Religion discussed here....

jfreeman373 · « **Reply #100 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 03:46 am »

In your church marbles, whom do you serve?What is that which you worship? What higher power greater than yourself do you recognize? IF the answer is yourself....than I would say you are quite incorrect in your religion. You are not the greatest being that ever was..... because I AM. So you see you are totally worshipping in the wrong God.

All joking aside, Is it the alchohol that you serve? A thing... an inantimate object that makes you not think about any deeper truth than having a good time? What about the bartender? Do you serve him/her or do they serve YOU another beer? What about the band? Do you lay down before the feet of the musicians and worship their grand creation because THEY are gods and greater than yourself? What about the music itself? It makes you feel good...like dancing maybe. Which in turn must mean you are worshiping your own emotion of happiness. Is your emotion worth the praise you lay before it? What about the women you hit on? Do THEY deserve your praise and worship as they make you grovel for a piece of *** ? Or maybe the women flock to you like geese go south for the winter. Dosn't that make you FEEL like your'e being worshipped? Yet again we are back to worshipping yourself which is the cornerstone of atheism, I should know I used to be an atheist; a satanist too for a matter of fact.

If you claim to be agnostic, then you are really just an atheist that dosn't understand the root of his own religion.

Kind of like Black magic verses White magic, they are really the same thing but the person that is weilding white magic thinks that they are good, while the black magic person knows that it is just a trap to pull them from white magic into the deeper level of black magic at some point in the hopelfully near future

.

They all lead to dead ends, you're stuck in a box that you can't escape. The more you are traped in that box... the smaller the boundries seem to become. Then the only thing left in your world that seems to have any importance at all is yourself, and when you are left with yourself long enough, YOU don't even seem to matter anymore, cut off from the rest of the world, alone in your own universe of your own making. Now the box is so small amd yet it is empty, because YOU are empty and nothing seems to matter anymore. You are not in the box... YOU ARE THE BOX! The world outside, the world you experience is dry and wasting away like a flower that was once beatiful and now withers with the dieing season of innocence. Nothing matters, there are no rules, everything goes, and it's all up to you to decide the outcome of other peoples lives as you take your neighbors wife and destroy some little childs family that did'nt even have a chance or anything to do with you becoming the person that you have become.

Is it fair to them? Is if fair to yourself? Is it fair to the people that care about you ? Is it fair to the rest of the world?

Maybe as you look into yourself you will say yes. Because so and so did this when I was this It is ok for me to do whatever it is I really know is wrong now. Or you could say NO I will NOT continue to be part of the disease that raveges mankind and destroys hearts and souls without giving it another thought.

You could even decide to forgive the people in your past that have helped to alter your growth from that which you were destined to become; The representative of righteousness in this world that casts it's light upon the darkness of this world and restores that which was raveged by the lion. Helping to remedy the mutants of perfection we have all become and fill yourself and others around you with the life giving waters of love.

Or... you could go have another shot and forget all about it and push it off for another day when you deserve to be the hand of God because you have been good and pure for a whole year straight.

The choice is clear, to me anyway. I can say honestly that I won't be going back into ANY box other than the day my body is laid to rest and my conscousness is finally free from the poison of this world that surrounds me and those I love for eternity.

Tyson · « **Reply #101 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 04:42 am »

Your assumption that morality is not possible w/out a higher power is incorrect. Good and evil, a moral code, can be defined outside of any sort of mysticism or supernaturalism.

jfreeman373 · « **Reply #102 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 04:44 am »

If so then what is it's source? Where does it come from? What makes anything right or anything wrong at all?

Sa-dono · « **Reply #103 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 04:56 am »

Quote from: jfreeman373

If so then what is it's source? Where does it come from? What makes anything right or anything wrong at all?

Society, government, the collective, etc.

JohnR · « **Reply #104 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 04:57 am »

I'd say it's internal.

Sa-dono · « **Reply #105 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 05:01 am »

Quote from: jfreeman373

In your church marbles, whom do you serve?What is that which you worship? What higher power greater than yourself do you recognize?

How about the Goddess Aprodite? I'm sure Marbles wants hot sluts!

That or the religion can just be based on Nirvana/Utopia and the many pleasures...

jfreeman373 · « **Reply #106 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 05:21 am »

Yet again we are back to self. Sounds good to me too. But... Iv'e been there, done that. Not quite as good as it sounds.

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #107 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 05:23 am »

I don't mean to put words in JFreedman's mouth, but I think what he mean was: absent a higher power, what makes any moral code of right or wrong absolute, as opposed to being completely subjective? Without a higher arbiter you could say right or wrong was flexible, or subjective to each individual.

Perhaps as Plato believed we percieved qualities inherent to objects, there may be an inherent wrong or right that does exist independent of our perceptions. Would this not be god, or at least on possible definition of god?

JohnR · « **Reply #108 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 05:24 am »

jfreeman373, I'm not sure whether to respond -- are you replying to my comment or Sa-dono's?

jfreeman373 · « **Reply #109 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 05:32 am »

I was replying to sa-dono. But while I'm at it I will respond to you too.
So you say it is internal...I would agree. But I ask this. What is the source of this internal moral code that we have ? Dare we say a conscience? Where does a conscience come from? I believe I have an answer but I would have to refer to an ancient book that was written by men and edited over thousands of years for my proof. What do I say then ? Don't know. Working on that.

jfreeman373 · « **Reply #110 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 05:37 am »

Quote from: Rob Babcock

I don't mean to put words in JFreedman's mouth, but I think what he mean was: absent a higher power, what makes any moral code of right or wrong absolute, as opposed to being completely subjective? Without a higher arbiter you could say right or wrong was flexible, or subjective to each individual.

Perhaps as Plato believed we percieved qualities inherent to objects, there may be an inherent wrong or right that does exist independent of our perceptions. Would this not be god, or at least on possible definition of god?

You took the words right out of my mouth and put them into your own.

JohnR · « **Reply #111 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 05:37 am »

Quote from: Rob Babcock

Without a higher arbiter you could say right or wrong was flexible, or subjective to each individual.

Well, this is true anyway. The code decided by the higher power is clearly open to a great deal of interpretation. Also, I don't believe it's "subjective" in the way that you (might) mean. Again, it's like the idea expressed a couple of times here that if someone doesn't have *their* belief system, they don't have one at all. Not true. Similarly, there's the idea that if one doesn't follow an externally-decided moral code, then one is subject only to the whims of desire, whatever happens to please me at the moment is what I do. This is not true either.

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #112 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 05:38 am »

To Sa-Dono, although that was just a general observation. This thread has been among the best I've ever seen on an internet forum, on any topic. But the part of me that likes the underdog has kept me from really adding much here, or "piling on."

As a guy who grew up Catholic (a decade of Chatochism, too) the imprint of the church is strong on me, and I do think the Catholic version of Christianity has a peotic beauty to it, irregardless of the it's correctness. I dig the pageantry, the ceremony, the Latin chants. It reminds me of Dungeons & Dragons, and I mean no disrespect.

Without coming down on one side or the other, I'll concede that although there are a lot of intelligent, lucid arguments here (particulary by Tyson), it's not a matter of logic, or reason. To truly understand any religion, you must embrace it's dogma. It's pointless to try to refute religion with evidence: if God is truly omnipotent, what evidence or lack thereof could condemn him? And while we might think his plan mad, how could we be qualified to pass judgement on the plan of an omnicient being? Surely as very small children we chafed at the rules of our parents, but as we matured we found that they were simply operating on a higher level of reason and with purposes we were utterly unable to understand. Would the relationship between God and us be any different?

I truly envy those with strong faith, and I admire it. Seeing guys like jfreedman stand up to withering scorn for their beliefs, yet keep gamely trying to defend them- how can I not admire that type of conviction and courage?

It would seem that nowadays, professing faith in God is just about the most outrageous, rebellious thing you could possibly do. For instance, a actress could come out as a lesbian/bi and become more glamorous (in case of a bi hottie, I'm guessing Marbles 'ears' would perk up

) . An athelet can admit to drugs or a drinking problem. But for a rocker to profess strong faith as a Christian (as Brian Setzer has) often opens them up to redicule. In Setzer's case, he says that in all the interviews he's done, only once or twice has a journelist ever even left his comments in. Religion just isn't sexy enough.

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #113 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 05:41 am »

BTW, by a higher arbiter, I only mean some power above us. For example, if I fill a bucket with water, we could all lift it and each say it weighs a different amount. And each one of us could claim to be making the best guess. Only with access to an accurate scale could the true weight be determined. In this case, regardless of what we each think, the object has a true weigh, independant of our opinion of it.

I'm not saying any one person has access to this higher truth, or that one's is better. Just clarifying my meaning.

JohnR · « **Reply #114 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 05:41 am »

Quote from: jfreeman373

Where does a conscience come from?

I don't know exactly. But I do believe I have one

I recall that someone talked earlier about their belief in God being something that was internal. Where did *that* come from? Did God put it there? Or is it something you chose because you just "know" that it's right?

I guess I would have to supply the equivalent answer to your question

jfreeman373 · « **Reply #115 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 05:49 am »

well, answering questions with more questions is the road that leads to an infinite truth. What about the whole Idea of infinity? We use it in mathmatical equations. We comprehend it's existence, but how can we... being finite individuals..... truly comprehend the infinite ? I believe the infinite is infinately large in scope and comprehension.

JohnR · « **Reply #116 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 05:55 am »

I'm not quite sure I understand your response...

At any rate, the questions were meant as an answer. Where does conscience come from? I don't know, it's just... there.

Sa-dono · « **Reply #117 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 05:57 am »

Quote from: jfreeman373

Yet again we are back to self. Sounds good to me too. But... Iv'e been there, done that. Not quite as good as it sounds.

We are only back at self because Marbles is the one "inventing" the religion. This is possibly no different than many other religions...but until someone invents a time machine, we will have no proof either way.

Sa-dono · « **Reply #118 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 06:03 am »

Quote from: Rob Babcock

To Sa-Dono, although that was just a general observation. This thread has been among the best I've ever seen on an internet forum, on any topic. But the part of me that likes the underdog has kept me from really adding much here, or "piling on."

As a guy who grew up Catholic (a decade of Chatochism, too) the imprint of the church is strong on me, and I do think the Catholic version of Christianity has a peotic beauty to it, irregardless of the it's correctness. I dig the pageantry, the ceremony, the L ...

You may want to write out a full sentence Rob. The "that" in your first sentence could be referring to anything at this point and time. You need a direct subject. Also, does any of the rest of that post have any point, or are you just stating your point of view for all?

I have no problem with people believing whatever they want to believe. Religions can certainly provide benefits to societies.

Tyson · « **Reply #119 on:** 12 Jan 2004, 07:13 am »

The source of morality, of course, is human life. Either things are for human life, or against it. Those actions which harm human life are bad, those which help it are good. Those things which have no effect (direct or indirect) on human life one way or another are not in the realm of the moral.