Not another religious idea...

[KOSR]

Let's say religion completely disappears, genesis proven completely wrong, no original sin whatsoever.

This will sound of the demise of mankind I think, just look at Hitler, he said; look these people are inferior on the outside, and proven by genes/science, also on the inside.

There are no morals, survival of the strongest, natural selection, burn the jews, negro's and gypsy's. Don't worry our genes would agree with us!

Religion gives us atleast some kind of buffer before people start slaughtering eachother on physical appearances, and supposedly now proven, because of inferior genes.

I don't even have to think about it, the historical results speak for themselfs, religion is the way for a peacefull mutually co-existing way of living, but unfortunately the bible has been vastly misinterpretet, AND, ultimately the religious writings have been written by mere mortals and cannot represent the ultimate truth, it's their interpretation. Unless god wrote the first pages of genesis himself, which is highly unlikely, everything is an interpretation, even moses and jesus interpretet their view. That's why I think everybody should think for himself, and not let other people preach their beliefs and blindly accept them.

Without religion the world would be in dismay, couple this with science and the most horrific acts will take place, mindless killing just because people are different.

We should survive atleast as a race together, humans side by side, not some non-moral gene battlefield.

 

[CableLight]

Originally posted by KnightOfSexualRelief

That's why I think everybody should think for himself, and not let other people preach their beliefs and blindly accept them.

My thoughts exactly. But, like you were saying, if there wasn't the idea about the "big man upstairs" watching down on our every move, I think a lot of people would abuse it.

I'm personally not a religious person, and really get irritated when I hear about some big conflict as a result of religion, but I think the general population of mankind truly needs something like religion to keep certain people in check. It's like...Religion isn't really a great thing, but it isn't a terrible thing. I don't really know something offhand I could compare it to, but it's like a paradox in itself.

 

[KOSR]

Originally posted by CableLight
My thoughts exactly. But, like you were saying, if there wasn't the idea about the "big man upstairs" watching down on our every move, I think a lot of people would abuse it.

I'm personally not a religious person, and really get irritated when I hear about some big conflict as a result of religion, but I think the general population of mankind truly needs something like religion to keep certain people in check. It's like...Religion isn't really a great thing, but it isn't a terrible thing. I don't really know something offhand I could compare it to, but it's like a paradox in itself.

Agreed, it is a bit of a paradox, it's manifestations are sometimes terrible, and other times enlightening.

I look at it like this; physical existence is imperfect, to exist, is to be imperfect.

If we were like a bundle of light, pure energy, obstructed only by a black hole, we would have almost no need for religion, we are almost perfect, flowing thruw the galaxy without hinderance. But we are not, we are human; we have to eat, breeth and reproduce, life is complex and imperfect, there is suffering and joy.

And one could go as far as saying that the more joy you bring for yourself and others the closer you stand to your true nature, or "god." But what is god and joy anyway? A couple of days ago I have been looking into metaphysics, and that seems more usefull for finding a personal fullfulling version of "god."

 

[CableLight]

Originally posted by KnightOfSexualRelief


And one could go as far as saying that the more joy you bring for yourself and others the closer you stand to your true nature, or "god."

True, but often one thing's joy ultimately stems from another's strife. The cow eats the grass to live, the grass was destroyed. Man eats the cow to live, the cow is killed. Man gets mad cow disease; cow has last laugh

 

[KOSR]

Originally posted by CableLight
True, but often one thing's joy ultimately stems from another's strife. The cow eats the grass to live, the grass was destroyed. Man eats the cow to live, the cow is killed. Man gets mad cow disease; cow has last laugh

Hmm, yes that is so very true

I was thinking a bit.

What if the universe was eternal, then there would be no god, because eternity is god itself, there is no creator, eternal existence is god.

I do not remember exactly where the bible says this but it goes like; pick up a stone and you shall see me. Saying that where-ever one looks one will see god manifested, existence itself.

Maybe after death our body will transcend into a different form of energy, one that is closer, or maybe less close, to the ultimate form of energy in the universe, something like light.

I would not mind turning into a ray of light after my death, turning into a rainbow in the sky. Everyone lives forever, immortality is already ours.

Since life is eternal, every cosmic particle, like atoms, will circle in all forms of energy, so we are alive as humans today, and maybe some of us will transcend into pure light in 5 billion "years." Others have a different destination, but all will go thruw all the stages at some time. Everyone has his own time.

Maybe this whole bible thing has been taken to literally, if the universe is eternal, than heaven and hell is already part of our existence.

The big-bang theory sounds like complete nonsense anyway:

Unbelievingly, after resisting for a long time, Einstein, and most of the scientific establishment, capitulated to the idea of the Big Bang by the influence of no less than a monk: George Lemaître.

This Catholic monk succeeded in infiltrating into the secular science the preposterous idea of a Biblical universe being created out of nothing. By who? By God, naturally! Congratulations to Abée Lemaître. Once more religion defeated science. Not for long, we hope!

The very essence of the big bang theory is "FAITH", that is, religion!

The whole atheist concept of life thruw chance and law is not bad at all if existence itself is eternal, and thus god. Maybe the atheists are working for "god himself" haha.

That leaves me to think about morals itself, how do you establish morals with this philosophy? Hmm.

Just philosophizing out loud

 

[CableLight]

Going with what you were saying, I think we are all (in some ways) destined to be eternal in some form. Just to quote my signature, I think the idea that no one is ever really gone as long as they're remembered can sum up my idea here - If memories are essentially a type of energy or stimulus in the brain, could it be possible for one's immortality to be sustained based on nothing more than that stimulus passing from person to person? If so, could it be said, then, that the energy in the brain sustaining that stimulus is, essentially, the person (in a form)?

I can't quite hypothosize accurately on what exactly does happen when we die. Sure, we've all got our own little ideas and whatnot, but to try to factually accomplish something with it would require one to...well...die and see what happens.

I don't personally subscribe to the heaven/hell idea, but I think that - and this is going to sound kind of corny - the whole "circle of life" thing ensures we're all perminately here on some level. If the law of conservation of matter holds true, the molocules/atoms/etc in our bodies (and those before us) may shift or alter in some way, but theoretically they should still exist somewhere and in some form.

 

[KOSR]

Originally posted by CableLight
Going with what you were saying, I think we are all (in some ways) destined to be eternal in some form. Just to quote my signature, I think the idea that no one is ever really gone as long as they're remembered can sum up my idea here - If memories are essentially a type of energy or stimulus in the brain, could it be possible for one's immortality to be sustained based on nothing more than that stimulus passing from person to person? If so, could it be said, then, that the energy in the brain sustaining that stimulus is, essentially, the person (in a form)?

I can't quite hypothosize accurately on what exactly does happen when we die. Sure, we've all got our own little ideas and whatnot, but to try to factually accomplish something with it would require one to...well...die and see what happens.

I don't personally subscribe to the heaven/hell idea, but I think that - and this is going to sound kind of corny - the whole "circle of life" thing ensures we're all perminately here on some level. If the law of conservation of matter holds true, the molocules/atoms/etc in our bodies (and those before us) may shift or alter in some way, but theoretically they should still exist somewhere and in some form.

I like that idea, about energy in the brain is the essence of a person. This would be a sort of "soul," a higher form of cosmic energy. An energy that can be filled or drained depending on how you interact with eachother.

This is afcourse an awesome base for morals in this philosophy, the "higher" morals one has and communicates, the more higher energy gets formed, and thus the more you become eternal. And so all the more reason to find out thruwout life what are good morals, and also reason to life a good life.

It sounds vague, but i'll defenitely think this over some more, I like it a lot

 

[CableLight]

Definately...The more people you come into contact with and the more you imprint yourself into memory, the more "collective" (in a manner of speaking) energy you would ultimately become if sustained.

I guess there would be the negative energy, or infamy as it were, that people could become, too. For instance: Hitler. When people think of him, they usually don't get the image of a guy running through a field of flowers with puppies, yet they still know who he is.

It's like the Light and Dark sides of the force

 

[KOSR]

Originally posted by CableLight


I guess there would be the negative energy, or infamy as it were, that people could become, too. For instance: Hitler. When people think of him, they usually don't get the image of a guy running through a field of flowers with puppies, yet they still know who he is.

Haha

One defenitely wants to avoid such things. Hitler is consumed by the darkness! I'm not a big star wars fan but that idea is not bad

Some things I thought of:

1.
A beginning and an end is a religious belief used by atheists and religions. Both say; look! life will end.

Atheist say so to prove that something will turn into nothing, pointlessness of life. Somewhat cynical I may add.

(Instutionalized) religions use it to make people conform to their norm, make people like cattle with fear. The whole heaven/hell nonsense you mentioned.

2.
To become eternal, or more eternal, you will have to make unselfish deeds or acts, or at least try to. This way you will create positive higher energy. Now I know what a "saint" means, another word ripped apart by institutionalized religion.

Unselfish deeds are the highest act one can make when alive as humans. Solid foundation for morals

 

[CableLight]

Hmm...I just started thinking this sounds an awful lot like karma, but it's still different enough to go its own route.

I agree with your #1. Even the reincarnation religions believe life will end (in a way) so you need to do certain things to ensure you don't come back as a mosquito or one of those dumb little fruit flies that lives for 5 days.

With #2, I can't really say for sure...I wouldn't want to ever directly tell someone how to live, but I'd really appreciate it if they took responsibility for their life. In other words, I think the fewer acts a person does to disrupt or hinder the world around them, the better.

 

[KOSR]

Originally posted by CableLight

I agree with your #1. Even the reincarnation religions believe life will end (in a way) so you need to do certain things to ensure you don't come back as a mosquito or one of those dumb little fruit flies that lives for 5 days.

I think it is because we humans tend to think our humanely existence is already the highest form of existing or energy, but maybe when speaking about "cosmic balance/energy," one could say that there are far higher forms of existing or energy a human could transcend into. We would go thruw all stages since we are here for eternity, everyone would be a fruitfly, but also a star and a rainbow at some moment.

Our human conciousness, our personal identity, our physical existence, might not be here for eternity, but that doesn't mean all life will end, like you said, ones essence can be substained by other people.

But since we are also eternal, maybe after an eternity, yet not eternity itself, we would become ourself again, like our human selfs, and thus the cycle is complete, and the process will start again. Maybe i'm taking it a little far, but, eternity is eternity

Originally posted by CableLight

With #2, I can't really say for sure...I wouldn't want to ever directly tell someone how to live, but I'd really appreciate it if they took responsibility for their life. In other words, I think the fewer acts a person does to disrupt or hinder the world around them, the better.

Hmm yes, telling others how it works is no good, people have to discover it on their own.

That makes me think about the original sin in the garden of eden. After eating the apple god "cursed" man/adam with the ability to know right from wrong; to be like god, and woman with the burden of labor.

It also says that man will rule over woman because of her temptation by the serpent, for that she will be ruled by MAN. A little bit dominant/submissive here. But that's not the main thing.

If only MAN can know what is right and wrong than man obviously had to make the moral codes we live by, and thus "rule" woman with these moral laws, because they have no intellegince like einstein etc, and create those moral codes.

This has been vastly misinterpretet I think, it just says; look, we, man, must make the rules, and since we know what is good we should figure our that beating your wife is not good at all.

I wonder what the real hebrew words of; garden, eden, man, woman, serpent, sin etc, really mean.

I think after years of translation the entire content and context have been completely mixed up and distorted by religious institutions for their own benefit.

-

I think I am going to read the bible slowly, and try to look thruw three millenia+ of interpretation and translation. I guess inside are supreme moral codes openly shown, or hidden.

Also jesus really seemed like he knew what was going on, I am defenitely going to study what his disciples were saying.

I like this conversation, brought me a new perspective, awesome

-

Two more things:

1.
As a human you have your senses to percieve the existing world. That doesn't mean that everything you humanely sense would be the only thing to exist. Maybe there are much higher levels of perception in the universe. Maybe we are tied to our senses as humans, and will at some time be set free, transcend into a higher form of perception.

A little vague, needs some work

2.
This also gives more room for multiple "gods." A god of light, a god of the earth, a god of fire etc. On the other hand I don't neccessarily see use to give certain phenomena the name of "god." With existence being eternal, and there being no afterlife in the literal sense, there probably wouldn't be a singular god like western religions preach. Existence itself is god, or parts of existence are different manifestations of god, but why name them anyway?

-

Good quotes on eternity:

http://www.worldofquotes.com/topic/Eternity/1/index.html

 

[CableLight]

How about, for #1 (I'm taking this from a different post of mine simply because I think it works here) "But let me ask you this - If you truly want to fully become a better person and understand the meaning of life, shouldn't you try to understand life as a whole? As in, not just people, but the full spectrum of things? Basically what I'm getting at here is that the wider view on life we obtain and the wider scale of things we're able to percieve, the better, no?"

That is, in a nutshell, the basic goal in life I have - understand as much about everything as possible. Ironically, I won't know if I've completed this basically until I die

For #2, the only thing I think that really qualifies for a the title of "god" is something not of our natural world (taking the literal definition). It's a really terrible description, I know, because it's only an assumption that cannot be proven/disproven.

If existance is [potentially] eternal and "eternity" being a quanitification made through the concept of time, and if you wanted to go with what you were saying about existance being a form of god, then...

existance = eternity; eternity = time, god = existance; therefore: god = time.

<EDIT> Also it must be noted that time is not a man-made thing. The concept of it we use is man-made, but the effect of time (simlpy, here = now, there = then) remains constant. We, as people, just gave it a name.

 

[KOSR]

That's interesting, even after searching the full meaning of "time" in the dictionary I still don't fully comprehend though

time ( P ) Pronunciation Key (tm)
n.

A nonspatial continuum in which events occur in apparently irreversible succession from the past through the present to the future.

It's starting to catch on, tricky concept time.

I just thought of this: God makes the clock tick, but it's not the clock itself. I'm not fully sure of it's correctness and full understanding though.

Eternity doesn't need a creator, it needs infinite time to last forever. Hmm.

-

It's really interesting what jesus was saying;

-Heaven has come to earth. [I think it always has, maybe he wanted to cleverly contradict genesis/old-testament?]
-Religious people block themselfs and others from experiencing "god."
-The highest in heaven are those like childeren, so the ones who have not "eaten" from the tree of knowledge(?) But then how would they know about morals, hmm. I wonder if the garden of eden is a methaphor for ones childhood. Maybe the garden of eden is complete nonsense anyway.

Earth=our time on earth, part of eternity
Heaven=Universe=Eternity;our eternal lives, the ones who practise higher morals on earth become more eternal, stand higher in heaven
God=time?

I think what he really thaught was listening ultimately to yourself, no-one else can do it for you. He tells you to look inside yourself, instead of focussing on ultimate awnsers on the outside, like naturalists do. Our senses are imperfect, flawed, and can never sense the whole truth.

Maybe our short period on earth is a lucky "chance?" for certain parts of existence to find a way to stand even higher in heaven, become more eternal, transcend higher into the universe.

 

[KOSR]

CableLight, thanks for your insights and openess so far, this conversation gave me a different perspective, something I needed after getting lured into atheist, naturalistic, evolutionary biology.

If you have anything to say or comment about my interpretation of time as you mentioned, i'd like to hear about it.

-

The one thing I am not quite content about is morality. Is morality a product of evolution and human history, or is there something like universal balance/energy, universal morality. I find it hard making a definite statement about that at the moment.

I'm almost sure there is something like universal/cosmic morality, since the universe is eternal, set in motion by god/time, but I can't quite get my thinking straight about it.