human conceit (Full Version)

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



Message

meatcleaver -> human conceit (6/2/2006 2:31:13 AM)

Rather than hijack another thread, I've just got to have this rant.

The very idea that human beings are central to some divine plan by some almighty god seems to me to be the ultimate and greatest of human conceits. Civilisations come and civilisations go in the twinkle of an eye. If we destroy our habitat like other civilisations have, we will destroy ourselves. No god will intervene. Look at the innocent starving children in famines in Africa. What did they do to provoke such divine wrath? Where is the loving god? Gone on vacation and left his wicked alter ego in charge?  

The universe existed way before we were the twinkle in an amoeba's eye and it will be here long after humans become extinct. Whatever the source of the universe, just intelligent observation tells us we are central to nothing but ourselves. We invented god in our image, god is a security blanket. He is no more going to save you, teach you or flog your ass in that great BDSM dungeon in the sky than reveal himself on prime time TV this evening.

It's easy to have a god that told some primitive fundemetalist zealots what his divine plan is in the far and distant past. Convenient even because who can question it? If anyone is going to look after human beings it is human beings themselves and the best place to start is by looking after our habitat and considering our fellow human beings, most of who live in dire poverty. There is no god to look after them because we are god because we created god.

God is nothing but human conceit.



Kedikat -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 2:32:58 AM)

Yep.





Tikkiee -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 2:34:09 AM)

Normally, I pass by your posts because they are so full of hate and anger; but this time, I totally agree with you.
Well said.



meatcleaver -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 2:41:41 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tikkiee

Normally, I pass by your posts because they are so full of hate and anger; but this time, I totally agree with you.
Well said.


I don't hate. I just get angry.

Call it divine wrath.[;)]



Tikkiee -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 2:44:02 AM)

quote:

Call it divine wrath.[;)]

LOL irony at it's best [8D]



Rule -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 2:56:20 AM)

It is both more complicated and simpler than that. The main problem is that the concept 'god' is like a kind of stew with many ingredients, so people understandably are confused about the nature of what they refer to when they use the word 'god'. It becomes simpler when one manages to distinguish between the different ingredients of the god-stew.



Kedikat -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 3:20:54 AM)

I think God may be a twisted remnant of a herd instinct. It's old uses underlying our more evolved minds, but having it's effect in religion and following.
Also, our relatively new ability ( on evolutionary timescales ) to forsee our death and think and worry about it. So conjure the comfort of escaping it, by creating afterlives in our various beliefs.
And a holdover from when we had no science but were smart enough to wonder why. We saw that we could effect things, so a bigger us must be effecting the bigger things. We made God in our own image. Some of us attempt to cast him out of what could be a garden of eden.



darkinshadows -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 4:27:38 AM)

I believe your comment is an over simplification of a much broader observation.
 
And whilst I accept your idea that 'God is nothing but human conceit.' I also deny it.  For myself.
 
I am amazed why time and time again, christianity (and more recently, Muslim belief) is viewed as 'open season'.
There are many, many beliefs stretched out across the world from Hinduism to the Oahspe writings - yet people continuously wish to tout distain for specific religions.
 
Personal thoughts and ideas are just that.  Personal.  Whilst they may not settle well with you, they are other peoples beliefs.  I wouldn't insult you by insinuating that your belief is conceited - I may say it isnt for me, and it isn't something I would follow but to tarnish everyone with the same brush is little more than religious hatred.
 
So, ok... some christians do the same thing - but tit for tat retribution only adds to misery and will never solve any mystery - and has led to countless genocidal occurances of all beliefs just because people feel it is appropriate to group all individuals into one neat little box.
 
Peace and Rapture



pinkee -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 4:29:03 AM)

Great sex is proof that God exists and loves U/us dearly.
 
pinkee



pahunkboy -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 4:42:05 AM)

In the words of Michael Milken, former junk bond king. Greed is good.

[Greed is nothing new...]

Greed, ego, pick a word.

Katrina showed an ugly-UGLY part of US governance- that  I cringed, and still cringe. A roll of the dice and it could be you or I- next time. Numerous people attempted to send help from all over the globe. Many were refused. [including a semi full of supplies from Walmart!]

As for God, ..I havent figured it out.
*smiles*



meatcleaver -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 5:02:52 AM)

Not all religions see humans as central to a divine plan but that is by and by.

People died at the hands of Christians by simply acknowledging what their senses observed and what the Greeks knew hundreds of years BC and that was the world is round. Religions have become more tolerant because they have had to, not because they are intrinsically tolerant. Science doesn't claim to know truth, it merely states what it observes and proposes theories. I would argue science is more than an opinion since it is through science we can fly around the world and observe the vastness of the universe amongst many other things but it is not dogmatic.

Religion claims the divine plan and its only evidence is mere opinion of people who appear to doubt their senses and have an inability to put forward coherent arguments that support their beliefs. That is why religion is dangerous, it is irrational.



ArtCatDom -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 6:12:04 AM)

I think its a conceit to argue against religion based on a very narrow swath of it.

*meow*



meatcleaver -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 6:49:20 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ArtCatDom

I think its a conceit to argue against religion based on a very narrow swath of it.

*meow*


Not really.

Since religions claim to be about truth, there really should be some empirical evidence you should be able to produce.... but then it is just faith in a truth without any evidence other than hearsay.

I'm ready to be convinced otherwise.



ArtCatDom -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 6:56:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: ArtCatDom

I think its a conceit to argue against religion based on a very narrow swath of it.

*meow*


Not really.

Since religions claim to be about truth, there really should be some empirical evidence you should be able to produce.... but then it is just faith in a truth without any evidence other than hearsay.

I'm ready to be convinced otherwise.


It was not my intent to get into a debate about the existance of God with you.

I was simply pointing out that the OP was based on a very very narrow subsection of religion. (And filled with venom at that.)

*meow*



Alumbrado -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 6:57:48 AM)

quote:

...That is why religion is dangerous, it is irrational.


That sums it up.

In order to 'belong' all religions require one to accept some irrational premise(s) on faith, and often, in the face of controverting evidence...
Then group dynamics take over, and before you know it, the pitchforks come out and it is OK to use any means to defend the 'true faith' from its 'enemies' ( i.e. both the evil rationalists and the competing creeds). 




meatcleaver -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 6:58:30 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ArtCatDom


quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: ArtCatDom

I think its a conceit to argue against religion based on a very narrow swath of it.

*meow*


Not really.

Since religions claim to be about truth, there really should be some empirical evidence you should be able to produce.... but then it is just faith in a truth without any evidence other than hearsay.

I'm ready to be convinced otherwise.


It was not my intent to get into a debate about the existance of God with you.

I was simply pointing out that the OP was based on a very very narrow subsection of religion. (And filled with venom at that.)

*meow*


The venom is your perception.



MistressLorelei -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 7:07:46 AM)

I believe what you say to be true... but, I don't condemn others for having this belief system.  While, I think that religion causes a lot of hate and ruin  in the world.... it also balances the world.  Many people base their ethics/morals and values on 'god is watching', 'if I want to go to heaven, I must/must not....'   God and Santa Claus have similar purposes...  be good for goodness sake, or you won't be rewarded in the end. 



ArtCatDom -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 7:16:51 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver
The venom is your perception.


I agree its a subjective judgement. However statements like the following reveal an antipathy (emphesis added):
quote:


It's easy to have a god that told some primitive fundemetalist zealots what his divine plan is in the far and distant past.


*meow*



meatcleaver -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 7:24:24 AM)

Well prophets are fundemental zealots. The primitive part is judgemental though, I accept.



ArtCatDom -> RE: human conceit (6/2/2006 7:37:15 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

Well prophets are fundemental zealots. The primitive part is judgemental though, I accept.


Well, I don't believe prophets are necessarily fundementalists, but I have a rather broad definition for Prophet compared to most monotheists. (This is due to my belief in continuing revelation and the inspiration of the Holy Ghost.)

*meow*



Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875