echi wrote:mesquite,
You, no doubt, forget that the Christian lives for the next world, not this one. God is always watching (judging), and he might be a bit disappointed to see one of his flock cower in their final, Earthly moments. If you're at all familiar with the Bible then you know what a big mistake it can be to disappoint the Creator!
I am familiar with the Bible echi, and damn near anything humans do is disagreeable to his royal offendedness.
mesquite wrote:echi wrote:mesquite,
You, no doubt, forget that the Christian lives for the next world, not this one. God is always watching (judging), and he might be a bit disappointed to see one of his flock cower in their final, Earthly moments. If you're at all familiar with the Bible then you know what a big mistake it can be to disappoint the Creator!
I am familiar with the Bible echi, and damn near anything humans do is disagreeable to his royal offendedness.
What I don't understand is why there is no mention of religious delusion in the DSM. (It must be politics, I reckon.)
steve - i wouldn't say a religious atheist as yet again that implies i am relgious. i believe that religion is a concept formed by churches not to form a relationship between each other and God and the community, but simply a money orientated business. i think that religion is dying, i am a man of faith, not religion. religious people follow the laws of their religion. that's it. they don't have a relationship with God or Jesus or whoever they are supposed to be worshipping. the go on the basis that if you live a good life and go to church, you'll get to heaven. whereas me, as a man of faith, realise this isn't enough, you must accept Jesus as your Lord AND Saviour. no just one and leave the other out. religious people are the people who frown upon others thinking that they are lower class because they don't believe, whereas a man of faith looks at others as he looks at himself. everybody is equal, whether they have salvation or not. so please don't say that i'm religious, i disagree.
as for the covering up of women etc. i think that nakedness is not a sin. pornography is not wrong because people are naked but because the people involved are looked upon as mere objects for the ''entertainment'' of others. the fact that they are using sex as a career instead of a connection based on love, that's why porn is bad, not the nakedness. adam and eve were naked and God didn't complain. only after they betrayed him and were infected by sin did they think they should cover themselves, God didn't ask them to, they felt guilt about being naked in each others company.
mesquite wrote:I am familiar with the Bible echi, and damn near anything humans do is disagreeable to his royal offendedness.
Now that's funny
I served in the army once, and there I shared a room with the most fu**d up christian I have ever met. To him non-christians were hardly human. The words 'his royal offendedness' brought him to mind. Sorry for the digression.
well of course non-christians are human. to think you're better than someone (or worse than someone) because of what you or they believe is stupid.
"What sort of god do you worship that would rather you die than say a few insincere words under duress to some deranged nutcase or fanatic?"
Who said rockpie worships a 'sort' of God that would rather him die?
that's true. God doesn't want me to die, or anybody else, that's why he offers eternal life through Jesus. this life is simply to prove our worth for the next. i read a danish proverb which states ''this life is a gift from God, what we do with it is our gift back to him.'' this is why Christians should not be afraid of death, if they've lived as they should then they will enter heaven.
Then again it depends what you mean by dying. If the soul lives forever we never die.
I think rockpie hit the mark. It is this fear of dying, fear of not existing, that prevents a person from taking an honest look at the facts of the matter. Taking an honest look might lead to the realization that our ego, our "person", cannot survive death. That can be a scary thought.
Faith offers the comfort of believing in ego immortality. But how much faith is enough?
I don't get why death is so scary.
Sure I get the dying part, and the part about loved ones mourning, but aside from that I just don't see what's the big deal. This whole ego is an illusion anyway, and not an all pleasant one.
Quote:I don't get why death is so scary.
Sure I get the dying part, and the part about loved ones mourning, but aside from that I just don't see what's the big deal. This whole ego is an illusion anyway, and not an all pleasant one.
Hey, Cyracuz.
I was going to try to be smart and give a good answer to that question. But it turns out I really have no idea (at least, I can't think of one at the moment).
Oh, wait..... here it comes.
It's a fear of the unknown, isn't it? That's crazy to think about, since everything that can be known is part of the ego. It's a perfect trap!
It is a perfect trap, and it is set by the ego. What a cabable illusion that is
Cyracuz wrote:This whole ego is an illusion anyway,
ego is an illusion....ok.
echi wrote:...everything that can be known is part of the ego.
everything known is part of this illusion.....alright.
Cyracuz wrote:It is a perfect trap, and it is set by the ego.
the trap is set by the illusion called ego.....uh.
Does this mean you guys know diddly yet your not falling for any traps?
How can you know?
Faith maybe?
Wait.......why am I asking you guys....
echi wrote:mesquite wrote:echi wrote:mesquite,
You, no doubt, forget that the Christian lives for the next world, not this one. God is always watching (judging), and he might be a bit disappointed to see one of his flock cower in their final, Earthly moments. If you're at all familiar with the Bible then you know what a big mistake it can be to disappoint the Creator!
I am familiar with the Bible echi, and damn near anything humans do is disagreeable to his royal offendedness.
What I don't understand is why there is no mention of religious delusion in the DSM. (It must be politics, I reckon.)
You mean like homosexuality? Well...'religious delusion' never was mentioned so I guess maybe they are not alike.
oops...
Here comes the actual 'royal' offendedness now......gotta go.
I know him....you guys can't possibly.
Quote:
Cyracuz wrote:
This whole ego is an illusion anyway,
ego is an illusion....ok.
echi wrote:
...everything that can be known is part of the ego.
everything known is part of this illusion.....alright.
Cyracuz wrote:
It is a perfect trap, and it is set by the ego.
the trap is set by the illusion called ego.....uh.
Does this mean you guys know diddly yet your not falling for any traps?
How can you know?
Faith maybe?
Wait.......why am I asking you guys....
That was worth a laugh
We must seem crazy. But it makes sense to me, so maybe I am... Thing is that it makes sense that everything is illution more than that everything is not.
Cyracuz wrote:Quote:
Cyracuz wrote:
This whole ego is an illusion anyway,
ego is an illusion....ok.
echi wrote:
...everything that can be known is part of the ego.
everything known is part of this illusion.....alright.
Cyracuz wrote:
It is a perfect trap, and it is set by the ego.
the trap is set by the illusion called ego.....uh.
Does this mean you guys know diddly yet your not falling for any traps?
How can you know?
Faith maybe?
Wait.......why am I asking you guys....
That was worth a laugh
We must seem crazy. But it makes sense to me, so maybe I am... Thing is that it makes sense that everything is illution more than that everything is not.
Then there is......nothing? I wonder if such a thing is in the DSM...
Wait there is no DSM....I get it.
I guess there is no religious intolerance or bigotry either. No religious delusion.....notta? No grammar or spelchek.
There is no Cyracuz?....noooooooooo.
Are you sure there are.......illusions?
Maybe the illusions are illusions....wowee
The actual thing isn't illution. But I cannot percieve it as anything but illusion. The separate value of anything is illusion, because only in coexistence with everything else does it make sense. Explaining one thing will always lead to a new thing, and that reveals that nothing is entirely independent. Thus their separate identities are illusory.
Cyracuz wrote:The actual thing isn't illution. But I cannot percieve it as anything but illusion. The separate value of anything is illusion, because only in coexistence with everything else does it make sense. Explaining one thing will always lead to a new thing, and that reveals that nothing is entirely independent. Thus their separate identities are illusory.
A good delusion/belief to adopt in order to deal with things like death...God...etc. and the fear of them at least in the short term....
Yes, self is an illusion to do just that, but I suspect that wasn't what you meant.
A question for you. If the self relies on external input to exist, how is it's separate identity justifiable?
Bartikus wrote:Does this mean you guys know diddly yet your not falling for any traps?
I fall for traps all the time. Some are better than others. The first step in getting free from a trap is to recognize that you are in one.
"Illusion", BTW, is not an entirely accurate description, but it's just as good as any other word.
