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.

 

Introducing "Bibleman"! And a host of other kid-oriented indoctrination tools

page: 7
19
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by nothingwrong
 



Originally posted by nothingwrong
I think all religions are feeling insecure at the moment. A mixture of the changing society and perceived threat from other religions. The reactions are there for all to see. Islam has factions becoming more radical, There are Jewish/Catholic schools virtually segregating themselves from the rest of us. And the far right are turning to their own form of radicalisation - aggressive evangelicalism taken to the extreme.


Excellent post!




Indoctrination into such a strict religion is the the only way those religions can now grow, or even avoid dwindling away. And they know this. The result is what you are seeing here.


And that is the bottom line. As logical7 says below...


Originally posted by logical7
i think its happening due to increasing 'atheisisation' of the society to the extent that being religious is considered as being backward.


Back when gods were first invented, we had so very little knowledge of what was happening - why the sun comes up, why the seasons change, why people die and so on... that we had to invent ways to explain it and invent a god that controlled it all. Religion was invented. Now that science is more prevalent and we have the actual knowledge about why these things happen, there is no longer a need to explain them with fabricated "gods", rewards and punishments, etc.

More people are letting go of the stories that don't really apply anymore. Naturally, those who still hold onto these stories are fearful that their way of thinking and believing is threatened by scientific knowledge and defensive, feeling the need to "fight" this new science. That's why many religious followers want science out of schools or at least to teach their stories along with the facts of science. That's why they came up with "intelligent design" (to counter the idea of evolution), by morphing science and religion. That's also why they feel it's necessary to teach children their beliefs at such a young age... That's why Bibleman and other modern toys, cartoons and coloring books are geared toward teaching kids while they're young. But kids that are being raised in today's world can't help but be exposed to science, unless they are raised in a "sheltered" community. And even then, you just can't keep people from learning, no matter how hard some are trying...

Yes, religions are threatened by atheism. Of course they are. Religion is big business and it employs millions of people. Not to mention how difficult it is to "give up" the belief in a higher power after many years of religious indoctrination. I know. I've done it.

I highly recommend watching the movie Religulous, if you haven't seen it. I also recommend this ATS thread by Klassified: Preachers who are not Believers.




posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 08:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


BH,
another eloquent and brilliant post by you. I couldn't agree more. Absolutely they are afraid, and feeling threatened and defensive.

I've seen Religulous (I own a copy) - it's straight and to the point. I would caution readers, though, that if they are sensitive about this issue they will not find it easy viewing. Nevertheless, the points it makes need to be brought forward.

I'll check out Klass's thread - I hadn't seen that one!



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 





More people are letting go of the stories that don't really apply anymore. Naturally, those who still hold onto these stories are fearful that their way of thinking and believing is threatened by scientific knowledge and defensive, feeling the need to "fight" this new science. That's why many religious followers want science out of schools or at least to teach their stories along with the facts of science. That's why they came up with "intelligent design" (to counter the idea of evolution), by morphing science and religion. That's also why they feel it's necessary to teach children their beliefs at such a young age... That's why Bibleman and other modern toys, cartoons and coloring books are geared toward teaching kids while they're young. But kids that are being raised in today's world can't help but be exposed to science, unless they are raised in a "sheltered" community. And even then, you just can't keep people from learning, no matter how hard some are trying...


You've summed it up quite well. And to highlight your points, let's take a look at some of Bibleman's enemies:


Professor Dawkins - Mad scientist and Leader of the United Alliance of Villainy.


A direct slur against Richard Dawkins, who's books and lectures pose a threat to conventional creationism and the "young earth theory" that they're still holding onto.


Dr. Narcissus - Self-adoring supervillain who corrupts others with self-esteem and independent thought.


Still pushing "Original Sin" and teaching children that self esteem and independent thought is sinful and dangerous to their eternal soul, ie: eternal punishment for self esteem and independent thought.




Femina - Evil sorceress who strives to infect the Church with insubordinate women priests and poison the minds of youth with Harry Potter books.


Of course any woman who is in favor of equal rights, women in the clergy, or "other" religions that practice the inclusion of women are evil witchcraft practitioners, who want to hurt and corrupt young children.

Their agenda is transparent. So are the producers', as they have leased out Bibleman to double as Koranman purely for the money.



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Back when gods were first invented, we had so very little knowledge of what was happening - why the sun comes up, why the seasons change, why people die and so on... that we had to invent ways to explain it and invent a god that controlled it all. Religion was invented. Now that science is more prevalent and we have the actual knowledge about why these things happen, there is no longer a need to explain them with fabricated "gods", rewards and punishments, etc.


Religion is not an invention. It is a collective reaction to a stimulus.

It's a bit of a misnomer that religion is about explaining things, or about compensating for a lack of knowledge... I'm disappointed to see so many people falling for such sloppy thinking as that.


edit on 25-4-2013 by BlueMule because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 09:26 AM
link   
reply to post by BlueMule
 



Originally posted by BlueMule
Religion is not an invention. It is a collective reaction to a stimulus.


I don't know what you mean by "a collective reaction to a stimulus." Do you mean like a crowd screaming when they hear a loud noise? Can you elaborate?



It's a bit of a misnomer that religion is about explaining things, or about compensating for a lack of knowledge... I'm disappointed to see so many people falling for such sloppy thinking as that.


How is that "sloppy thinking"? Please explain.



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by BlueMule
 



Originally posted by BlueMule
Religion is not an invention. It is a collective reaction to a stimulus.


I don't know what you mean by "a collective reaction to a stimulus." Do you mean like a crowd screaming when they hear a loud noise? Can you elaborate?


Sort of. Religion is not an invention in the same way that the scream of that crowd is not an invention of the crowd. It's a reaction.

But religion is more like a song than a scream, imo. And the loud noise they hear is more like a light.

"All religions, all this singing, one song.
The differences are just illusion and vanity.

The sun’s light looks a little different on this
wall than it does on that wall, and a lot different

on this other one
but it’s still one light."


-Rumi


How is that "sloppy thinking"? Please explain.


It's sloppy to think that at its root religion is about explaining things because it isn't true.


edit on 25-4-2013 by BlueMule because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by BlueMule
 



Originally posted by BlueMule
But religion is more like a song than a scream, imo. And the loud noise is more like a light.





Originally posted by BlueMule
It's sloppy to think that at its root religion is about explaining things because it isn't true.


Ah! ... I'm sorry. Your words don't serve as an explanation or elaboration of your statements. They make no sense to me. But that's OK. Something tells me I wouldn't understand anyway.



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


WOW!!

I'm ...I'm...
I don't know what to say. Professor Dawkins?! Cheap shot.
Narcissus - don't think freely or feel good about yourself, you're a no good, hopeless, worthless, nitwit?? Yikes.

Femina?

Wow. Thanks so much for digging all of this out - I was nervous about bringing up Bibleman at all, but it seems there are plenty of us who doing independent investigating, have already put together quite a nefarious picture of this.

I just finished reading Klassified's excellent thread as pointed out out by BH above -

Interesting discussion of how seminaries actually create non-believers, who then go out and teach the lies anyway.

One of the speakers at the conference was a man named Jerry DeWitt, who was a Pentecostal preacher in a small town in Louisiana and quit his job - stating that it was all a lie. Unfortunately, he had to stay in that town - went into bankruptcy and has been cut out of people's lives now, even though he thought they were truly friends. He might be able to get out in late June, depending on how the bankruptcy proceedings turn out.

Now those who were once his social support system won't even make eye contact with him if they cross paths in the grocery or on the street. They all believe he will go straight to hell. Of all his flock, only 4 people remained his friends and accepted him anyway. They do think he will go to hell, but they still "accept" him. Jerry's final remark was that he was grateful that they DID NOT tack on the most crushing thing a person can hear: "I love you, anyway."



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by logical7
 


Of course "God" needs armor. He's so righteous and benevolent, he can't stand being weak and unprotected. Why else does he need an army of angels? Why else does he sit on his ivory throne in the middle of nowhere fiction? Why else does he disguise irresponsibility as mercy? He's so strong, armor wears him!



WOW, though you're being sarcastic, You've brought up a Brilliant and I do mean Brilliant point, that I'd like to take a moment and delve into if I may, and I'm grateful that you posted this. I've been deconstructing religion, mostly JesusDom for a few years now, after reading intensely the OT that triggered Mega memories for me because of RA child abuse that I still at fifty am dealing with. (born in DC, family Catholic, Knights of Columbus father, mothers side her father criminal did deals with Senators, oh yes, Diamonds and who knows what else, Billecie was his name, I was horrifically abused as was my uncle, when he was a child, my fathers side of family (we moved when I was six, or fled not sure reasons there they are sketchy but I've only talked to them, fathers side on phone a few times) all work for the US gov. NOT nice people, ruined MY life and my brothers, my uncle committed suicide two years ago, ANYWAY, became a Christian because BRAINWASHING does that to Abused children, rebelled, went back, rebelled, then began to ask QUESTIONS, all I see now is OCCULT in all of it, From my own living it so...

There's way much more, OK but to sum it up, I began to investigate because one I want Justice and two I want answers, I no longer believe in the Bible crap or any other Religion, even if they are real, seen enough of their Fruits to say No Thanks. But Anyhoo, relevancy here, in my research, I come to the conclusion that the NT is really nothing more than ROME, aka Constantine or Ceasar, as Jesus as an anagram(?) and Judas being the representation of all those who refused to bow to Jupiter, etc. The Book of Daniel sheds some light into this, though I don't trust the OT either, they all bat # crazy in my book but, the thing with the Armor, you bring up a good point because it's one of the mind binders Fundies use a lot. And it DOES not work, it's Does however brainwash a VICTIM ESP of abuse (DV abuse rampant in religion and so is child abuse) to believe in some mystical Witchcraft type of thing and what it does it causes the victim to live in a Fantasy world and begin to DETACH from reality, very dangerous actually. It's one of the huge triggers for me, was for years, because it is all Occult, a form of sorcery actually. Danger is however, is no Ine stops to question in that mindset, how do you know What or Who in this spiritual realm you are fighting if you can't see them, and ony know what you've been brainwashed to know...great GROOMING to create a NAZI type of follower. Also contradictory to OT, about being presumptions...just a Lot I could get into here, but point being, for some reason, what you say makes a lot of sense. Why would any being Righteous need that much armor? Why so much Militarization? That sounds like Rome thinking right there, WAR LORD thinking, but one that keeps VICTIMS passive, as well as willing sacrificial door mats. Nero would have LOVED that one. As for this ridiculous Bibleman, if anything, it does more to dumb down Xertianity and exposes how backwards it is, even from a spiritual intellectual viewpoint, imbarrassment to say the least. The commenter about Barbie girl, nailed it...but I'd go as far as to say Barbie "concubines" girl, which is what these pedowanks Fundies really want...they not any different than the Fundies of other CULTS. Aka Religions.



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by ThreeBears
 


Thanks very much for your moving self-disclosure, ThreeBears!
I am horrified to hear your story, but these stories need to be told!! If you'd like to go into more depth or even just cross-post this into the thread in my signature, it would be very much appreciated.

My effort with that thread was to have one sort of "clearing house" where members can read the stories of other members without having to dig through profiles. It's not a 'discussion' so much as a 'collection'.

Yes, Bibleman is frightening, and after reading everyone's responses to him here, as well as Klassified's excellent thread about Preachers Who are Not Believers, which talks about higher education and authorities in the shadows dictating academia's direction...

I see a huge mess. I know that higher education is now moving AWAY from teaching Liberal Arts and Humanities such as "Western Civilization", "Philosophy", "Cultural Studies" etc. It is those classes, which were REQUIRED of freshmen and sophomores no matter WHAT their "major" was going to be (a student couldn't even declare a major until they were juniors - which makes perfect sense to me) back in the 70s and 80s, that create THINKERS. People who can connect the dots.

Even so, a youth of 18, 19, 20, 21 years old will not take the same meaning from Dialogues of Plato (which was one of my college texts that I kept, and re-read last month) as a more seasoned and mature adult will (speaking in terms of simple life experience and accumulated knowledge). To withdraw the Arts and Humanities from college curricula is tantamount to fascism and is, indeed, going to create generations of naive, ill-educated worker bees rather than THINKERS, and that frightens me VERY MUCH INDEED.



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Ah! ... I'm sorry. Your words don't serve as an explanation or elaboration of your statements. They make no sense to me. But that's OK. Something tells me I wouldn't understand anyway.


/shrug






posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by BlueMule
 


LOL! I hate it when you cop out like that, Blue Mule.
Oh well. Can't force you to share with us. At least you're reading along. I have to take issue with your statement that Bibleman is a benign "superhero", though. I feel it is very dangerous.

How Religion Threatens Children with Death

Religion masquerades as a peaceful, loving, and voluntary institution. However, religion can only continue because parents bring their children into the fold. The number of adult converts are not nearly enough to continue the legacy of religion. You need candidates that can endure years of propaganda, dismantling the empirical mind, under close supervision and isolation from outside information. Essentially, you need slaves that you can make dependent on religion so that when they reach their freedom they will choose to stay and continue the cycle. You need children.

Choice or agency only exists in the context of voluntary interactions.


The author makes an analogy of being in Walmart and having a gun pressed to your back to steal something that person wants. You do it because you don't want to die.

Same thing with indoctrinating children with hell and rejection.


Similarly, children are forced to be religious. No one's holding a gun to their backs. I understand that. But, it would be suicide for a child to go against his or her parents and the entire community. That's simply not how humans work. It's not how we've evolved. We want to survive, even if it means walking out of Walmart with merchandise while a gun is pressed against the back or pleasing our parents and community so that the people providing food and shelter don't become a threat to life.

Both scenarios are coercive. Both display a power disparity. Both threaten the victim with death. Only one is legal. Only one targets children.


....


edit on 25-4-2013 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Covertblack
 


what else would he have? a cross he throws at people?



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


is god almighty supposed to look like a pimp?



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by shelbylcollins
 


LOL!!!
Thanks for the chuckle.


Any other thoughts about it?



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by shelbylcollins
 


Not sure, but he seems quite vigorous and dapper, doesn't he??!
Reminds me of LeStat the vampire walking around in his frock coat, all decked out.



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 11:05 AM
link   
I also don't think the pope is supposed to look like that.



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by shelbylcollins
 


I'll look forward to your response as you go through the thread. It's been quite enlightening and entertaining so far, even though it's a VERY SERIOUS subject.



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by BlueMule
 


LOL! I hate it when you cop out like that, Blue Mule.


It was a bit off-topic, I guess. I'm just a little annoyed by the whole 'religion is an invention' meme.


Oh well. Can't force you to share with us. At least you're reading along. I have to take issue with your statement that Bibleman is a benign "superhero", though. I feel it is very dangerous.


Yesterdays mystics have become todays exaggerated superheroes and supervillians. Sometimes superheroes are on the wrong side of the law, and sometimes supervillians are on the right side of the law. One persons superhero is another persons supervillian.

From the comic-book perspective of the space-age, God is the atom. Or Cosmic rays. Or genetic mutation. Or whatever else gives mystics (superheroes) their charisms or mana or siddhi.

But here is Bibleman, partaking of the new superhero mythos without conforming to the new imagery. The God-image, that is to say the source of his mana, is not updated to accommodate the space-age. I can see why people might find that offensive.

So that makes Bibleman a fictional mystic, in my tentative interpretation. Ironic, since so much of mainstream religion has ostracized mysticism.

Anyway, I'm just sort of rambling.


edit on 25-4-2013 by BlueMule because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlueMule
I'm just a little annoyed by the whole 'religion is an invention' meme.


If religion wasn't invented, I don't know how it came about... I don't understand the annoyance with the idea that people, at some point, invented religion. Human beings created religion.



new topics




 
19
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join