Evolution question.

[taijasi]

Ah! Someone does understand.

It's kinda hard to take someone seriously who is guilty of the same crime "he" is accusing others of...

Again, my reply is long-winded as usual ... but I am surprised you are taken in by what Q has attempted to do, Juan. Surely you can see the fallacy in it. Fortunately, I address that very early in my post.

 

[Operacast]

Evolutionary theory is a very important part of an evolving understanding of how this Creator and Guide Works with us -- or vice versa.

T H A N K
Y O U !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Operacast

 

[taijasi]

Reaching for the light?

Oh I like this best, so I'll start here!

Precisely. No, I mean more like ... business as usual, or life as we know it -- but I so like the reminder that this really is "reaching for the light," either more or less consciously.

With the exception of a belief in a Gaia type theory of super organism, in which man is utterly expendable, I see absolutely no evidence anywhere for such a "plan". Where is the evidence?

... until science proves that there is some real evidence for "Diving Planning", it is only philosophy. And, crucially, should be regarded as such.

As for patterns, I'm speaking of things like the Beauty that is to found both in the natural world and through human creations and contributions. I am speaking of the Guidance that has been received by a 1000 sages that this world has recorded, and 10,000 more who have been forgotten or carefully erased. I am thinking of the chambered nautilus, and the Golden Ratio in the stems of plants and within our bodies. I would ask you to consider the Majesty of the Heavens, as we find orbits within orbits within orbits within orbits ... and are left to ponder what amazing coalescence of materials, entities, conditions and timings have been necessary to create life on this planet alone.

This is just a beginning, but the Divine Order I speak of is what I think is being worked out through every Kingdom of Life upon our planet (in the lesser Cosmos, or microcosm, with man as one of the least reflections of the Whole). This Order has to do with how the very Kingdoms interrelate, symbiotically benefit and are supported by each other. It is witnessed by the unique, delicate balance of conditions which you invoke in the Gaia hypothesis ... yet as we are discovering, mankind is not just a scourge on the face of the planet, or a disposable, unnecessary part of what is happening.

Some might think we have done more harm than good here, but this is a premature conclusion, albeit tentatively accurate from at least some points of view. To ignore the future that is before us (assuming that we wisely choose and allow the future to work itself out) is like saying, "I am 36 years old, HERE is what the purpose of life is. I have no more to learn, and nothing more to accomplish. I understand all mysteries, both lesser and Greater -- and I am ready to snap my fingers and lay everything on the line." Though I would usually argue against Pascal's Wager altogether, I invoke it here because I think God really does matter, whether we are theists, atheists or agnostics. Belief changes nothing. Things are as they are ... {and this gets back to the real heart of the discussion I think! How are things? Metaphysics does have its place.}

Science often seems to make the same mistake as religion, by looking at the temporarily-animated cadaver in the mirror and saying, Ecce homo! And by so pronouncing, there is not simply a lie or a misunderstanding, there is also a subtle expression of pride, and this is the door of vanity, of self-delusion, and the root of confusion over our true identity. The way this comes off, you might think I'm suggesting there's some kind of conspiracy ... and the religion of science is being consciously, carefully forced upon us by sinister minds bent on world domination. That notion is perhaps slightly exaggerated.

What I mean by science as a religion is more the kind of role that scientific belief plays in the lives of many Americans, and Westerners. In short, we idolize it, and regard its pronouncements as authoritative. In the East, I think this is also the case, but less so, because there is still a fairly strong tradition and ability to see the world holistically. Science is not set so far apart from spirituality as a valid means of enquiring about the world, and the mind is not so compartmentalized. In the Western world, as part of our quest for Truth, we seem to be willing to sacrifice any real synthesis of what we really already know about life, ourselves, each other and the modus operandi of the Universe (both locally, and at large).

We have a fragmented psyche, individually and collectively, and it is very much in need of healing and better integration before we can make such sweeping statements as "there is no tangible, empirical evidence of a PATTERN, or Order, that guides or steadily and faithfully influences all Life and events here upon our little planet." There is even a distinction, whereby sometimes and in various ways there is Guidance, both direct and seemingly indirect, or behind the scenes ... while at a deeper or perhaps more remote level it might be more accurate to simply speak of influences in the abstract. An equally valid approach would be to acknowledge the Divine Principles (even Principalities and Powers, as some might choose) Whom and which are responsible for these influences, just as a nature walk through a quiet forest may awaken the curiosity of a nest of newborn squirrels, or otherwise affect vast hosts of insects.

We are certainly a mystery to these insects, and probably quite a spectacle for forest animals unaccustomed to human visitation ... but if we could overhear these animals saying to themselves, once we have left, that they probably just imagined us, since after all, there is no real evidence that we were ever here -- and certainly nothing which provides direct and objective contact ... if we could hear this conversation, don't you think we might feel inclined to correct the error? I mean, just for the sake of poor little squirrel nutkin?

Ah, what a squirrel doesn't know may make him happy, right? I would much rather the little fellas enjoy a happy, productive life without having to face the grim fate of the highway ... or become the victims of "sport."

I just say, in this silly little world of my imagination, where animals do talk, and the insects do have some inkling, we have a responsibility to them, an obligation ... even if much of this is easily fulfilled simply by not stepping on them! Imagine how much more wonderful the relationship can be where we seek to cooperate with our tiny little companions, and cultivate them, help them to be of service, even protect them from our human-created disasters, as much as reasonably possible.

Those Who Guide from behind the scenes are every bit as conscientious as the humans in the above silly little scenario, except that tremendous Wisdom, unfailing Love and due measure of Divine Empowerment (to serve the Plan) are Theirs. They use the means at Their disposal to fulfil Their obligation not only to us, but also to each other, and to Greater Kingdoms in the Great Chain of Being.

We ask too much when we demand that this supposed Plan be chiseled into stone. We tried that. Look what happened.

We have books. We have the Internet. We have discussion forums. We have the UN, and governments which have the capacity to cooperate and serve world need, just as we have the the same capacity with respect to smaller groups and each other as individuals.

The point is, the Plan is not some kind of neatly codifiable, static and inflexible dogma to be firmly grasped like a pontifical scepter for the convenient cudgeling of little, ingrate humanity into shape. Religion that does not enshrine the Truth, in whatever form and means of expression, has nothing to share, no way to benefit Humanity ... and so we become reduced to holy wars to determine who will have the right to blindly rule, herding our followers like sheep.

I find I have more sympathy than ever for those who believe that simply by abolishing all of the superstitious nonsense, we may get back to the task of creating a world that's really worth living in, worth sustaining, and worth shaping into a place that other civilizations would be honored to visit ... and wouldn't need to be assigned to for Emergency Duty, and SALVAGE work.

I also have much respect for those who do still try to improve the various religions by reform. And I like to try and count myself within some of these groups, since to take the other approach (abolition), in my opinion, is to let the baby slip out with the bathwater. Those drains are really hard to get your hand down ... nevermind how an entire baby manages to slip through!



Everything else you said, pretty much from the first half of your response, Tao, is precisely how I see things ... or close enough. I tend to meander a bit in my responses, I realize, but thank you for taking the time to address my post, and to present your view in such detail. I speak as an Idealist sometimes, and cannot always claim that I fully live what I believe ... and this is the only thing that makes me feel a little bit guilty (or hypocritical) about what I share. The other 93% of me, however, hasn't the slightest doubt of what I'm sharing ... aside form an occasional question of timing, diplomacy or protocol. I guess it makes me wish sometimes, despite all the benefits, that discussions like we have here at CR could be synchronous, and not asynchronous. Oh well.

Peace,

andrew

 

[Dogbrain]

How fascist can you get!! Government should serve the people, all the people, not dictate to them.

tao

You are the fascist who wants to have jackbooted thugs burst into homes and take children from their families for daring to teach religion. YOU are the one who wants to have government dictate atheism.

 

[Tao_Equus]

You are the fascist who wants to have jackbooted thugs burst into homes and take children from their families for daring to teach religion. YOU are the one who wants to have government dictate atheism.

Rflmao!! You know when I saw your first few posts I actually thought this guy could be interesting. Well you dug a big hole and buried that thought a good 6 foot under. I am that last person here that would advocate that kind or any kind of fascism. You know the type often supported by Greek Orthodoxy that left so many dead and divided in the Greek civil war. Thank you for leaving my mind clear on exactly who and what you are. For making it quite clear early on that talking to you is a total waste of time. Idiot.


tao

 

[wil]

Appears to be a thread where we can see how far we haven't evolved.

Much like attacking Iraq in response to 9/11, we don't realize that it doesn't take much to end it...just takes one to say, no, I won't respond in kind.

Sure the other may continue the barrage, but how could that be my problem?

We cannot determine the events that lead upto any rant and whether it is justified or not. But we are in complete control of our response and responsible for it...or at least should be.

Seek first to understand, then to be understood.

Let's choose to evolve.

 

[Dogbrain]

I am that last person here that would advocate that kind or any kind of fascism.

So, you are NOT the person who advocated that government seize children who are being taught religion by their parents? This is a long thread, so I may have misattributed. Who did advocate that government take children away from families that taught these children religion?

 

[bananabrain]

That one would throw out scientific theory because it changes as we gain more information- for example, to throw out evolutionary theory because researchers have not yet figured out the exact percentage that we're like chimps... this is like throwing out one's religion because everyone has a different idea about what it means. In fact, the latter is far more divergent amongst "experts" than the former. It's like the people who reject Christ because Christians can't figure out one unified view of Him and God, and we don't know exactly where all the text from the Bible came from, or when it was written, or what got left out and why.

Both are throwing the baby out with the bath water.

this is exactly what i think.

There are very few facts in life. Most depends on perspective. Even the color of sky could change if one is color blind, or entirely blind from birth.

this is because of the philosophical concept called "privacy of experience" - but it does not work for ideal mathematical constructs, of course.

perhaps the notion of "reliably transfer" is still an overreach, as Banana implies.

yeah, because of "privacy of experience". for me, music is synaesthetic. so is spirituality. so is text and language. what i can't communicate or reliably transfer is that empirical zone where music, text, language and spirituality overlap (POMAs?) suffice it to say that for me, they came together in an *artistic* way. in the way that i could tell a given musical arrangement "works", i could tell that a particular spiritual balance based around dynamic equilibria "works". i can correlate this with how other people have done similar things using the frameworks of the jewish (and other) mystical tradition. i don't *know* if evolution has got the big picture essentially correct or not, but it is the best theory we have at present that fits the evidence available.

So we share genes with chimps...we also share genes with Charles Manson, the common house mouse, the american cockroach, bananas and yeast. All flora and fauna share genetic material...to me that is such an overwhelming realization.

the point is that, whether dawkins realises this or not, it works on so many levels, regardless of whether DNA is in the picture. i don't claim to be a physicist, but at the molecular and atomic levels we don't just share genes, we share atoms and molecules with not just all living things, but all matter. the issue probably becomes controversial at the point at which the spritual notion of "providence" becomes conflated with the scientific and philosophical notion of "causality". that is why free-will is so crucial.

My objection was to defining speciation by cosmetics...you know, color of the skin, size of the nose, amount of intelligence kind of thing? Which *is* one of the primary uses of the term "species," and it was this specifically that led to eugenics and german atrocities during wwII.

i'm sorry, that really wasn't clear. however, by disturbingly similar logic, my objection to some religious behaviour is in defining precisely what is meant by "the Divine Will" - some people, obviously, thinking it means blowing other people up and others thinking it means treating people like non-people. and so on and so forth.

What is science but educated speculation?

the thing is, juan, what is religion but educated speculation about what constitutes the "Divine Will"?

I don't mind if creationism is taught in religion classes, I just don't want it taught as science on the taxpayers dime. I certainly don't mind if Comparative Religion, or World Religions, or Western (eastern, northern southern...) Religion is taught as an elective provided there is a budget for that and it doesn't take resources away from core liberal arts. I'm not so naive that I don't know what religionists actually want, though. They want the government, if not actively indoctrinating our kids, at least introducing them to religion oriented foundational mythology. That way religion always sets the flavor of nationalism.

that's what bothers me, too.

btw, operacast: i hear you, mate, i think i have something written down somewhere already, i'll try and dig it out.

if Huston Smith's The World's Religions: Our Great Wisdom Traditions were required reading for every middle schooler, our children would immediately be tremendously better equipped to deal with just such difficult questions

hmmm. from what i've heard about huston smith, i'm not sure that's entirely true. but i suppose i should read him before i start shooting my mouth off...

Only now, in the past few decades of astronomical observation and progress in the various branches of physics, are some of our "cutting edge" discoveries finally catching up with what the ancients knew tens (if not possibly hundred) of thousands of years ago.

yes, if only there was non-astral evidence of this!

I could go with this for kids over 12 so long as it was 100% unbiased and revealed the many wrongs religion can be held accountable for. I do not think children incapable of thinking deeply far younger, quite the opposite, but as religion throws up such contentious questions that have such wide ramifications a child ought to be able to do a bit of independent learning before approaching such complexity.

really? one of the things i thought was particularly good about my own early religious education was how critical it was of religious short-circuits; kids are never too young to be taught how to treat others. what is more likely to happen is that when they reach the age of 12-13, the heuristic of "treat other people nicely and with respect" will start rubbing up against the "G!D Wants this" message and go into creative tension. it is when the two come into conflict that the wheels come off.

Religions like Buddhism that are heavy on the introversion then often attach a cartload of baggage, ( obligatory text and ritual), and whilst they can in some cases aid a person to as full a perception of their reality as any of us achieves, they are still largely baggage for the majority of seekers.

this is a criticism of organised religion that is a real old chestnut, tao - the way round it is by application of systemic thinking and, you guessed it, dynamic equilibrium.

dogbrain: i think tao has probably conceded that he's not really going to take anyone's kids. let's not get into another fight.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[Only Special To God]

Appears to be a thread where we can see how far we haven't evolved.

Much like attacking Iraq in response to 9/11, we don't realize that it doesn't take much to end it...just takes one to say, no, I won't respond in kind.

Sure the other may continue the barrage, but how could that be my problem?

We cannot determine the events that lead upto any rant and whether it is justified or not. But we are in complete control of our response and responsible for it...or at least should be.

Seek first to understand, then to be understood.

Let's choose to evolve.

*standing and applauding Wil*

Very good Wil, thank you so much as things are starting to get a little out of hand.

And I am standing by you to say that I admire you for stating what I am feeling, as you have found the words for me! Good job Wil!

God Bless,
Ian

 

[Quahom1]

I see. Trade a few words around, sure, but I don't quite think you've accomplished what you were after...

Ah, but I did.

 

[Quahom1]

Appears to be a thread where we can see how far we haven't evolved.

Much like attacking Iraq in response to 9/11, we don't realize that it doesn't take much to end it...just takes one to say, no, I won't respond in kind.

Sure the other may continue the barrage, but how could that be my problem?

We cannot determine the events that lead upto any rant and whether it is justified or not. But we are in complete control of our response and responsible for it...or at least should be.

Seek first to understand, then to be understood.

Let's choose to evolve.

What does this have to do with evolution?

 

[Tao_Equus]

*standing and applauding Wil*

Very good Wil, thank you so much as things are starting to get a little out of hand.

And I am standing by you to say that I admire you for stating what I am feeling, as you have found the words for me! Good job Wil!

God Bless,
Ian

What can I say? I appreciate Wil's sentiments too? Well I do, but I have no Christian notion of turning the other cheek. And whilst it may seem I'm more "eye for eye" that is not the whole truth either. I would rather not descend into some vitriolic tennis match but I cannot sit idly by and let one persons quest to misrepresent me turn into such a personalised attack on me. That someone cannot even, by his own statement, be bothered to read through a thread then conclude that I am a fascist from the emotional insecurities of someone who desires to misquote me is more than I am willing to accept here. I am willing to be judged here by anyone, on what I do say, but NOT on what others try to conclude "I might of said" based on their own weak logic requiring the diversion of slur.

In all my intercourse with people here over 5 years I have never yet encountered this situation. I have never felt so estranged from this site. The Juantoo whom I have worked hard with on previous threads to reach some mutual understanding has gone. In his stead an edifice of inflexibility, trivial nitpicking and indignation that point to me of some personal struggle turned on me. Well I hope it has been of some use to you. If it helps you resolve it in a way that makes people happy then it was worth it. But I hope you have dignity and vision to see what you have done. And realise that though my respect for you is undiminished, my trust in you is sorely wounded.

This thread is the first time in all my time here that I have actually felt assaulted. Yet so soon it spread through the ranks of the righteous. If ever I required proof of why religious belief is so volatile and untrustworthy I find it here. Thank you for demonstrating my point.

The pole on the old limbo stick of tolerance has been considerably lowered by this thread. On other threads my all out effort to produce honest dialogue on Islam seems to be doing the same thing. Everywhere people are determined to reinterpret my motives as being malign. As though I am the one filled with hate. As though my modest effort at presenting an alternative to the endless apologists is symptomatic of only one possibility. Well I object to that. You are not required to hate to believe in social evolution. You are not required to adopt dogmas of eugenics and supremacy to believe that man has, will and should move in a forward direction.

There is one reason and one reason alone that I am so passionate in my views. That reason is that I am blessed with Children. I want to see a better world for them. I want to be part of the movement that is not fixated with Armageddon and the afterlife but that strives to enhance our life here on Earth. One that strives to give our children's children a world as complex and diverse and as beautiful as the one we know today. That I see religions as way too open to individual self-deceit and even greater institutionalised deceit is a valid point of view. That I feel mankind should strive for truths that transcend religious importance, and our historical addiction to them by letting our children be children and not mind-wiping them from the start.

Where do you think I found such a view? Starbucks? McDonalds? Walmart?? No. Like another long time poster here that recently PM'd me said "I don't see things quite the same way as before. My perspective has changed significantly in the last two years.". Like him I arrived here with a head full of very different thoughts to those I attempt to articulate now. In fact I arrived here trying to prove to myself that God was something like Gaia theory's soul. But as I got more involved here I read the hocus pocus, mumbo jumbo superfluities that were so blatantly the contrivances of men peddled as divinely revealed truths. (whether vacuously through a dilute spirituality or hammered into stark relief in fundamentalist obsidian). I did not come here looking to reject God, more I came here and I was forced to. I cannot be sure there is no God, and I have never written off that remote possibility, but I am absolutely sure there is no kind of God that gives one hoot about what we think about. And I got that certitude here at CR. And from some of the posts I have read several of the theists here should be praying 9 times a day that I am right.

I do not want it thought that I feel completely isolated here. Many have chimed in with their own inspirational and enlightening posts that not only made me think but forced me to challenge my perceptions. To those and those that are more often in opposition to me, I owe thanks and I see that thanks as being best delivered as continuing to be true to myself and to you. I am not backing down on my current direction. I will continue to put forward my ideas to this "gathering hut of village elders" from across the globe because I believe I genuinely strive for the bigger truths. I am not selfish, now and always my concern is mankind as a whole and how we face the challenges of the future. Some may think they will find it with their heads stuck in some medieval dogma but I just cannot see that happening. We live in a new age where we have seen every conceivable doctrine enacted and corrupted. What we need is a completely new paradigm built on the honest reappraisal of our history. We need a ruthless spring clean to make room for the fact that we are now truly a global village that cannot prosper if we are all fighting over irrelevancies. Leaving our children alone would be the quickest route to this. Letting our children play is key to this. How much do we love life? How much do we love our children?


tao

 

[Only Special To God]

What can I say? I appreciate Wil's sentiments too? Well I do, but I have no Christian notion of turning the other cheek. And whilst it may seem I'm more "eye for eye" that is not the whole truth either. I would rather not descend into some vitriolic tennis match but I cannot sit idly by and let one persons quest to misrepresent me turn into such a personalised attack on me. That someone cannot even, by his own statement, be bothered to read through a thread then conclude that I am a fascist from the emotional insecurities of someone who desires to misquote me is more than I am willing to accept here. I am willing to be judged here by anyone, on what I do say, but NOT on what others try to conclude "I might of said" based on their own weak logic requiring the diversion of slur.

In all my intercourse with people here over 5 years I have never yet encountered this situation. I have never felt so estranged from this site. The Juantoo whom I have worked hard with on previous threads to reach some mutual understanding has gone. In his stead an edifice of inflexibility, trivial nitpicking and indignation that point to me of some personal struggle turned on me. Well I hope it has been of some use to you. If it helps you resolve it in a way that makes people happy then it was worth it. But I hope you have dignity and vision to see what you have done. And realise that though my respect for you is undiminished, my trust in you is sorely wounded.

This thread is the first time in all my time here that I have actually felt assaulted. Yet so soon it spread through the ranks of the righteous. If ever I required proof of why religious belief is so volatile and untrustworthy I find it here. Thank you for demonstrating my point.

The pole on the old limbo stick of tolerance has been considerably lowered by this thread. On other threads my all out effort to produce honest dialogue on Islam seems to be doing the same thing. Everywhere people are determined to reinterpret my motives as being malign. As though I am the one filled with hate. As though my modest effort at presenting an alternative to the endless apologists is symptomatic of only one possibility. Well I object to that. You are not required to hate to believe in social evolution. You are not required to adopt dogmas of eugenics and supremacy to believe that man has, will and should move in a forward direction.

There is one reason and one reason alone that I am so passionate in my views. That reason is that I am blessed with Children. I want to see a better world for them. I want to be part of the movement that is not fixated with Armageddon and the afterlife but that strives to enhance our life here on Earth. One that strives to give our children's children a world as complex and diverse and as beautiful as the one we know today. That I see religions as way too open to individual self-deceit and even greater institutionalised deceit is a valid point of view. That I feel mankind should strive for truths that transcend religious importance, and our historical addiction to them by letting our children be children and not mind-wiping them from the start.

Where do you think I found such a view? Starbucks? McDonalds? Walmart?? No. Like another long time poster here that recently PM'd me said "I don't see things quite the same way as before. My perspective has changed significantly in the last two years.". Like him I arrived here with a head full of very different thoughts to those I attempt to articulate now. In fact I arrived here trying to prove to myself that God was something like Gaia theory's soul. But as I got more involved here I read the hocus pocus, mumbo jumbo superfluities that were so blatantly the contrivances of men peddled as divinely revealed truths. (whether vacuously through a dilute spirituality or hammered into stark relief in fundamentalist obsidian). I did not come here looking to reject God, more I came here and I was forced to. I cannot be sure there is no God, and I have never written off that remote possibility, but I am absolutely sure there is no kind of God that gives one hoot about what we think about. And I got that certitude here at CR. And from some of the posts I have read several of the theists here should be praying 9 times a day that I am right.

I do not want it thought that I feel completely isolated here. Many have chimed in with their own inspirational and enlightening posts that not only made me think but forced me to challenge my perceptions. To those and those that are more often in opposition to me, I owe thanks and I see that thanks as being best delivered as continuing to be true to myself and to you. I am not backing down on my current direction. I will continue to put forward my ideas to this "gathering hut of village elders" from across the globe because I believe I genuinely strive for the bigger truths. I am not selfish, now and always my concern is mankind as a whole and how we face the challenges of the future. Some may think they will find it with their heads stuck in some medieval dogma but I just cannot see that happening. We live in a new age where we have seen every conceivable doctrine enacted and corrupted. What we need is a completely new paradigm built on the honest reappraisal of our history. We need a ruthless spring clean to make room for the fact that we are now truly a global village that cannot prosper if we are all fighting over irrelevancies. Leaving our children alone would be the quickest route to this. Letting our children play is key to this. How much do we love life? How much do we love our children?


tao

Hello Tao,

The only reason that I wrote that about applauding Wil, is because of the tone of the words that were being used. It was heated and the dialogs were getting angrier and angrier. This is a forum, yes? I do know and understand that this is were we come to discuss and debate. Dude! This was way past debate, if the two of you were in the same room, someone would have called the police as there would have been a fist fight. Is that right?

We are talking about our beliefs, what we feel in our hearts, what is in our minds, and what knowledge that we have that we can share with other who do not know. I am not attacking anyone. I am talking to you as I want to understand. But, you have to also remember that if you are constantly dismissing someones culture, beliefs and feelings, then it does come back around. Believe me, I have seen it, and if I did not see then I heard about it.

I do not know what religion you believe in. Does it really matter? I feel that you are trying to find God, but you are trying too hard. To me you are the type of person who believes with his mind, but not his heart and you know it.
So, you question anything and everything, because you want to believe, but you can't because your mind is set, your eyes are waiting to see something, anything that will help you to believe.

Tao, with your mind being set in the mode that it is your heart will not open to let God in. There is not set criteria to make God come into your heart. That is all up to you Tao, you are the one who is holding the key to the lock on your heart, and you are the only one who can unlock it.

In regards to children. I like you think that children should be children, but I do believe in them attending Church with their family. Church is a special place, it is where people who gather (like us in this forum) together to pray, sing, laugh, listen, cry, help each other and discuss life. Children should be subjected to that. I do understand that there are other various degrees of what parents subject their children to in the name of God is so horrible, but that is another topic for another day.

I am sorry that you are angry......I rooted for Wil about speaking up about how heated the conversation was. It was even upsetting me, and I am reading it!

God Bless you Tao, I will put you in my prayers asking God to help you to find a way to let him into your heart.

Ian

 

[Penguin]

I have learnt a lot starting this thread. Very interesting indeed

 

[Tao_Equus]

Besides, most kids are gonna figure it out anyway, eventually. Haven't we? Most people just don't give a $hit about any of this. Church is a social club to chase next saturday night's date, religion is a myth they stop believing in like Santa Claus, the easter bunny and the tooth fairy. But its all fun to lead the kids on while they're still gullible. I'm being a little sarcastic here...


.

If you dont mind I backtrack a bit to say something on the above.

If I get this right you are saying church is only a social club for non-believers and questioners that none the less will brainwash their "gullible" kids. Just how sarcastic were you being?

I watched a program the other night on some small town that was once a mining town in the heart or Yorkshire. The pits closed relatively recently, by grace of Thatcher's drive to smash the Unions. But within these communities survive strong social clubs that include every demographic of the community. There are religious people there but the clubs are beacons of secular inclusion that are independent of religion.

My point is that if you are trying to say that you only want church to exist because you want a social club where you can find Saturday nights date in peace while the children are quietly mind-wiped in the backroom then what a sorry self-serving excuse for a religion you have. And all the bad points, the intolerance, war, all the refugees and victims that the religions daily add to their numbers are all justified to yourself because you want a social life!! But hey, throw $10 on the church plate for the hungry poor and your conscience is clear.

It is possible to have a community outside of religious doctrine. It is not a requirement to build a Church hall, a community hall serves better. It serves everyone.


OSTG,

I am sorry that you are angry......I rooted for Wil about speaking up about how heated the conversation was. It was even upsetting me, and I am reading it!

God Bless you Tao, I will put you in my prayers asking God to help you to find a way to let him into your heart.

Sometimes we have a right to be angry. Sometimes anger is the only honest response. it is what you do with that anger that really matters.

Whilst I appreciate and thank you for your sentiments you are reading my stage on life's journey very wrong. Some of us have their heads firmly buried in the past. Some live only for the present. And some have their thoughts dwelling in the future. I do not care about finding or rejecting God. I care about our practical realities as we face an increasingly uncertain future. I want to see mankind throw off the yoke of irrational superstition that ties him into a cyclic repetition of hatred. The Abrahamic religions are by historical analysis central to the politics of greed throughout their range. If we continue to make them central to the politics of the future then that cycle will continue. I think the modern human should demand more of her/himself than the elastoplast of these patriarchal and interfering Gods that patently do not exist. We should wake up to the fact that we and we alone are the masters of our destiny.


tao

 

[taijasi]

Ah, but I did.

No, Q, your effort is to suggest that we may simply change shoes and be equally correct, or that the other viewpoint is equally accurate. Neither of these is the case.

yes, if only there was non-astral evidence of this!

Last time I checked, the Great Pyramid, the Aztec and Mayan Pyramids, Chichen Itza, Stonehenge, Machhu Pichhu (sp?), and dozens of other observatories ... weren't limited to the astral plane. Gee, I thought they went ahead and concretized (sic) those Temples. Did my eyes deceive me?

Or was there no booming voice to tell me what to believe. Looking for something written in STONE to help you along? Try the Egyptian Denderah Zodiac. Want to date all this stuff? Go for it.

Want to tell me we were monkeys swinging from trees 10,000 years ago? Sure man. 100,000 years ago? Okay, whatever. And those monkeys built precisely these pyramids, observatories and Temples more than 200,000 years ago ... if not 400,000 or even earlier in some cases.

I'm sorry you can't see what is right in front of you. I suggest you VISIT some of these locations, before writing them off as simply the fortunate handiwork of primitives. Before your holy scriptures were anyone's vaguest idea ... the PRECISION of the Egyptian pyramids was already a marvel of the OLD WORLD.

THINK, man, THINK. No one can deny you that. Nor will you deny me that right. Please redirect mind ray. I have no need for being told that your sublime wisdom is somehow superior to mine. I know that both proceed from the same Source. Either you know this too, or you are behind the game, behind the times, draggin' the line.

What does it take?

Poke fun, jest, seek to discredit ... ANYTHING when we do not agree. And you will DENY that these other cultures and religions existed tens of thousands of years ago? Then if not, or if you admit they existed even 4 or 5 thousands years BC, what have you to say to that? What have you to say of the alignment of the stars with the shafts in the Great Pyramid of Giza?

If you would bother to study the Precession of the Equinoxes, you would knot that it is scientific FACT that we are speaking of a cycle in excess of 25,000 years. Furthermore, you would know that it can only be three cycles ago, at the very earliest during which the aformentioned alignments can properly be possible -- though we have reason to believe it could be many cycles earlier.

I am not surprised. Just disappointed. Do some reading. Look past the conventions of orthodoxy. This earth is not the center of the universe. Nor is any, one religion. Soon, those who proclaim to the contrary will be no more than laughing stock. Many will simply lower their head, and sigh ... but it is probably always best to smile, regardless.

There are the holdouts, and there always will be. Won't there.

 

[bananabrain]

oh, deary me, here we go again, andrew, just when we were starting to get somewhere you have to insist that everything simply confirms that you were right all along, everyone's got a closed mind except you, the evidence is all there right in front of our eyes, it's all 10000000000000 years old and all the religions are dead and we just blindly follow stone tablets and equinoxes and cycles and lemurians and blah blah blah blether yada yada yaawwwwwwwnnnnnnnzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[Tao_Equus]

oh, deary me, here we go again, andrew, just when we were starting to get somewhere you have to insist that everything simply confirms that you were right all along, everyone's got a closed mind except you, the evidence is all there right in front of our eyes, it's all 10000000000000 years old and all the religions are dead and we just blindly follow stone tablets and equinoxes and cycles and lemurians and blah blah blah blether yada yada yaawwwwwwwnnnnnnnzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

b'shalom

bananabrain

I am not in Andrews "camp" (not that I am calling you "camp" Andrew!), but BB given the archaeological evidence, do you not think that "technological rationalising and advanced" thinking has been around far longer than the average history lesson gives credit? And far longer than the Abrahamic tradition? I find it naive, given the evidence, to think our Victorian history lessons are truly representative.


tao

 

[juantoo3]

I like passion. I think people write their best stuff when they are animated to passion. And sometimes their worst, which can be equally enlightening as many of my own post amply illustrate.

Be careful what you pray for...you might get it.

I have written chance comments in the past in other threads that have exploded in my face, to my complete amazement as to why? And there are other times I have challenged obnoxious comments by others and ended up in a tussle. So this is hardly a unique situation for me.

I suppose I could have left your comments go unchallenged, like I have so many times before. After awhile though, it gets old, being told I am an uneducated idiot who cannot reason for himself.

You promote wrong impressions about me, what then is wrong with me returning the favor? You misconstrue what I write, seeing what you want to see and ignoring the balance...and I am wrong to do the same for you? You claim I want to silence your opinion in an attempt to silence my opinion.

I could go back through our entire exchange and clarify where you have imposed your preferred perceptions instead of reading and comprehending what I actually wrote, but that gets old too.

Religion isn't your thing...I get it. No problem. I've never called you a name, belittled your character or thought any the less of you for it. I do have problems with you belittling my character directly or by association for my adherence to my religion.

BTW, demonstrating the faults inherent in evolutionary theory doesn't mean I am against or disbelieve in the theory, it means I am thoughtful enough to see there *are* limitations.

You wanted a passionate conversation...I dare say I think you got a bit more than you bargained for.

I'd still buy you a pint of your favorite brew and call you my friend.

 

[taijasi]

oh, deary me ... {crapola}

I believe there is an `ignore' feature somewhere here at CR. I am off this very instant to locate it!

Since, however, for some ungodly reason (sic) bb seeems to have moderator status, I will need some kind of intervention to accomplish my goal. Can any one tell me how to IGNORE a member, save when that person is posting in moderator capacity?

I really would be most appreciative, and it would help immensely!

Thank you.