Category: Religion, Myth, and Theology

  • CHRISTIANS: WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE? What is the cause of natural law? To the sci

    CHRISTIANS: WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE?

    What is the cause of natural law? To the scientist it is the order of the universe. To the faithful it is god’s design. What’s the difference other than whether god created the universe (faith) or we don’t know what created the universe (skepticism), if we all obey the natural law of reciprocity and imitation of jesus and christian charity and exhaustion of forgiveness. That’s what jefferson said, and that’s what I say and we are law givers not priests. It’s not our job to do anything other than the law that prohibits bads. That which creates goods is up to those who do not violate the law. If we obey gods law because someone in the past said we must or if we do so because the scientific evidence in all walks of life says we must, what is the difference?


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-19 15:32:00 UTC

  • RT @RachelBock9: Many have asked me how I can have a science background and be c

    RT @RachelBock9: Many have asked me how I can have a science background and be called to faith, especially after spending my whole adult li…


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-18 15:22:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1185214551249375235

  • “”God is love” (1 John 4:8) is bullshit pilpul that really means “love is God,”

    —“”God is love” (1 John 4:8) is bullshit pilpul that really means “love is God,” which is euphemistic code for envy-based care/harm fundamentalism that punishes the strong for being strong and celebrates the weak for being weak.”—Predmetsky Rosenborg

    via Michelle German


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-18 14:18:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1185198378793213954

  • “”God is love” (1 John 4:8) is bullshit pilpul that really means “love is God,”

    —“”God is love” (1 John 4:8) is bullshit pilpul that really means “love is God,” which is euphemistic code for envy-based care/harm fundamentalism that punishes the strong for being strong and celebrates the weak for being weak.”—Predmetsky Rosenborg

    via Michelle German


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-18 10:17:00 UTC

  • “In all systems of theology the devil figures as a male person. Yes, it is women

    —“In all systems of theology the devil figures as a male person. Yes, it is women who keep the church going.”— Don Marquis


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-17 01:11:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1184637975495430144

  • “In all systems of theology the devil figures as a male person. Yes, it is women

    —“In all systems of theology the devil figures as a male person. Yes, it is women who keep the church going.”— Don Marquis


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-16 21:11:00 UTC

  • LETTER FROM CURT TO THE CHRISTIANS” (so to speak) ~35min. Explaining Prop. Objec

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8hb5UpTiNo”A LETTER FROM CURT TO THE CHRISTIANS” (so to speak)

    ~35min. Explaining Prop. Objectives for Religion

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8hb5UpTiNoUpdated Oct 15, 2019, 4:48 PM


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-15 16:48:00 UTC

  • VIDEO: “A LETTER TO CHRISTIANS” ~35 Minutes. Explaining Objectives. Oct 15, 2019

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8hb5UpTiNoNEW VIDEO: “A LETTER TO CHRISTIANS”

    ~35 Minutes. Explaining Objectives.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8hb5UpTiNoUpdated Oct 15, 2019, 4:40 PM


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-15 16:40:00 UTC

  • FAITH Faith is a fairly easy thing to explain. In other words we know what cause

    FAITH

    Faith is a fairly easy thing to explain. In other words we know what causes the feeling we call ‘spirituality’ and why it’s so influential to some and not at all to others. But we can’t introspect into it. So you can’t introspect into how you raise your arm. And you can’t introspect into the feeling you get from faith, but that doesn’t mean we cant explain how you raise your arm (I certainly can) or that we can’t explain the feeling of faith (I certainly can). It’s that the ‘magic’ is due to our inability to introspectively analyze it. There are some tricks we can use (visual illusions) to experiment with vision. There are similar tricks for spirituality. The feeling is not complicated. The free association we can conduct in that state is not complicated. And mastering the ability to freely associate emotionally by repetitive practice is not complicated. So whether you specialize in pre-rational emotion, pre-rational intuition, physical performance, or rational thought, or rational calculation, is just a matter of your ability and interest. And your developmental arc since that series is simply the developmental hierarchy. And just as there are many fragile points in your sexual development there are many fragile points in your social development there are also many fragile points in your cognitive development, and some of us are biased to the sensory, to the motor, to the social, to the verbal rational, and some to the calculative spatial.

    It’s not that faith isn’t an excellent way of developing mindfulness by supplying your own sedation. It’s not that the buddhist meditation and philosophy isn’t. Or the stoic. It’s that there are consequences (costs) for each of those methods and only the stoic produces your adaptation rather than avoidance.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-14 21:29:00 UTC

  • DISAMBIGUATION OF CAUSALITY IN RELIGIOSITY Three axis of Causality in Religion v

    DISAMBIGUATION OF CAUSALITY IN RELIGIOSITY

    Three axis of Causality in Religion vs Science. 1) Intelligence, 2) Empathizing vs Systematizing. 3) Degree of familial indoctrination in Religion vs Science.

    So The demarcation isn’t just IQ, but IQ and the Competition between Feminine Feeling vs Masculine Thinking. I was raised very catholic it simply ‘lost’ the battle just like religion won the battle for others – and everyone else somewhere in between.

    Yet among they thought leaders here, most of us have a religious background and far more people than you’d think have studied religion, or considered a religious career.

    So I don’t see a difference in our objectives, just means of achieving the masculine or feminine distribution.

    And the Pagan is definitely masculine – extremely and unapologetically, and some of us ‘feel’ the masculine not the feminine. Conversely Atheism is definitely a feminine cognitive expression.

    So as in nearly all our differences in understanding of the world, the question of religiosity is largely genetic and less so environmental, and the genetic difference is explicable as differences in one of the only substantial variables in the human brain: gender dimorphism.

    — Working On This —

    (Female)

    Reactionary Atheism (preference, monopoly)

    -v-

    Resistant Agnosticism (truth, markets)

    (Male)


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-14 09:07:00 UTC