5 ms·

Which god? Faith just makes you live a life without evidence. Seems like a poor choice to me. And with all of the negative associates of being religious seems t

Which god? Faith just makes you live a life without evidence. Seems like a poor choice to me. And with all of the negative associates of being religious seems to me you're blowing the one absolutely confirmed life for some fairy tale.

kls 6y ago
Living life without evidence is one way to look at it, another way to look at it is living to a moral code that thousands of years of humanity has agreed provides a happy life. If you look at most of the world religions they pretty much agree on what those are: Abrahamic religions call them out as Pride, Envy, Gluttony, Lust (note on this, it is all consuming desire it is not just sex but sex is a powerful vector for unhealthy lust. As an example one can lust after social acceptance), Anger, Greed and Sloth. Buddhism calls the three fires out as ignorance (Greed, Sloth), attachment (Envy, Lust, Gluttony), and aversion (Pride, Anger). I don't see it as a poor choice to live to those defined moral codes. The negative association with being religious is due to many people letting other people think for them now days. If one take the actions and words of a person over studying for oneself what the text say then that is exactly what one is doing. If one ascribes negative connotations to the underpinnings, without knowledge of whether those that claim knowledge yet may be ignorant of what the text says, then one acts in the same ignorance. Most of the religious texts, espouse universal love, non-judgment (by other people) and harmony. Most of the people that claim they understand them, have never event read the texts from end to end, much less any of the competing religions text to compare and contrasting one against the other. For example let's take Abrahamic religions because they are fun to pick on, most Muslims, Jews and Christians (especially Christians) could not even tell you what Psalm 137:9 is, much less explain why someone would be happy to dash child against the rocks. Well deeper understanding would be that this is what the Israelites wanted, revenge for their dead children that were bludgeoned to death. But what happened was not revenge, but rather judgment and that is the lesson being conveyed, our hearts will seek revenge but what puts things in balance is not revenge but judgment. Point being, I have been hard pressed to find a single laymen from any of the 3 Abrahamic branches, that know the verse much less that could explain it (honestly Muslims where the most knowledgeable on the subject). Further most Christians don't even realize that Jesus was a devout pacifist, cavorted with mainly "sinners" and routinely spoke out about the pious. As a side note Jeremiah 32:35 is another fun one. Why did it not enter his mind? Is he not all knowing and omnipotent? While it may be a fairy tail, by all accounts Jesus and Buddha were pretty awesome dudes, I want to be like them, even if it's just for the time I am here.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
  > I don't see it as a poor choice to live to those defined moral codes. As I'm sure you are aware, most atheists follow similar moral beliefs and, as far as I'm aware, there's little evidence that being religious helps you adhere to these rules any better.
  - kls 6y ago
    Yes please don't read that as an implication that by default that 1) All religious people are moral 2) all non-religious are not. My point was more of the fact of the outlook the two views seem to produce. The reality is Atheism did not produce an MLK or a Ghandi, rather it has produced Nihilism and Nietzsche from its fruits. There is nothing wrong with that, without ying there cannot be yang. I was just highlighting (in my other post) that as observers we can actually choose how we see reality. Some of that choice may appear delusional, or may in fact be delusional, but does not make it any less real to the observer. Take for example the monks that claim enlightenment, they believe suffering is an illusion and that basically you just have to not believe in suffering to not suffer. This could be deluded thinking and sounds crazy on the surface, until you see one of them trance and ignore the most extreme pain. Their delusion manifests itself into reality just by their will. There is similar delusional thinking that comes from Atheistic points of view and they have had real world manifestations. I am hesitant to name some of them due to the fact that it will look like I am claiming them atheism is not a moral choice. Which is not the intent.
    - SpikeDad 6y ago
      Please do. What delusional thinking do atheists engage in? To be an atheist one only needs to not be convinced god(s) exist? Are you saying we are deluded into thinking that the existence of gods has been proven? Please expand on this?
      - kls 6y ago
        Francis Galton
- 6y ago

kls 6y ago

Living life without evidence is one way to look at it, another way to look at it is living to a moral code that thousands of years of humanity has agreed provides a happy life. If you look at most of the world religions they pretty much agree on what those are: Abrahamic religions call them out as Pride, Envy, Gluttony, Lust (note on this, it is all consuming desire it is not just sex but sex is a powerful vector for unhealthy lust. As an example one can lust after social acceptance), Anger, Greed and Sloth. Buddhism calls the three fires out as ignorance (Greed, Sloth), attachment (Envy, Lust, Gluttony), and aversion (Pride, Anger). I don't see it as a poor choice to live to those defined moral codes. The negative association with being religious is due to many people letting other people think for them now days. If one take the actions and words of a person over studying for oneself what the text say then that is exactly what one is doing. If one ascribes negative connotations to the underpinnings, without knowledge of whether those that claim knowledge yet may be ignorant of what the text says, then one acts in the same ignorance. Most of the religious texts, espouse universal love, non-judgment (by other people) and harmony. Most of the people that claim they understand them, have never event read the texts from end to end, much less any of the competing religions text to compare and contrasting one against the other. For example let's take Abrahamic religions because they are fun to pick on, most Muslims, Jews and Christians (especially Christians) could not even tell you what Psalm 137:9 is, much less explain why someone would be happy to dash child against the rocks. Well deeper understanding would be that this is what the Israelites wanted, revenge for their dead children that were bludgeoned to death. But what happened was not revenge, but rather judgment and that is the lesson being conveyed, our hearts will seek revenge but what puts things in balance is not revenge but judgment. Point being, I have been hard pressed to find a single laymen from any of the 3 Abrahamic branches, that know the verse much less that could explain it (honestly Muslims where the most knowledgeable on the subject). Further most Christians don't even realize that Jesus was a devout pacifist, cavorted with mainly "sinners" and routinely spoke out about the pious. As a side note Jeremiah 32:35 is another fun one. Why did it not enter his mind? Is he not all knowing and omnipotent? While it may be a fairy tail, by all accounts Jesus and Buddha were pretty awesome dudes, I want to be like them, even if it's just for the time I am here.

asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
> I don't see it as a poor choice to live to those defined moral codes. As I'm sure you are aware, most atheists follow similar moral beliefs and, as far as I'm aware, there's little evidence that being religious helps you adhere to these rules any better.
- kls 6y ago
  Yes please don't read that as an implication that by default that 1) All religious people are moral 2) all non-religious are not. My point was more of the fact of the outlook the two views seem to produce. The reality is Atheism did not produce an MLK or a Ghandi, rather it has produced Nihilism and Nietzsche from its fruits. There is nothing wrong with that, without ying there cannot be yang. I was just highlighting (in my other post) that as observers we can actually choose how we see reality. Some of that choice may appear delusional, or may in fact be delusional, but does not make it any less real to the observer. Take for example the monks that claim enlightenment, they believe suffering is an illusion and that basically you just have to not believe in suffering to not suffer. This could be deluded thinking and sounds crazy on the surface, until you see one of them trance and ignore the most extreme pain. Their delusion manifests itself into reality just by their will. There is similar delusional thinking that comes from Atheistic points of view and they have had real world manifestations. I am hesitant to name some of them due to the fact that it will look like I am claiming them atheism is not a moral choice. Which is not the intent.
  - SpikeDad 6y ago
    Please do. What delusional thinking do atheists engage in? To be an atheist one only needs to not be convinced god(s) exist? Are you saying we are deluded into thinking that the existence of gods has been proven? Please expand on this?
    - kls 6y ago
      Francis Galton
6y ago