I thought I answered this question already; maybe it was in politics.
I must say, I have posted on the "invisible man" theory many times, but yet again, someone comes up with a different angle. And, damn, if all the "I love the invisible man","God is love", people just come POURING out of the woodwork.
There is no God. Get over it. Science is not perfect, it is based in REALITY; something one cannot say of God.
Just for kicks how about a rational refutation of this:
There are some people that believe, God is or could be, Love. If this is so then God's relationship with human beings is that of an ALL ENCOMPASSING love. As such those who have FAITH that God exists, that they love God and God loves them must question their relationship with God. In considering the realationship (with God) the person in question must ask ones self "is this a positive relationship; is this relationship harmful to me?".
The nature of RELIGION assures us that this is wrong, one must not question the relationship with God, one must have faith that God, and as an extension, his dogma, is infallable. To this end, religion, while purporting to be heralding the LOVE of GOD, brings about HATE. Hate of other religions, those who don't believe as "THEY" do and those who do not live as the particular dogma dictates. You have to look no further than your local law library to see how religion encompasses the very opposite of what God is purported to be. Religion's don't exist in love, they exist in HATE and conflict. Religion's, the world over, dictate the way a peson should live in obeisance of a certain God. There is no room for compromise, not when you are talking about religion; it's live "our" (whoever happens to be in power at the time) way or die.
This brings me to the next argument; RELIGION vs. GOD.
Invariably, when one discusses God or religion, the same arguments present themselves ad nauseum. One being, that God exists, the other being that god aka "the invisible man" does not exist. The second argument that surrounds the God vs. religion debate is which religion is praying to the RIGHT God? And, third, but MOST IMPORTANT, is the INDIVIDUAL relationship with God.
The mere act of believing or not is simplistic in nature but complex in makeing the decision to believe in God or not. Does God exist? Can I find any evidence of this being? Does the lack of evidence of existance, in itself, lend to the supposition that God does NOT exist? Or, does the lack of evidence of exitance lend itself to the supposition that God DOES exist? I can't answer this, not for anyone else anyway, the answer that FAITH is the answer is ludicrous. I have FAITH that the sun will rise tommorow, my faith is based on experience and science. but I am rational enough to know that a nuclear attack will make it irrelevant. Those who believe in God have no choice but to base their belief in experience, science cannot help them here. Those who do not believe in God have no choice but to base their belief in experience; science can't help them either. "My mother died; it was God's will" "My mother died; her heart stopped".
I'll skip the second argument; which religion is worshipping the correct God. It doesn't lend itself to this particular question of "Love vs. Hate and Religion vs. God". Besides, it would take me a couple of months to properly encompass that particular argument. I do, however , wish to address my arguments to the third proposition; "the individual's relationship with God".
It is this personal relationship with God that brings us to the lack of understanding between those that don't worship a God vs. those that do worship a God. What rational, faith, can exist in the worship of a being that cannot be counted on to engage us in a rational manner nor to engage us in a loving manner? Consider this, my child dies, it hurts, I ask God why, he dosen't answer. My friends and pastor tell me that it is God's will, that he, indeed, has a plan and my loss and pain is part of that plan. They go on to tell me that God still loves me, even though he allowed my most precious of possesions to die; my child, a part of me. They tell me that God may be testing my faith, that I should still continue to trust in God and to continue to have FAITH in his plan for me. Now, if I told a woman , in an abusive relationship, that her husband still loved her, that he had a plan, that he was beating the hell out of her and causing her pain just to test her love for him most of you would call me an idiot; and rightly so. The nature of RELIGION is that it trys to REMOVE the rational mind from the human being and force that person to continue in a very unpleasant and destructive relationship.
The nature of religion is that it holds God to standards we, as rational beings, would LOUDLY and FORCFULLY REJECT. Who, by a show of hands, would allow that some entity, perporting to love us would cause us pain and then have the unmitigated gall to tell us that we should just keep haveing FAITH?
Why should those that have FAITH, NOT, question their relationship with God? Will he get mad? Will he kill us? There is ONE thing and, one thing only, that religious FAITH has that no other rational relationship can ever give us; a means to live forever in happiness. It is this so-called promise that allows religion's to twist and corrupt the experience of believing in ANY GOD into just a way to control others.
Religion is not an acceptable, rational, positive relationship. Religion, extreme or otherwise, is a simple matter of using the spiritual nature of man to excise the rational, MORAL, nature of man. Speaking in VERY general terms, christians loath voodoo and witchcraft. They (christians) do their best to debunk other religious practices as evil, wrong, devil inspired (why do we need a devil?) or UNENLIGHTENED. Other religions use their dogma to control women; to keep them in their place or to use them as the scape goat of everything that goes wrong. Other religions use their religious dogma to control the lives of their parishioners or their clergy.
I debunk ALL religions as UNENLIGHTENED, I make no distinctions between any religion in this manner. All religions seek to CONTROL rational beings by the threat of everlasting terror and pain, religions use the "promise" of life everlasting to try to tear the rational mind from the human being. I have no beef with God, as such, I simply believe, and history proves me out, that religion is the baliwick of man and has little or nothing to do with a personal relationship with the God or Goddess that many would happily believe in, if not for the fear that they would involve themselves with some irrational religious doctorine.
I cannot prove that God exists and I cannot prove that God does not exist. But, I CAN prove, or at least bring into serious question, that God ever existed in a religious sense. Consider: the christian religion, old testament, God was a ferocious, vengeful God, he allowed NO sin to go unpunished (just ask the jews); then, from on "high" there was born a son of God and God allowed his son to be tortured and killed so that people might have a method of forgivness, so that even the most vile of sinners may have access to the "everlasting life in heaven". Is it only me that sees this as an underlying control mechanism; as a way to increase the pool of believers? Am I the only one that sees that RELIGION, at this period of world history, needed to purport some type of forgivness mechanism to continue to get people to worship a God, long since, considered,at the least, to be harsh and unforgiving?
The nature of man suggests that we are born moral beings, with the ability to think and act in a rational manner. We are capable of abstract thought, thus, leading us to also be spirtual beings. To consider the "WHY" "WHERE" and "HOW" of our existance. To ask these questions leads us to try to find a rational answer to them. The belief of a supreme being is not inherently irrational, but to build religion around this belief, especially the religions that man has built, IS IRRATIONAL.
It is only with religious fervor and hatred that a plant was made illegal, it is only with the hatred of religious dogma that women are treated as second class citizens. The mere fact that women are not, mostly, treated that way in western society's is that our society insisted on a more ENLIGHTEND treatment of women; in direct opposition to religious dogma. It is only with religous hatred that same sex lover's are treated as less than human. We, those on the cannabis boards, constantly look for enlightenment from our politicians, in the hope that one day we can all sit down at the same lake side and smoke the biggest, fattest, dooby every rolled, without fear of being Joe Bob's sexual plaything. I think that this will never happen and the reason is in our faces evey day; RELIGION. Only when religion is made to take a backseat to the needs of the individual. Only when religion becomes ENLIGHTEND enough to accept God as a loving being and not as the means to control others will we be free from the religious tyranny that has taken over the world. When a law is no longer based on "protecting me from me" and is NOT based in some religious dogma will we, those without FAITH, be able to seriously consider the question of God. Until that time, we look to other areas of our spirituality and hope that is enough, because the alternative is linked to religous dogma and religous dogma is, invariably, linked to hatred.
I make no apologies for being a rational being. I am also a spiritual being. I believe that a rational being CAN believe in a God, it is in our nature to seek out the spirituality of our being and to manifest it in some way. There is NO rational being that can believe in ANY religious dogma that seeks to control a persons actions. This is contrary to our nature, our intellect and to our constitutionaly protected rights (you knew I would get the constitution in there didn't you?). God may be around somewhere, but I doubt that you will find him in any unenlightend religious text. I can find my spirit in the simple act of fishing. It is one of my most favorite things to do. Not sport fishing, just baiting a hook in a shady piece of water, somewhere far enough from others that what I am smoking won't be a concern and far enough away from thirsty individuals; I don't think they would want to drink my particular brand of "tea".
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Certified Organic All-In-One Grow Bags by Magic Bag 
Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds 
Red Vein Kratom 
Buy Bali Kratom Powder 
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order 
Bridgetown Botanicals
Larrythescaryrex 
World Spirit 
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 all )
jim_dewit
plague member
pattern
Bavet
Fliquid
sir tripsalot