The Dangers of Religious Hypnosis and Indoctrination: The genocidal faiths of Christianity & Islam.

Originally posted by inforeal

Anyway, BTW, Did you know Crowely was a Sufi [ Islamic Mystic]

I have studied his book Magick [ great book] and there he has many Islamic formulae he gives his students. Also Hindu and Buddhist stuff.

I think that it is a totally outrageous claim to make that Crowley was a Muslim. Crowley certainly studied many religions, he travelled widely to other non Christian cultures, however Sufi Islam is simply a mystical form of Islam; Sufis do "not" reject the Koran or Sharia Law; on the contrary.

49. I am in a secret fourfold word, the blasphemy against all gods of men.

50. Curse them! Curse them! Curse them!

51. With my Hawk's head I peck at the eyes of Jesus as he hangs upon the cross.

52. I flap my wings in the face of Mohammed & blind him.

53. With my claws I tear out the flesh of the Indian and the Buddhist, Mongol and Din.

54. Bahlasti! Ompehda! I spit on your crapulous creeds.

55. Let Mary inviolate be torn upon wheels: for her sake let all chaste women be utterly despised among you!

Aleister Crowley
Liber AL vel Legis

If Crowley can be defined by any religious philosophy, he was most certainly a Kabbalist, and the orders he was associated with (The Golden Dawn and the O.T.O) were both essentially esoteric Kabbalistic societies. I don't think that anyone who has read Crowley's numerous works could define his "religious philosophy" in any other way apart from as a Kabbalistic philosopher and metaphysician.

Further just as Muslims believe that Sharia Law is the "Final Law," and Mohammad is the "Final Prophet" we Thelemites take the view that Thelemic Law is the Final Law and that Crowley was our prophet of this age and for the future Aeon. Sharia Law is entirely antithetical (i.e., the opposite idea) of Sharia Law.

Brother Lucifer what you might not understand, perhaps because of your youthfulness,

I am 52 years old; my profile photo was taken in 1998 when I was a lot younger and a bit prettier.

is that ALL spiritual teachers left knowledge for the exoteric masses [external religion] and knowledge—sometimes in secret, though often not— for the esoteric few who are more advanced than the lot of humanity.

In Judaism you have Kabala, in Christianity you have the Christian mystics, and the Gnostics, and in Islam you have Sufism.

Indeed, in Islam the ordinary Muslim hardly has ever heard of Sufism let alone know what it is, as the ordinary Christian hardly knows of the great Christian esoteric mystical tradition, and also exoteric Jews hardly, notwithstanding Madonna, know what Kabala is all about.

With the Kabbala, many Kabbalists, such as myself, entirely reject Judaism and the Mosaic law; the Kabbalistic philosophy is anyway entirely ancient and was entwined with many of the sex cults and mystery cults of the ancient world and with most of the esoteric societies of the modern world; it is not a "Judaic" philosophy, it is merely that it has been passed down to us predominately through Jewish scholars. Sufism on the other hand, is simply a sect of Islam which does not reject the primitive and savage teachings of Mohammad, just as Christian mystics generally do not reject the primitive and savage Biblical teachings.

Islam as a global phenomenon is anyway not Sufism; it is a primitive and barbaric 7th century system of theocratic government with a set of religious laws which Muslims seek to impose on the modern world.

Lux

reply to post by Lucifer777


Read my post on the esoteric and exoteric aspects of religion.

Crowley while traveling in the mideast joined a Sufi order. I didn’t say he was a Muslim, did I? In-fact there are some Sufis that no longer follow the Sharia of Islam but still respect Muhammad as an adept.

In many Sufi orders it is not necessary to be a Muslim.
Crowley did practice Sufi exercises. That is a fact; I could show you in his book Magick pg 20.

Also, Sufism is not a sect of Islam. It is the esoteric aspect of Islam, as Kabala is the esoteric part of Judaism.

Originally posted by Danbones
I disagree with term fascist when aplied to muslims.
Mussolini was a fascist.

....islam-o- facist is an oxy moron

The term "Islamofascism" is included in the New Oxford American Dictionary, which defines it as "a controversial term equating some modern Islamic movements with the European fascist movements of the early twentieth century". The term is used in this manner by writers like Stephen Schwartz and Christopher Hitchens, to describe Islamist extremists, including terrorist groups such as al Qaeda. William Safire makes particular note of Hitchens as a "popularizer" of the word, though Hitchens declines credit for coining it. The terms Islamic fascism and Muslim fascism are also used by the French philosopher Michel Onfray, an outspoken atheist and antireligionist, who notes in his Atheist Manifesto that Ruhollah Khomeini's Islamic Revolution "gave birth to an authentic Muslim fascism."

en.wikipedia.org...

The term Islamofascism refers to an entirely different phenomenon to the fascism of Mussolini's Italy. I also generally use the term "Christian fascism" since the political philosophy of Christianity is that of global theocraric monarchy; an absolute dictatorship of a "king of kings" who ruthlessly and genocidally imposed Biblical law.

Islam is not merely a religion; it is a system of government; Mohammad was essentially military dictator; he was not "elected" to power in Mecca, his army took Mecca in an armed violent revolution. The political philosophy of Islam is essentially that of theocratic (god-government) dictatorship where Sharia Law is dictatorially imposed.

The muslims are, when not installed by the western intelligence community, not on a banking system that can be construed as corporatist, and so can not be considered fascist.

Mohammad forbade the practice of Riba (Usury), however in practice Islamic banks are business and they "do" make profit on loans, often far much more than European banks, they just don't refer to the profit on such loans as "interest;" Islamic banking is still Usury, they just refer to the practice with different terms.

Islamic banking has the same purpose as conventional banking except that it operates in accordance with the rules of Shariah, known as Fiqh al-Muamalat (Islamic rules on transactions). The basic principle of Islamic banking is the sharing of profit and loss and the prohibition of riba (usury). Common terms used in Islamic banking include profit sharing (Mudharabah), safekeeping (Wadiah), joint venture (Musharakah), cost plus (Murabahah), and leasing (Ijar).

In an Islamic mortgage transaction, instead of loaning the buyer money to purchase the item, a bank might buy the item itself from the seller, and re-sell it to the buyer at a profit, while allowing the buyer to pay the bank in installments.
en.wikipedia.org...

Lux

Originally posted by inforeal

Crowley while traveling in the mideast joined a Sufi order. I didn’t say he was a Muslim, did I?

Perhaps you could provide a source for Crowley joining a Sufi order. You did allege that he was a "Sufi" and I think that is rather taking things too far; he certainly studied Sufism in Egypt, but he also studied Buddhism and Buddhist meditation in India, but he was hardly a Buddhist; he certainly was a "joiner" of esoteric societies, but he was openly antagonistic towards Islam and indeed any system of law which promoted the "sins of restriction (restrictions on human nature, erotic desire etc.).

In his fascinating new book "Aleister Crowley and the Aeon of Horus" Paul Weston states that "... Crowley was actually studying under a Sufi Sheikh at the very time that the events leading to the reception of The Book Of The Law began The teacher was of the school of the Sidi Isawiyya. Founded by Sidi Ibn Isa, they incorporated pre-Islamic shamanic magical rites into their practices,..." ............As to AC himself, my impression of the Sufi connection from reading the Confessions, is that he did meet a couple of pukka Sheiks in his travels, and did sojourn amongst "whirling dervishes" (in a situation that sounds more like some kind of raw, older tribal traditions mixed in with Sufism). But he clearly didn't spend as much time with that tradition as he did with the yoga system. www.lashtal.com...

In-fact there are some Sufis that no longer follow the Sharia of Islam but still respect Muhammad as an adept.

The traditional Sufi orders, which are in majority, emphasize the role of Sufism as a spiritual discipline within Islam. Therefore, the Sharia (traditional Islamic law) and the Sunnah are seen as crucial for any Sufi aspirant.
en.wikipedia.org...

Although Sufism is mostly an Islamic phenomenon, the practices and beliefs of Sufis vary widely from person to person, from teacher to teacher and from region to region; it seems that "some" Sufis were covertly opposed to Islam and simply disguised themselves as Muslms in order to avoid persecution, in the same way that many European Kabbalists and esotericists, such as Nostradamus pretended to be Christians to avoid persecution.

To restate, Thelemic Law is the total anti-thesis (opposite idea) of Sharia Law.

Lux

reply to post by awake_and_aware

Because there's no evidence (logical or emprical) for the existence of a deity.

Please only speak for yourself!

I have all the empirical evidence I'll ever need. By the grace of THE UNSPEAKABLE I have experienced a consciousness that is greater than anything I could ever have imagined. There is no word, and no term that could describe it adequately, therefore I simply call it THE UNSPEAKABLE.

My experience was of a deeply personal matter. That's the way TU has been communicating with us since the beginning. I'm sure that my experience wouldn't mean that much to you because it was specifically tailored to my needs at the time. You have not (yet) had it and maybe never will, but when it happens it will hit you like lightening.

I'm not special. I have nothing to sell to you. I don't want to convert you. By all means burn all religious books. The problem is that the various religions have hijacked THE UNSPEAKABLE. There are deep truths within all religious texts, but they are buried between lies, dogma, socio-political power games, omissions, authoritarian censorship, and plain misdirection to subdue our human consciousness.

Sorry for my rant, but each time I see somebody negate the existence of a deity I need to intervene ...

It could very well be that your definition of a deity corresponds to the depiction of a religious god. Then I have to agree with you, but don't throw out the baby with the bath water ...

Re this thread: I think that Lucifer777 is exposing the lies and inconsistencies of religions very eloquently, and with logic. But again, THE UNSPEAKABLE is not accurately described in those texts.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
Can any person of belief name a moral act that an Atheist can't do, that a religious person can?

As a "believer" in THE UNSPEAKABLE I see you as an equal. My visions is guided by unconditional (stupid) love.
As an Atheist you see me as a "blinded believer", somebody who could very well believe in pink fairies on a hot Sunday afternoon ... Do you see me as an equal?

Originally posted by Danbones
like the billions a year paid to Hosni Mobarak (obama

) in Egypt
now there is a facist
installed and paid for by the Christian US tax payer.

Mobarak has been in power because the Americans and the Israelis want him there. He is certainly a dictator and his police seem to to routinely torture people. However...the Egyptian army has promised a civillian government. In a nation of 80 million people who are mostly Muslims, it is entirely possible that Egypt could become an Islamic Republic. Egypt has one of the most modernised armies and air forces in the region, including American F-16's; their armed forces number almost half a million and their tanks and artillery far outnumber the Israelis (more on en.wikipedia.org...).

They might be celebrating in Cairo, but I am quite certain that they are are not celebrating in Washington and Tel Aviv. The economic and military elites of the world are probably not going to be rejoicing over their F-16's falling into the hands of an Islamic Republic. What I suspect may happen is that the Egyptian military elites will be offered huge bribes (and also threats) to retain control of the country or to impose a pro-US and pro-Israeli civillian government (who will be similarly bribed and threatened). Personally I would consider that situation to be preferable to an Islamic government.

An elected Republic is widely considered to be progressive in comparison to tyranny, however if there is a nation of religious fanatics who have an opportunity to elect representatives, they will most likely elect religious fanatics. The Egyptian revolution has been "dubbed" the Facebook revolution, but the Egyptian Facebook crowd are mostly the young, educated middlle classes whose values are much more Western, however they are not a significant majority in Egypt, whose population is mostly poor and indoctrinated by religion.

If Egypt turns into an Islamic republic, it will only bring the region closer to the abyss of apocalyptic war. If there is a choice between a corrupt government bribed by the US and Israel, and an Islamic Republic, a bribed and corrupted US puppet regime still sounds like the sensible option.

Lux

while I do agree with alot of this that religion in the exoteric sense is a bunch of outer bs conditioning and has and will lead to some more dangerous time .....I still uphold the existence of an Infinite Being ...and the Esoteric inner secrets .....

The one interesting aspect that I wanted to add to this forum, which I personally think is rather scary, is that Nostradamus said that Europe would be invaded by Muslims and world war III would be specifically Everyone else versus the muslim united nations.

I was wondering what your take on this is OP, considering recent threads on the Islamification of Britain and Europe.....

What I suspect may happen is that the Egyptian military elites will be offered huge bribes (and also threats) to retain control of the country or to impose a pro-US and pro-Israeli civillian government (who will be similarly bribed and threatened). Personally I would consider that situation to be preferable to an Islamic government.

reply to post by Lucifer777


Having worked for the Israeli government are you in a position to expand on "bribes & threats"?

reply to post by awake_and_aware

Science and the pursuit of truth can remove private prejudice and faulty beliefs.

Yet science cannot measure/quantify the love I feel for my son. So therefore it doesn't exist?

Nah man, good research
and good points too,
but i see that they have changed the definition of the word fascist to something else
newspeak BS (IMHO)
war is peace
freedom is slavery
islam o fascism

Fascism requires a banking system that if used makes the users no longer Muslim.
just like christians using the fiat system are really violating fundimental tenets of their faith...
christ in the temple with the money changers..
(there's yer sign)
this is just a dog and pony show
or punch and judy
or the odd couple..
wrestling

Originally posted by dominicus
while I do agree with alot of this that religion in the exoteric sense is a bunch of outer bs conditioning and has and will lead to some more dangerous time .....I still uphold the existence of an Infinite Being ...and the Esoteric inner secrets .....

What we see occurring in the "New Age / Neopagan" movement in general is that people tend have a rather personal eclectic mix of New Age beliefs and have rejected the more primitive and ancient organised religions such as Christianity and Islam. I think that people will always have "spiritual" or "metaphysical" beliefs, but there is a vast difference between a free thinking person with eclectic beliefs and a person who is a victim of religious hypnosis and indoctrination by the professional hypnotists of the Islamic and Christian religions. Generally I predict that as people become more rational, educated, literate and scientific, organised religion will decline more and more. The main reason that organised religion is a "growing phenomenon" is particularly due to the rising birth rates in the Third World and developing world, however organised religion has generally been in decline in the Western World since the birth of the Enlighternment in the 18th century.

Personally I think that the "one child" policy of the Chinese government is an ideal solution which would stem the birthrates of the Third World and developing world, but it is not so much a problem in the First World where population rates are essentially stable. The "Georgia Guidstones" policy of attempting to reduce global population to 500 million is really not such a bad idea; it is the among the poorest nations of the earth where the birthrates are highest, and it often simply produces a population of relatively uneducated victims of religious indoctrination, many of whom spend their lives in utter misery.

The one interesting aspect that I wanted to add to this forum, which I personally think is rather scary, is that Nostradamus said that Europe would be invaded by Muslims and world war III would be specifically Everyone else versus the muslim united nations.
I was wondering what your take on this is OP, considering recent threads on the Islamification of Britain and Europe.....

The alleged "Islamification" of Europe is due to the high birth rates among Muslim families, many of whose children grow up to be secularists and are really just modern Europeans who consider themselves to be Muslims by culture and heritage rather than being "reigious," much like the younger generation of Jewish Europeans, for whom Judaic religious fanaticism is an anathema (destested or loathed). It is entirely rare for a modern person of European descent to convert to Islam; apart from European women who marry Islamic men.

"The point of prophecy is not to predict the future but to change the future."

With regards to Nostradmus' prophecies, I personally do not believe that the future is predetermined; what I do believe is that prophecies are often self fulfilled. Since both the Islamic and Biblical prophecies predict an apocalyptic scenario and the global conquest of their respective religions through military dictatorship, it is entirely likely that the adherents of both religions will attempt to "self fulfill" such prophecies, which in a post nuclear age is entirely possible.

I do believe that WW3 will be a war primarily against Islam and that it will result in the eradication of Islam, however I also do not believe that Christianity will prevail in the West; our economic, military and political elites are largely secularists, and the commonly held Christian conspiracy theory that they are "Luciferians" seems to be entirely correct, however these are not people who "worship" a deity called Lucifer; they are merely the result of secular and New Age Enlightenment philosophies, and this is entirely progressive in my judgement. .

Lux

Originally posted by AllIsOne

What I suspect may happen is that the Egyptian military elites will be offered huge bribes (and also threats) to retain control of the country or to impose a pro-US and pro-Israeli civillian government (who will be similarly bribed and threatened). Personally I would consider that situation to be preferable to an Islamic government.

reply to post by Lucifer777

 

Having worked for the Israeli government are you in a position to expand on "bribes & threats"?

"By way of deception thou shalt do war"


I did not work for the Israeli military; I was an agricultural import agent for Carmel Agrexco for several years, which was then a nationalised corporation which exported Kibbutz agriculture. I am not in possession of any state secrets; anything I know about the Israeli military is sourced from reading books, Internet articles and speaking with numerous Israeli friends and so forth.

I would recommend reading "By Way of Deception: The Making and Unmaking of a Mossad Officer" by Victor Ostrovsky if you want an insight into the culture of the Israeli military intelligence. It was published over 20 years ago, but it is still quite relevant. You can read the entire book in PDF format on www.solargeneral.com...


The higher echelons of the Israeli military are certainly not religious fanatics, they are much like modern Europeans, though they certainly are cultural supremacists. Since this is the ATS forum and one of the main topics is the "false flag" operations of New York 9/11 and London 7/7, the Israelis seems to be high priests of covert operations and false flag operations, and I expect them to continue with this strategy in the future; essentially their mantra seems to be "Why fight your enemies, if you can incite someone else to fight them." It is a very successful strategy which I expect will be used time and time again to reach their objectives in the war against Islam.

Originally posted by AllIsOne
reply to post by awake_and_aware

 

Because there's no evidence (logical or emprical) for the existence of a deity.

I have all the empirical evidence I'll ever need. By the grace of THE UNSPEAKABLE I have experienced a consciousness that is greater than anything I could ever have imagined. There is no word, and no term that could describe it adequately, therefore I simply call it THE UNSPEAKABLE.

"The Argument from Religious Experience and Religious Schizophrenia."

"Empirical" evidence is essentially the evidence of the 5 senses gained from observation or experiments; in other words "scientific" evidence; there simply is no scientific evidence for the existence of a Creator, and if there were, no scientist would be an atheist.

What you are referring to is essentially the "argument from religious experience," and that is merely an argument based on subjective experiences (i.e., it is happening within your own mind.), which in my personal experience can be entirely unreliable. Just as the human mind is capable of producing "dreams" which we have no control over, the mind is also capable of producing waking visions and religious type experiences.

Since members of numerous different contradictory religions report such experiences, this should make clear just how unreliable such experiences are. Even in the world of New Religious Movements, some of which are entirely malevolent, cultists report such experiences as visions and revelations which confirm their faith; similarly in the Hindu world where the use of shamanic psychoactives is quite common among certain Holy men such as the Sadhus (devotees of Shiva), despite the fact that Hinduism is a racist human sacrifice cult.

Just to give an example, recently I was watching a particular TV program which was quite horrific, and when I awoke the next morning I was in the middle of a very realistic nightmare about the same subject as the TV program; I think that most of us will probably have had experiences like that, and waking visions or preceived spiritual experiences can play similar tricks on the mind. Similarly a person who is obsessed by "Jesus" will be more likely to relate their "spiritual" experiences to their particular faith.

I have had numerous "spiritual" type experiences, visions, etc., during my lifelong experimentation which shamanic psychoactives, but I have learned not to take such experiences too seriously; the fact that around 25% of schizophrenics in psychiatric institutions have "religious" schizophrenia should serve as a warning, for they too commonly report such religious experiences, voices from god, etc.

It is my personal opinion that many of the religous fanatics on the Internet who are persistent in their delusions and ramblings are themselves also suffering from a religious form of schizophrenia; unfortunately religions encourage this by pointing to models of perfect persons (such as Jesus and Mohammad) who themselves were classic religious schizophrenics.

It is also my view that while many of the major professional Christian hypnotists of the multi-billion dollar "Jesus business" are just charlatans and business men, who merely "pretend" to be religious schizophrenics, there are also many who are genuine religious schizophrenics. We living in a partly insane world because many of the "models" of what a "good" or "godly" person is, is simply a model of insanity, which is then emulated by the hypnotised masses.

Lux

I have all the empirical evidence I'll ever need. By the grace of THE UNSPEAKABLE I have experienced a consciousness that is greater than anything I could ever have imagined

Derp. We are all part of something more greater than ourlseves. We are but a part of reality, growing on a planet like apples on a tree.

Subjective experience means nothing in debate, it's intellectually bankrupt - your experience "proving" God could be lousy evidence for "GOD" if someone else was to experience it.

I'm glad Lucifer has just covered this "experience" in depth:-

""The Argument from Religious Experience and Religious Schizophrenia."

reply to post by Lucifer777

"The Argument from Religious Experience and Religious Schizophrenia."

"Empirical" evidence is essentially the evidence of the 5 senses gained from observation or experiments;

No, you are omitting the fact that the brain is the central faculty that gives meaning to sensory inputs.

in other words "scientific" evidence; there simply is no scientific evidence for the existence of a Creator, and if there were, no scientist would be an atheist.

As there is no scientific evidence for the non-existence of a Creator. Therefore some scientists are Theists and some are Atheists.

What you are referring to is essentially the "argument from religious experience," and that is merely an argument based on subjective experiences (i.e., it is happening within your own mind.),

See above. All experiences are subjective (within ones brain/mind) - repeatability is a different story.

Look, you are trying to tell me that religious experiences are not real - merely imagined. I on the other hand am convinced that certain people simply lack the ability to experience it.

There are people who cannot "experience" Beethoven's 5th. To them that music is just frequencies that don't resonate with their inner being - they do hear the same score, but there is no emotional connection. That is all OK until they start to argue that there is no music at all, just frequencies because it "only" happens in the mind. Do you see that slippery slope?

which in my personal experience can be entirely unreliable. Just as the human mind is capable of producing "dreams" which we have no control over, the mind is also capable of producing waking visions and religious type experiences.Since members of numerous different contradictory religions report such experiences, this should make clear just how unreliable such experiences are.

Your statement doesn't clarify anything. When you try to quantify THE UNSPEAKABLE, your socio-religious background becomes your frame of reference. ---> The elephant and the blind men. Source: en.wikipedia.org...

Even in the world of New Religious Movements, some of which are entirely malevolent, cultists report such experiences as visions and revelations which confirm their faith; similarly in the Hindu world where the use of shamanic psychoactives is quite common among certain Holy men such as the Sadhus (devotees of Shiva), despite the fact that Hinduism is a racist human sacrifice cult.

Yes, and your point is? There are charlatans on this planet. What a surprise ...

Just to give an example, recently I was watching a particular TV program which was quite horrific, and when I awoke the next morning I was in the middle of a very realistic nightmare about the same subject as the TV program; I think that most of us will probably have had experiences like that, and waking visions or preceived spiritual experiences can play similar tricks on the mind.

With all due respect, but your analogy tells me that you probably don't have the faintest clue what I was referring to by THE UNSPEAKABLE. It's like you're showing me that you've dipped your finger in the bathtub, but the sea is very deep my friend ...

Similarly a person who is obsessed by "Jesus" will be more likely to relate their "spiritual" experiences to their particular faith.

Yes, see frame of reference above.

I have had numerous "spiritual" type experiences, visions, etc., during my lifelong experimentation which shamanic psychoactives, but I have learned not to take such experiences too seriously;

And yes, you shouldn't because you were just trippin' ...

the fact that around 25% of schizophrenics in psychiatric institutions have "religious" schizophrenia should serve as a warning, for they too commonly report such religious experiences, voices from god, etc.

I wonder how many of them have experimented, as you do, with psychoactives ...

It is my personal opinion that many of the religous fanatics on the Internet who are persistent in their delusions and ramblings are themselves also suffering from a religious form of schizophrenia; unfortunately religions encourage this by pointing to models of perfect persons (such as Jesus and Mohammad) who themselves were classic religious schizophrenics. It is also my view that while many of the major professional Christian hypnotists of the multi-billion dollar "Jesus business" are just charlatans and business men, who merely "pretend" to be religious schizophrenics, there are also many who are genuine religious schizophrenics. We living in a partly insane world because many of the "models" of what a "good" or "godly" person is, is simply a model of insanity, which is then emulated by the hypnotised masses.

Lux

I'm not religious and cannot comment on that.

reply to post by awake_and_aware

Subjective experience means nothing in debate, it's intellectually bankrupt ...

And yet subjective experience is at the core of what defines, and distinguishes a human being.
I think you are just too lazy to consider another viewpoint than your own. Intellectually speaking ...

reply to post by AllIsOne


I'll consider "GOD" or a "creator/source" to reality. But i won't put "faith" in it until there is irrefutable evidence. Even if i had an "experience" how could be sure it was God without objective evidence.

That's me - just "lazy", I refuse to accept any religions idea of God, because so far no human as been able to prove it, i've even tried praying - it doesn't work - I thought i'd give it a try though.

My position (Agnostic) Atheism is still open-minded although i doubt the theories of "GOD" of men so far because their "evidence" has been found wanting.

16e.)...
Any Post mentioning or advocating personal use of illicit mind-altering drugs will result in immediate account termination.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Drop the subject, please, before this thread winds up with the banana peels and yesterdays coffee grinds.

Originally posted by AllIsOne
reply to post by Lucifer777

 

"The Argument from Religious Experience and Religious Schizophrenia."

"Empirical" evidence is essentially the evidence of the 5 senses gained from observation or experiments;

...in other words "scientific" evidence; there simply is no scientific evidence for the existence of a Creator, and if there were, no scientist would be an atheist.

As there is no scientific evidence for the non-existence of a Creator.. therefore some scientists are Theists and some are Atheists.

What you are referring to is essentially the "argument from religious experience," and that is merely an argument based on subjective experiences (i.e., it is happening within your own mind.),

No, you are omitting the fact that the brain is the central faculty that gives meaning to sensory inputs.

All experiences are subjective (within ones brain/mind) - repeatability is a different story.

Extreme subjectivism leads to solipsism; solipsism is essentially "soloism," and a kind of philosophical insanity. Solopsists are not really philsophers, they are really people suffering from a form of mental illness, but philosophers often like to attack solipsists, just to explain the ridiculousness of total subjectivism.

Bertrand Russell once told the story of a solipsist who wrote him a letter commenting that solipsism was such a truthful philosophy that he was surprised that there were not more solipsists. Of course, for a solipsist, all that exists is their subjective experience and there simply "are" no other solipsists. There is also a philosopher's joke about how to "cure" a solipsist. The cure involves tying the solipsist up and repeatedly hitting him with a hammer; at some point the solipsist will recant and state "OK I admit, the hammer has an objective existence."

You may have a hallucination of Mickey Mouse or you may have a dream of Mickey Mouse, or you may have a dream or a vision that you are being chased by the Devil; it may "seem" very real and your fear may be a very real fear, but such visions are delusions created in your mind; the person who cannot separate delusion from reality is essentially suffering from one of symptoms of schizophrenia

Of course, we are subjective creatures and we perceive the world of the 5 senses through our mind, however philosophy of science has very strict guidelines about what empirical proof is, and this involves independent verification, falsification and peer review. If you think that you may be hallucinating when an object falls "down" due to the effects of gravity, you can always other scientists if they also see objects falling "down;" however you cannot do this for visions of angels, demons, gods, goddesses or fairies, since such visions are simply created in your mind. If you have a vision of a fairy at the bottom of your garden, this does not prove the objective existence of fairies; it is simply a phenomenon of the subjective mind.

Look, you are trying to tell me that religious experiences are not real - merely imagined. I on the other hand am convinced that certain people simply lack the ability to experience it.

I have had a lifetime of such experiences which seemed very real to me, but I also understand the power of mind; just because I have certain dreams, visions or hallucinations which "seem" real does not make them objectively real. To restate, the schizophrenic cannot tell the difference between subjective experiences in their mind and reality. Paranoia is another example of this; some religious schizophrenics are convinced that "everybody" is an instrument of the Devil, and is out to get them, and that they are being chased by demons, even when they are in the safety of an institution surrounded by care workrs.

There are people who cannot "experience" Beethoven's 5th. To them that music is just frequencies that don't resonate with their inner being - they do hear the same score, but there is no emotional connection. That is all OK until they start to argue that there is no music at all, just frequencies because it "only" happens in the mind. Do you see that slippery slope?

Total tone deafness is an extremely rare neurological condition (a malfunctioning of the brain). Almost every single human being has "some" varying degree of tone deafness apart from approximately about one in 10,000 people who have AP (absolute pitch) and who are essentially musical geniuses, down to the 4-5% of the population who have difficulties hearing the difference between musical notes; there is debate over whether this is due to perception or neurology, but the arguments seem to favour the neurological. See geniusblog.davidshenk.com...

which in my personal experience can be entirely unreliable. Just as the human mind is capable of producing "dreams" which we have no control over, the mind is also capable of producing waking visions and religious type experiences.Since members of numerous different contradictory religions report such experiences, this should make clear just how unreliable such experiences are.

Your statement doesn't clarify anything. When you try to quantify THE UNSPEAKABLE, your socio-religious background becomes your frame of reference. ---> The elephant and the blind men. Source: en.wikipedia.org...

Yes, but I have made this point in revious posts here; the Hindu might have a religious experience and claim that Shiva appeared in a vision, while the person in the Bible Belt in Arkansas might claim that Jesus appeared in a vision. This is really the "subjective" equivalent of the blind men and the elephant.

Even in the world of New Religious Movements, some of which are entirely malevolent, cultists report such experiences as visions and revelations which confirm their faith; similarly in the Hindu world where the use of shamanic psychoactives is quite common among certain Holy men such as the Sadhus (devotees of Shiva), despite the fact that Hinduism is a racist human sacrifice cult.

Yes, and your point is? There are charlatans on this planet. What a surprise ...

You obviously don't really understand the point I am making about sujective experiences, however I am attempting to express myself as simply as possible.

the fact that around 25% of schizophrenics in psychiatric institutions have "religious" schizophrenia should serve as a warning, for they too commonly report such religious experiences, voices from god, etc.

I wonder how many of them have experimented, as you do, with psychoactives ...

Schizophrenia is a neurological disorder (a malfunctioning of the brain) and religious schizophrenia may also be due to brain chemistry. '___' for example is a naturally occurrng psychoactive which "every" human body produces in differing quantities. Since the body of "every" single human being produces nature's most powerful psychoactive, which is also found throughout the animal and plant kingdom, it is not necessary to ingest additional '___' to produce the experience of dream like states, visionary and religious type experiences; for some people it is perfectly natural, while other people rarely or never report such experiences, and for religious schizophrenics, their body may be over producing '___', though this is currently theoretical and has not been scientifically established, but what has been established through the testimonies of '___' users is that they commonly report religious and shamanic experiences, the experience of "god" speaking to them etc., whereas religious schizophrenics report such experiences even without ingesting additional '___'.

The brain is an electro-chemical apparatus and it has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt that "religious" type experiences can be chemically induced. These experiences may be subjectively real, but they are certainly not objectively real; just because a person has a religious vision of Ganesha (the Hindu elephant god) does not mean that Ganesha has an objective existence either in this dimension or in any other dimension.

Lux

Originally posted by masqua

16e.)...
Any Post mentioning or advocating personal use of illicit mind-altering drugs will result in immediate account termination.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Drop the subject, please, before this thread winds up with the banana peels and yesterdays coffee grinds.

I was unaware that this subject was off limits on ATS when I started this discussion and I wll avoid the subject; however the subject of '___' specifically is a subject which concerns a naturally occurring substance which the body of every single human being produces, and which may be the source of religious schizophrenia in persons who do "not" use illicit drugs. I am not aware of the legal situation in the US, but in Europe, the '___' containing plants which make up the Ayahuasca mixture are entirely legal.

Lux