I dont understand religion...

Great Debates
81

QUOTE=Czarcasm;18884333]This again? What is with this claim that a lot of people pushing this woo stuff make that they used to be hard-line atheists, when most of them eventually show through their words that they have no idea what atheism really is?
[/QUOTE]

Eh… I was on the board of the humanist secular society here and since I’ve ben active on this message board since 2003 you can easily verify that I was, indeed, a rabid atheist. Perhaps not quite as bullheaded as you or as prone to create straw men, but I was pretty rabid.

It’s a perspective. It’s called personification. How hard can this be to understand, really? You are (I assume) not an unintelligent person, so why do you insist on making yourself dumber for the purpose of this discussion?

Should be easy to find several quotes if you do a search. I don’t feel like I need to ”prove” my atheist credentials though, I’m pretty aware of exactly what opinions and perspectives I have held. And if you want to insinuate that I am lying about my past, there’s not much point in having a discussion anyway. Because why would you want to engage in a debate with someone who is willfully dishonest? I wouldn’t. I also don’t spend time trying to ”prove” to people that I am not.

Actually I don’t see anything wrong with any of what you wrote. And I don’t think that religion offers better answers than science, which is the straw man that the atheist cheerleaders keep propping up because that assume that their duality are the only options. Somehow it seems impossible for some people to grasp that both ideas may be wrong or only partial. Or that just because one school of thought contains one thing that is true/false it doesn’t mean that everything is true/false.

82

Eh… I was on the board of the humanist secular society here and since I’ve ben active on this message board since 2003 you can easily verify that I was, indeed, a rabid atheist. Perhaps not quite as bullheaded as you or as prone to create straw men, but I was pretty rabid.
[/quote]

I would really like to see what you posted that you think qualified you as a “rabid” atheist because it would help us define what you mean by that vague term, and since you were the one that claim that you posted in that manner, I think that you would be best suited to judge which of your early posts quality. It’s only logical.

83

Our primate relatives have societies also - without religion. Living in societies with rules is in our genetic makeup, and I suspect primitive tribes with leaders and social rules predated religion.

That we did go through these states doesn’t mean we had to. In a world with conflicting tribal groups, hatred of the other probably had great survival value. Even if religion had value back then in stabilizing societies, it isn’t necessary now to stabilize societies, as shown by the fact that the most stable societies today are secular.

today, religion offers things that are needed for some people.
Sure it does. So does Star Trek Fandom. Putting ourselves in another world, perhaps a world with a loving god, is good. But we’d be better off realizing it is only a story, and not enforcing Kirk vs. Picard with the power of the state.

I grew out of that stage. Our society should also.

84

Well, it does try to kill us every so often for no reason, so in that respect Earth is somewhat like God.

85

The religious explanation, as far as I can tell, is Goddidit. No explanation for the consciousness of god or gods though.
Why are we here? The answer that there is no why - we are here and we ask how we got here - is not pathetic just because you don’t like it. If the reason for the tragedies we see all around us comes from God, God is one sick puppy. I appreciate that it helps many people to think there is a reason for all, but let’s not confuse psychic balm with reality.
Or, as my friend’s father used to say, “why is a crooked letter.” He was a concentration camp survivor, telling him that God in his mercy killed his first wife and child would be evil incarnate.

86

I didn’t insinuate anything, it was just one sentence with a simple request as you were as an rabid atheist. I’m just curious about such things on how others perceive their past behavior. But is this an admission you will not be forthcoming with anything to back up your assertion? You made the claim in GD; this is not IMHO or MPSIMS, and as you say, I’m pretty aware of exactly what opinions and perspectives I have held. I guess what I’m doing now though, is doubling down, and calling your bluff on this.

GD, AFAIK, has a more stringent format of what is followed. I didn’t previously bother with a search, was hoping you would just ante up, because like I said, I’m always curious about such claims, but just recently I skimmed through threads you started going back to 2003. You claimed you was the most rabid and unforgiving atheist, gosh, I would think you would have a lot you could fall back on. You can either back up this assertion, or admit you were at least mistaken or using hyperbole if this is the case.

Another reason I doubt your scenario is because of the moderation of this board. They don’t put up with such crap, and wouldn’t allow atheists or theists to act in a rabid manner for too long for either side, without a hell of a lot of notes, suspension or permanent ban. And if they didn’t act on it, I would bet my bottom dollar you’d have found yourself in the BBQ Pit numerous times because the Dopers…they sure the heck wouldn’t have put up with it either.

87

Um, Ok if you say so…The only way this makes any sense if you consider multiple competing religions. Usually a single religion will come up with some form of 'consistency. Also usually some forms of 'unknowing;

Cite please

Well I know God as well as you know your friends and family, perhaps better. Is that a religion? God has nothing to do with any religion. You have to get your head out of the clouds and open your mind and heart to beyond what the religion of athism has taught you. Religion does not equal being God’s child, religion is the opposite of being God’s child. Atheism is no exception, it is a religion with rules, apparently with you the false statement that God=religion.

Yea right, if that were true the SDMB would have closed down in 1997.

No where have I found the Church of Atheism more strong then on this board. And I have attended many ‘skeptic’s’ groups, so have not been devoid of atheistic’s meetings.

88

Okay, maybe save it for later then, because I hope you get back to that, and explain what was so out of the ordinary about your religious experience that convinced you.
[/quote]

No, no, I don’t mean that the un-ordinariness of my experience “convinced” me. I mean that I had an experience, it happens to be an experience that I describe as a religious experience, and it was an experience that was out of the ordinary. A different out-of-the-ordinary experience might not have caused me to draw the same conclusions, but I can’t imagine any everyday mundane experience, on the other hand, would have left me later concluding “I just had the kind of experience that must have been the origin of our species’ notions of God. Well I’ll be damned. There’s actually a reality underlying all that mythos”.

Any more than some experience NOT out of the ordinary would be likely to lead you to harbor such thoughts, I would imagine.

[QUOTE=razncain]

[QUOTE=AHunter3]

Atheists and agnostics should logically be the majority of people, perhaps the overwhemling majority. And if we control for the public-shaming and social-necessity history of obligatory religion, that has probably always been the case. For every person who has seen the light, another 10,000 people who identify as theistic have felt the heat instead.

Go in peace and rejoice in your courage and authenticity that you refuse to give lip service to something that isn’t true for you.
Theists are certainly the majority, although often in the upper echelons of academia, particular the sciences, and in particular the leading scientists, atheists are by far the vast majority.
[/quote]

Are theists, particularly Christians really feeling all that much heat in America though? Faith is held on a very high pedestal in this country, and others, in most circles. Often what heat they do feel, is coming from other theists. Polls show that atheists in America are among one of the least trusted groups. Do you think it is deserved?

[/QUOTE]

You didn’t understand this part either, apparently. Imagine a person born somewhere in the western hemisphere in the last 1000 years. That person most likely has not had a life-changing religious experience and has no reason to pretend to an understanding of the stuff that gets promulgated as religious thought… except for the heat. The pressure of other people who will treat that one like a pariah, a social criminal of sort, if he or she doesn’t at least give lip service to believing in God and probably embracing a big chunk of the rest of the dominant religious ideology that surrounds them.

In other words, I was not saying people feel a lot of heat because they are theists, I was saying a lot of people are theists because they have felt the heat (as opposed to seeing the light).

89

Fundies Say The Darndest Things

You’ll find plenty by doing a search engine on that cite saying atheism is a religion, I found dozens in a few seconds. Perhaps you’ll find yourself already on that cite. Think I’ll send some of yours in just on this thread, what do you think the chances are of it getting submitted?

90

Not exactly. The exercises themselves are personal in nature. All atheists/agnostics acknowledge having a physical body and nothing else. So the first stage in demonstrating the existence of the supernatural is to prove to them that they have a soul.

I’ll refer to a few terms from the Ancient Egyptian Religion again to make my case. You see, the ancient Egyptians believed that each and every individual is a composite of both a tangible and invisible constituent. The tangible physical body was referred to as the *khat *; but on top of this, the individual was also believed to possess a more rarefied and ethereal substance resembling the physical body that they called the Ka. After the Ka came the Ba or the soul, and so on and so forth. These three bodies were believed to be interconnected and that a change in one would lead to a change in the other. This was the basis for performing certain exercises they called *HEKA * or work on the Ka. The individual would physically perform certain acts that would affect their Ka which in turn changed the constitution of their Ba or soul. This change in the Ba would result into an extraordinary experience felt by the individual that would leave no doubt in their mind about the what has just occurred to them.

Now I can understand that this all makes for some ‘interesting’ reading on some message boards, but believe you me, carrying out the exercises and experiencing their effects is a completely different story altogether.

After this, the Ancient Egyptians further postulated that even the planets themselves (yes, all 7 mentioned in my earlier posts) also possessed a *Khat *, Ka, Ba and other elements. Each planet was also believed to possess some sort of consciousness (Khu) that resided within its spiritual body (Sah) and that each planet carried out a specific function that affect each and every individual on earth. For instance, the Sun was responsible for health; the Moon, action; Mars, war; Mercury, intelligence; Jupiter, fortune; and so on. This postulate was the basis for the potency of astrological talismans which were believed to accentuate the respective qualities of the planets in the individual who possessed them.

Again this all makes for some interesting reading until one has actually created an authentic astrological talismans and experienced its effects.

91

What are the exercises?

92

Read Chic and Sandra Cicero’s Self Initiation into the Golden Dawn Tradition.

93

“Golden Dawn” as in the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn?

94

Regardless if you find it ordinary or not, what was your religious experience? And I suppose you consider yourself the one in 10,000 that has seen the light?

Apparently. Couldn’t find any obfuscation on your part. Nor did you get my quote right with the part you were responding to, having some of my material quoted under your name.

95

Can you just give us a basic rundown of the exercises, or a couple of examples? A small sample of what we might be getting into?

96

You’ve got it.

97

Yeah, I’m actually that conceited.

I’m also lazy:

The incident

Some musings and thoughts and discussion on the subject thereof.

If your interest is serious, click the links. I’m not sufficiently caffeinated to proselytize this morning.

98

Cool, thank you!

If Mrs. Cicero is faithful to Israel Regardie’s interpretation of the Golden Dawn, there’s actually not a lot of theism involved.

Mr. Regardie held that “though the Golden Dawn rituals persistently use phraseology which implies the belief in a personal God, that usage to my mind is a poetic or dramatic convention.” All that fancy gods-and-angels talk was, to his mind, merely “technical methods” by which to achieve the real goal: “Exalting the individual consciousness.” (This sets Mr. Regardie apart from people like Aleister Crowley, who ended up actually believing in “the independent metaphysical reality of the entities contacted in magical ritual.”)

In terms of practical spiritual exercises, Mr. Regardie probably wasn’t a big fan of conjuring spirits and that sort of thing (though other G.D. members were). For example, when he published the Stella Matutina material, he left out stuff like the Clavicula Tabularum Enochi, and other spirit-conjuring stuff he found embarrassingly “mediaeval.”

Some of the practical spiritual exercises he did recommend were, IIRC, staring into tattwa cards until one’s vision got all blurry and weird, as well as scrying for the purposes of astral projections. Maybe he worked with magic mirrors as well? Not sure, been a while since I read up on the man…

Of course I do not know where, exactly, Mrs. Cicero stands on all this - or, for that matter, where thepillar stands. Or which of these exercises, in any, he or she practices. (For all their talk of strictly following ancient traditions, occultists tend to be incredibly open to both innovation, experimentation, and creative interpretation.)

99

I have to disagree with this. The one thing that is true about religions is that none of them are true.

100

What do you mean by this? What does it mean for a religion to be true?