RE: human conceit (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

Kedikat -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 4:16:23 PM)

So I can agree somewhat with many religions displaying a form of conceit, when they have a strong core of humans being so extra special that the universe was created for them.
Though the word conceit is inflamatory.
And a good deal of the people who follow those religions, may not express that conceit, or practice on a basis of it. I am a Liberal, but disagree with the texts on many points and practice it in my own way.



juliaoceania -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 4:17:46 PM)

I think the problem is equating the concept of a supreme being with religion



meatcleaver -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 4:25:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkinshadows

Some people would disagree that religion is a manmade concept - for it comes from the words of whichever deity is held at that religions core... man would be viewed purely as the vessel to relate it.
 


So which religion and which diety is the truth? Since the core of a religion is truth, there can only be one truth. To believe in more than one diety is to be pantheist. To say all the dieties are the same is claiming a get out of jail free card because you will find many believers in most monotheist religions believe their religion is the true religion and the rest are false.



Kedikat -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 4:28:20 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

I think the problem is equating the concept of a supreme being with religion


Yes. And trying to find the devine shortcuts to it's being pleased with you. Somehow I think, following some arcane rituals, and or praying to a supreme being would not interest it. Being the best you can be in the everchanging universe it created might.  If it created this everchanging universe for us to enjoy and be challenged by, do you think it would be pleased to see us stuck in a ritual rut, bound up in old texts rules? That would be a very petty supreme being.

Edited to include. I in no way want the last line or two to be interpreted as a challenge to the one quoted. I agree with her statement. And elaborated on it with my opinions. I don't intend that she is stuck in ritual or such.



meatcleaver -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 4:41:52 PM)

I think it is time for some quotes of Frederich Nietzche.
 
Is man one of God's blunders? Or is God one of man's blunders?
 
Faith: not wanting to know what is true.

God is a thought who makes crooked all that is straight.

I cannot believe in a God who wants to be praised all the time.

The Christian resolution to find the world ugly and bad has made the world ugly and bad.
 
There cannot be a God because if there were one, I could not believe that I was not He.
 
Two great European narcotics, alcohol and Christianity.

A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything.
 
A subject for a great poet would be God's boredom after the seventh day of creation.







MstrTiger -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 5:27:45 PM)


“Some people would disagree that religion is a manmade concept - for it comes from the words of whichever deity is held at that religions core... man would be viewed purely as the vessel to relate it.”

Nope, a religion is created by people venerating the word and not the words themselves. Expressing belief in a divine power is just part of the delusion, you cant separate the worship aspect of religion from the god that is being venerated, a religion can create a god though a god cant create a religion. Gods are creations of belief and veneration and if people stop worshiping them then they no longer exist in any true sense.



petwolf22 -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 5:50:22 PM)

i consider myself agnostic--whatever it is, if there is something there, it's not for us to comprehend or worry about and we'll find out when we get there.

While i'd certainly like to believe that there is something after death and some kind of being watching over us all, it doesn't change in any way what eventually happens in the end.  Still gonna die.

i don't believe that "god" (in whatever form) would be such an egotistical being that he gives out rewards based on who is the most pious, gives the most constant praise, or erects the greatest altar to him--which is what many religions as a whole seem to be competing with.

So i agree...some of the constructs of religion are a result of humans developing their "crutch" to cope with life.  God (again in whatever form) isn't worried about whether or not we pray 5 times a day, eat pork, fast, light candles and sing at midnight, hide our women's faces, lie prostrate on blankets, hang a cross in the house, or dance around naked on the solstice.

What matters is to live your life well--not to prove yourself worthy to your god, or to protect your position in the afterlife, but to benefit humanity as a whole as well as the world around you.



Kedikat -> RE: human conceit (6/3/2006 1:24:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

I think it is time for some quotes of Frederich Nietzche.
 
Is man one of God's blunders? Or is God one of man's blunders?
 
Faith: not wanting to know what is true.

God is a thought who makes crooked all that is straight.

I cannot believe in a God who wants to be praised all the time.

The Christian resolution to find the world ugly and bad has made the world ugly and bad.
 
There cannot be a God because if there were one, I could not believe that I was not He.
 
Two great European narcotics, alcohol and Christianity.

A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything.
 
A subject for a great poet would be God's boredom after the seventh day of creation.






Yep.
God says what is true, so it's not our fault.
God as an escape from mans blunders? Say a few right words and all is forgiven and made rigt=ht?
God will in the after life make all my crookedness straight?
My father/mother/peers do not praise me enough, and I don't want to work to earn it?
The worlds a mess, and I am not responsible or willing to clean it up?
I have to be humble, in order to be perfect.
Oh there are so many more...and europeans don't corner the market anymore.
And the gate keepers have problems all their own.
Ahhhh so thats why I am so bored......I suspected it all along.

I got it a bit out of order. But you get the idea I hope. I am God, you are God, we are all responsible for the mess we are in, and the blisss. But some prefer to keep blaming God, or their lack of pleasing them.
Nietzche was an asshole, but one I could argue with in a bar and concede many points to.



Kedikat -> RE: human conceit (6/3/2006 1:26:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MstrTiger


“Some people would disagree that religion is a manmade concept - for it comes from the words of whichever deity is held at that religions core... man would be viewed purely as the vessel to relate it.”

Nope, a religion is created by people venerating the word and not the words themselves. Expressing belief in a divine power is just part of the delusion, you cant separate the worship aspect of religion from the god that is being venerated, a religion can create a god though a god cant create a religion. Gods are creations of belief and veneration and if people stop worshiping them then they no longer exist in any true sense.

A definition of existential solipsism?



darkinshadows -> RE: human conceit (6/3/2006 1:36:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkinshadows

Some people would disagree that religion is a manmade concept - for it comes from the words of whichever deity is held at that religions core... man would be viewed purely as the vessel to relate it.
 


So which religion and which diety is the truth? Since the core of a religion is truth, there can only be one truth. To believe in more than one diety is to be pantheist. To say all the dieties are the same is claiming a get out of jail free card because you will find many believers in most monotheist religions believe their religion is the true religion and the rest are false.

Not going to get into the monotheist debate, that is really a different thread altoghter.
 
Which deity and which religion is irrelvant to that statement.  I was responding to another post, and wished to respond in such a way that did not single out individual religions as I do not believe in starting any anti - religion discussion.  I do not believe in starting an anti - anything thread as every idea is subjective and personal.  What I do respond to is the obvious hate and lack of acceptance that people should choose to throw out on individual beliefs, concepts etc be they scientific, religious, spiritual or whatever concept they hold.  You do not like religion - fine.  More power to you.  You do not agree with Christianity or a religion that holds a supreme 'being' as the ultimate creator - your choice and your life.  But to make sweeping statements on entire religions, peoples and throwing in a little name calling and labeling make you no different to the individuals you obviously have a problem with, who you may have, at one time or another, felt oppressed by.  By being angry, by allowing them to have a conscious effect upon your being and life, you are submitting to any power you may perceive they have over you.
And that is where wars, hatred and genocides occur.
 
Peace and Rapture



darkinshadows -> RE: human conceit (6/3/2006 1:44:18 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MstrTiger


“Some people would disagree that religion is a manmade concept - for it comes from the words of whichever deity is held at that religions core... man would be viewed purely as the vessel to relate it.”

Nope, a religion is created by people venerating the word and not the words themselves. Expressing belief in a divine power is just part of the delusion, you cant separate the worship aspect of religion from the god that is being venerated, a religion can create a god though a god cant create a religion. Gods are creations of belief and veneration and if people stop worshiping them then they no longer exist in any true sense.

Just because you stop breathing - doesn't mean the air disappears.
The above is your view - and thats great.  But there are many people from many religions who would disagree.  So that makes them delusional?
I make no apology for wondering when you and others who have contributed to this thread, and any other discussion on something/someone you do not agree with (be that religions, countries, state) decided it is alright to insult people you do not agree with.  What happened to discussing differences without labeling?
 
Peace and Rapture



darkinshadows -> RE: human conceit (6/3/2006 1:47:55 AM)

Again, some religions would disagree as death may be death bodily - but not spiritually.
Just a opposite opinion.
 
Again - the usage of the word 'crutch'... Why is it a crutch?  Are these people sick?  Injured?  Deformed in some way?  Maybe some are.  But not all.
Why do I believe in God.  Because I am Him and He is me and He is just there.  No injury, no scars, just love.
 
Peace and Rapture.



Kedikat -> RE: human conceit (6/3/2006 2:07:37 AM)

In spite of another thread I started, and have kept somewhat neutral in. I will say in this thread, that I am anti religion. Not anti all the good things that are obviously in all religions. But anti people having to find or practice those so obviously good things in the context of a formalized religion. That is what I rail against. That the basic, obvious good things that people should practice in the day to day life, need not be found and regulated in any stricture such as politics or religion. I find the two to be so similar in many ways. After so many thousands of years of people living and learning of the world/universe and each other together. Religion and politics just seem to be the last artificial divisions of realising what works. There are no definable boundaries. They are all fuzzy. But society, politics and religion need to shed what does not work, combine what does. And grow without limits of the past. History in all it's forms is just a lesson learned to build upon. Not something to fasten to. Some of it carries on, some is discarded.
Human beings continue to separate themselves into definitions that limit them and conflict. The limitations so often are self inflicted. No gay man limits what I might do, no Muslim or Christian limits what I can attain, if all of them do not fear what another can be.
If you define your world in some realm, so be it. Excel in your realm. Do not limit my realm, or envy what I do in it, nor condem it. Revel in the excellance we can all achieve. And the happiness that is there. Be glad that there are those who explore other realms, so that you might be free to join them.
But even in my undefined and totally open realm, I may be unfulfilled at times. But I fault no others, not even the universe. I just keep trying.



darkinshadows -> RE: human conceit (6/3/2006 3:25:00 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kedikat

In spite of another thread I started, and have kept somewhat neutral in. I will say in this thread, that I am anti religion. Not anti all the good things that are obviously in all religions. But anti people having to find or practice those so obviously good things in the context of a formalized religion. That is what I rail against. That the basic, obvious good things that people should practice in the day to day life, need not be found and regulated in any stricture such as politics or religion. I find the two to be so similar in many ways. After so many thousands of years of people living and learning of the world/universe and each other together. Religion and politics just seem to be the last artificial divisions of realising what works. There are no definable boundaries. They are all fuzzy. But society, politics and religion need to shed what does not work, combine what does. And grow without limits of the past. History in all it's forms is just a lesson learned to build upon. Not something to fasten to. Some of it carries on, some is discarded.
Human beings continue to separate themselves into definitions that limit them and conflict. The limitations so often are self inflicted. No gay man limits what I might do, no Muslim or Christian limits what I can attain, if all of them do not fear what another can be.
If you define your world in some realm, so be it. Excel in your realm. Do not limit my realm, or envy what I do in it, nor condem it. Revel in the excellance we can all achieve. And the happiness that is there. Be glad that there are those who explore other realms, so that you might be free to join them.
But even in my undefined and totally open realm, I may be unfulfilled at times. But I fault no others, not even the universe. I just keep trying.


 
I hate labels.  But they occur.  Fact.  Christian - dominant - scientist - liberal - man - woman - transexual... they help to define what we are to ourselves.  What some people fail to do is realise that they are individual definitions and cannot and IMO should not be used to generalise a population, group or section.  As long as we remember that a tin of beans is a tin of beans but maybe not as yummy as heinz tin of beans... then all would be wonderful.
 
I wanted to just pick out a couple of things I disagree with from my personal point of view.
 
quote:

But society, politics and religion need to shed what does not work, combine what does.

I believe it is society... or rather man/woman who should shed what doesnt work and combine what does.  I think that humans can work with religion, science, politics, spirituality and the environment... instead of trying to seperate them all and work to accept them on a universal and individual basis.  Each of these evole and change constantly.... there is always new understanding and progression.  That is what evolution is all about.
 
I totally agree on your statement on your 'realm'.  I could not support it more.  But it is the realisation that each person is unique and they have their own 'realm' and that doesn't make them lesser, or sheep, or more delusional, or more conceited or anything.  Difference occurs.  If everything was uniform it would be dull and boring IMO.
 
Life would be wonderful if we could accept each others difference and not have to live them for ourselve, not feel the need to 'lift' our own belief higher than theirs by being condesending or throwing around insults.  (Not that You have at all Kedikat in fact I find your posts most refreshing and wonderful to debate with).
 
Peace and Rapture



Kedikat -> RE: human conceit (6/3/2006 5:17:07 AM)

[/quote]
I believe it is society... or rather man/woman who should shed what doesnt work and combine what does.  I think that humans can work with religion, science, politics, spirituality and the environment... instead of trying to seperate them all and work to accept them on a universal and individual basis.  Each of these evole and change constantly.... there is always new understanding and progression.  That is what evolution is all about.
 
I totally agree on your statement on your 'realm'.  I could not support it more.  But it is the realisation that each person is unique and they have their own 'realm' and that doesn't make them lesser, or sheep, or more delusional, or more conceited or anything.  Difference occurs.  If everything was uniform it would be dull and boring IMO.
 
Life would be wonderful if we could accept each others difference and not have to live them for ourselve, not feel the need to 'lift' our own belief higher than theirs by being condesending or throwing around insults.  (Not that You have at all Kedikat in fact I find your posts most refreshing and wonderful to debate with).
 
Peace and Rapture

[/quote]

Thankyou .
My concept of just taking what works, would in a way delete the concepts/boundaries? of politics, science, religion. It would take what works in all of them and just be humans living and growing. Utopian of course, but I can dream. Though I can be venomous in my writing, against religion and politics and other things. It is seldom in an overall sense. As all of them have things of great value to offer. I just hate it when it is dogmatic and enforced upon all as THE way.
( political/religious/cool trend )

I enjoy your replies and posts too. :)



pinkee -> RE: human conceit (6/3/2006 6:24:39 AM)

Only an a** would post the Op in this thread.
 
pinkee



MstrTiger -> RE: human conceit (6/3/2006 10:10:52 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkinshadows

quote:

ORIGINAL: MstrTiger


“Some people would disagree that religion is a manmade concept - for it comes from the words of whichever deity is held at that religions core... man would be viewed purely as the vessel to relate it.”

Nope, a religion is created by people venerating the word and not the words themselves. Expressing belief in a divine power is just part of the delusion, you cant separate the worship aspect of religion from the god that is being venerated, a religion can create a god though a god cant create a religion. Gods are creations of belief and veneration and if people stop worshiping them then they no longer exist in any true sense.

Just because you stop breathing - doesn't mean the air disappears.
The above is your view - and thats great.  But there are many people from many religions who would disagree.  So that makes them delusional?
I make no apology for wondering when you and others who have contributed to this thread, and any other discussion on something/someone you do not agree with (be that religions, countries, state) decided it is alright to insult people you do not agree with.  What happened to discussing differences without labeling?
 
Peace and Rapture



You appear to have totally missed my point, the difference between air and god is the fact that air exists in the real world, gods only become gods because people make them so. You said that “Some people would disagree that religion is a manmade concept” such people are clearly wrong, I have nothing against people worshipping whoever they like though they should not take the fact that just because something is worshipped it necessarily therefore exists and it does not mean the thing they worship has any real impact on the world beond the actions of the people who worship it.

For example if someone started a cult tomorrow worshipping a giant celestial chicken would that mean that just because people worshipped the giant celestial chicken that it would exist in any real sense? No, of course it would not, he would just be a creation given form through worship. Even though the giant celestial chicken does not exist that does not stop him from being a god, gods are created through veneration and because people worship the giant celestial chicken that makes it a god even though it is not real.

Could you also point out where in my post I insulted you? and also at what point I labelled anyone? I was just saying what I thought about the issue, do you find people disagreeing with you personally insulting?

"A definition of existential solipsism?"

I am not sure i asked google though nothing about it came up I dont know much about philosophy.



darkinshadows -> RE: human conceit (6/3/2006 10:35:19 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MstrTiger

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkinshadows

quote:

ORIGINAL: MstrTiger


“Some people would disagree that religion is a manmade concept - for it comes from the words of whichever deity is held at that religions core... man would be viewed purely as the vessel to relate it.”

Nope, a religion is created by people venerating the word and not the words themselves. Expressing belief in a divine power is just part of the delusion, you cant separate the worship aspect of religion from the god that is being venerated, a religion can create a god though a god cant create a religion. Gods are creations of belief and veneration and if people stop worshiping them then they no longer exist in any true sense.

Just because you stop breathing - doesn't mean the air disappears.
The above is your view - and thats great.  But there are many people from many religions who would disagree.  So that makes them delusional?
I make no apology for wondering when you and others who have contributed to this thread, and any other discussion on something/someone you do not agree with (be that religions, countries, state) decided it is alright to insult people you do not agree with.  What happened to discussing differences without labeling?
 
Peace and Rapture



You appear to have totally missed my point, the difference between air and god is the fact that air exists in the real world, gods only become gods because people make them so. You said that “Some people would disagree that religion is a manmade concept” such people are clearly wrong, I have nothing against people worshipping whoever they like though they should not take the fact that just because something is worshipped it necessarily therefore exists and it does not mean the thing they worship has any real impact on the world beond the actions of the people who worship it.

For example if someone started a cult tomorrow worshipping a giant celestial chicken would that mean that just because people worshipped the giant celestial chicken that it would exist in any real sense? No, of course it would not, he would just be a creation given form through worship. Even though the giant celestial chicken does not exist that does not stop him from being a god, gods are created through veneration and because people worship the giant celestial chicken that makes it a god even though it is not real.

Could you also point out where in my post I insulted you? and also at what point I labelled anyone? I was just saying what I thought about the issue, do you find people disagreeing with you personally insulting?

"A definition of existential solipsism?"

I am not sure i asked google though nothing about it came up I dont know much about philosophy.

Clearly wrong?
No. To YOU they are clearly wrong.  To others and to themselves they are clearly correct.  But that isnt what you are saying.  You are saying that without a doubt - whatever... they are CLEARLY WRONG.  If that isnt what you are saying, at least show others the dignity of stating its your opinion and not make a sweeping statement.  Who made you 'god' to say any deity doesn't exist?  Where is your proof?
 
oh and I didn't miss your point.  It is possbile you missed mine, but I would not make that assumption for you.
 
Your post didnt insult me, you do not possess that ability.  I felt it was insulting and condecending and you did nothing different than people who choose to mock others beliefs have done throught the years (and yes that includes religious people mocking the non religious).  You clearly labelled all people who express belief in a divine power as delusional.  There is a difference between disagreeing with anothers point of view and name calling.
 
Kedikat and I share different views, yet not once has He had to stoop to placing labels on anyone or anything - just stated His point of view.  Self labeling is consensual.  Labeling others just for the sake of pigeonholing all into one neat little box is not.
 
Peace and Rapture



MstrTiger -> RE: human conceit (6/3/2006 5:00:45 PM)


If you are going to make an attempt at countering what I am saying I would recommend you trying to argue against the things I am saying rather than just bitching about the way I say them, you totally ignored everything I said and applied your own totally inaccurate interpretation of how I used one word I did not use it in a negative way at all. I think it is quite apparent that everything in my post was my own personal opinion and I do not think I would need to spell that out for people to appreciate the fact.

You can totally ignore what I say and all me a bigot to suit your own purposes if you want, though you are totally wrong to do so I would also just like to point out that by making me out to be a bigot with no actual justification whatsoever means it is in fact you that are applying inaccurate labels to people and not me. I hold no negative view of anyone who follows any of the major world religions even though I do not like some of the deeply bigoted sentiments held within some of them.

You say I am wrong? Would you like to point out where I am wrong? And please don’t just use that question as an excuse for another pointless outburst, if you cant defend your own particular viewpoint on a particular subject in anyway other than to make out the person who holds the counter opinion is a bigot then perhaps you should reconsider offering an argument in the first place.



MstrTiger -> RE: human conceit (6/3/2006 5:31:20 PM)


Further more have you read the opening message? Do you actually think this is the sort of thread where it is appropriate place to bitch at people about voicing their opinions? I have nothing against people believing whatever they want to though I do object to people bitching about me on a thread like this when all I did was raise some points to debate, you might want people to put your beliefs on a pedestal and frankly if you do then I think posting about them on a thread like this makes you look quite silly feel free to bitch about people not respecting other peoples beliefs if you like though frankly I don’t think this is the sort of thread to do it on, it appears to be more about controvercial debate.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
4.699707E-02