Why do most religions tell people to deny themselves (slavery/New World Order propaganda)?

a reply to: enlightenedservant

I already explained the difference between religious which says not to kill and not killing to respect free-will

The difference is religion also says not to party, drink, want more material goods, etc. Having fun is natural. The only thing we should do is respect each other's free-will, everything else is too much control.[b[ Religion makes up many unecesary rules.

Which denominations of Christianity, for example? The common denominations. Most Christians don't follow The Prosperity Gospel.

a reply to: arpgme

Well perhaps if someone takes simple joy in dismembering others, their pursuit of happiness is what everyone else (especially the religious types) calls evil.

A fairly extreme example, I'll admit, but it does illustrate the point.

Put even more universally, the pursuit of personal happiness is selfish. It ignores the needs and wants of those around us and places us in the position of not even considering the effects and consequences of our actions on others.

Jesus put things rather clearly when he said:

"YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND. This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF. On these two commandments depend the whole of the Law".

Self and personal happiness is not prevented by religious laws (which you seem to be implying), but it is prioritized differently.

originally posted by: arpgme
a reply to: enlightenedservant

I already explained the difference between religious which says not to kill and not killing to respect free-will

The difference is religion also says not to party, drink, want more material goods, etc. Having fun is natural. The only thing we should do is respect each other's free-will, everything else is too much control.[b[ Religion makes up many unecesary rules.

Which denominations of Christianity, for example? The common denominations. Most Christians don't follow The Prosperity Gospel.

LOL Really? Your argument now is "Religion says not to kill but we say not to kill to respect free will, so we're totally different"?

Also, how can you preach free will while also preaching limits on that freedom? That doesn't make sense. Freedom with limits isn't freedom at all. You may have 2 rules (free will & respecting the free will of others), but they completely contradict each other.

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: arpgme

Well perhaps if someone takes simple joy in dismembering others, their pursuit of happiness is what everyone else (especially the religious types) calls evil.

A fairly extreme example, I'll admit, but it does illustrate the point.

Put even more universally, the pursuit of personal happiness is selfish. It ignores the needs and wants of those around us and places us in the position of not even considering the effects and consequences of our actions on others.

Jesus put things rather clearly when he said:

"YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND. This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF. On these two commandments depend the whole of the Law".

Self and personal happiness is not prevented by religious laws (which you seem to be implying), but it is prioritized differently.

It's not an extreme example, though. People kill others all the time and for various reasons. People find pleasure in a lot of things that harm others, which is the whole reason most religions place limits on those actions in the first place; to get adherents to overcome their vices, flaws, weaknesses, and other desires to do negative things.

But arpgme seems to have such a blind hatred for the concept of "religion" that he/she can't accept that. Instead, he/she would rather tell us religions are wrong because they place limits on the free will of others, while simultaneously preaching his/her own limits on the free will of others ("don't do anything that harms the free will of others").

EDIT: But he/she doesn't seem to have a problem with the Church of Satan, Satanism, or Hedonism. I've brought them up several times because of their similarities to what he/she keeps preaching, but those comments keep getting ignored.

originally posted by: arpgme
a reply to: luciddream

Buddhism/Hinduism talks about selflessness to gain nirvana.. not indulge in earthly materialistic things.

Exactly. They are anti-life. In some form of Buddhism, they even admit they just want darkness/void/emptiness.

I thought they where after the highest level awareness by transforming the negative sides of the ego connecting to the oneness instead. But it is true by stopping the chatter of the consciousness other information is allowed to rise from the unconsciousness.

The middle path. Accepting behavior of all if they are not harmful to the ones that are involved. But not allowing abuse by free will on the self less since they deserve symbiotic behavior even if they are limited on their ability to demand it.

arpgme the problem with free will is that you can be very harmful to a self less person without breaking their free will since they do not have the awareness to know what is going on. It is not enough to only allow free will and make sure no others free will is not tampered with since some souls will be damaged before they know what is going on. Pedophilia is a perfect example of this where the free will of one being is sometimes not evolved enough to have a will that is different than a abuser of free will.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Some of it sounds a lot like theosophy, yes. The idea that the serpent was really doing Adam and Eve a favor by freeing them from God by bringing them knowledge and giving them the power to be gods themselves. And from that follows the free will idea of you can do whatever you want so long as you love and by extension love the god who turns out to be an angel of light - Lucifer.

Generally, it is a selfish doctrine. Be happy. Be selfish. You see that leaking through in the Prosperity Gospel.

What the OP misses is that denial of self is practiced to varying degrees. For me it's about considering others before I consider myself. Or the Golden Rule.

a reply to: ketsuko

Exactly. It sounds great saying "Let everyone be free & happy". But its flaws becomes obvious once people try to put it in practice. That's the entire reason every society eventually creates rules, laws, and some form of judicial system.

Their belief "but you can't infringe on someone else's free will" probably was included when it became obvious that "do what you want" would instantly incite negative actions in a lot of people.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Free-will is holy and we should honor it in ourselves and in others (no killing, taking advantage, etc.) all other rules are just extra unnecessary stuff.

To call Free-Will evil is to call The True God evil. The True God within has nothing to do self-denial / hatred of self. The True God loves Free-will and Happiness for everyone. Free-Will is a divine quality.

Free-Will is the basis of Life and Happiness is the purpose of Life.

originally posted by: arpgme
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Free-will is holy and we should honor it in ourselves and in others (no killing, taking advantage, etc.) all other rules are just extra uneeded stuff.

To call Free-Will evil is to call The True God evil. The True God does not like self-denial. The True God loves Honesty, Free-will, Happiness.

Am I really evil and satanic for being in freedom for humanity instead of people trying to force their religion on others through law?

I'm curious now. What exactly is your belief system? What is it called?

And why can't you admit that your rules of "free will" and "don't infringe on the free will of others" contradict each other? That 2nd rule even creates the same limitations on freedom as many religions do. But somehow your version is different because what?

To me, it seems like you just want to pull people away from God. You don't mind your 2nd rule placing the same restraints on people as long as those people aren't doing it because of God.

EDIT: And I didn't use the word "evil" once in those posts. And you should probably look up the Church of Satan, Satanism, and Hedonism before you try to distance yourself from them. Because they preach what you've been saying, too.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

And why can't you admit that your rules of "free will" and "don't infringe on the free will of others" contradict each other?

It's one "rule" (principle), not two: Respect Free-Will within self and others because Freedom is a Divine Gift.

To me, it seems like you just want to pull people away from God. You don't mind your 2nd rule placing the same restraints on people as long as those people aren't doing it because of God.

The problem happens when people force their religious beliefs on others, like banning gay marriage, keeping slavery (in the past), and many other religious-based laws which shows a disregard for the Free-Will of others.


Does Satanism teach that God gave Free-Will as a Divine Gift but we should not abuse each other's Free-Will? Do they teach that everyone's Free-Will should be respected and not just an "elite" or "chosen" group? I don't think what I'm saying is Satanism.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: arpgme
a reply to: Itisnowagain

Yes, but he doesn't reapect the free-will of the person he rapes, so he's an enemy of Freedom like the gods of slavery most people worship.

You're deliberately evading my points. Should we allow rapists, pedophiles, serial killers, abusive boyfriends, child abusers, poachers, con men, thieves, bullies, war profiteers, cartels, pimps, armed militants, neo-Nazis, and child sex rings to pursue what makes them happy too?

Yes...on a remote atlantic/pacific island where they can take up all their time - raping, pedophiling, abusing, thieving, nazi-ising the other 'onmates' of the island...while they obsess over their own forte, eschewing the kinds of things they must do to survive - with no food, no shelter, no protection from law, no nothing - real life lord of the flies...if they choose to kill each other off, more room for 'new' offenders...no faceless system injecting them, hanging them, shooting them - no squillions of dollars spent of taxpayers money supporting lifetimes in gaol...nothing...they are 'free' to pursue what they desire...but must do it against the background of a society of criminals that are 'free' to also do it...

That's what I call a 'win-win' situation...

Å99

originally posted by: arpgme
a reply to: enlightenedservant

And why can't you admit that your rules of "free will" and "don't infringe on the free will of others" contradict each other?

It's one "rule" (principle), not two: Respect Free-Will within self and others because Freedom is a Divine Gift.

To me, it seems like you just want to pull people away from God. You don't mind your 2nd rule placing the same restraints on people as long as those people aren't doing it because of God.

The problem happens when people force their religious beliefs on others, like banning gay marriage, keeping slavery (in the past), and many other religious-based laws which shows a disregard for the Free-Will of others.


Does Satanism teach that God gave Free-Will as a Divine Gift but we should not abuse each other's Free-Will? Do they teach that everyone's Free-Will should be respected and not just an "elite" or "chosen" group? I don't think what I'm saying is Satanism.

So what is your belief system? What is it called? Or is this just your personal theory? Note, I won't hold it against you if is.

originally posted by: akushla99

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: arpgme
a reply to: Itisnowagain

Yes, but he doesn't reapect the free-will of the person he rapes, so he's an enemy of Freedom like the gods of slavery most people worship.

You're deliberately evading my points. Should we allow rapists, pedophiles, serial killers, abusive boyfriends, child abusers, poachers, con men, thieves, bullies, war profiteers, cartels, pimps, armed militants, neo-Nazis, and child sex rings to pursue what makes them happy too?

Yes...on a remote atlantic/pacific island where they can take up all their time - raping, pedophiling, abusing, thieving, nazi-ising the other 'onmates' of the island...while they obsess over their own forte, eschewing the kinds of things they must do to survive - with no food, no shelter, no protection from law, no nothing - real life lord of the flies...if they choose to kill each other off, more room for 'new' offenders...no faceless system injecting them, hanging them, shooting them - no squillions of dollars spent of taxpayers money supporting lifetimes in gaol...nothing...they are 'free' to pursue what they desire...but must do it against the background of a society of criminals that are 'free' to also do it...

Å99

How would we even determine who these people are without infringing on their "free will"? Are they supposed to turn themselves in? Because any judicial investigation would infringe on their free will if they chose not to answer. And what about their victims before they're transferred to this hypothetical island?

Not to mention, forcing them to go to this island would be infringing on their freedom as well. What about the ones who want to stay in any other country? Like I said, this theory falls on its face when applied to reality.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

This is what I believe, it's not a theory, but a belief. There are more and more people who believe in Freedom for all (although not many, most are hypocrites).

If people exercised their full right of free will the world would be in chaos. I agree with the post made by "enlightenedservant" on this one. You can't tell people to do what they want and at the same time tell them what they can't do, that doesn't even make sense. If someone likes little girls, and being with little girls makes them happy then why is that a problem. What's wrong with liking little girls?

Free-will is not free if it has limitations or punishment behind it. The truth is, anyone can do whatever they want, the choice is yours regardless if I think it is wrong or right.

Also, how is it possible to force religion on someone? The truth is you can't. I can stand out on the corner and preach all day long, but I can't force anyone to accept it. I get tired of non-religious people claiming that religious people are forcing their views on people when that is not even the case.

originally posted by: arpgme
a reply to: enlightenedservant

This is what I believe, it's not a theory, but a belief. There are more and more people who believe in Freedom for all (although not many, most are hypocrites).

Ok, so it's a belief system you created yourself? Like I said, I won't hold it against you if you did. I'm just curious where this comes from.

I've actually read into the Church of Satan & the Satanic Bible. It's nothing like what people stereotype it to be. One of it's first rules is that Satan isn't real & they don't worship him. Then it goes into freedom of the individual & some other stuff. It's been a long time since I read it & I have no desire to reread any of it (sorry not going to reread it just for this thread). But that's why I asked you if there was a correlation with them.

I think your beliefs actually may match up more with Hedonism, though. It's been roughly the same time frame since I studied them too (don't judge me, I was in truth-seeking phase). But they seemed to be more about pursuing happiness, pleasure, bliss, etc. There were actually several other groups/religions that preached similar thoughts, particularly ones claiming to be from similar groups in ancient Rome.

EDIT: You may want to look into the Marley's "One Love" movement, too.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: akushla99

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: arpgme
a reply to: Itisnowagain

Yes, but he doesn't reapect the free-will of the person he rapes, so he's an enemy of Freedom like the gods of slavery most people worship.

You're deliberately evading my points. Should we allow rapists, pedophiles, serial killers, abusive boyfriends, child abusers, poachers, con men, thieves, bullies, war profiteers, cartels, pimps, armed militants, neo-Nazis, and child sex rings to pursue what makes them happy too?

Yes...on a remote atlantic/pacific island where they can take up all their time - raping, pedophiling, abusing, thieving, nazi-ising the other 'onmates' of the island...while they obsess over their own forte, eschewing the kinds of things they must do to survive - with no food, no shelter, no protection from law, no nothing - real life lord of the flies...if they choose to kill each other off, more room for 'new' offenders...no faceless system injecting them, hanging them, shooting them - no squillions of dollars spent of taxpayers money supporting lifetimes in gaol...nothing...they are 'free' to pursue what they desire...but must do it against the background of a society of criminals that are 'free' to also do it...

Å99

How would we even determine who these people are without infringing on their "free will"? Are they supposed to turn themselves in? Because any judicial investigation would infringe on their free will if they chose not to answer. And what about their victims before they're transferred to this hypothetical island?

Not to mention, forcing them to go to this island would be infringing on their freedom as well. What about the ones who want to stay in any other country? Like I said, this theory falls on its face when applied to reality.

Think about it. If you forfeit the will by 'doing as you please' - you are sent to a lifetime sentence in a fascility where your food, shelter, clothing, plumbing, electricity etc. etc. etc. is paid for by the abiding mass of society - clearly, a vexatious worldwide problem.
The ethics issue of death penalties is removed, and replaced by an environment wholly 'honoring' their right to exist in the kind of society they desire...just not ours...since, their sentence has deemed that they have no respect for the freedom they could have had, if they didn't impinge on the 'free will' of society to live in relative peace and safety...themselves included...

You have not 'taken away' their free will to do whatever they want, just provided them with the locale, and like-minded people to do it with...a self-regulating prison that costs no money...win-win...

Å99