darkrezin,
This idea of having a god without having a religious affiliation or attending church is certainly a very contemporary way of being and I welcome it. I see it as a step in the right direction of abolishing religion, at least in modern society.
There will always be quaint out of the way places with charming primitive beliefs. Let them exist too but not in our public schools etc.. and let's realize this is a vestige of an ancient era when many mythological beings were thought to exist.
Most of us long ago went from hundreds of gods to one god. Now we need to take that one last but significant step in the evolution of human thinking to make it zero gods.Thankfully, I can see from reading the user comments that we are heading in that direction.
I don't mean to offend anyone or seem condescending.
God is not great: How religion poisons everthing
you don't nessessarily, but some of your ideas about the subject are slightly innaccurate.
in the world of hundreds of gods it's always been known(
) that these were all aspects of the greater divinity.
having a god without the religious affilliation is actually the older tradition.
manfriday-it's true about einstien and a personal god, but he certainly believed in a creator and his ideas were not that out of line with certain schools of jewish thought.....
in the world of hundreds of gods it's always been known(
) that these were all aspects of the greater divinity.having a god without the religious affilliation is actually the older tradition.
manfriday-it's true about einstien and a personal god, but he certainly believed in a creator and his ideas were not that out of line with certain schools of jewish thought.....
-
BingoTheClowno
- Posts: 1722
- Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Chicago
- Contact:
Yes, he was religious and he wrote the following: "Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is or can be done." This is not surprising giving the times he lived in, where, again, to not recognize the church meant persecution by the Grand Office of the Inquisition. Of course we now know not who but what sets the planets in motion. But you might want to learn about his papers entitled An Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture where he is against the Trinity doctrine. Such claims led the House of the Lords to issue the Act for the Suppression of Blasphemy and Profaneness, act used to persecute and hang those who proclaimed it. Imagine how many other things he could have discovered had he not wasted time on such bullshit.manfriday wrote: Einstein did not believe in a personal God, but Newton...
heh. That guy was EXTREMELY religous, and was about as Christian as they come.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/06 ... index.html
History's a bitch.
Last edited by BingoTheClowno on Mon Jun 25, 2007 11:25 am, edited 2 times in total.
My understanding was that he believed in god in the same way that Hawkins believes in God.. that God is not a personal creative force, but an impersonal energy that was the catalyst for the formation of the universe.. But not really a 'creator' in the sense that it was a willful act by a higher intelligence.manfriday-it's true about einstien and a personal god, but he certainly believed in a creator and his ideas were not that out of line with certain schools of jewish thought.....
No, we do not. We only have theories as to the method.Of course we now know who sets the planets in motion.
It may be bullshit to you, but it was a very big deal in his personal life.Imagine how many other things he could have discovered had he not wasted time on such bullshit.
Imagine all of the things you could accomplish in your life time if you did not waste time making music. Or hating christians. Or engaging in the other activities that are important to you on a personal level, yet may seem like 'bullshit' to others.
Gary is right on both counts.
I can only speak about Hinduism as it's part of my culture but it is made clear that any image of a God including that of Vishnu (the overall single God) is only a form that is comprehensible to human eyes and understanding. The true nature of God and the meaning of existence is quite simply beyond our comprehension. You may think that this is a limiting factor for learning, but this is not the case at all. If there's any way to comprehend infinity, the origin and nature of the universe, etc, then I'd love to hear about it. Until then, I don't think it's possible to dispute anything. The only thing behind this is that there are many more important and pertinent things to worry about in life, such as being nice to others and living ethically. Until this situation has been reached, humanity isn't really in a position to go wasting billions of dollars on scientific research that ultimately does nothing but provide war technology and further means of controlling society.
It is also made clear in Hinduism that there is no set path to follow, and everyone has their own. Any ritual and ceremony comes from a devotion to God and a willingness to worship God, in return for guidance. It's obviously very difficult to prove tangible evidence for God returning his side of the bargain but I think that it's really up to the individual worshipper - it's their time that they are putting into it after all and no-one else's. Why begrudge someone that freedom just because you think it is such a futile thing to do?
Also another interesting thing about the Hindu religion is that its origins lie in meditation and subsequent writings about meditative experiences, although it has also described many avatars/prophets through the years (manifestation of God as man).
I can only speak about Hinduism as it's part of my culture but it is made clear that any image of a God including that of Vishnu (the overall single God) is only a form that is comprehensible to human eyes and understanding. The true nature of God and the meaning of existence is quite simply beyond our comprehension. You may think that this is a limiting factor for learning, but this is not the case at all. If there's any way to comprehend infinity, the origin and nature of the universe, etc, then I'd love to hear about it. Until then, I don't think it's possible to dispute anything. The only thing behind this is that there are many more important and pertinent things to worry about in life, such as being nice to others and living ethically. Until this situation has been reached, humanity isn't really in a position to go wasting billions of dollars on scientific research that ultimately does nothing but provide war technology and further means of controlling society.
It is also made clear in Hinduism that there is no set path to follow, and everyone has their own. Any ritual and ceremony comes from a devotion to God and a willingness to worship God, in return for guidance. It's obviously very difficult to prove tangible evidence for God returning his side of the bargain but I think that it's really up to the individual worshipper - it's their time that they are putting into it after all and no-one else's. Why begrudge someone that freedom just because you think it is such a futile thing to do?
Also another interesting thing about the Hindu religion is that its origins lie in meditation and subsequent writings about meditative experiences, although it has also described many avatars/prophets through the years (manifestation of God as man).
-
BingoTheClowno
- Posts: 1722
- Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Chicago
- Contact:
I don't hate christians.manfriday wrote:
It may be bullshit to you, but it was a very big deal in his personal life.
Imagine all of the things you could accomplish in your life time if you did not waste time making music. Or hating christians. Or engaging in the other activities that are important to you on a personal level, yet may seem like 'bullshit' to others.
Hu? The trinity concept has been an orthodox Christian (protestant or Catholic) teaching since the beginning. While the word "trinity" never shows up in the bible it was pretty well established by the early church that trinitarian concepts are present. Arianism, and Gnosticism (certain sects anyway) are about the only movements I can think of off hand who rejected the notion of the trinity.anybody who considered himself to be protestant in the "abrahamic" tradition is opposed to the pagan idea of trinity. this is a common complaint from early protestant thinkers..deeper understanding of the babylonian mysteries would explain what i'm saying.....
If I remember what I read correctly, dealing with the trinity and cannonizing it once and for all was the primary focus of the Council Of Hippo. Since then no major christian sect protestant or otherwise has raised the issue of the trinity.
One of the biggest problems with Christianity is that you either HAVE to have a concept like the trinity, or you have to be content with the notion that by worshiping Christ you are breaking what could arguably be the most important of God's 10 commandments.yup, it's very unhebrew to believe in the trinity that began with nimrod, semaramis and tammuz(osiris, isis and horus). there have been several attempts at "hebrewizing" christianity, though as you say, the trinity is fairly well accepted canon...
And if you entertain the very distinct possibility that judaism itself came out of Egypt, and Atensim it's not too big of a stretch to see where the concept of the trinity could have come out of sumerian or egyptian religions as well.
But then most of what I have read about nimrod was in Jack Chick tracts about how evil Catholics are, so..
yes, true for the olympian gods. the olympian gods were not the creators of the universe, just powerful forces that ruled aspects of it. the olympian gods were the children of older gods(chronus/saturn). really, it's a matter of semantics, but even in animistic traditions, there is a "great spirit" that is the father of the gods...alfonso wrote:Not true for the gods of the Olympus. Nor for the animistic traditions, a.f.a.i.k.garyb wrote: in the world of hundreds of gods it's always been known(
.
-
BingoTheClowno
- Posts: 1722
- Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Chicago
- Contact:
judahism is not nessessarily hebrew or even israelite. judah is one of several hebrew tribes.
atenism is just another form of sun god worship, no different than appollo, baal, quetzequatl or molech, it is not hebrew. really, atenism is the same religion of ra/osiris, but was a direct political blow to the priesthood of the time. the trinity is NOT hebrew and though hebrews learned many habits from the egyptians, no israelites who followed hebrew traditions ever followed the trinity(except for the ones who made the golden calf of molech). many members of the ruling classes and consequently many of the masses, did follow pagan beliefs as evidenced by the cabala and many parts of the old and new testaments.
zeus is just the roman name for the old sumerian god. nimrod was the one who, according to the encyclopedia brittanica set up state run religion with a god/king who was the sun god incarnate and instituted the idea of "government through random acts of violence". when the us/coalition forces went into iraq and secured the iraqi national museum, they were ecstatic to find the treasures of nimrod still intact(according to the los angeles times). nimrod(also known as gilgamesh), is the founder of civilization as we know it, and all kings from all nations are according to his example. the present day land of iraq is named after the ancient name of uruq. the powers that be try to tell us history as though all these different kingdoms are disconnected from each other. in reality, it's one big continuum.
none of this has anything to do with whether or not there is a creator of the universe, however.....
btw-a funny aside...saturn, the roman god, is the name spelled according to late latin. in early latin, the spelling is satan...
atenism is just another form of sun god worship, no different than appollo, baal, quetzequatl or molech, it is not hebrew. really, atenism is the same religion of ra/osiris, but was a direct political blow to the priesthood of the time. the trinity is NOT hebrew and though hebrews learned many habits from the egyptians, no israelites who followed hebrew traditions ever followed the trinity(except for the ones who made the golden calf of molech). many members of the ruling classes and consequently many of the masses, did follow pagan beliefs as evidenced by the cabala and many parts of the old and new testaments.
zeus is just the roman name for the old sumerian god. nimrod was the one who, according to the encyclopedia brittanica set up state run religion with a god/king who was the sun god incarnate and instituted the idea of "government through random acts of violence". when the us/coalition forces went into iraq and secured the iraqi national museum, they were ecstatic to find the treasures of nimrod still intact(according to the los angeles times). nimrod(also known as gilgamesh), is the founder of civilization as we know it, and all kings from all nations are according to his example. the present day land of iraq is named after the ancient name of uruq. the powers that be try to tell us history as though all these different kingdoms are disconnected from each other. in reality, it's one big continuum.
none of this has anything to do with whether or not there is a creator of the universe, however.....
btw-a funny aside...saturn, the roman god, is the name spelled according to late latin. in early latin, the spelling is satan...
Yes, but Atenism was one of (if not the first) monotheistc religion.atenism is just another form of sun god worship, no different than appollo, baal, quetzequatl or molech, it is not hebrew.
It is believed that the first books of the bible were written by Moses, who came out of Egypt. It is not unreasonable to believe that Moses could have been exposed to Atenism, and he may have brought that with him.
There are plenty of folks who believe that the biblical Christ was just another repackaged 'sun god'.
Which of course makes perfect sense as Christ had not been born yet...no israelites who followed hebrew traditions ever followed the trinity
This is kinda funny.. Another note on satan.. "lucifer" is never mentioned in the bible before it was translated to the latin Vulgate.btw-a funny aside...saturn, the roman god, is the name spelled according to late latin. in early latin, the spelling is satan...
Just in case anyone wanted to know why an ancient evil entity that supposedly existed since before the creation of the earth would have a Roman name.
lucifer is horus, also known as appollo(in the bible appollyon). he is the morning star, the son of the sun god and his consort, the moon goddess. this can be seen on top of the mosque today as a moon and star(or the hammer and sickle of the communist world), the peak of the minaret being the phallus of the sun god, the moon as the devine mother and the star as lucifer/horus.
atenism is not the first monotheistic religion although it's credited as such on the history channel....the pharoh just refused to allow the other forms of the deity to be worshipped. still, the pharoh was in the form of horus, the man-king who has not yet ascended, who is yet to take his heavenly throne as the sun god in his heavenly form. the priestly caste was cut off from normal power channels and rebelled. basically, atenism was a form of the mystery religion like cabala, some forms of catholicism, and gnosticism, all very un-hebrew...
moses did not write the pentatuch, even according to Jews. this is what's told to children. in fact, in the bible, it's mentioned that in the reign of a certain king, these books were rediscovered and there was much gnashing of teeth and repentance. moses was a lawgiver true, but not a book writer..
atenism is not the first monotheistic religion although it's credited as such on the history channel....the pharoh just refused to allow the other forms of the deity to be worshipped. still, the pharoh was in the form of horus, the man-king who has not yet ascended, who is yet to take his heavenly throne as the sun god in his heavenly form. the priestly caste was cut off from normal power channels and rebelled. basically, atenism was a form of the mystery religion like cabala, some forms of catholicism, and gnosticism, all very un-hebrew...
moses did not write the pentatuch, even according to Jews. this is what's told to children. in fact, in the bible, it's mentioned that in the reign of a certain king, these books were rediscovered and there was much gnashing of teeth and repentance.
moses was a lawgiver true, but not a book writer..