Religion is slavery, and god is obsolete.

page: 22
49
<< 19  20  21    23 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 8 2010 @ 12:05 AM
link   
All religions are obsolete [snip], make room for the new religion, just give in [snip], your beliefs cannot save you from you meaningless and pathetic lives. No matter how hard you pray, God is deaf and cannot listen to you. God is great, and you're just little roaches. You are not different from you neighbor and you know it, being a good christian doesn't make you special, you are not special, get over it. God doesn't care, he just watches.

 


Edit to remove vulgar terms

[edit on 11/5/10 by masqua]




posted on May, 11 2010 @ 07:03 PM
link   
Galatians 6



3 For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.

7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 07:16 PM
link   
Woops lol sorry bout that. Yes I agree that a lot of the aspects of religion are outdated by modern forms of thinking but to truly change this we need only look in the mirror and be outward in our own expressions of our experience. We cannot simply tell someone or discredit an idea because it seems we have to actually show them ourselves successful and well off and content with a new idea. Also, some aspects of religion are ok just not all. This is a form of free thinking like caring for a bonzai tree. You knip off the parts that are not to your desire or liking to create a picture that works for yourself.

[edit on 11-5-2010 by PositivelyDetermined]



posted on May, 15 2010 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by cLOUDDEAD
God is the only reason I'm not in a major depression, but whatever. The thing I don't understand is why you bring up "purpose". There really is no purpose to life if there isn't a God.


Man you said it, and your closer to the truth with that statement than you'll ever know.
Try imagining a life lived with no purpose, try doing it, and you'll find freedom!

Why do we enjoy nonsense? (non - sense) because the senses need rest, too.



posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 08:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Kaytagg
 


Well, you could look at it this way; God is presently in his "day of rest". Looks like a long day to me.



posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by OzWeatherman
 


It is their choice, correct. Take a good look at the current GOP. They are shoving their religious beliefs down our throats. Is that what we want?



posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 04:48 PM
link   
As a former Christian, I have seen both sides, and I must admit that belief in God, does have some remarkably appealing psychological benefits. I have come to suspect that the main appeal of religion is that it gives adults permission to live in a pretend world as if they were a child. Many of us probably remember fondly when we believed in Santa Clause and would lie awake in our beds at night listening for his arrival on Christmas Eve. As a adult Christian, I found myself anticipating Christ’s return in a similar way. However, I am convinced that this appeal is part of the formula that leads to a form of enslavement. Sure, in most cultures, acceptance of religion is voluntary (if you are an adult), but it is based on false promises. People think that they will be rewarded in the afterlife for good behavior in this world.

When I was a child, my father was a church custodian and he had his tithes subtracted directly from his paycheck, however, when we went to church on Sunday, my mother still felt compelled to put money in the collection plate. Naturally, my father’s pay as a church custodian was rather small, and my mother did not work, so we really could not afford to contribute twice to the church coffers. Eventually our poverty caused us to miss church because we had nothing left to contribute. If the church is really concerned about the plight of the poor, why do they use collection plates which put an almost irresistible social pressure on the poor to contribute?

I have also seen firsthand, how the Catholic Church’s opposition to birth control in the Philippines has created such a large surplus of labor, that the “rich” (rich in the Philippines, in most cases, would be equivalent to middle class in the U.S.) can have a live-in maid for the equivalent of about $50 US per month (plus food and board). If a Filipino manages to get a 4 year degree in Commerce, they will be qualified to compete for store cashier jobs that pay about $4 US per day. (After 6 months of employment they become eligible for government mandated benefits at which time they have a high probability of being laid off.) Wouldn’t these be considered “slave wages”? (There are even doctors in the Philippines that become nurses, so that they can get jobs overseas that pay more.)

In India, the Hindu based caste system also guarantees a supply of cheap labor, and since membership in a particular caste is not voluntary, this seems to be a much more obvious form of slavery. And if American women were suddenly placed under the same rules as women belonging to Islam, how would they describe their new position?

In my opinion, the rich and powerful, around the world, rely on religion as a means of control and therefore they do what they can to preserve it and promote it (as long as it does not interfere with their own political desires), regardless of their own personal beliefs. (Communism became its own form of religion, with the State playing the role of God, so conventional religions were seen as competition that needed to be eliminated.) As people become more educated and have greater economic opportunity, religion begins to lose its grip and in order to survive, religions are forced to liberalize their rules. These liberalized religions are more concerned with controlling the thoughts of it’s members, so they may serve a political role, than controlling their actions, and therefore individual members fail to see themselves as slaves in any way.

And if believers are not slaves, then what role does worship play? If seeing his/her people on their knees in worship is what God requires, then what kind of God is he/she? If you had the power to create living intelligent beings, would you want them to worship you? If I were a “god”, I would be embarrassed to have people worship me and I would despise it, and yet every religion seems to require it. If a political leader requires worship, he is considered a despot, but a god that requires worship is just being a god.



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 03:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by swordwords

As a former Christian, I have seen both sides, and I must admit that belief in God, does have some remarkably appealing psychological benefits. I have come to suspect that the main appeal of religion is that it gives adults permission to live in a pretend world as if they were a child. Many of us probably remember fondly when we believed in Santa Clause and would lie awake in our beds at night listening for his arrival on Christmas Eve. As a adult Christian, I found myself anticipating Christ’s return in a similar way. However, I am convinced that this appeal is part of the formula that leads to a form of enslavement. Sure, in most cultures, acceptance of religion is voluntary (if you are an adult), but it is based on false promises. People think that they will be rewarded in the afterlife for good behavior in this world.

When I was a child, my father was a church custodian and he had his tithes subtracted directly from his paycheck, however, when we went to church on Sunday, my mother still felt compelled to put money in the collection plate. Naturally, my father’s pay as a church custodian was rather small, and my mother did not work, so we really could not afford to contribute twice to the church coffers. Eventually our poverty caused us to miss church because we had nothing left to contribute. If the church is really concerned about the plight of the poor, why do they use collection plates which put an almost irresistible social pressure on the poor to contribute?

I have also seen firsthand, how the Catholic Church’s opposition to birth control in the Philippines has created such a large surplus of labor, that the “rich” (rich in the Philippines, in most cases, would be equivalent to middle class in the U.S.) can have a live-in maid for the equivalent of about $50 US per month (plus food and board). If a Filipino manages to get a 4 year degree in Commerce, they will be qualified to compete for store cashier jobs that pay about $4 US per day. (After 6 months of employment they become eligible for government mandated benefits at which time they have a high probability of being laid off.) Wouldn’t these be considered “slave wages”? (There are even doctors in the Philippines that become nurses, so that they can get jobs overseas that pay more.)

In India, the Hindu based caste system also guarantees a supply of cheap labor, and since membership in a particular caste is not voluntary, this seems to be a much more obvious form of slavery. And if American women were suddenly placed under the same rules as women belonging to Islam, how would they describe their new position?

In my opinion, the rich and powerful, around the world, rely on religion as a means of control and therefore they do what they can to preserve it and promote it (as long as it does not interfere with their own political desires), regardless of their own personal beliefs. (Communism became its own form of religion, with the State playing the role of God, so conventional religions were seen as competition that needed to be eliminated.) As people become more educated and have greater economic opportunity, religion begins to lose its grip and in order to survive, religions are forced to liberalize their rules. These liberalized religions are more concerned with controlling the thoughts of it’s members, so they may serve a political role, than controlling their actions, and therefore individual members fail to see themselves as slaves in any way.

And if believers are not slaves, then what role does worship play? If seeing his/her people on their knees in worship is what God requires, then what kind of God is he/she? If you had the power to create living intelligent beings, would you want them to worship you? If I were a “god”, I would be embarrassed to have people worship me and I would despise it, and yet every religion seems to require it. If a political leader requires worship, he is considered a despot, but a god that requires worship is just being a god.

That web is fun to shake but sooner or later you realize it and fall down but occasionally you go up and play a bit.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 08:19 PM
link   
Religion is really a search for an understanding of the human condition. To learn about religion is crucial in understanding the nature of how a person defines their internal self. When a person attempts to reasonably explain the cosmos outside of the observable, what I believe they’re really trying to do is understand their place in it. Once they begin to know their place in the universe, they can begin to form themselves into something that can best fit that role. They could also fail to fit that role, and deal with the emotional repercussions of not being the person that they set out to be.

I also believe that the same applies on a larger scale when dealing with societies. Although the specific meaning may be different with every individual, the greater concepts that apply to cultures effects the way a group of people identifies their purpose within the universe. As cultures change over time, their religious concepts change, resulting in an almost completely different set of beliefs. For example, thousands of years ago, it might have been completely feasible to believe in young earth creationism, but today, with the evidence at hand, it’s not a reasonable belief. So, in order for religions with young earth beliefs to survive, it needed to adapt to the changing social environment.

As we change as a people, religion needs to provide different answers than it did in generations before. Early religious needs were often practical and explained simple points about the physical world. Gods were the reason behind weather patterns, food production, physical health and other immediate purposes. As society progressed, humanity began to need answers to bigger questions, since the ones previously answered through religion could now be answered or at least addressed tangibly. The progression of asking how something happened (like floods, for example), to how we happened, to why we happened will help us to better know what our purpose is as people, if there is a purpose at all.

Whether any particular religion is “true” is beside the point. The purpose of religion is not to correctly predict the nature of the universe, its creation or its purpose. I believe that the purpose is to help us understand how humanity perceives itself and how that perception creates cultures based on societal and individual needs.

TL;DR

Religion isn't about subjugation, it's about forming a belief that will allow you to understand your own place in the cosmos.
edit on 14-4-2011 by SorensDespair because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 02:46 PM
link   
IMHO the problem with religion is not whether "god" exists or which "god/prophet" you should or shouldn't believe in, but in the documentation used to control the masses. In the MEN controlling the supposed way or word to/of "god". All religious documents were/are written as interpretation, to me they are all interpretations of mans' need to control others. To follow them blindly, to quote them as fact with no physical evidence, leaves them open to corruption, misinterpretation, misrepresentation.

Before there was mass reproduction, how many people could actually own a Bible, Quran, Torah or other such "words of god". If they could actually read, very few could afford them. They relied completely on the religious leaders to hand them what they should think and feel about god. They were trained like puppies, if your good and do as I say (not as I do), then you will go to Heaven, Vahalla, Alessian Fields, Paradise. But if you don't do as I say, if you don't give money to the church, if you don't pay homage, you burn in Hell, Hades, or whatever level of pain, torture, dispair, misery, said religious leader decided to tell you about.

Before the printing press, all these religious books, scrolls, whatever, were hand written, hand scribed, sometimes hundreds of times by hundreds of individuals, there is always potential for basic human error. A smudged word, information edited, removed, reworded to suit the purpose of the "leaders" of the times.
I think this applies to modern day religions as much as it did in the past, with the exception that now more so then ever religious documents are spun in such a fashion, that some people are led to believe in the most outrages, illogical interpretations in order to keep mankind confused, mistrustful, hateful, paranoid, prejudice.

Now that I think of it, perhaps it's not religion that is the problem, but the MEN who run it.



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by AABacon

Originally posted by cLOUDDEAD
God is the only reason I'm not in a major depression, but whatever. The thing I don't understand is why you bring up "purpose". There really is no purpose to life if there isn't a God.


Man you said it, and your closer to the truth with that statement than you'll ever know.
Try imagining a life lived with no purpose, try doing it, and you'll find freedom!



Essentially, our 'purpose' is to ensure the continuation of the species (breeding). Everything else (religion, god, etc) is a human construct.



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by aorAki
 


Are human constructs pointless, or can they serve a greater purpose?



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Kaytagg
 


Ahem . . .
Obviously you are an atheist and cannot have any real conception of God.
He is great, He is good, and He is almighty.
But most importantly, he is love.
No God, No Love.
Know God, Know Love.

Seraph



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by seraphnb
 


I feel that comments like that are cop outs. And yes, you can love without "knowing God". Saying things like that indicate your lack of understanding of atheists, much like if an atheist were to tell you that you're not intelligent because you believe in God.

If you truly know you're "enemy", chances are, they wouldn't be your "enemy".



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 06:49 PM
link   
I am a Christain and what anyone thinks and does is between them and God. People are free to think as they wish. Personally I believe there is more than one path to God but mine is through Christ. I dont care if others believe or not, my relationship with God is mine personally and not fo everyone.

What I find funny is many who do not want me mentioning Christ feel free to mock believers. What is the difference? If I respect your belief or lack of belief should you not return the favor?



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by lastrebel
 


I'm an agnostic, but I on my desk at work, I have Athenasius's Life of Antony, Christianity in Late Antiquity by Bart Ehrman, The Q-Thomas Reader, Michael WIlliams's Rethinking Gnosticism and a few others. The company doesn't want to ask me about them because they probably think it will infringe on my religious freedom.



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by SorensDespair
reply to post by aorAki
 


Are human constructs pointless, or can they serve a greater purpose?


If the greater purpose they serve is our true purpose which is the continuation of the species, then yes!

If, by 'greater purpose' you are talking about something metaphysical and fantastical such as the soul,or god; then no., as these themselves are human constructs!




posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by aorAki
 


If nothing past reproduction and survival of the species is important, then why are we having this discussion? I'm a male, and far outside of your range for procreation, I'd assume.

This conversation is a human construct! (constructed by you and me), so I ask again, are human constructs pointless, or can they serve a greater purpose?



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 07:27 PM
link   
I got what you said, and ultimately I would say they are pointless!

I just get so tired and full of darkness these days so excuse my brevity. We (humans collectively) have such big ideas, yet we are ultimately here for the blink of an eye. Thus, beyond continuation of the species, nothing else matters.
edit on 19-4-2011 by aorAki because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by aorAki
 


I would say that they are not. If you are still participating, there's probably something beneficial to you about it. Whether it's the enjoyment of conversation, the satisfaction of debate or the fun little clacking of your fingers on your keyboard, there is something that you gain by taking part in it. And that is the point.

Just saw your edit. Don't worry, dude. Take pleasure in the little things. Sometimes, religion is what lets people get by. Sometimes it's trying to figure out why religion allows people to get by. Sometimes it's studying why trying to figure out why religion allows people to get by gives people pleasure.
edit on 19-4-2011 by SorensDespair because: response to another edit.





new topics
top topics
 
49
<< 19  20  21    23 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum