It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Both have almost identical agendas. Men are on top, women are subservient, there is one rigid set of rules, with police and military might to enforce them, and education is tightly controlled by the State. One scholar suggested that it’s helpful to understand fundamentalism as religious fascism, and fascism as political fundamentalism. Fundamentalists spurn the modern, and want to return to a nostalgic vision of a golden age that never really existed. Likewise, the phrase “overcoming the modern” is a fascist slogan dating back to at least 1941.
St. Paul had severe personal hangups about sex, for instance, that lie behind his personal problems with homosexuality and women. How else would he say that it is a shameful thing for a woman to speak in church, or that men are made in the image of God, but women are made in the image of men? These are the reasons that informed biblical scholars take some of Paul’s teachings as rantings rather than revelations. But for fundamentalists, their scriptures fell straight from heaven in a leather-bound book, every jot and tittle intact.
Originally posted by Majic
Here's hoping that neither of them win. Life under any form of fundamentalism destroys the soul of the people enslaved by it.
Originally posted by Majic
Fundamental Disagreements
It's always interesting to skim through these threads and others involving religious debates and disagreements.
What I see here pretty much matches what I've seen elsewhere: there is a religious war in America, and the main belligerents are fundamentalist Christians and fundamentalist Marxists.
Originally posted by The Vagabond
I'm stealing this line- I don't remember who from- but what we need are fundementalist moderates. COMPROMISE OR WE'LL KILL YOU!
Originally posted by RANT
I think America is just confused at the moment. I blame technology.
Originally posted by soficrow
Good stuff guys. (You were kidding, right RANT?)
Originally posted by The Vagabond
Until we get both human consciousness and media presentation to a holographic level, all of this communication does as much harm as good because we're not getting the big picture. We're getting bombarded so that we can't see the forest through the trees.
every part of a hologram contains the full image of the whole, meaning that no matter how you view it it's always in context. Holographic presentation and understanding would essentially be the ability to process all news as a whole, in its proper context and proportions, through every smaller part of the whole.
Essentially this would require humans to be hyper-intuitive, to the point that given any one event a human could analyze all causes and effects accurately.
That's A LOT of evolution to accomplish before all this media becomes fully healthy.
I sure hope that the exposure to media itself will stimulate such evolution.
Originally posted by soficrow
But isn't that what life is? Learning enough to form our own big picture? ...How old were you when you first developed a real framework?
IMO - It's NOT harmful, any more than "reading too many books" is harmful. Just a different path to the same place.
...A Christian would say you can't ever see the whole picture - only God can.
Yes. Needs intellectual, psychic and spiritual awareness/growth. Part of which is recognizing that there always are limitations, and absolute control is not an appropriate goal.
Originally posted by soficrow
But the Net. Ahhh. To me it's liberation. Freedom. Like going back to university and alternately or simultaneously, like a deep meditation.
About 10 years ago an Indian elder told me she thought the Net was a physical manifestation of the psychic connection we all have. (Ie., the 'ether,' overmind or ...) ...She felt that the Net would bring those capacities into reach for everyone. I pretty much agree.
Originally posted by The Vagabond
Originally posted by soficrow
But isn't that what life is? Learning enough to form our own big picture? .
Actually thats what thought is. Life is just a biological process which is mainly characterized by eating and pooping.
IMO - It's NOT harmful, any more than "reading too many books" is harmful. Just a different path to the same place.
It's not the worst thing in the world, but imperfect context and knowledge is the root of all mistakes, which are painful. The sooner we get done thinking the sooner we're done with all of that painful learning, but without the usual caveat of being ignorant as a result.
...A Christian would say you can't ever see the whole picture - only God can.
I came to the strangest realization a few years ago. Christians are wrong a lot, and in the process of being wrong a lot you miss a lot of life. The Christian view on life is like being so busy thinking about dessert that you forget to eat dinner.
Yes. Needs intellectual, psychic and spiritual awareness/growth. Part of which is recognizing that there always are limitations, and absolute control is not an appropriate goal.
Not control, understanding. Holographic consciousness, Nirvana, Oneness, Communion With God, whatever you want to call it. Most newer religions see heaven as being something like this- you're done playing with life, you've been shown all of it finally, and you know when to put it down and let it be.
But at the cultural level, it just makes life harder is what I was saying. Not that hard is bad. But to reach that boiling point "pop" of actual psychic connection as opposed to the artificial disconnet the net fosters (both physically and figuratively) there's going to be trouble. There's no easy osmosis of understanding. Just more conflict. And the immediacy of conflict is what's come about. People now log on to look for trouble. Either an ideological fight, more proof everyhing is going to hell, or just to add to the list.