Are religions biologically based and natural or supernaturally based?

[Greatest I am]

Odd, because I can name not a single "idol worshiping" person on RF, whether Christian or Muslim or something else (FYI, I would avoid using that kind of language in the future as it can be interpreted as a troll). If anything, RF has a disproportionate number of non-theists and Pagans.



I'd think it wouldn't be necessary because of how obviously apparent it is. If you don't have a god-concept that alleges itself as an omnimax. When your gods aren't omnimax, you have shared power, which is in direct opposition to this idea of "alpha male" and "supremacy." Any and all theisms that aren't omnimax - which basically describes anything that isn't classical monotheism - is going to negate that hypothesis. Even in the case of classical monotheism (aka, the omnimax one-god), I think it is a stretch to say it is rooted in supposed desires of being "alpha male" or "supreme." There are strong underpinnings of humility and self-depreciation in the classical monotheist religious traditions. If anything, all theisms (with the possible exception of autotheism) are fundamentally about recognizing that there are forces out there greater than you are.



Theism in of itself is never concerned with either of these things. Theisms aren't belief systems, they're positions on the nature of the gods, which doesn't have much to do with morality, ethics, or behavior. I'm not sure how this plays in to our topic?

Only in the sense that to me, religions and their God are invented for the morals they teach as people tend to follow the best communicators and value good morals.

Some people think that God must be good.

Your "are fundamentally about recognizing that there are forces out there greater than you are."

Is a purely subjective judgement. For instance, I do not see the bible God as being greater than I because I have better morals and can reproduce. I thus best him on the mental side as well as the physical.

I found your first on idol worshiping as strange.

All Christians and Muslims are idol worshipers.

Any who name a God are idol worshipers of that named God.

Christians have Yahweh/Jesus and Islam has Allah. They both say there is no one graeter and that definitely fits the definition of idol worshipers.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

What is the difference between natural and supernatural?
They are misunderstandings of what God is... that create false questions in the first place. There are, by the way, no contradictions. All is God.

You are God?

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Or there's another answer and you haven't thought of it...which is a possiblity, right?

1 Thessalonians 5:21 Test all things; hold fast what is good

Name the other answer and we can test it and hold it if good.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

There's no such thing as an "alpha male human". btw I can't stand sweeping statements about "religion" that only cover the Abrahamic faiths.

Those are 99% of those theist here but we can include any who wish to be.

All other species have a fittest of that species. Locally if not universally.

Why do you deny that mankind also has a fittest, be he identified or not?

Do we not evolve like all other animals and do we not compete like all other species to determine who is the fittest, again, locally if not universally?

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Here I am not speaking from any dramatic personal experiences. My beliefs are formed from the collective analysis of the experiences of many others and from teachers aligned with the eastern/Indian and Theosophical traditions. I believe they have revealed the most believable and complete understanding of existence (surpassing materialist science). Our consciousness can experience what our physical senses can not detect.


What does 'think more demographically' mean? Please, tell us of your experience.

You seem to have more of what I would call faith or hope. I reserve belief more for what I know to be real.

That aside. I have a things to show my experience that I also pose a question with. It was more designed for a Christian so you need not answer unless you feel moved to.

--------

Care to compare the Jesus you know to the one I know?

I have been asked to do an O P showing my beliefs and have written a nutshell view to fill that request.

I was a skeptic till the age of 39. I then had an apotheosis and later branded myself an esoteric ecumenist and Gnostic Christian. Gnostic Christian because I exemplify this quote from William Blake and that makes me as hated by Christians today as the ancient Gnostics that Constantine had the Christians kill when he bought the Catholic Church.

“Both read the Bible day and night, But thou read'st black where I read white.”

This refers to how Gnostics tend to reverse, for moral reasons, what Christians see in the Bible. We tend to recognize the evil ways of the O. T. God where literal Christians will see God’s killing as good. Christians are sheep where Gnostic Christians are goats.

This is perhaps why we see the use of a Jesus scapegoat as immoral, while theists like to make Jesus their beast of burden. An immoral position.

During my apotheosis, something that only lasted 5 or 6 seconds, the only things of note to happen was that my paradigm of reality was confirmed and I was chastised to think more demographically. What I found was what I call a cosmic consciousness. Not a new term but one that is a close but not exact fit.

I recognize that I have no proof. That is always the way with apotheosis.

This is also why I prefer to stick to issues of morality because no one has yet been able to prove that God is real and I have no more proof than they for the cosmic consciousness or what I call; the Godhead.

The cosmic consciousness is not a miracle working God. It does not interfere with us save when one of us finds it. Not a common thing from what I can see. It is a part of nature and our next evolutionary step.

I tend to have more in common with atheists who ignore what they see as my delusion because our morals are basically identical. Theist tend not to like me much as I have no respect for literalists and fundamentals and think that most Christians have exaggerated tribal mentalities and poor morals as they have developed a double standard to be able to stomach their God.

I am rather between a rock and a hard place but this I cannot help.

I am happy to be questioned on what I believe but whether or not God exists is basically irrelevant to this world for all that he does not do, and I prefer to thrash out moral issues that can actually find an end point. The search for God is never ending when you are of the Gnostic persuasion. My apotheosis basically says that I am to ignore whatever God I found, God as a set of rules that is, not idol worship it but instead, raise my bar of excellence and seek further.

My apotheosis also showed me that God has no need for love, adoration or obedience. He has no needs. Man has dominion here on earth and is to be and is the supreme being.

Since then, I have tried to collect information that would help any that believe that apotheosis is possible, generally not Christians, --- as they do not believe in the mythical esoteric Jesus that I believe in and churches do not dare teach it.

This first clip gives the theological and philosophical interpretation of what Jesus taught and the second clip show what I think is a close representation of the method that helped me push my apotheosis.

Basically, the usual Christian Jesus is their hero and savior while my version demand that man himself steps up to the plate and save himself.

Which version do you think is more moral and deserving of praise and why?

Regards
DL

 

[George-ananda]

. It was more designed for a Christian so you need not answer unless you feel moved to.

I'm feeling moved to.

--------

Care to compare the Jesus you know to the one I know?

I have been asked to do an O P showing my beliefs and have written a nutshell view to fill that request.

I was a skeptic till the age of 39. I then had an apotheosis and later branded myself an esoteric ecumenist and Gnostic Christian. Gnostic Christian because I exemplify this quote from William Blake and that makes me as hated by Christians today as the ancient Gnostics that Constantine had the Christians kill when he bought the Catholic Church.

“Both read the Bible day and night, But thou read'st black where I read white.”

This refers to how Gnostics tend to reverse, for moral reasons, what Christians see in the Bible. We tend to recognize the evil ways of the O. T. God where literal Christians will see God’s killing as good. Christians are sheep where Gnostic Christians are goats.

This is perhaps why we see the use of a Jesus scapegoat as immoral, while theists like to make Jesus their beast of burden. An immoral position.

During my apotheosis, something that only lasted 5 or 6 seconds, the only things of note to happen was that my paradigm of reality was confirmed and I was chastised to think more demographically. What I found was what I call a cosmic consciousness. Not a new term but one that is a close but not exact fit.

I recognize that I have no proof. That is always the way with apotheosis.

This is also why I prefer to stick to issues of morality because no one has yet been able to prove that God is real and I have no more proof than they for the cosmic consciousness or what I call; the Godhead.

The cosmic consciousness is not a miracle working God. It does not interfere with us save when one of us finds it. Not a common thing from what I can see. It is a part of nature and our next evolutionary step.

I tend to have more in common with atheists who ignore what they see as my delusion because our morals are basically identical. Theist tend not to like me much as I have no respect for literalists and fundamentals and think that most Christians have exaggerated tribal mentalities and poor morals as they have developed a double standard to be able to stomach their God.

I am rather between a rock and a hard place but this I cannot help.

I am happy to be questioned on what I believe but whether or not God exists is basically irrelevant to this world for all that he does not do, and I prefer to thrash out moral issues that can actually find an end point. The search for God is never ending when you are of the Gnostic persuasion. My apotheosis basically says that I am to ignore whatever God I found, God as a set of rules that is, not idol worship it but instead, raise my bar of excellence and seek further.

My apotheosis also showed me that God has no need for love, adoration or obedience. He has no needs. Man has dominion here on earth and is to be and is the supreme being.

Since then, I have tried to collect information that would help any that believe that apotheosis is possible, generally not Christians, --- as they do not believe in the mythical esoteric Jesus that I believe in and churches do not dare teach it.

This first clip gives the theological and philosophical interpretation of what Jesus taught and the second clip show what I think is a close representation of the method that helped me push my apotheosis.

Basically, the usual Christian Jesus is their hero and savior while my version demand that man himself steps up to the plate and save himself.

Which version do you think is more moral and deserving of praise and why?

Great stuff, Mr. Greatetst. My first thought is that you are giving way, way too much concern to traditional Christianity and taking way too much energy comparing yourself to that. You should state your beliefs more comfortably and not worry about the comparison to old-time Christianity. Why are you doing this?

 

[Robert.Evans]

1 Thessalonians 5:21 Test all things; hold fast what is good

Name the other answer and we can test it and hold it if good.

Regards
DL

I am asking YOU, as you seem to be speaking as though you know that the answers. I am merely saying that there could be another and you don't know it. It is not my job to find you answers when I you think you already have them. Closed mind.

Everything (all) is God. That is what I said.

 

[Greatest I am]

I'm feeling moved to.

--------


Great stuff, Mr. Greatetst. My first thought is that you are giving way, way too much concern to traditional Christianity and taking way too much energy comparing yourself to that. You should state your beliefs more comfortably and not worry about the comparison to old-time Christianity. Why are you doing this?

The duty of all Gnostic Christians is to try to move people closer to their God. Our duty is also to fight evil.

We see the Christian God as a vile and immoral demiurge and that is why the ancient Christians decimated us and burned our scriptures when Constantine bought the church. We were right and they were wrong but had the political power to help usher in the Dark Ages of free thought and their Inquisition.

Christians are still following an immoral religion that is based on human sacrifice and the punishment of the innocent instead of the guilty.

For evil to grow, all good people need do is nothing.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

I am asking YOU, as you seem to be speaking as though you know that the answers. I am merely saying that there could be another and you don't know it. It is not my job to find you answers when I you think you already have them. Closed mind.

Everything (all) is God. That is what I said.

Nice. You say I have a closed mind because your have nothing to put into it.

Do you blame your kids when you drink too much?

Regards
DL

 

[George-ananda]

The duty of all Gnostic Christians is to try to move people closer to their God. Our duty is also to fight evil.

So far so good.

We see the Christian God as a vile and immoral demiurge and that is why the ancient Christians decimated us and burned our scriptures when Constantine bought the church. We were right and they were wrong but had the political power to help usher in the Dark Ages of free thought and their Inquisition.

Christians are still following an immoral religion that is based on human sacrifice and the punishment of the innocent instead of the guilty.

For evil to grow, all good people need do is nothing.

I think you are way overstating the 'evils' of Christianity. Most Christians I know are basically nice people. This dogma you seem so concerned about seems hardly relevant in this day and age to most people including Christians. I suggest concentrating on Gnosticism and not worry about the ancient almost irrelevant dogma of others.

 

[Greatest I am]

So far so good.

I think you are way overstating the 'evils' of Christianity. Most Christians I know are basically nice people. This dogma you seem so concerned about seems hardly relevant in this day and age to most people including Christians. I suggest concentrating on Gnosticism and not worry about the ancient almost irrelevant dogma of others.

True that most Christians are Christian by name only and that most care little about their theology.

Christianity in the West is still the major source of homophobia and misogyny and for people who believe in justice and equality to ignore them is to help keep those immoral practices in our societies.

For Christianity to continue discriminating and denigrating women and gays is quite immoral.

Fight that evil when you can, otherwise, you are a part of the problem and not a part of the solution.

For evil to grow, all you need do is nothing.

Regards
DL

 

[Robert.Evans]

True that most Christians are Christian by name only and that most care little about their theology.

Christianity in the West is still the major source of homophobia and misogyny and for people who believe in justice and equality to ignore them is to help keep those immoral practices in our societies.

For Christianity to continue discriminating and denigrating women and gays is quite immoral.

Fight that evil when you can, otherwise, you are a part of the problem and not a part of the solution.

For evil to grow, all you need do is nothing.

Regards
DL

Having a difference in men and women is not to degrade one or the other. I see no logic in that statement of yours. The gay act is not normal nor natural. It produces no life. That would seem to be common sense. Why you would think it okay, i have no idea.

 

[ak.yonathan]

I think the proof we have of God’s being manmade is that no real supernatural God has ever bothered to correct any of the contradicting information about him, her or it. No God has ever corrected us.

Not only has God never corrected us, religious folks are constantly changing what God supposedly said. I used the example on another thread of the concept of Limbo in Catholicism. For most of the history of Catholicism, we were told God created a place right next to Heaven called Limbo. This is where babies went when they died before being baptized, apparently because God wasn't quite mean enough to throw babies into Hell when they were too young to take responsibility for themselves.

Flash foward and one day the Pope suddenly says "just kidding, there is no such thing as Limbo."

If that's not evidence that all things religious are man made, I don't know what is. If God was real he either made Limbo, or he didn't. Either being gay is an unforgivable abomination, or it's not. Either divorce is a mortal sin or it isn't. Either there are real witches which we shall not suffer to live, or witches aren't real. Every day religious people change things that were supposedly God's Word...the Catholic Church is particularly guilty of this.

If God was making all this stuff up, how can mere humans change what He created?

I've been trying to correct the contradicting information about Him for the past couple of days now. But even if God wasn't making an effort, how does that prove that He doesn't exist?

 

[Greatest I am]

Having a difference in men and women is not to degrade one or the other. I see no logic in that statement of yours. The gay act is not normal nor natural. It produces no life. That would seem to be common sense. Why you would think it okay, i have no idea.

Those who would deny others a loving relationship with a life long partner of there choice are just showing how little they know of love or how little they follow the golden rule.

WHY ARE YOU NOT DOING UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD WANT DONE TO YOU?

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

I've been trying to correct the contradicting information information about Him for the past couple of days. But even if God wasn't making an effort, how does that prove that He doesn't exist?

It is not to others to prove a negative claim. That is impossible to do.

It is to those who make a positive claim to prove their case.

I take as evidence against the reality of a God as described in the bible in the proof that he is not here.

What is your proof to counter this undeniable fact?

Regards
DL

 

[Demonslayer]

The gay act is not normal nor natural. It produces no life.

Funny, I was just discussing this on another thread. Can you show where in the Bible is says sex must be for procreation?

Also, is heterosexual sex not normal if the man has a low sperm count, or if the woman is past menopause?

 

[ak.yonathan]

It is not to others to prove a negative claim. That is impossible to do.

It is to those who make a positive claim to prove their case.

I take as evidence against the reality of a God as described in the bible in the proof that he is not here.

What is your proof to counter this undeniable fact?

Regards
DL

There has been a lot of unexplained natural phenomena recently, such as strange sounds and extreme climate changes.

 

[Demonslayer]

There has been a lot of unexplained natural phenomena recently, such as strange sounds

Strange sounds?

 

[Greatest I am]

There has been a lot of unexplained natural phenomena recently, such as strange sounds and extreme climate changes.

I see no examples but your point is?

Regards
DL

 

[ak.yonathan]

There has been a lot of unexplained natural phenomena recently, such as strange sounds

Strange sounds?

Yeah, you know the ones that kind of sound like trumpets.