OK, This is what I have to say

by peacepipe 81 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Bridgette

  Uncle Penn,
  I am simply curious, were you ever a witness (something you said in another post)?

  Pax,
  Bridgette
• 

  Bridgette

  Oh and, while I'm not Julie, can I butt in and say, I beleive enlightenment is DEFINITELY growing. No, not in every individual--but in pockets, it's growing in leaps and bounds. Many sociologists are calling this another rennaisance. And yes, in the first rennsaisance, you saw GREAT upheaval in human society. But you also saw some of the greatest scientific ideas, art and philosophical growths ever. As a result, unfortunately, the church attempted to stifle free thought, but thankfully to no avail. She came around, as will the church today.
  I enjoy your style, Unclepenn. At least you make me think instead of sigh, or chuckle!
  Peace and Laughs,
  Bridgette
• 

  Julie

  Hi Penn--

  :Julie, would you say that people are moving further from enlightenment in view of the continual moral decline we see in society?

  Oh no, not at all. As crazy as this might seem it is quite the opposite. The further back we go in history the more barbaric things are really. One thing that people often say when discussing violence in the OT that they didn't know about is "Those were violent times...". Indeed they were.

  While war is not a rarity these days it is much less common than it once was. Most countries are relatively content now with their established territories and there is much less bloodshed over boundry lines and personal squabbles as there used to be. Fewer civil wars over contested thrones and, judging history by the bible, much less genocide.

  I do think it is ironic that the bloodiest place on Earth (the middle east) is also considered to be "holy" by countless souls. People have been killing each other that patch of real estate for centuries, no--millenia, basically for religious motives. Most of mankind has moved on. There have been some of the most horrendous deeds committed in the name of religion. Crusades for one, and all the "holy wars" being declared and Freudian slips like "crusade" from our president.

  I am quite convinced that "good" is not the offspring of religion. As we become wiser we learn, though it'd be nicer if we could pick up the pace. Religion would keep us from doing that and we'd still be where we were 1000 years ago, IF we'd have let that happen. Good thing we didn't. (What makes it "good" is that it benefits everyone and profits no one.)

  Julie
• 

  Unclepenn1

  Hey Bridgette, thanks for the kind words. No, I was never a witness, just your garden variety pagan that got saved. I used to get so sad seeing people waste their saturdays getting all dressed up and going door to door spreading lies, so I got interested in reaching these people with the love of God. Anyway, that's why I am here, to just kind of learn more and chat with folks like you.

  I have a love for truth and I think it is logical and objective. I ask questions to try and draw out information from people to see what they believe and then test it in light of what I know to be true. I have found that most don't really give it much thought. For instance, I was having dinner with some folks the other night and the lady I sat across from told me that she believed all paths lead to heaven. I asked about the WTC tragedy and that if that road lead there too. She said no. So, I began a 'tongue in cheek' dialogue giving her the impression that I thought she was oppressive to people's beliefs. This made her think about morality and the possibilty that people can be wrong about God. Anyway, if you ever want to discuss things like this futher, I would welcome an email type conversation. Have a great night!

  Penn

  Mohammed- 'My teachings lead to the attainment of truth'
  Buddha- 'The truth has been revealed to me'
  Jesus- 'I am the truth'
• 

  siegswife

  There's something I don't understand about all this. If the concept of a god is a creation of man, doesn't that tell you something? Why would man create this god if it wasn't for the purpose of deceiving and holding power over other men? Could it be that they believed this to be for the 'greater good'?
  Of course, I personally do believe in God, but I'm really trying to understand this. If God doesn't exist, then that means that all the killing and hate that take place in his name is really the work of men, doesn't it? What does that say about mans potential for working out good in groups? If they really do believe in a lie, does that mean that lies themselves are more powerful than mans intellectual capacity? Doesn't the fact that men are quite capable of hating in the name of god mean that their capacity for hate is greater than that of love? How can something nonexistant be the source of these things?
  If God and Satan don't exist, then all of the heartbreak and injustice that has taken place throughout the centuries comes only from men. On what do you then base your ideas that men without religion could be so much better?
• 

  Unclepenn1

  :Julie, would you say that people are moving further from enlightenment in view of the continual moral decline we see in society?

  Julie said-Oh no, not at all. As crazy as this might seem it is quite the opposite.

  OK, here are some things that teachers had to deal with in our schools in 1940....

  Running in the halls, chewing gum, not putting paper in the waste paper basket, tardyness, talking in class.

  Here is what they deal with today, in our age of further enlightenment....

  Rape, murder, gang violence, drugs, guns, bombs, teen pregnancy, alcohol, abortion, blackmail, metal detectors, and just plain rebellion! Are we really progressing towards enlightenment?

  Julie said-While war is not a rarity these days it is much less common than it once was.

  Did you know that there have been over 100 wars since 1940?

  Julie said -I do think it is ironic that the bloodiest place on Earth (the middle east) is also considered to be "holy" by countless souls.

  How 'ironic' is it that the Bible says that Jerusalem will be a 'cup of trembling' and a 'burdensome stone' for the entire world. Hmm, strange, written thousands of years ago, some obscure piece of property 1/3 the size of San Bernadino County will be a burden for the WHOLE WORLD! When is the last time in the last 10 years you picked up a newspaper and Israel wasn't being talked about.

  Something to think about

  Mohammed- 'My teachings lead to the attainment of truth'
  Buddha- 'The truth has been revealed to me'
  Jesus- 'I am the truth'
• 

  Farkel

  :Fair enough! Hey, I noticed from another post that you live in San Diego. Me too. Where are you at?!

  Mostly, I've lived at the beach: PB, Crown Point, OB, Point Loma. It's just too expensive for me to live their lately.

  I'm in Normal Heights now, near Adams Ave. and 30th Street.

  Farkel
• 

  Tina

  The concepts of morals and justice go back way before biblical times. I'm thinking of Plato,Solon et al. Murder was wrong before the bible was written. the bible has not cornered the market on morals and justice.
  Man has always created gods. And laws and morals pertaining to these gods.Including the westernized version of yahweh.They were and are conceived in anthropomorphic characteristics.
  Gods have always been conceived for many purposes. The ancients,to explain the unexplainable what science and enlightment have explained today.
  You have allegorical tales and myths of creation,Adam and Eve,Great flood,etc. Many of these taken from other older cultures and integrated into their ideology.
  More so as a tool for power,control and domination. This icludes the judeo-christian concept of yaweh. The conception of dieties simply projects the best and worst qualities of human nature onto supernatural 'beings' (jesus/satan) For obedience to such dieties,reward and punishment must come into play.Hence the creation of 'divine laws' to go along with the diety. And with these divine laws come absolutism,the only correct view of reality. Complete authority. And with dieties of absolutism,we have and always will have conflict. These absolutist endanger us and society with their public displays of piety. These public displays are varied and diverse. They can be bombing an abortion clinic,attempting thru political lobbying to chip away at certain civil freedoms. It can be public murder of women in a football stadium a la taliban.
  When absolutism comes into play it is never for the the greater good. It is only for the good of that specific religion and its adherents. What we have is people using ancient tribal dieties and laws,attempting to explain a very modern complex world,and it just doesn't work. That's like me taking a medieval medical text on the 4 bodily humors and attempting to use it to practice medicine today.....
  Reading the bible,for example , will horrify one with it's lessons of brutality,intolerance,genocide,bigotry,and hatreds. There is no greater good in that book. You basically have a diety that says do it my way or you die. Do it this way or you will be punished. Ack phone brb lol

  Carl Sagan on balancing openness to new ideas with skeptical scrutiny..."if you are open to the point of gullibility and have not an ounce of skeptical sense-you cannot distinguish useful ideas from worthless ones."
• 

  siegswife

  OK, but that still doesn't address the real issue here. If God and Satan don't exist then men are the source of these hateful acts. Regardless of whether they've created dieties to take the rap, the hate comes from them, if there is no other source for it. The same thing would be true of love, of course, but since men have thus far shown a greater capacity for hate, what does that mean? Assuming that God doesn't exist (I really believe He does) then anyone who has come to that conclusion cannot BLAME God for the hateful things that have been done. They can only, ultimately, blame the men who have made their gods in their own image. Why then can one assume that men would be better off without religion? If religion is only the image of man, man wouldn't be changed without it...
• 

  Tina

  hi seigswife,
  Have you ever read the Nicomachean Ethics?
  From ancient times down to day,there will always be people who practice virtue.,based on the concept that man is a rational being. And humans being the social animals that we are,will work for the best interests of society. That every act has a goal or chief good towards which all human acts aim....
  So yes, I think man is to blame when acts of hatred occur. WHile humans do have capacity for great hate they also have great capacity for great good. My premise is that greater good can be accomplished without all the added divisiveness and hatred caused by religions. I believe that continued enlightment on the complex social issues etc,would take us alonger way than by the rigid strictures and absolutisms of religions. Religions are modern mans tribalism.

  Since I dont believe in a god,I of course,dont blame a god for hatreds perpetrated my humans. I think man has always used a god to justify hatred,just as he will attribute good things .
  Man doesn't need religious beliefs to change. he doesn't need a supernatural sky daddy to know right and wrong,what is moral. He needs to recognize personal responsibility for self and his world. That it takes work,not prayers to accomplish and enact positive changes. That by contributing to humanity,one becomes the virtuous person posited by ancient scholars and philosophers. By education,and more education to remove assumptions,prejudices,biases we've been handed thru 'social heredity'.That realizing the world isn't in absolutes,that its thru the diversity of life we learn and grow to be better people. Learning to appreciate the ambiguities and nuances of the world around us.
  ack,sorry,off my soapbox. Hope this made some sense! regards,Tina

  Carl Sagan on balancing openness to new ideas with skeptical scrutiny..."if you are open to the point of gullibility and have not an ounce of skeptical sense-you cannot distinguish useful ideas from worthless ones."