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.

 

Is it a Conspiracy or a Discussion on Faith?

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 06:59 AM
link   

This is not the forum for discussing religious views (or "bringing the truth" to people.) The specific focus here is conspiracies in religion. Posts that begin a new thread should reflect some sort of conspiracy angle.

If your topic doesn't have a conspiracy angle, it will be moved to Faith and Spirituality in BTS.

www.abovetopsecret.com...


A discussion of what makes a topic suitable for Conspiracies in Religion

Religious conspiracies abound. The people of the world have regained an interest in theology and, because of the differences apparent within the wide range of faiths, are committing themselves to a wide array of methods to either destroying opposing views/dogmas or at least pulling their teeth.

By the simple act of Googling 'religious conspiracy', a member can find ample on-line examples which are available. The public, with the aid of computers, have at last 'woken up'.


Popular culture has discovered religious history. And, writes Jane Sullivan, the line between fact and fiction is being treated with scant respect.

It was the moment when Kath turned to Kim and said: "I'm thinking of joining Opus Dei," that I realised the code was well and truly cracked.

For centuries, we have lived with arcana, the world of secrets and mysteries known solely to the initiated few. Only a special training at the feet of the masters, a weird ritual or two or possibly a pact with the Devil would get you past the gate. Then along came popular culture and the secret was out.

www.theage.com.au...


Listed in the link above are a number of popular conspiracy theories.

The chaos on interpretation which the internet has uncovered comes at a particularly timely point in history.

The religious hijacking of the west and, in particular, America;


At the time, most Americans were completely unaware of the militant agenda being preached on a daily basis across the breadth and width of America. Although it was called “Christianity” it can barely be recognized as Christian. It in fact was and is a wolf parading in sheep’s clothing: It was and is a political scheme to take over the government of the United States and then turn that government into an aggressor nation that will forcibly establish the United States as the ruling empire of the twenty-first century. It is subversive, seditious, secretive, and dangerous.

-snip-

The religion the canny thinkers founded follows the reverse of communism and secular humanism, it poured political and economic ideology into a religion and that combustible mixture produced “Dominionism,” a new political faith that had the additional advantage of insulating the cult from attacks on its political agenda by giving its practitioners the covering to simply cry out, “You’re attacking me for my religious beliefs and that’s religious persecution!”

www.yuricareport.com...


More grist for the conspiracy mill;

Intelligent Design


Most scientists would say that "Intelligent Design" is not intelligent science. It's not really right, though, to condemn intelligent design as bad science -- for it is not even science at all. The real problem with Intelligent Design is not that it's bad science, but that it's bad religion. And the real poison that it offers society is the implication that its advocates represent religion in a holy war against an atheistic scientific understanding of life and the universe.

whyfiles.org...



The Anti-Christian Conspiracy (A variation on the popular ATS thread)


Blame it on the vast anti-Christian conspiracy. That was the explanation offered by US Representative Tom DeLay of Texas and his supporters last week for the whirlpool of legal difficulties that finally led the ex-leader of the Republicans in Congress to admit it was time to call it quits.

www.google.ca...


The legal Conspiracies facing courts of law;


Once a child is being exposed to organized religion, the reasoning seems to go, it's in the child's best interests to continue this exposure, even when the child isn't interested, when stopping the exposure isn't causing disruption, when one parent thinks the exposure is unnecessary, and when the other parent would be free to expose the child himself during his time with the child. I can't see how that is consistent with the Establishment Clause principles that the government generally may not prefer religious behavior over secular behavior, and that the government may not coerce people into engaging in religious practice.

volokh.com...


The Robert Welch Rapture Conspiracy


"The Communists have always proceeded on the age-old theory that the most important accomplishment in all forms of warfare is to paralyze your enemy's will to resist before coming to actual hostilities. There is no surer nor more deadly form of paralysis to inflict on their enemies than religious neutralism. This is most convincingly indicated by the fact that at least two million Christians today, in the United States alone, have swallowed all or some of the British-Israel line for Protestants, or of the parallel line which is a more recent development among Catholics.

"These are the very people who should be most faithful and determined in their resistance to Communism. Instead they have been almost completely neutralized by a now gigantic scheme which the Communists themselves have been skillfully promoting for over a hundred years."

reformed-theology.org...



The list can go on for pages and pages.

Please add your favourites onto the list for discussion of what potentially makes a conspiracy a conspiracy.


[edit on 21/3/08 by masqua]




posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Thanks for opening this thread. I need to gain clarity myself on the difference between discussing faith and religious conspiracy.

This was brought home to me when, in earlier days, my threads posted to the Forum "Conspiracy in Religion" were moved to the "Faith" Forum. My conspiracy-theories dealt with Religion itself being the conspiracy or possible conspiracy rather than "conspiracies-IN-religion". I recall a thread of mine dealing with the Gods having been conspiratorial beings involved in a conspiracy-against-humanity and another thread of mine dealing with a religious book being a mind-control instrument. Why were these moved? Probably because they dont deal with conspiracy IN religion such as your examples in the opening post.

Another line of thinking for me has been religion itself being the source of conspiracy-theory.

When in the bible it says "The angels of darkness will appear as angels of light"...

...this seems to me like one of the first conspiracy-theories ever uttered as it implies that what appears to be one thing is secretly and covertly something else.

I first wanted to express my own confusion on the subject.

As for the question you pose in your opening post: I have no confusion or doubt whatsoever about most discussions here being faith-based discussions rather than conspiracy-discussions. My observation is that you can detect them as soon as the conversation drifts to...

..."My belief/theory/system of thinking is better than yours".

More on the points in your opening post later.



[edit on 21-3-2008 by Skyfloating]



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
More on the points in your opening post later.



I was hoping to see your involvement in this thread.




Regarding my opening post, it should be mentioned that there is a forum solely dedicated to the way in which religion affects politics and that venue should be used for what is deemed 'religious conspiracies to affect government business'.

The hoped-for end result of such agendas is the installation of a Theocracy.

Plenty of conspiracies are perpetrated to either buttress or tear down such forms of government.

[imo]The Shah of Iran, his backers/installation to power and eventual assassination by the forces of a religion is only one of hundreds in recent history.[/imo]

Lots to choose from.



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by masqua

Religious conspiracies abound. The people of the world have regained an interest in theology and, because of the differences apparent within the wide range of faiths, are committing themselves to a wide array of methods to either destroying opposing views/dogmas or at least pulling their teeth.


The last time this really dawned on me when I was considering opening a thread about religion (in skunkworks). I realized that the less I state my honest opinion, the more participants in the thread I will have.

"Islam is a conspiracy" - I would have had many participants.

"Christianity is a conspiracy" - I would have less participants but still plenty from the atheist and islamist sector.

"All Belief-Systems are a conspiracy" - I would have zero participants.

This really happened. My only thread that got ZERO responses was the one I thought has most truthful.



Intelligent Design
Most scientists would say that "Intelligent Design" is not intelligent science. It's not really right, though, to condemn intelligent design as bad science -- for it is not even science at all. The real problem with Intelligent Design is not that it's bad science, but that it's bad religion. And the real poison that it offers society is the implication that its advocates represent religion in a holy war against an atheistic scientific understanding of life and the universe.


This paragraph raises a question: Is "Intelligent Design Theory" bad science or bad religion?

Or is it a good attempt to bring both sides closer together?

My understanding is that "Intelligent Design" neednt be limited to being promoted by christians only, not even by religions only. I am strictly anti-religious and still interested in the theory of Intelligent Design and what it stands for.





Please add your favourites onto the list for discussion of what potentially makes a conspiracy a conspiracy.




Any hidden agenda to gain and sustain power at the disadvatage of others.



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by masqua
 


conspiracy angle wise i have no idea how you guys run your system behind closed doors but i'm catching onto the rules little by little.

i can only assume that when a member goes to start a new thread that 1 or more of you(moderators) must get to look it over and approve or disapprove of where its location should be placed ?

sorry its getting to the point for me that too many rules and enforcement or lack of enforcement depending on the likes or dislikes of whatever particular moderators are on the different threads leaves me guessing as to whether its safe or not safe to tread into a potential mine field?

the few corrections i have received so far have been enough to cut back my comments in the threads so i just spend most of my time here now looking.

if you prefer for me to stick to just u2u's just say so and you'll never see my involvement in a thread again.



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 10:28 AM
link   
I would submit for this discussion a definition from the "Wiki"


Types of conspiracies
Cabal, an association between religious, political, or tribal officials to further their own ends, usually by intrigue

Conspiracy (civil), agreement between persons to break the law in the future

Conspiracy (crime), agreement between persons to break the law in the future, in some cases having committed an act to further that agreement

Conspiracy (political), a plot to overthrow a government or other power


Of interest here is the first type, a "cabal". There are relevant discussions for a religious conpiracy based on even "theology" that may be thousands of years old. Just because it may involve "doctorine" does not make it any less a conspiracy.

an association between religious, political, or tribal officials to further their own ends, usually by intrigue



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by yahn goodey

i can only assume that when a member goes to start a new thread that 1 or more of you(moderators) must get to look it over and approve or disapprove of where its location should be placed ?


Yes, that's the way it works.


depending on the likes or dislikes of whatever particular moderators are on the different threads leaves me guessing as to whether its safe or not safe to tread into a potential mine field?


Civil discussion is always welcome and is no minefield. The opposite, though, is.

You mention the moderator staff.

There's differing opinions between staff on the matter, that's certain. As with every topic ever posted on ATS, people have varying opinions and it's no different 'behind the scenes'. This is is normal, though, and the staff here DO brainstorm on those differences, trying to get a consensus on how to manage the boards effectively.

What NO staff should do is act unilaterally based on their own preferences. There are Christians, Atheists, Agnostics, etc. as staff members. If one were to take it upon themselves to become a crusader, acting on their own thinking and without consideration to unbiased moderating, the trend would be quickly noted and corrected.

Has it happened? I believe in some ways it is inevitable that it does. Was it discussed between staff to come to an agreement on the subject? Yes, it has. Will there be changes come out of these discussions. Yes again, and this thread is the result of such ongoing discussions.

At this point, I should mention (again) the fact that Conspiracies in Religion is about Conspiracies while the Faith forum on BTS is about faith issues. there needs to be a distinction made since the lines have become blurred lately. Hence this thread and the need for discussion.

If you go to the BTS Faith, Spirituality and Theology board in BTS, you'll find a thriving number of discussions continually going on and it has become one of the top 20 forums of the entire site. Not too shabby.


the few corrections i have received so far have been enough to cut back my comments in the threads so i just spend most of my time here now looking.


Why not continue engaging in discussions that are not considered conspiracies on BTS? Not posting at all seems to be counter-productive on a 'User Generated Discussion Board".


if you prefer for me to stick to just u2u's just say so and you'll never see my involvement in a thread again.


Not sure where that sentiment is coming from, but the reason for this thread is to discuss the issue openly, not through U2U's. Hopefully, you'll bring forward what has caused you to state the above rather than fall to silence.



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by heliosprime


Types of conspiracies
Cabal, an association between religious, political, or tribal officials to further their own ends, usually by intrigue



Note the two bolded words. An association between politicians and religious leaders to further their own ends. Another example would be the Christian Right and the current American administration to enact laws based on theological ideals/dogmas.

Such a conspiracy would be best placed in AP, since politicians are involved.

Conspiracies that are solely based in theology is what belongs in this forum, though.


Of interest here is the first type, a "cabal". There are relevant discussions for a religious conpiracy based on even "theology" that may be thousands of years old.


I agree, and, imho, the place for it is in AbovePolitics, since it IS a political topic.

 

BBCode edit



[edit on 21/3/08 by masqua]



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 11:41 AM
link   
I have uh several threads regarding Conspiracies in Religion, a couple have been moved to BTS not sure how many, but most seem to stay where I put them.

In a nutshell, my belief is that religions, All of them, are false. They are nothing more than a ancient tool the PTB use to control the masses. They are made and inspired by men, to control men and women most using racism, sexism, and fear, and the morality myth by instilling a superior mindset into the individual participant [that holier than thou attitude we are all familiar with] in a effort to keep the human race divided and under control.

I tend to go after Christianity the most, because it's the religion I'm most familiar with and effected by.

The first time I was knowingly effected was in the 80's, I live in Missouri and was raised in Evangelical churches. I watched from a young age as one pastor after another swayed the congregation, into voting for certain laws, yet all the while they enjoyed a tax exempt status.

The laws I'm referring too were the Blue laws in Missouri, these laws prohibited Alcohol sales on Sunday, and outlawed gambling like bingo and went so far as forcing retail and department, and grocery stores to close on Sunday. Well these laws ended up failing, because it drove Missourians across our state lines bolstering the tax revenue with boarder states. Some of the effects of the laws continue, you can't buy booze after 1:30 am in the state.

Basically while the congregations where patting themselves on the back, I was shocked to see them attempting an succeeding to legislate their moral beliefs, imposing them on all. There was no concern about human rights of people who didn't share their beliefs, they felt their opinions where all that mattered. It wasn't enough for them Not to participate in the things they were against, they wanted them illegal, for all.

This to me is disturbing, because we all have seen the results of religious extremisms both in history and modern day, and I wondered how far these people would push this kind legislation.

Many of our laws in the USA are religious based, going back to prohibitions in the 20's and 30's, upto and including America's War on Drugs. Why else would Americans support a War such as this, when it's been a complete failure, where something like $500 Billion has been spent and Millions of Americans are in prisoned, IMHO for not conforming to America's religious beliefs.

well thats my $0.02 for now.

[edit on 21-3-2008 by ah crap!]

[edit on 21-3-2008 by LDragonFire]



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 11:55 AM
link   
It would seem that most of what goes on in the conspiracy in religion forums is theological debate for BTS.

Conspiracy in religion is, i.m.o., when someone reveals a sinister motivation behind someone in religion.

One topic can be viewed from either a conspiracy view point or from a theological.

See, some people use religion to manipulate...this is the conspiracy.
Others believe in the dogma within religion...this is discussion of theology.

They seem to go hand and hand, but one (conspiracy) is about motives.
Again, by pure definition a conspiracy is a plot against a person or group of people.

Now one could argue that the origins of these beliefs were created to control and manipulate. What gets tricky is when people bring theology into it (based on faith) to defend it. This goes back into theology, because with faith, everyone has a different slant.

I dont know. Seems quite straight forward, but at the same time its easy to see how passions can typically drive a conspiracy topic into theology.

Peace

dAlen



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by LDragonFire
In a nutshell, my belief is that religions, All of them, are false.


There is a difference between organized religion and religion.

It could be stated that ALL organized religions are conspiracies to control the masses and that they originated in prehistoric times, before monarchies, governments and countries as a way to keep things quiet among a group of people who had to live together.

All true... but it was established so long ago that there is no record or individual conspirators we can point to. It is a truly ancient form of control. The thing is, though, that society would never have begun in the first place had it not been for this idea.

But there is another part of the puzzle that isn't a conspiracy at all.

What initially started religion? Was it not the realization that there was something more to life than just nature? Instincts were fine for hunting/gathering, but mankind rose beyond that and began to 'contemplate' on the best methods to hunt and gather. This abnormal behaviour known as 'navel gazing' bore fruit in that it bettered the lives of the people. Hunters would join together to perfect the method of the hunt and others would transplant edible crops in community plots in order to best serve the needs of the tribe.

The people who 'thought' of these ideas were called shaman and these unique men and women became tribal leaders; the first politicians to rise to the occasion of 'organizing things'.

There is a part of the brain which is the fountain of invention and that is where religion 'really' got established from. It is our ability to seemingly pick ideas out of the darkness of our unconsciousness and put them to use for the betterment of everyone else.

The Golden Rule of all religion is the idea of doing for others what you'd like them to do for you. Living by that standard forces one to reflect on their own conscience and apply the rule to everything they do. It's the beginning of civil society. All the failings of mankind which thwart the giolden rule are reflected in more rules like the Ten Commandments. Greed breeds trouble, for instance.

So, religion HAS a purpose and it IS a positive influence.

The problems with it lie within all the human tendencies to ignore or subvert that initial Golden Rule.



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by masqua
 


conspiracy angle wise: i dont know how anyone can discuss a conspiracy in religion without discussing their personal religious views that they would perceive as to be the truth to themselves.

me i enjoy studying the bible but-----i am not a member of any religious organization because from what i see of them so far they all have conspired 1 way or another to apostatize from the teachings of moses and the early new testament church of the Messiah.
i mentioned u2u's as an alternative because i have no idea where this invisible line is in the minds of moderators that i might cross over and get told off for crossing some more----

instead of me having to worry if today is the day for the big ban hammer come down---------------------why not just push ALL religious discussion period down to bts and thereby make all the athiests happy and the management of ats-------unless they enjoy repeating the same warnings over and over ?



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by masqua

Originally posted by LDragonFire
In a nutshell, my belief is that religions, All of them, are false.


There is a difference between organized religion and religion.


I disagree here, one person believing in God and living by what he thinks his god wants, to me is faith. A group of people living by this very same mindset becomes religion, and once it involve multiple people, the manipulation naturally starts, the agendas inter into the equation. All religions are corrupt, because lets face it, humans are corrupt, they will use whatever means to justify their actions or to fulfill a agenda they believe in. If religions where truly inspired by God, their would be a divine influence to counter this corruption in us all, to this point in history there is no evidence of this occurring, what we get instead is the need or requirement to attend church on a regular basis to reaffirm the faith, kinda like having to return to the gas station in order to keep your car going.


It could be stated that ALL organized religions are conspiracies to control the masses and that they originated in prehistoric times, before monarchies, governments and countries as a way to keep things quiet among a group of people who had to live together.


I believe God was born from mans fear of the unknown. They way man explained things that were unexplainable was to put a God face on it, hence the first religions worshiped the Sun, Moon, and nature in general.


All true... but it was established so long ago that there is no record or individual conspirators we can point to. It is a truly ancient form of control.

I 100% agree with you here, the only clues we have are of human nature, primitive human nature at that.

The thing is, though, that society would never have begun in the first place had it not been for this idea.


This I completely disagree with, humans are social creatures, it is in our nature. Human society began as hunter gatherer groups, rules for society developed out of necessity, groups that were successful developed the necessary rules for society or they did not survive.

Monkeys as well as all other social creatures have developed complex societies without religion, we are the same as them, just smarter.


But there is another part of the puzzle that isn't a conspiracy at all.

What initially started religion? Was it not the realization that there was something more to life than just nature? Instincts were fine for hunting/gathering, but mankind rose beyond that and began to 'contemplate' on the best methods to hunt and gather. This abnormal behaviour known as 'navel gazing' bore fruit in that it bettered the lives of the people. Hunters would join together to perfect the method of the hunt and others would transplant edible crops in community plots in order to best serve the needs of the tribe.

The people who 'thought' of these ideas were called shaman and these unique men and women became tribal leaders; the first politicians to rise to the occasion of 'organizing things'.


These shaman would pass knowledge down from one generation to the next verbally before written language, if a tribes shaman would die prematurely, the entire tribe could parish. Once writing was introduced this changed everything, the tribes were not completely dependent on the shaman anymore, they became dependent on the writings.

Power corrupts even with a title of shaman did not mean these were good people, they just had more knowledge than the average joe. Writing changed this, so the ones with the power of reading and writing now had the power over everything, the corruption continues. The written word is very powerful and can effect people generations even a millinia after the words have been penned.

To me the shaman used a form of religion to aid in controlling the tribe, good or bad.

The written religion has and is used to control the world.


There is a part of the brain which is the fountain of invention and that is where religion 'really' got established from. It is our ability to seemingly pick ideas out of the darkness of our unconsciousness and put them to use for the betterment of everyone else.


Lets say a early human tribe crops failed, the people go to the shaman and ask why, the shaman replies it's the will of the Gods and we must make a sacrifice to please the Gods, so they make a human sacrifice and in a short time they have a good hunt or they fight another tribe and take there food, this reaffirms that there God has saved them. Good or bad will happen and it's a win win situation for the shaman, if bad happens then the scrafice wasn't good enough to please their God, if good happens then their God listened to them and blessed them. I say religion evolved out of necessity a tool if you will, most humans must believe in something


The Golden Rule of all religion is the idea of doing for others what you'd like them to do for you. Living by that standard forces one to reflect on their own conscience and apply the rule to everything they do. It's the beginning of civil society. All the failings of mankind which thwart the giolden rule are reflected in more rules like the Ten Commandments. Greed breeds trouble, for instance.


I believe most of these rules were in effect long before the ten commandments, and were a natural evolution of human society that was incorporated into religious law, but truthfully we can speculate all day on this. There is really no way of knowing.


So, religion HAS a purpose and it IS a positive influence.

The problems with it lie within all the human tendencies to ignore or subvert that initial Golden Rule.


If you give credit to religion this is a true statement, but we really don't know where to give this credit. Religion has impeded science and advancement in humans [see dark ages] religion has destroyed more human cultures on Earth than anything else [north and South American Indians and countless others with a convert or die mentality that continues in some religions today] religion is responsible for more deaths or murder of humans than any other belief process [inquisition, witch trials, war based on religious differences, crusades, ect] religion has directly controlled more humans than any other belief process, look at how many early humans scientists especially in old Europe had to watch what they wrote or said publicly, religion dominated All of Europe along with old world monarchies for centuries.

It explains why so many wanted to come to America, So they could have religious freedom.

But really from my point of view, I see little Good about religion.

Awesome topic and a great discussion.



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by yahn goodey
 




conspiracy angle wise: i dont know how anyone can discuss a conspiracy in religion without discussing their personal religious views that they would perceive as to be the truth to themselves.


Good point and well stated!

As an agnostic, it could be said that I have no religion and yet I believe in a Creator. I would have no Bible to resort to, no clergy to advise me nor a church where I could go to be among other agnostics forcompanionship. All that is available to an agnostic is the Creator... a personal relationship.

Perhaps this is how a conspiracy should be approached, even by those who feel attached to a ministry. When confronted by evidence of wrongdoing, one should lay aside religion and look at the facts much like police would study a crime. A cop checking into a crime of child abuse should never let their own feelings cloud their judgement, even if they were a victim of child abuse themselves. To allow them to become involved could jeapordize the case with foolhardy pre-judgements and rash actions, fed by the hatred which naturally rises.

A good conspiracy master would also not let their own pre-conceptions blur good judgement. What you are saying is that it you think it impossible to stay detached simply because of your own beliefs. That would be a bias. We see it often enough here, in the Aliens and UFO's or 9/11 forums where people have already made up their minds, regardless of the evidence before them. This is why some will say that UFO's do or don't exist constantly, but never give a reason.

When discussing conspiracies in religion, a good investigator looks at the evidence only, approaches the topic with detachment, uses the information they can find pertaining to it and leaves the personal bias out of it.


i have no idea where this invisible line is in the minds of moderators


There is no invisible line. There is only the Terms and Conditions and the ground rules of each forum. As far as religion is concerned, this site has three. One for conspiracies in religion, another for conspiracies in religion with regard to politics and a third for discussing matters of faith. Three boards and three very distinct topic rules.

If a moderator uses their own bias in an action on a members post/thread and you believe this to be the case, the best advice is a complaint. All are read by every staff member online at the time and eventually by all staff as they log in. This is what we are here for. For one staff member to act with a bias is a problem for all staff since, their actions would paint us all with the same brush.


instead of me having to worry if today is the day for the big ban hammer come down


I don't understand why you are so focussed on being banned. If you are experiencing problems, PLEASE use the complaint feature and get this off your back with the whole of staff. We're not the ogres some would take us for, honestly, and we definitely are not 'all of one mind', I assure you.


why not just push ALL religious discussion period down to bts and thereby make all the athiests happy and the management of ats


Because conspiracies stand apart from religion. Religion is based on the Golden Rule and conspiracies are based on the seven deadly sins... greed, lust, etc.



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 




I disagree here, one person believing in God and living by what he thinks his god wants, to me is faith.


Nope, I don't buy that. As an agnostic, for instance, I believe that what God wants is what I feel is the right thing inside... my conscience.


A group of people living by this very same mindset becomes religion, and once it involve multiple people, the manipulation naturally starts, the agendas inter into the equation. All religions are corrupt, because lets face it, humans are corrupt, they will use whatever means to justify their actions or to fulfill a agenda they believe in. If religions where truly inspired by God, their would be a divine influence to counter this corruption in us all, to this point in history there is no evidence of this occurring, what we get instead is the need or requirement to attend church on a regular basis to reaffirm the faith, kinda like having to return to the gas station in order to keep your car going.


Humans are not corrupt, they are corruptable. It takes a real effort to do the right thing while doing the wrong thing is quite easy, especially when no-one is watching. This is why conspiracies happen. Take, for instance, the case of a person who goes door to door, pretending to collect for a charity. He counts on the people who want to do the right thing, but does the wrong thing by taking their money for himself (a conspiracy writ small). Now, consider an organised group who hire many people to go door to door, thinking they are collecting for a charity and then their bosses keep that huge amount of cash for themselves... a conspiracy writ large.

Humans are not naturally corrupt. Don't say that about my mom ever again.




I believe God was born from mans fear of the unknown. They way man explained things that were unexplainable was to put a God face on it, hence the first religions worshiped the Sun, Moon, and nature in general.


That would be a belief, not a conspiracy. That I disagree with that is perhaps another BTS Faith, Spirituality and Theology thread entirely.


I 100% agree with you here, the only clues we have are of human nature, primitive human nature at that.


Primitive nature is instinctual and has nothing to do with thinking at all.


humans are social creatures, it is in our nature.


Sorry, I don't buy it completely as you see it. Herd instinct aside, our social structure is the result, not of nature's 'toughest and meanest' rule, but instead the 'smartest' rule. There is a huge difference. As to herd instinct, it is nature's way of saying 'safety in numbers', but in humans, it is built on community effort to the benefit of all. Big difference, imo.



Power corrupts even with a title of shaman did not mean these were good people


Some were, some weren't, none were 'all the same'.



the ones with the power of reading and writing now had the power over everything, the corruption continues. The written word is very powerful and can effect people generations even a millinia after the words have been penned.


So... what does that say about ATS, where over 130,000 members are able to read and discuss in civil discourse, without threat of death or injury for stating their minds? Yes, words were written and re-written, changed a bit here and there, dropping a line, adding a line... whatever is good for the one writing or hiring the writers.

what DOES stand the test of time unchanged is myth. But that's another story entirely.



I believe most of these rules were in effect long before the ten commandments, and were a natural evolution of human society that was incorporated into religious law, but truthfully we can speculate all day on this. There is really no way of knowing.


Humans existed before the Golden Rule and the Ten Commandments. We have not changed. Our environment has changed through our inventiveness, but human nature has not. Take any of those commandments; do you feel, in your heart, that if you were given the choice between good or bad in any given situation related to them, that you would be indifferent in how you choose? I don't think so. Only a sociopath would have no conscience.



Religion has impeded science and advancement in humans [see dark ages]


Wrong, it is religion which has given us everything... art, science, civilization, ALL of it can be traced back to a few trying to get in contact with their Creator. Another thread.



religion has destroyed more human cultures on Earth than anything else [north and South American Indians and countless others with a convert or die mentality that continues in some religions today]


It was greedy individuals using religion as a means to an end which caused this. Don't lay it at the feet of religion, lay it at the feet of those who use it for conquest. In other words, greed, which is hardly a religious idea.


religion is responsible for more deaths or murder of humans than any other belief process [inquisition, witch trials, war based on religious differences, crusades, ect] religion has directly controlled more humans than any other belief process


Same answer as bolded above


look at how many early humans scientists especially in old Europe had to watch what they wrote or said publicly, religion dominated All of Europe along with old world monarchies for centuries.


Same answer as bolded above


from my point of view, I see little Good about religion.


And from mine, everything good, but fragile and in need of protection from those who would subvert the principle of the Golden Rule for lining their own pockets.


Awesome topic and a great discussion.


Thanks



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by masqua
Nope, I don't buy that. As an agnostic, for instance, I believe that what God wants is what I feel is the right thing inside... my conscience.


As a agnostic as well, we differ on view points here, one persons view or feeling what is right or wrong varies from one person to another, remember people will goto great lengths to justify their actions and beliefs. You might have a conscience, but to assume all have this to the same degree as you is just not right. It seems to me if a person doesn't have the same conscience level as you, then it is that way because God made it that way, and relieves any wrong doing they might do Because of God.


Humans are not corrupt, they are corruptable. It takes a real effort to do the right thing while doing the wrong thing is quite easy, especially when no-one is watching. This is why conspiracies happen.


I disagree here, children are not born with morals, they are Taught morals, I have 3 kids and have witnessed this first hand. Humans are born corrupt, if they were not it would not be necessary to teach the Golden Rule, or how to act in a family or society settings, they would just automatically know how to act, there would be no need to teach them.


Take, for instance, the case of a person who goes door to door, pretending to collect for a charity. He counts on the people who want to do the right thing, but does the wrong thing by taking their money for himself (a conspiracy writ small). Now, consider an organised group who hire many people to go door to door, thinking they are collecting for a charity and then their bosses keep that huge amount of cash for themselves... a conspiracy writ large.


What I find interesting is the double standard, if this group you speak of, was a religious group, doing good things for the poor, or homeless or any charity, they and the God get the credit, yet if this same group was found out later to in fact be breaking the law, or not doing what they are supposed to, their religion is not held accountable, it becomes the humans fault alone, so when humans do good for God, God gets the credit, but when humans do bad on behalf of God, the religion is not blamed. Good public relations go along way.


Humans are not naturally corrupt. Don't say that about my mom ever again.


yeah I hear ya, the thought of my mom being born bad is hard to get my head around, but according to this Golden Rule

Ethical teaching interprets the Golden Rule as mutual respect for one's neighbour


And many different Ethnic and religions Teach the golden rule, because it's just not natural for humans to be this way.


I believe God was born from mans fear of the unknown. They way man explained things that were unexplainable was to put a God face on it, hence the first religions worshiped the Sun, Moon, and nature in general.


That would be a belief, not a conspiracy. That I disagree with that is perhaps another BTS Faith, Spirituality and Theology thread entirely.

It not really possible to discuss conspiracy without also discussing faith, as I will show below.


Primitive nature is instinctual and has nothing to do with thinking at all.


I disagree


Sorry, I don't buy it completely as you see it. Herd instinct aside, our social structure is the result, not of nature's 'toughest and meanest' rule, but instead the 'smartest' rule. There is a huge difference. As to herd instinct, it is nature's way of saying 'safety in numbers', but in humans, it is built on community effort to the benefit of all. Big difference, imo.


First of all to say that humans used the herd instinct is not correct, we mirror more the pack instinct of predators, a domination hierarchy. What do humans do today, we dominate in sports, politics, business, we are a very predatory species.


So... what does that say about ATS, where over 130,000 members are able to read and discuss in civil discourse, without threat of death or injury for stating their minds? Yes, words were written and re-written, changed a bit here and there, dropping a line, adding a line... whatever is good for the one writing or hiring the writers.

what DOES stand the test of time unchanged is myth. But that's another story entirely.


Time will tell, but it really cool to be apart of.


Humans existed before the Golden Rule and the Ten Commandments. We have not changed. Our environment has changed through our inventiveness, but human nature has not. Take any of those commandments; do you feel, in your heart, that if you were given the choice between good or bad in any given situation related to them, that you would be indifferent in how you choose? I don't think so. Only a sociopath would have no conscience.


We are taught what is good or bad, through our parents and through our society, the only difference is a sociopath doesn't care about good or bad.


Wrong, it is religion which has given us everything... art, science, civilization, ALL of it can be traced back to a few trying to get in contact with their Creator. Another thread.


I disagree with you here, do you really think that if religion did not exist, that art would not exist? And how about the effort of religious groups to block stem cell research, along with all the other science including astronomy, At one time you would have been in big trouble if you claimed Earth was not at the center of the universe, and I could go on and on here about religion blocking scientific research, but as you said its a topic of another thread.


It was greedy individuals using religion as a means to an end which caused this. Don't lay it at the feet of religion, lay it at the feet of those who use it for conquest. In other words, greed, which is hardly a religious idea.


Again if good comes from it, God be praised, but if bad comes from it, it's the humans fault.


And from mine, everything good, but fragile and in need of protection from those who would subvert the principle of the Golden Rule for lining their own pockets.


A belief in Faith, the conspiracy in my mind is religion itself.




posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 


Ill get around to commenting on as much as I can to your post above, but a busy weekend awaits, so please be patient.

One thing, though... I don't want to get too far afield from the purpose of
this thread, which is trying to figure out what is and is not a conspiracy regarding religions.

Hopefully, some others who are interested in defining the difference between theological debates and conspiracies in religion might want to chime in as well.

Or does everyone else believe it's all cut and dried?



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 07:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by masqua
Or does everyone else believe it's all cut and dried?




NO! Religious conspiracies CAN NOT be addressed is purely "secular" discussions. That would be discussions of "Da Vinci Code" fantasy silliness. There are many complex conspiracies involving political and religious figures throughout time. For example the murder of the nights templar in 1309 by the french king who wanted their money. He used the pope to condem the knights and hunt them down. That is a spectacular conspiracy involving Kings, Popes, Priest Knights, money, differing visions of "faith" and doctorine.

There are many other similar issues that must be expressed in terms of faith and doctorine when one all powerful church uses its resources to dismantle one or more smaller churches of different faith. The distruction of differing church history, the murder of those who would speakout to this evil against them. That discussion is of the conpiracy of evil men smashing a smaller number of mens lives to achieve a dominant role.

A "Conspiracy in Religion"...................



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by heliosprime
 


The rounding up, torture and murder of the Templar Knights is a perfect example of a conspiracy perpetrated by greedy king in order to finance another crusade.

Now, how about the beginnings of the Templars? What was their initial true purpose in Jerusalem? What were they digging for and who stood to gain from it and, of course, what was in it for them? Was the establishment of the Templar knights a century before also a conspiracy?

Lovely stuff which can be looked at with a detachment from any religious dogma.

Thank you, heliosprime, for providing, in this topic alone, a wealth of conspiracy related material.



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by masqua
 


conspiracy angle wise now we are getting somewhere in enlightening me /us as to what ats thinks religion is===the golden rule as opposed to what ats religious conspiracy is=== the 7 deadly sins.

ok guess what ? i don't know what you or ats thinks are the 7 deadly sins since i don't recall reading this term in the scriptures or anywhere else although i vaguely recall hearing that term used elsewhere.
you got started with: 1. greed 2. lust 3.?
scripture wise what i find is 7 abominations Yahvah hates: 1.haughty eyes 2.a lying tongue 3.hands that shed innocent blood 4. feet that run rapidly to evil 5. a heart that devises wicked plans 6. a false witness who utters lies 7. 1 who spreads strife among brothers.(proverbs 6:16-19)
so are these the 7 you/ats defines meaning religious conspiracy?

i'm not trying to be smart ----i'm just trying to understand -----please tell me/us what the last 5 are so i can try to abide by ats definitions/rules of the 7 deadly sins.maybe these definitions are already written down somewhere in the ats systems rules book? but i don't know where to find all the rules in one spot-----they appear to be scattered.
please give us a link to it --tnks




top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join