Poll shows atheism on the rise in the U.S.

Originally posted by ChristianJihad

They are about as overpowering as you on the subject requiring proof of everything to show it is real

reply to post by rickymouse

 

Indeed, that is generally how intelligent beings operate, a claim is made and they ask for evidence, the opposite being faith ie igorant gullability.

I agree. I approach things like a scientist. Show it to me. Oh, don't physically have it? OK, show me evidence of it. Oh, no evidence either, save one book? Prove it to me. Oh, you cannot. Forget it then. Not interested.

Glad I am not that gullible.

reply to post by dontreally

Well revelation is a different matter. Take the Sinai experience: that was God contacting man.

Read it again. That was obviously an ET craft that landed, and it was a ET craft that led Moses through the desert too.

Originally posted by silent thunder

Poll shows atheism on the rise in the U.S.

www.washingtonpost.com

Religiosity is on the decline in the U.S. and atheism is on the rise, according to a new worldwide poll.

The poll, called “The Global Index of Religiosity and Atheism,” found that the number of Americans who say they are “religious” dropped from 73 percent in 2005 (the last time the poll was conducted) to 60 percent. At the same time, the number of Americans who say they are atheists rose, from 1 percent to 5 percent.

(visit the link for the full news article)

This is very positive news, it's good to see that hopefully the Mental aberration that is "Religion" may finally be on the wane.

And not before time may I add, because although personal spiritual beliefs are fine, organised religion is the curse of Mankind. Responsible for more Wars, Death, Destruction, Heartache than other thing I could mention. Also on a personal level the pain and cruelty inflicted on countless millions of people by organised religious institutions is almost beyond imagination.

So yes let's hope the non religious trend is upward , and the invisible man living in the clouds is no more.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

Yep - what doesn't add up is that people keep insisting stuff exists when there is no evidence for it - it's weird.

And how does one search for evidence for it??? It's been asserted time and again that 'occult phenomena' cannot be tested in the same manner as other physical sciences. It simply cannot. The scientific method requires rigorous analysis, doubt even, in order to arrive at objective conclusions. But in testing occult phenomena, the feeling of doubt undermines the experiment. Subjective attitudes regulate the success or failure of the experiment. It's a 'connecting' of inner states - the "emotions" which animate your conscious perception - and the outer physical environment.

Unless science gets this, it cannot be tested properly.

Like I said, the 'elites' of ancient times, for essentially as long as man has set up governments, has been the nobility. For how many generations have the land owners been noble houses in perpetual succession? And these nobility were the educated ones; educated in the classical sciences, in Plato, Aristotle, and of course, in what's called "the royal science" - Hermeticism. Occultism has always been a major preoccupation of the nobility. So isn't it mighty suspect, how from the early Renaissance, to the early modern era, where commonwealths and socialist states gradually replaced traditional aristocratic systems, that all of a sudden - the elite - didn't know a single thing about occultism?? I just think there is something that doesn't quite add up. The science of sciences, the most esoteric - hence the name - of things, occultism, which deals with interactions between man and transcendental realities and entities, that science swallowed this attitude up and completely forgot it?? I don't think so. My personal belief is: there has been a design against popularizing this perception amongst the vast majority of academics. That in order for knowledge of the physical in it's objective condition to be amassed - the wider culture, which every individual takes a part in - must be devoid of subjective prejudices towards belief in occult forces. One the culture and atmosphere is empty or starved of these perceptions, another perception - knowledge of the physical world stripped of subjective attitudes - is easily attained.

Fact is, and perhaps an overlooked platitude, is that general agreement in objective sciences fosters investigation into such sciences. And if the interest of the elite is in amassing knowledge of this plane of reality, it's also imperative that a certain ignorance and prejudice exist towards occult phenomena.

But nonetheless, as stated, such phenomena most certainly exist, because the world we see is more than what exists. There's a parallelism between us and the world: just as we have vitality leading to action, so to does the world have an ontological - invisible to the eyes - but implied in creation, aspect to it. And just as we have emotions, so too does the physical world have an archetypal emotive aspect which parallels this force in us. And so forth. This is the explanation for things like 'synchronicity', which is the coincidence between inner and outer states, as well as astrology - which works on the principle of organization in the outer world which parallels our own emotional systems.

I'm not of course arguing for a determinism, because I do believe man maintains a degree of freedom from environmental influences and emotions, but that doesn't mean such environmental conditions do not exists - at multiple levels.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

Specifically the belief the bibles of the world represent the mind of God.

What are the 'bibles' of the world?? There is only one Bible - and only one which speaks from a first person perspective.

No other books - besides possibly the Quran - make the claim of it being Gods mind in written form. The Vedas, Upanishads and Puranas, acknowledged to be words of wise men. From the perspective of man. Only the Pentateuch - the 5 books of Moses, or simply, the "Torah" - is claimed to be Gods mind invested in human language, conveying to man some purpose for his creation, albeit, in seemingly banal narratives about things which one assumes has little to do with spirituality.

The other two parts of the Hebrew Bible, the Neviyyim - prophets, and Ketuvim - writings, are supplementary texts to the Torah itself. They have canonical significance, of course, but not to the same degree as the Torah itself.

History contradicts that argument only on the basis of faith. I would have to have faith that those historical people had those revelations. In order to have faith in that I would have to have faith there was a Christian God to begin with.

It's more appropriate to say "Jewish" God, since the Christian God is an appropriation of the Jewish conception.

It's circular reasoning. No different than saying the Bible is the Word of God because the Bible says it's the Word of God. It's faith. Nothing more nothing less.

A claim was made 3400 years ago. Something on a massive scale. The claim is unusual and anomalous in the history of civilization. So the claim exists, and the claim as it exists says that God contacted man. You can call it 'circular' reasoning, but nonetheless, history speaks of a fact which occurred - the fact being that such a claim even exists, and has persisted in the form of one very unusual people - the Jews - for 3000 + years. I agree, that it doesn't quite meet the intellectual standards that science demands. But still, in my opinion, there is something mysterious in this fact. You can say man can't know the mind of God - but that is just an opinion grounded in a bias; history shows an example of a people who claim God contacted man - and since it was from above to below - what he imparted to man, the Pentatuech - necessarily contains Gods mind - his desires - for man.

There's no reason why man can't know God, since it not mans designs, but Gods. To argue that it is impossible is to say that God can't do this because I assume that he can't do this, for no other reason than harboring prejudices against what God can and cannot do. For example, there are those who circumscribe Gods power to nature alone. Nature is Godly; but man, his personhood, his needs, desires etc, this is all circumstantial and devoid of meaning. WHY?? If God is God, everything falls under his imperial authority. Nothing that exists exists without divine intention.

Do you mean in a sense all these religions are true? That any of those paths is the path to God?

I've pondered that thought. However, it's not without it's difficulties, particularly in the ethical sphere.

In the end I think it's more wishful thinking than a possible reality. Intractable differences exist. If we agree on a certain 'ethic', some system is being slighted, either the Jewish one, which insists on a divine prerogative for man, or the others, which allow 'relativism' insofar as their emphasis is different from that of Judaism. They emphasize the Godhead - or essence of things - while Judaism emphasizes God's objective relationship with man. The former tend to vilify the latters conception as 'illusory' - the gnostics specifically called the Jewish God the 'demiurge'.

So, I can see without difficulty why such irreconcilable differences exist between the Jewish order and the 'new world order' - to put it bluntly.

When I entertain thoughts of a divine relativism, I hope that each can do as each feels right. In other words, to exist as God has made them exist. The easterners, who live in a part of the world - the east - traditionally associated with proximity and closeness to divinity, will not sit content with anything but a system that confirms that perception, therefore, an ethical system without rigorous demands. Ethics is structure, and structure is a feature of the 'west' - where the sun sets, and where shade enunciates contour and shape to physical dimensions. Conversely, unlike the East, with it's emphasis on undifferentiated essence, the west, in the americas, the native Americans have found divinity within natures womb. I find that extremely fascinating. The exact opposite of the Eastern approach. They see God (or the goddess) within natures bounty and live in complete satisfaction with that conception. It's in between these two poles of conception that difficulties arise. The Jewish conception - which is Israel - an area geographically centered when you bring the americas together with the euro-asian continental mass, you arrive at a 'center'.

If you think about it, to look completely inwards, to the essence, is to look on the periphery: it's an abstraction from things present as opposed to finding meaning in things directly imminent in mans experience. The Jewish conception - the center piece - is the direct apprehension of mans existential situation. His perception considers the Ego - the person - of prime importance. Not metaphysical categories - which exist outside egoic experience - are emphasized, but mans personal relationship with God.

In descriptive terms, the poles of spiritual apprehension are the easterner and westerner, while the center, or direct experience, is the Jewish.

With Islam and Christianity, you find emphasis in too opposite directions from the Jewish, although both circumscribe the definitively personal in their systems. Islam, despite it's rigorous legality, is quite liberal. The essence - the Al Choq - the truth of Godhead, is whats sought. Once attained, sharia becomes void of meaning. Christianity, despite its Jewish foundations, has always been more Hellenistic than Hebraic. And today we see full well how true that contention is. The Germans were the first to assess the situation honestly (to the misfortune of Europes Jews): Christ must be an "aryan" i.e. supportive of an Aryan (Indo-European) ethic, if he is to be accepted by the modern world. The Jewish ethic is alien to Greece. Greece, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, cannot countenance the prudish ethics of the Hebrews.

Anyways, I realize the difficulties. I would like, for the others to adjust their morality, but I realize my wishes are my own. I cannot hope for anything like that without instigating a war, so therefore, I must remain practical about it. Murder, theft, abuse of animals - all these things can be understood by all to be punishable.. Sexual morality, another major issue, is at odds. Idolatry, Blasphemy, again, are strictly religious concerns.

Aye. Life is complicated. I wish we could all just get along and be agreeable to one another. But, we are different. And these differences should not only be respected, but protected. Unfortunately, some of the greatest opponents of conservative religiosity are the same who preach 'tolerance' of other peoples beliefs. It reminds me of that south park episode "we shall not tolerate intolerance!"

If you could collect some information and evidence to support that I would absolutely love reading it if your were to make a thread on it! Academia aside, the Christian force has been strong in society so I imagine it would be hard for that bias to have been so prevalant and persistent.

Christianity is in it's death throes, many would agree. The traditional 'judeo-christian' ethic, or rather, the Jewish ethic, since the Christian ethic supports a lawless morality - based on kant's 'moral imperative' - (excuse me while I chuckle!) that one should act because one knows it's right to act, and therefore, magically, one all of sudden becomes obligated to act. But in anycase, the flux of culture in the western world has been towards moral relativism, and if you doubt that, look at whats all the buzz in hollywood - 50 shades of grey. 50 shades of 'areas' a book about BDSM. This could never have been 50 years ago, but today, it's a fact of culture.

The Jewish ethic is dying, too the satisfaction of many. To me, it's a travesty of mammoth proportions. What's lost is worse than what's gained. More pain will come of this - and perhaps more 'fun' as well - than if man thought living responsibly were more important. But 'responsibility - I suppose means something different to people with different value systems..... In anycase, I think the Jewish ethic is the most sane ethic. I find the normalization of sadism, masochism and bondage/domination to be repugnant and averse to human nature - in the sense of our spiritual needs.

Originally posted by BlueMule

Originally posted by spiritualzombie
It only takes away the power of false divisive manipulating control machines called Religion.

That's a childish attitude.

"All religions are true for their time; they are true as metaphorical representations of the range of human psychological and spiritual experience" -Joseph Campbell

As culture advances metaphorical representations become obsolete, not "false". It's just a matter of finding the truth in them, extracting it, experiencing it, and then updating the metaphors into forms that the new stage of culture can grok.

edit on 17-8-2012 by BlueMule because: (no reason given)

If religions were all advertised as nothing more than philosophies, such as metaphorical representations that would be one thing, but no, that's just something people of a higher mind try to say to validate it. The fact is they are scams. It's not opinion, it's a fact. Jesus is the only way, or is it Allah? I forget-- but supposedly one of those figures is the ONLY way for me to get to heaven where I can reap all the rewards-- Which is apparently the ONLY reason for me to be good, is so I can be rewarded. All that divisive selfish ridiculous hocus pocus nonsense creates a childish planet where we engage in war over Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. It is the definition of retardation. Religion holds us back and retards our progress as people.

Originally posted by racasan

this bit of scripture is odd

Originally posted by BlueMule

'Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false'
2 Thessalonians 2:11

Why would god send a strong delusion – I thought tricking people was Satan’s job?
If you love somebody wouldn’t you try to give the clarity?

And the whole thing of a creator feeling the need to fool his creation is just bizarre on so many levels

Pop-religion, which is heavily exoteric, has given people flawed ideas of God, religion, myth, mysticism. Basically people need to forget everything they think they know and start over. The best place to start over at is studying the academic fields of comparative mythology, comparative mysticism, comparative religion. If you do sooner or later it will click and then the archetypes will activate in your psyche which will lead you to mystical experience. Without mystical experience and the study of comparative fields, its impossible to properly understand religion. As Nietzsche said, we are in the age of comparison. But no one is comparing. So no one gets it.

Studying the religion of your culture isn't enough. Studying science isn't enough. Studying theology or going to church isn't enough. It takes a Hero Journey, and it takes comparative scholarship.

The Hero Journey

Originally posted by ChristianJihad

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
All part of the antichrists plan: eliminate god, encourage mass murder, immorality, homosexuality. the exact opposite of the teachings of god and his prophets. .

So how do you square this with the fact that the same god created the evil to begin with ?

To test us.

Reply to post by BlueMule

What you are claiming in your post is exactly what religious people claim, you wont understand until you read (insert whatever). The problem with that is you would have to start from a point of assuming some part of it is true. You would be going on looking for evidence of something you already presupposed to exist. So it all eventually boils down to you wont believe until you believe.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
Reply to post by BlueMule

 

What you are claiming in your post is exactly what religious people claim, you wont understand until you read (insert whatever).

I claim that you won't understand an academic field of study until you study it. Whether its philosophy, or economics, or history, or comparative mythology, or whatever. If you want to think this claim is false because its 'exactly what religious people claim', go right ahead.

Having studied comparative mythology, comparative religion, comparative mysticism for many years I am simply offering my recommendation and testimony. If you don't want to listen to me, that's fine. But I happen to know from experience being born and raised in a Christian environment that studying the comparative fields that I listed changes everything.

And as a mystic who has experienced classical mystical experiences, I can also testify that such things change everything. But, I understand that my message is not easy to recieve. People are lazy and they get stuck in their ways and they like to think they did it right. And here I come saying no, you did it wrong, start over.

The problem with that is you would have to start from a point of assuming some part of it is true.

It looks to me like you are starting from a point of assuming that what you say here is true.

So I will write you off as just another person destined to live a lie. That is 99.99% of people and I am fine with that. Carry on, and thank you for playing that particular role. I will leave you now and continue playing my role.

Originally posted by BlueMule

Having studied comparative mythology, comparative religion, comparative mysticism for many years I am simply offering my recommendation and testimony. If you don't want to listen to me, that's fine. But I happen to know from experience being born and raised in a Christian environment that studying the comparative fields that I listed changes everything.

Studied how and where?

I don't think anything changes everything. What do you mean exactly?

Reply to post by BlueMule

Um, I personally dont believe any of it exists, because there is no real evidence for it outside of anecdotes. A 'mystical' experience, whatever that is, means something different for everyone. Someone could see a roach crawling up a wall and feel inspiried. There is no concrete definition of what it is, however most of these can be recreated in labs by altering brain chemistry or function. There is really nothing special about it. Outside of all that though, your claim is that if you study those subjects that you will experience something 'mystical' thus validating it. But the problem here is you are telling people going in that something will happen so they will be looking for something to happen. You are also making the claim that its all true but nobody reads enough about it....its just like the religious lol.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
Reply to post by BlueMule

 

Um, I personally dont believe any of it exists, because there is no real evidence for it outside of anecdotes.

And you think you know what 'it' is supposed to be and how to think of 'it' but you don't.

I'm not into prolonged arguments with people I consider too deluded to help, especially when they have demontrated that they have no intention of listening to me. Goodbye, and feel free to have the last word.

Originally posted by Annee

Studied how and where?

I'm not going to say where I studied because that gives more personal details than I feel comfortable disclosing on this website.

As for how...how else? Listening to lectures, reading books, completing assignments, discussing the subject matter, etc.

There are plenty of books out there that people can get to start. The works of Joseph Campbell are a good starting point.

I don't think anything changes everything. What do you mean exactly?

As an analogy consider how everything changed for Thomas Anderson when he took the red pill...assuming you've seen The Matrix. Of course 'everything' is an arbitrary term and mileage may vary. I'm not into semantic nit-picking so if that's your plan, I won't play ball.

Originally posted by BlueMule

Originally posted by Annee

Studied how and where?

I'm not going to say where I studied because that gives more personal details than I feel comfortable disclosing on this website.

An accredited college/university?

A southern bible belt college/university?

A east coast conservative college/university?

A west coast liberal college/university?

A bible college/university?

The internet?

Originally posted by BlueMule

I'm not into semantic nit-picking so if that's your plan, I won't play ball.

Its your conversation.

I think its quite significant where you studied: philosophy/religious comparisons.

I think the differences between studying in a southern bible college - - say compared to a west coast liberal college would be significant.

I think its a fair question.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by BlueMule

I'm not into semantic nit-picking so if that's your plan, I won't play ball.

Its your conversation.

I'm not the OP. I'm just participating, as are you.

I think its quite significant where you studied: philosophy/religious comparisons.

I think the differences between studying in a southern bible college - - say compared to a west coast liberal college would be significant.

I think its a fair question.

All I am comfortable saying is that I did not attend a bible college.

If you have any questions about comparative mythology, religion, mysticism, esoterica, atheism, fundamentalism, etc I'll be happy to try to answer them. But I am not going to answer any more personal questions.

Reply to post by BlueMule

Eh it really doesnt matter what 'it' you may be referring to, you are talking about spirituality and the metaphysical. None of it can be validated in controled conditions or using science, so its irrelevant. There is nothing for you to explain, I simply pointed out you are using the same tatics to recruit people that religious people use while trying to belittle them. Im sorry if that upsets you but the truth hurts sometimes.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by SolarIce
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Whys it silly?

Ask any number of people who believe in God, they will all tell you that something happened to change their lives forever, I'm sorry you have yet to have the chance to feel a divine force intervened in your life, but it happens everyday, maybe you should open your mind a little more, and get away from the technology a bit?

also if something was there before the big bang, how did it come about? How did anything come about?

edit on 15-8-2012 by SolarIce because: (no reason given)

But why do you believe in the God that you do? Why can't it be Odin or Zeus or the Flying Spaghetti Monster? The reason you believe it's God that created the universe is because that's what stuck in your mind from your education. If you were hindu, you might think it was Vishnu... If you lived in Saudi Arabia, you'd probably think it was Allah... If you were brought up pagan, it could be one of dozens of primary Gods that might have created the universe.

Man has always created Gods for his lack of understanding in how things work or why things happen. For some people, that's not enough and they need to understand the WHY and HOW of something. People say it's divine because they don't know.

Originally posted by grahag

Man has always created Gods for his lack of understanding in how things work or why things happen. For some people, that's not enough and they need to understand the WHY and HOW of something. People say it's divine because they don't know.

That's total BS. It's the worst kind of secular conceit. That's not the way it works at all. Spend a few years studying comparative mythology and you'll see. Or, stick with your secular conceit there, which you created for your lack of understanding in how things work or why mythology happens.