On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 2:08 PM, Harvy Brans <harvybr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Religion can be degined as merely conceptualizing God. Thus atheism > qualifies.
> On Nov 9, 10:56 am, Medusa <Medusa4...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Joe wrote: > > > The universal goal of all religions - including atheistic or > > > apatheistic ones - is ego-transcendence.
> > > Comments?
> > For the 20 millionth time: athesism _is not_ a religion. Neither is > > apatheism.
> > And the goal of all religions is control. Over people and their > > possessions.
ATHEISM IS A RELIGION OF DENIAL THAT LIFE =GOD=LIFE. It constantly
searches another God to deny
apatheism is the art of saying no gods but can say life=god=life and
find function that serves life and fit quite well into the future as
theist!
it is not Atheist even by definition in the dictionary that say it is
both.
I say it is Theist because it accepts life=god better then life
=extinction that all atheist have to take when it comes to gods for
life is a god...it is the only GOD in all the Universe. Only non-life
is other than LIFE that is GOD BY JUST BEING!
On Nov 9, 1:56 pm, Medusa <Medusa4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
LIFE IS A REAL GOD, AND NEEDS NO OTHERS OR LESSER PARTS.
THERE IS ONLY LIFE AND NON LIFE IN ALL THE UNIVERSE...CHOOSE YOUR
FATE!
BEHOLD THE KINGDOMS OF LIFE AND DARE YEA SAY LIFE DOES NOT EXIST AND
OTHER THAN LIFE IS GOD?
No "non-living" thing or non-thing came or did. ONLY LIFE AND NON LIFE
FOR GOD IS LIFE! THE WISDOM OF THE LAWS OF PHYSICS IS THE BODY OF LIFE
AND THE ABILITY TO CHEAT NON LIFE WITH RECORDINGS THE ULTIMATE POWER
OF THE ULTIMATE FORM OF LIFE... "MODERN HUMAN LEVEL BEINGS". in the
past you must claim no life ever took place to be Atheist! you must
claim no laws of physics permit them to move from world to world or
build histories to claim "IAM" of the Bible and 24 elders that
represent 24 worlds to Humanity in the story... that is so close to
reality of today it is hard to claim it a lie!
If the story claims "IAM" came and did..then it claims life off this
world.
ATHEIST MUST FOCUS ON ONE SINGLE GOD TO CLAIM ATHEIST IS EVEN ANYTHING
REAL...IT HAS TO BE A FAKE GOD OUTSIDE THE LAWS OF PHYSICS OR THEY
CAN'T CLAIM TO BE WHAT THEY CLAIM FOR LIFE BECOMES GOD AND GOD CAN BE
ANYTHING LIFE THINKS TO DO AND IS ABLE IN THE LAWS OF PHYSICS.
We have no room for atheist in the future... of all things to go
atheist is one no one will care is gone.
practical, logical theist will own the future.
LIFE =GOD=LIFE...ANYWHERE!..That God is what we are in destiny to
become and seed the very cycles of life to do it again and again from
any of the worlds we seed.
And remember that life does not care how you think you see it...it
walks right over you and eats you up when you die...like it or not!
You that are composed and are home to life forms plain don't think
yourself alive? That is what Atheist is... no god and no gods..but god
is found by wisdom of the ages of humanity to advance in sciences and
laws of physics... we know life is God! We know there is non life and
life ONLY!
THERE IS NO THIRD THING other than created devices like machine
intelligence.
father life
son as fruit of life in intelligence and wisdom in perception
holy Ghost that is non-life serving life as border of living and non
living to gain massif abilities no flesh can have... why? because we
can! we are god and god does all things possible in wisdom. Survival
of the whole is the law... extinctions are a sin when self created
ones by neglect to serve life that is God that is all life of any
place and of any kind.
to claim Atheist you need to close one eye and squint with the other
as you hit your head to be dizzy and have trouble seeing reality round
you.
On Nov 9, 2:03 pm, Harvy Brans <harvybr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
It depends, really. I think some Buddhism is a religion, some is
philosophy. Some Buddhism, likewise, is naturally pantheistic or
outright atheistic, other Buddhism is theistic. But I would say any
set of dogmatic, magical tenets and rituals is still pretty much a
religion. Not all forms of Buddhism really fall into that--some Zen
thinkers really just question the nature of thought and self and don't
posit anything to be unquestionable or accepted on "faith". Some
strains of Buddhism and Taoism certainly don't require anything close
to a "conversion", for one thing, they are a set of ideas that put
themselves up for scrutiny for anyone who calls or doesn't call
themselves a "Buddhist" or "Taoist"--just like other philosophies
don't require "conversions" but present themselves to everyone for
critical consideration.
One thing any rational person can agree on is that if Confucianism or
Taoism or Buddhism are religions, than so are Stalinism and Maoism,
which are actually in many ways closer to the Abrahamic religions.
On Nov 9, 11:35 am, "Turner Hayes" <lordlacol...@gmail.com> wrote:
Depends on the sect of Buddhism. Zen Buddhism and Therevada Buddhism
has no such thing. Mahayana Buddhism doesn't either but it has much
more of a supernatural feel. Western traditions of Buddhism tend to
have the conceptual deity, developed from a means to convert abrahamic
religious people who posit a god. Religion is full of assimilation.
However, I would definitely say that the Mahayana Buddhism is a
religion, though it has no deity, because of the rituals and
scripture, and the likes. I'm pretty sure most scholars consider some
sects, if not all, of Buddhism a religion.
On Nov 10, 9:03 am, Harvy Brans <harvybr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
So, if I conceptualize a tea pot floating in space, does that qualify
me to be a religious tea connoisseur? If I conceptualize a circle,
does that qualify me to be a religious geometric-ist? If I
conceptualize my mind without a body, does that qualify me to be a
religious dualist? Or if I conceptualize all the different gods of all
religions, does that make me a member of all the religions, despite
them being mutually exclusive?
You might as well just say that if I conceptualize myself as killing
another person (Dev can be sympathetic to this), then I'm a murderer.
That's retarded.
On Nov 10, 9:08 am, Harvy Brans <harvybr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Actually, according to the Christians I am evidently a murderer for
conceptualizing killing them, even though the Bible says just as much
about us which makes them worthless hypocrites who obviously should be
killed if you want the world to be a less hypocritical place, so I
doubt you'll get much of anywhere with that analogy.
Once again, if a lack of belief in something is a religion, then we
all have infinite religions for every concept we don't adhere to as
having a counterpart in actual reality.
On Nov 9, 1:11 pm, watts <watts....@gmail.com> wrote:
> So, if I conceptualize a tea pot floating in space, does that qualify
> me to be a religious tea connoisseur? If I conceptualize a circle,
> does that qualify me to be a religious geometric-ist? If I
> conceptualize my mind without a body, does that qualify me to be a
> religious dualist? Or if I conceptualize all the different gods of all
> religions, does that make me a member of all the religions, despite
> them being mutually exclusive?
> You might as well just say that if I conceptualize myself as killing
> another person (Dev can be sympathetic to this), then I'm a murderer.
> That's retarded.
> On Nov 10, 9:08 am, Harvy Brans <harvybr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Religion can be degined as merely conceptualizing God. Thus atheism
> > qualifies.
> > On Nov 9, 10:56 am, Medusa <Medusa4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > Joe wrote:
> > > > The universal goal of all religions - including atheistic or
> > > > apatheistic ones - is ego-transcendence.
> > > > Comments?
> > > For the 20 millionth time: athesism _is not_ a religion. Neither is
> > > apatheism.
> > > And the goal of all religions is control. Over people and their
> > > possessions.
On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 1:35 PM, Turner Hayes <lordlacol...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't think atheistic religions exist. Others may disagree, but I don't > consider, say, Buddhism to be a religion if it doesn't posit a God.
I think most Buddhism does posit Duality (mind and spirit) so that spiritual component would position it as a religion, don't you think?
> On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Joe <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The universal goal of all religions - including atheistic or >> apatheistic ones - is ego-transcendence.
>> Comments?
-- Witchy Woman, AvC Anti-Spam Brigade. "Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression of free speech and assembly. Men feared witches and burned women. It is the function of speech to free men from the bondage of irrational fears." --Louis D. Brandeis, Justice, US Supreme Court Justice
> Actually, according to the Christians I am evidently a murderer for
> conceptualizing killing them, even though the Bible says just as much
> about us which makes them worthless hypocrites who obviously should be
> killed if you want the world to be a less hypocritical place, so I
> doubt you'll get much of anywhere with that analogy.
> Once again, if a lack of belief in something is a religion, then we
> all have infinite religions for every concept we don't adhere to as
> having a counterpart in actual reality.
> On Nov 9, 1:11 pm, watts <watts....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > So, if I conceptualize a tea pot floating in space, does that qualify
> > me to be a religious tea connoisseur? If I conceptualize a circle,
> > does that qualify me to be a religious geometric-ist? If I
> > conceptualize my mind without a body, does that qualify me to be a
> > religious dualist? Or if I conceptualize all the different gods of all
> > religions, does that make me a member of all the religions, despite
> > them being mutually exclusive?
> > You might as well just say that if I conceptualize myself as killing
> > another person (Dev can be sympathetic to this), then I'm a murderer.
> > That's retarded.
> > On Nov 10, 9:08 am, Harvy Brans <harvybr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > Religion can be degined as merely conceptualizing God. Thus atheism
> > > qualifies.
> > > On Nov 9, 10:56 am, Medusa <Medusa4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > Joe wrote:
> > > > > The universal goal of all religions - including atheistic or
> > > > > apatheistic ones - is ego-transcendence.
> > > > > Comments?
> > > > For the 20 millionth time: athesism _is not_ a religion. Neither is
> > > > apatheism.
> > > > And the goal of all religions is control. Over people and their
> > > > possessions.
> On Nov 10, 10:17 am, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > Actually, according to the Christians I am evidently a murderer for
> > conceptualizing killing them, even though the Bible says just as much
> > about us which makes them worthless hypocrites who obviously should be
> > killed if you want the world to be a less hypocritical place, so I
> > doubt you'll get much of anywhere with that analogy.
> > Once again, if a lack of belief in something is a religion, then we
> > all have infinite religions for every concept we don't adhere to as
> > having a counterpart in actual reality.
> > On Nov 9, 1:11 pm, watts <watts....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > So, if I conceptualize a tea pot floating in space, does that qualify
> > > me to be a religious tea connoisseur? If I conceptualize a circle,
> > > does that qualify me to be a religious geometric-ist? If I
> > > conceptualize my mind without a body, does that qualify me to be a
> > > religious dualist? Or if I conceptualize all the different gods of all
> > > religions, does that make me a member of all the religions, despite
> > > them being mutually exclusive?
> > > You might as well just say that if I conceptualize myself as killing
> > > another person (Dev can be sympathetic to this), then I'm a murderer.
> > > That's retarded.
> > > On Nov 10, 9:08 am, Harvy Brans <harvybr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > Religion can be degined as merely conceptualizing God. Thus atheism
> > > > qualifies.
> > > > On Nov 9, 10:56 am, Medusa <Medusa4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > Joe wrote:
> > > > > > The universal goal of all religions - including atheistic or
> > > > > > apatheistic ones - is ego-transcendence.
> > > > > > Comments?
> > > > > For the 20 millionth time: athesism _is not_ a religion. Neither is
> > > > > apatheism.
> > > > > And the goal of all religions is control. Over people and their
> > > > > possessions.
Lately? I've been hearing that this group is getting a shocking bunch
of new idiots for two years. But I understand how you feel, and would
like to point this much out: the attitude from the "liberal" or
"moderate" theists generally suggests that we somehow underestimate
theist intelligence, or exaggerate theist insanity. But if that were
the case, if we really hold an unrealistic view of theists as nuts,
then why do we keep being surprised? Face it: since even I am still
occasionally amazed at how fucked up thetards are, even I must
overestimate them and give them too much credit. Now, they'll think
they're saying something clever if they say "I am consustuntly amazzed
att how stoopid youse afeists r, soe thure!" after reading this, but
they'd just be saying that because they heard me say that, and it
sounded good. We both know they have made no progress in defending
theism, that they have not one single line of argument that any
rational person would have abandoned. If they weren't deeply, truly,
madly insane, they'd pull out their empty pockets and say, "I got
nothin'. I got nothin' here now and I'm ready to take somethin' in."
But a theist does one of two things after an argument with a competent
opponent: becomes an atheist or proves their position is no more
intellectually or morally defensible than that of Adolph Hitler or
Osama bin Laden.
On Nov 9, 1:39 pm, watts <watts....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 10, 10:17 am, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > Actually, according to the Christians I am evidently a murderer for
> > conceptualizing killing them, even though the Bible says just as much
> > about us which makes them worthless hypocrites who obviously should be
> > killed if you want the world to be a less hypocritical place, so I
> > doubt you'll get much of anywhere with that analogy.
> > Once again, if a lack of belief in something is a religion, then we
> > all have infinite religions for every concept we don't adhere to as
> > having a counterpart in actual reality.
> > On Nov 9, 1:11 pm, watts <watts....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > So, if I conceptualize a tea pot floating in space, does that qualify
> > > me to be a religious tea connoisseur? If I conceptualize a circle,
> > > does that qualify me to be a religious geometric-ist? If I
> > > conceptualize my mind without a body, does that qualify me to be a
> > > religious dualist? Or if I conceptualize all the different gods of all
> > > religions, does that make me a member of all the religions, despite
> > > them being mutually exclusive?
> > > You might as well just say that if I conceptualize myself as killing
> > > another person (Dev can be sympathetic to this), then I'm a murderer.
> > > That's retarded.
> > > On Nov 10, 9:08 am, Harvy Brans <harvybr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > Religion can be degined as merely conceptualizing God. Thus atheism
> > > > qualifies.
> > > > On Nov 9, 10:56 am, Medusa <Medusa4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > Joe wrote:
> > > > > > The universal goal of all religions - including atheistic or
> > > > > > apatheistic ones - is ego-transcendence.
> > > > > > Comments?
> > > > > For the 20 millionth time: athesism _is not_ a religion. Neither is
> > > > > apatheism.
> > > > > And the goal of all religions is control. Over people and their
> > > > > possessions.
watts wrote:
> You might as well just say that if I conceptualize myself as killing
> another person (Dev can be sympathetic to this), then I'm a murderer.
> That's retarded.
Yes, it is very stupid, but the Christian religion I was raised in
said this very thing: thinking about an action was as bad as doing
it. And God reads all your thoughts. . .
> Depends on the sect of Buddhism. Zen Buddhism and Therevada Buddhism
> has no such thing. Mahayana Buddhism doesn't either but it has much
> more of a supernatural feel. Western traditions of Buddhism tend to
> have the conceptual deity, developed from a means to convert abrahamic
> religious people who posit a god. Religion is full of assimilation.
> However, I would definitely say that the Mahayana Buddhism is a
> religion, though it has no deity, because of the rituals and
> scripture, and the likes. I'm pretty sure most scholars consider some
> sects, if not all, of Buddhism a religion.
> On Nov 10, 9:03 am, Harvy Brans <harvybr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Buddhists have a deity, it is conceptual and not personified.
> > On Nov 9, 10:35 am, "Turner Hayes" <lordlacol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I don't think atheistic religions exist. Others may disagree, but I don't
> > > consider, say, Buddhism to be a religion if it doesn't posit a God.
> > > On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Joe <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > The universal goal of all religions - including atheistic or
> > > > apatheistic ones - is ego-transcendence.
|
