The Philosophy of the Edenic Faith

Hey Nahushtan, welcome.

Did you make it all up over a long weekend with too much alcohol, or do you have reasons why you think this is all true.

Is it rather just a way of living that seems good to you, while borrowing the good bits of various religions?

I am very curious. How does one found one's own religion?

I'm with Eorl. Did you just make this all up or what?

How does that make it different and less credible than all the rest?

farmerman, it doesn't....but I wasn't there to see Martin Luther wacking away at the doors of the Wittenburg church, so I didn't get to ask him any questions

Martin Luther didnt whack away at the doors , he nailed his theses upon them. Im afraid that, when we all get to the bottom of any religion, were stuck with the same question about
"who made all this up?"

Religions are all funny that way, they demand total unquestioning fealty of their revealed "truth" with a strong helping of utter contempt for someone elses.

fm-

No wonder you don't appreciate functionalist science as applied to human social structures.

Nahushtan (or may we call you "Serpent"),

Your number 7 says "abstinence from things which are not needed".

How about "abstinence from from belief in mythical beings" or "abstinence from encouraging the proliferation of designer niche markets in the faith industry" ?

splendiferous

What is functionalist science? Youve got me on that one. Does your comment mean that you deny the truth of my last point? Ive always wondered why , as a kid, we always divided the world into Catholics and Non-Catholics. We always prayed for our poor miscuided bretheren (and sisteren). The Evangelicals literally foam at the mouth, and the Muslims, outraged that we make fun of them by spoofing Mohammed as a bomber, go out and start throwing bombs.

You realize that the Federation of Planets has some rules of admission. I think weve been passed over as " too primitive"

Well fm-

That's hardly surprising in view of the trouble we seem incapable of preventing ourselves from causing despite enormous efforts,mostly renumerated by peer assessment,to reconstruct our divine nature.

Functional science is when you don't bother debating the shape or colour or other aesthetic characteristics of a hammer and rely instead on how efficient it is at knocking nails in fast.

All those cults which depart from the true faith of The Holy Church of Rome soon begin to foam at the mouth.I think it is due to a reaction to the way proper priests look down their noses at them which is all they are allowed to do in these remarkable times.

. My guess is that youve made that entire line out of "spendispeak". My only knowledge of "functional sciences" from the US vernacular, has to do with vocational training. VoTech schools call things like farrier training or inductrial metal treating a"functional science'

fm wrote-



You are right.That is my style.If I borrow anything I usually attribute it but the sources of my language use are so vast that I simply try to express my admiration in trying to condense a general imitation.

You probably do the same which might just as easily be referred to as effemspeak.(A bit of ID-iot invention I couldn't resist).

Farrier training and industrial metal training are essentially functional although it is not unknown for farriers, when being called to a riding school on an emergency,to become disorientated and not a little mystical.

People who sit on committees are not generally organised psychically for functional operations due to the well known principle your Mr Veblen enunciated so beautifully that use=odium and waste=status.

well he was just a humorous old Cheesehead anyway. You really have to be more selective about who you lionize and why.

I simply look out at the world and it is entirely as He described it.Trash shifters are useful and therefore odious and philosophers are useless and therefore admirable.

Have you never read The Book Of Etiquette?It is a catalogue of uselessness.

Check out the auction sale of Madame de Pompadour's accoutrements after she so sadly passed away.

Hey.... what happened to our brand new guru?

Not crucified already surely?

hehe guys. very funny.
prehaps he was scared off by the fact you all picked him to pieces the moment he opened his trap.

why is it that atheists pick so much? Philosophers tend to pick the use of wording very often, have you every thought that it actually weakens your argument? If you pick at wording, maybe its because the argument is so good it doesnt actually have anything you can pick at properly.

maybe that would make a better thread.

Or maybe we should make up our own religion, which encourages people to be sinical about everything? we can hand out pamflets and everything! Oh, and i get to be the god of this new religon btw. all worship me!!! I command thee! mwuhahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

well PQ, if I may point something out. The more religiously endowed were the ones who picked him apart. I, as a proud agnostic, was on his side asking others what they feel is so special about the beliefs they hold?
The religious individuals were the first to pounce because, heaven forbid, anyone should question the "correctness" of Christianity.

Point accepted. But what i said is still true even if it isnt applied to this here argument.
that is the exact reaon why christians annoy me.
One of my friends walks around as if his head is in his arse.
did jesus do that? If so, then no wonder he died.

Going back a little to-



Luther,like other reformers such as Arnold of Bresica and Jacopone da Todi and a long line from 1000 AD to now were all the same.Calvin ugh.

They fought the Church for governing too slackly.

They have their equivalents in all major cultures.

What they sought was to rid society of human social action and put in its place Nature,clean waking consciousness,and "pure cause controlled and cause pervaded space".Science overpowering economics.The defeat of the patrician in favour of the common man but only the urban type.Roundheads rather than cavaliers.

And their Holy Causality is not of this world.It is simple abstract scientific truth which can be verified and tested.

As Spengler remarks-

"The mystic experience of Luther which gave birth to his doctrine of justification is the experience,(SD),not of a St Bernard in the presence of woods and hills and clouds and stars,but of a man who looks through narrow windows on the streets and house walls and gables.Broad God-perfused nature is remote,outside the city wall; and the free intellect,detached from the soil,is inside it.Within the urban stone-walled waking consciousness (where Mediacorps lurk) sense and reason part company and become enemies,and the city-mysticism of the last reformers is thus a mysticism of pure reason through and through and not one of the eye-- an illumination of concepts,in presence of which the brightly coloured figures of the old myth fade into paleness."

Thus elitist to its core.The poor and the uneducated could shift for themselves.Nothing but aloneness in the presence of the infinite was to remain once the priestly intermediary of belief was removed.

I'll bet Judge Jones has never heard of any such idiotic nonsense in his life not being a common person.

ID is on the side of the common people and in the long run cannot lose this battle.Pharmaceuticals are just a sticking plaster.

The quote at the top of this post is nothing but empty wordnoise,superficially slick and designed to produce a city-slicker sneer as if you can dismiss the Reformation with a wisecrack.

Any SDer with symbols of rustic mysticism around his/her house is schizo.