclude that god is controlling the mundane circumstances of life that are by far too short to call miraculous. The circumstances in life change depending on what one or another does or does not do. And some things we have no control over at all. There really is nothing mysterious here. We as a fully functional society in this age do not need an explanation for how and why things happen in life except for what we can observe and learn directly from life itself. We do not need an entity that takes credit for positive circumstances and to pass the buck on negative ones. We are better than that! </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Intermezzo </i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
So far on this soon to be autopsy we have examined the application and use of this social system, the core structure and parameters, the repression of education, and the work and reward system. As the latex gloves snap on we move to the anatomy of the “tail end” where we shall see the reproduction system and the crime and punishment system. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Reproduction and Internal Support </i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
In the proverbial hive of the massive colony of followers we have a queen bee overseeing the entire operation: the church. In conjunction of the peoples’ daily spiritual battles of the human condition it is the duty of the believer to spread the gospel. In many if not most situations the newly recruited come from a troubled situation and are looking for some guidance and find it. After getting acclimated, they too, go out and recruit others. This is merely <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">one</i> way this massive entity extends, gathers, and replicates. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
It seems to fit rather well here that the church is not shy to remind its followers about their duty of being humble; that they are not worthy of what they have and not worthy of their gods love. This idea kills their pride and sense of individuality and replaces it with living for the sole purpose of gods plan. It is the complete and total mental surrender of ones’ self to the one mass forever trapping and subduing the individual. Though this system is self-abolishing to its believers this system with all its “fluff” manages to persuade them that this is a good thing. Whether it is a dictatorship or a religious cult, this honestly sounds like a big cup of “sit down and shut up” just without the whipped cream or sugar. Bearing a burden of this stature on a people is in itself immoral in the eye of those outside of the box. Some may argue and say that this mentality is to promote submission of self to a higher intelligence. However, if it really was, the guidance which people are seeking in religion is something that can be prescribed by other methods. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
The masses of people have another recommendation from the church and that is to tithe and donate in every way possible so that the cause will go on. Here’s the reward system again: they’re told that what they give they will receive many times back...<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">when they’re dead</i>. There are verses in the bible that tell them that for whatever little they give they shall receive boundless treasures in the kingdom of god. As leaders keep the troops motivated they assure them that they are doing a good thing by subsidizing the church when so many of their followers are living in poverty. If anyone can benefit from their money it is the same pocket from where it came<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">. </i>Well unfortunately the followers do not or cannot see this and don’t think any better. When all they know are the parameters in which they live and strive to survive then how could they think any different? Even if a believer ponders for just a second about what’s outside the box they are heeded away by fear that they will be eternally tortured for even <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">thinking</i> about it. Now in all honesty if this doesn’t sum up tyranny, cult, and mass manipulation then I don’t know what does. Imposing on someone the fear to <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">think</i> has to be one of the greatest crimes on humanity.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
Thanks to the strength of the human intellect more and more people are starting to think<sup>3</sup>. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Crime and Punishment </i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
Just as with the work and reward system, the crime and punishment system works in much the same way. <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">If</i>, by chance one does not believe, no matter how nice, how moral, or how much good that person does and regardless of how good or bad their life circumstances were, they’re supposedly going to be punished…when their dead. In my life I have known some genuinely good non-believers. However when spoken about by Christians I was told that these non-believers have everything right accept for one thing: the belief in Jesus. And as a result they will suffer unfathomable unending torture as a punishment…when they’re dead. To me, this notion, coming from “moral” people, was in itself immoral. In fact, it seemed to me that it was also primitive, barbaric, closed-minded, and jealous in nature, controlling, audacious, unfounded, and immature. Looking at it this way really does show that this system has a major problem: it just can’t step up to the plate! It just can’t “man up” and show us what it claims it’s made of. Instead it’s showing us exactly what it <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">is</i> made of: <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">nothing. </i>And for the record that’s exactly what’s going to happen in its future: <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">nothing</i>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
In fact to make things more interesting there are actually people out there who are either just tired of going on in the same old routine in life or who just can’t wait to see their enemies crushed. And for those people there’s a special show scheduled which they call the “end of days”. As it’s said Christ will come crashing through the sky, the dead will rise and cause all hell to break loose on Earth. After World War III there will be one thousand years of peace and then the curtain finally closes and everyone goes home. Honestly what can I say but, “That’s show business!”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
I think George Carlin hit the nail right on the head when he spoke about <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o&noredirect=1">religion</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Conclusion</i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
As I said rather forwardly it seems that there is a real problem here. As we take away the pretty things in Christianity such as the compassion of Jesus, the reassurance of gods love, and bountiful rewards we are left with a cleverly hidden skeleton of mass manipulation and tyranny. Talk about a “wolf in sheep’s clothing.” It really is a very sad situation. Promising people their rewards or punishments till after death leaves them astray with no shepherd out looking to bring them to safety. Having no proof of their protector, no rewards for their hard work and controlling their mentality is rootless just like slavery was. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
Fortunately, unlike a virus, we may not have to let it run its course. But there may not be a cure if there’s no notion of something wrong and most people are willing to die for their beliefs regardless of what reasoning is put in front of them. But by outlining the differences between these realities hopefully religious believers may begin to see the differences and begin to find their way home. It would be more productive looking at the face of religion as mythology as those tales were also created to loosely explain the unexplainable or give meaning to certain principals in life. As they are not taken literally so too should religion be viewed from the historical perspective as mans archaic system of laws and rudimentary attempts at understanding our universe. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
There <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">is</i> a better way to live. There is a structured way people can guide their lives by their own selves. There are ways to meet with like minded people and share the deep sense of community and humanity without being soldiers in someone else’s war or sprout seeds from mans’ convoluted and ignorant past. They don’t have to give up the sense of “spirituality” because that heightened sense of awareness and inspiration is part of who we are and is meant for embracing not false misleading doctrines or mythology but the brilliance of life and the whole of humanity. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
Notable articles as indicated by superscripts above:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">1) Psychology Today: <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human-beast/201111/if-we-live-in-age-anxiety-how-can-religion-be-dying">If We Live in an Age of Anxiety, How Can Religion Be Dying?</a> </i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">2) Psychology Today: <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/collections/201112/whats-the-point/why-do-you-exist">Why Do You Exist?</a></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">3) Psychology Today: <a href="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human-beast/201107/why-atheism-will-replace-religion-new-evidence">Why Atheism Will Replace Religion: New Evidence</a></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
</div>L.A.S.H.http://www.blogger.com/profile/03232903538937971137noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4673251404004825805.post-40033090437794537512011-12-14T22:11:00.000-08:002012-02-10T15:38:20.334-08:00Be Bright<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--yVYv3d5q10/Tvgn-FWJx4I/AAAAAAAAAAg/FG6NU2rWOPM/s1600/NAT+006web.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="300" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--yVYv3d5q10/Tvgn-FWJx4I/AAAAAAAAAAg/FG6NU2rWOPM/s400/NAT+006web.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
It never ceases to amaze me how much of my life was hampered by the reins of religion. Every once in the while I’ll come across something in my life that I noticed it could have been different had I grown up in a moral but non-religious family. One of those ideas I’ll share with you now. <br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
The influence of religion in our lives was extreme. We were taught in this way because our mother was taught that way. Her and her five siblings were taught that way because their parents were taught that way. As my parents divorced around the time I was ten my father’s secular influence unfortunately wasn’t really in the picture as it had been decided that we would be living with my mother.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
As the shock waves of the divorce started to settle down I eventually started pursuing interests in my life. I became a highly devoted and accomplished pianist studying classical music on my own. I became recognized in middle and high school which later resulted in my performing solos at concerts and special events. I also considered myself a scholar as I took on long detailed research projects outside of school in anything that sparked interest in my young mind. Growing up in a poor family I had little to no allowance but whatever I did manage to save I always spent on sheet music and books. I loved reading but I never read fiction. There were simply too many interesting things in life that I wanted to learn. And so it began. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
There were a few subjects that I felt compelled to read about which some would say are controversial. They were the subjects of paranormal investigations, UFO’s, world religions, human sexuality and miscellaneous nostalgia. They were all “normal” ideas to the naturally curious mind. I read about the stories; the people who encountered strange objects in the skies or claimed they had psychic abilities. I then read about the research and the laboratory experiments that were conducted. I additionally conducted my own experiments. As an amateur astronomer I was already watching the skies and recorded anything “of interest”. The subjects were exciting and adventurous for a young man like myself but my overall mindset was investigating the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">truth</i>. I wasn’t set out on proving that these things were indeed true but I was set out investigating whether they are true or not! </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
I kept my “underground library” in a locked cabinet as I knew my mother wouldn’t understand my reason for having them. One day she decided to break into it to see what “evil” things I was hiding and the experience for me was of persecution by having books confiscated and destroyed. My heart was torn as I saw my books ripped apart and thrown away. I pleaded with her that I was not interested in the “worship of the devil” as she accused me of but it was in answering my own questions of what these things are and whether or not they exist; that we indeed had a right to learn and understand for good cause. My inquisitiveness was called “seeds of the devil” and “wrong”. Unfortunately after my mini-inquisition I underwent a heavier religious discipline. And so it would take me years before I had the time, place and freedom in which I could once again engage in these studies. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
Now granted, paranormal investigations and UFO’s seem next to the Easter Bunny and Santa Clause now but back then as a teenager it was an honest inquiry <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">and</i> exciting! It was my right to seek knowledge and understanding: to be skeptical. But I lived for years under the rule of religion and dogma. Under that roof I had “no rights” and had no choice but to honor my mother as unquestionably correct and righteous as dictated in the Ten Commandments. My freedom of thought was years delayed and I can’t help but wonder what kind of person I would have become if I was allowed to exercise my freed mind. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
Just the same I felt a dissonant chord strike within me years later when watching a documentary on <a href="http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/leonardo-da-vinci/">Leonardo de Vinci</a>. Leonardo was researching (by way of dissection) the heart and had noticed build-up in the arteries. He recognized that this build-up was a result of something streaming in the blood and might possibly have been the cause of death of the person under his scalpel. It was at that moment that he was summonsed to the Vatican where he was then charged with Necromancy and ordered a cessation of all his medical research. As I understand it it was his drawings and writings which helped save him from further persecution and even death as they showed his honest quest for understanding and not communion with the dead. Although writing backward left-handed didn’t help him there but hey, he was self taught!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
Thought da Vinci’s lifetime was at the beginning of what we know as modern science it’s always interesting to ponder what he might have further contributed to the understanding of this blockage. Fortunately the work he had previously completed was still groundbreaking in the ways of modern science as diligently articulated in this essay on his <a href="http://jtcs.ctsnetjournals.org/cgi/content/full/127/4/929">clinical research</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
Even though da Vinci had a personal idea of what spirituality was he still had the mind to employ scientific inquiry and not simply set aside his subjects as ‘god’s perfect creations’ which should not be subject to scrutiny. I’m sure that if I had the freedom to study freely the known universe I would have made more of a significant contribution to my intellectual life and perhaps even my prosperity. The following years after that critical point religion and other family problems forced me to find answers in no other place <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">but</i> religion. That inevitably futile search lasted ten years as I later left home, left Christianity, and tried finding the answers in other religions like ancient yoga meditation and lastly Buddhism. I eventually and finally found what I was looking for outside of the realms of religion and spirituality: sense, i.e. non-contradiction. I found it through the medium at which I first started my quest: science and critical thinking. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
Today I am clearly not a religious person but I can consider myself a spiritual person. But the term “spiritual” is an old one that refers to a higher part of ourselves and what we feel about our involvement in the universe…or multiverse. Though I do not believe in god, gods or spirits I don’t like to use the term atheist. It kind of has a negative connotation so non-theist is more of an appropriate word. To make things more complicated though I am a non-theist I do still have what people would call spirituality! I therefore like to refer to myself rather as <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><a href="http://the-brights.net/vision/essays/dennett_nyt_article.html">bright</a> </i>as coined by Daniel Dennett. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
Though I will reserve my writing on spirituality and becoming a non-theist for another posting I will share briefly with you where my spirituality lies in order to show that in this type of transition life does not become less special. In fact, it became more special that I have ever, ever perceived. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
There were a few losses and gains from this change. I think it goes without mention that I’m comforted knowing that god and my deceased relatives are not watching me in my private moments…at all! You know those moments where you wonder, “I wonder if they can see me…..” Nope!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
One loss from this kind of change is knowing that I’m not going to live forever. <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Okay~ minor set-back.</i> I had to now put my prime focus on living for the now. I know that whatever I wanted to experience I have to do before I die. I had to re-examine and re-evaluate my past and make sure that I got the best out of life for what I am physically and mentally able to achieve. I couldn’t just be a good boy, chill out and party it up in god’s great kingdom! But looking at life in this way put more of an importance in what I do every day. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
Putting the prime focus on this life also allowed me to find and redefine my own spirituality. The simple idea that the beginning of our beautiful Earth and its inhabitants were no longer the simple miracle of a god; the extraordinarily complex and beautiful system of its origins seems more amazing to me and now shined as bright as the sun in my mind with sparks of amazement, reverence and wonder. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
Reading Charles Darwin’s <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Origins of the Species</i> and<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"> The Descent of Man</i> for example thrill me in much the same way that reading sacred scripture would have done. Watching something as extraordinary as <a href="http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/david-attenboroughs-first-life/"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12pt;"></span></i></a><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><a href="http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/david-attenboroughs-first-life/">David Attenborough’s First Lif<span style="font-style: normal;">e</span></a></i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 12pt;"> </span>or <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><a href="http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/charles-darwin-tree-life/">Charles Darwin and the Tree of Life</a></i> brings to reality the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">true</i> greatness behind global life. It sparks the notions that this is real and this is about me, where I came from and where I am going. It is, in itself, a truee sense of spirituality, i.e. a heightened awareness and connection to <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">all</i> life which in this view is <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">one</i> life. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
When asking me my religions preference at my initial examination my personal physician wrote down “agnostic / atheist” in my file. I told her, “Scratch out agnostic and underline atheist. I <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">know</i> what I believe.” She smiled a bit and said, “You have big shoulders.” “What do you mean?” I asked. She responded, “That’s a lot of weight to carry.” It was then that I realized that indeed I did and I was proud. I had not only the confidence and strength of mind to question the binding ideas of religion; I also gained the scientific knowledge to prove to my logical mind what was real. But most importantly I realized that I was also happy; that I reclaimed my sense of spirituality and sense of belonging that I once had. That was the third and final piece of the puzzle I needed to complete what I initially stared years ago. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<a href="http://www.condenaststore.com/-sp/O-Lord-why-art-thou-such-a-drama-queen-New-Yorker-Cartoon-Prints_i8575612_.htm">New Yorker Magazine Cartoon</a></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
</div>
</div>L.A.S.H.http://www.blogger.com/profile/03232903538937971137noreply@blogger.com1