Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules (Everyone Must Read!!!)

1] What you CAN NOT post.

You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this forum to post any material which is:
- abusive
- vulgar
- hateful
- harassing
- personal attacks
- obscene

You also may not:
- post images that are too large (max is 500*500px)
- post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or cited properly.
- post in UPPER CASE, which is considered yelling
- post messages which insult the Armenians, Armenian culture, traditions, etc
- post racist or other intentionally insensitive material that insults or attacks another culture (including Turks)

The Ankap thread is excluded from the strict rules because that place is more relaxed and you can vent and engage in light insults and humor. Notice it's not a blank ticket, but just a place to vent. If you go into the Ankap thread, you enter at your own risk of being clowned on.
What you PROBABLY SHOULD NOT post...
Do not post information that you will regret putting out in public. This site comes up on Google, is cached, and all of that, so be aware of that as you post. Do not ask the staff to go through and delete things that you regret making available on the web for all to see because we will not do it. Think before you post!


2] Use descriptive subject lines & research your post. This means use the SEARCH.

This reduces the chances of double-posting and it also makes it easier for people to see what they do/don't want to read. Using the search function will identify existing threads on the topic so we do not have multiple threads on the same topic.

3] Keep the focus.

Each forum has a focus on a certain topic. Questions outside the scope of a certain forum will either be moved to the appropriate forum, closed, or simply be deleted. Please post your topic in the most appropriate forum. Users that keep doing this will be warned, then banned.

4] Behave as you would in a public location.

This forum is no different than a public place. Behave yourself and act like a decent human being (i.e. be respectful). If you're unable to do so, you're not welcome here and will be made to leave.

5] Respect the authority of moderators/admins.

Public discussions of moderator/admin actions are not allowed on the forum. It is also prohibited to protest moderator actions in titles, avatars, and signatures. If you don't like something that a moderator did, PM or email the moderator and try your best to resolve the problem or difference in private.

6] Promotion of sites or products is not permitted.

Advertisements are not allowed in this venue. No blatant advertising or solicitations of or for business is prohibited.
This includes, but not limited to, personal resumes and links to products or
services with which the poster is affiliated, whether or not a fee is charged
for the product or service. Spamming, in which a user posts the same message repeatedly, is also prohibited.

7] We retain the right to remove any posts and/or Members for any reason, without prior notice.


- PLEASE READ -

Members are welcome to read posts and though we encourage your active participation in the forum, it is not required. If you do participate by posting, however, we expect that on the whole you contribute something to the forum. This means that the bulk of your posts should not be in "fun" threads (e.g. Ankap, Keep & Kill, This or That, etc.). Further, while occasionally it is appropriate to simply voice your agreement or approval, not all of your posts should be of this variety: "LOL Member213!" "I agree."
If it is evident that a member is simply posting for the sake of posting, they will be removed.


8] These Rules & Guidelines may be amended at any time. (last update September 17, 2009)

If you believe an individual is repeatedly breaking the rules, please report to admin/moderator.
See more
See less

Religion and the Armenian Genocide

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #81
    1.5

    Actually faith and reason are complimentary. It is man's fallen nature of cave life that makes them appear contradictory. I see you have a very negative view of religion. Are you willing to consider that the abuse of religion is not the initial intent of the teaching but just a result of our egotism to use it as a tool to justify itself by perverting it?

    This may get a little brutal now but I want you to tell me if what you will now read represents a relgion initiating with a conscious source or the abuse of religion only possible through man not satisfied with "reason.":

    http://www.agiasofia.com/genocide/genocide.html

    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,And now the Young Turks, who had adopted so many of Abdul Hamid's ideas, also made his Armenian policy their own. Their passion for Turkifying the nation seemed to demand logically the extermination of all Christians---Greeks, Syrians, and Armenians. Much as they admired the Mohammedan conquerors of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, they stupidly believed that these great warriors had made one fatal mistake, for they had had it in their power completely to obliterate the Christian populations and had neglected to do so. This policy in their opinion was a fatal error of statesmanship and explained all the woes from which Turkey has suffered in modern times. Had these old Moslem chieftains, when they conquered Bulgaria, put, all the Bulgarians to the sword, and peopled the Bulgarian country with Moslem Turks, there would never have been any modern Bulgarian problem and Turkey would never have lost this part of her empire. Similarly, had they destroyed a ll the Rumanians, Serbians, and Greeks, the provinces which are now occupied by these races would still have remained integral parts of the Sultan's domain. They felt that the mistake had been a terrible one, but that something might be saved from the ruin. They would destroy all Greeks, Syrians, Armenians, and other Christians, move Moslem families into their homes and into their farms, and so make sure that these territories would not similarly be taken away from Turkey. In order to accomplish this great reform, it would not be necessary to murder every living Christian. The most beautiful and healthy Armenian girls could be taken, converted forcibly to Mohammedanism, and made the wives or concubines of devout followers of the Prophet. Their children would then automatically become Moslems and so strengthen the empire, as the Janissaries had strengthened it formerly. These Armenian girls represent a high type of womanhood and the Young Turks, in their crude, intuitive way, recognized that the mingling of their blood with the Turkish population would exert a eugenic influence upon the whole. Armenian boys of tender years could be taken into Turkish families and be brought up in ignorance of the fact that they were anything but Moslems....

    Chapter XXIV (The murder of a nation): "Let me relate a single episode which is contained in one of the reports of our consuls and which now forms part of the records of the American State Department. Early in July, 2,000 Armenian "ameles" (such is the Turkish word for soldiers who have been reduced to workmen) were sent from Harpoot to build roads. The Armenians in that town understood what this meant and pleaded with the Governor for mercy. But this official insisted that the men were not to be harmed, and he even called upon the German missionary, Mr. Ehemann, to quiet the panic, giving that gentleman his word of honour that the ex-soldiers would be protected. Mr. Ehemann believed the Governor and assuaged the popular fear. Yet practically every man of these 2,000 was massacred, and his body thrown into a cave. A few escaped, and it was from these that news of the massacre reached the world. A few days afterward another 2,000 soldiers were sent to Diarbekir. The only purpose of sending these men out in the open country was that they might be massacred. In order that they might have no strength to resist or to escape by flight, these poor creatures were systematically starved. Government agents went ahead on the road, notifying the Kurds that the caravan was approaching and ordering them to do their congenial duty. Not only did the Kurdish tribesmen pour down from the mountains upon this starved and weakened regiment, but the Kurdish women came with butcher's knives in order that they might gain that merit in Allah's eyes that comes from killing a Christian. These massacres were not isolated happenings; I could detail many more episodes just as horrible as the one related above; throughout the Turkish Empire a systematic attempt was made to kill all able-bodied men, not only for the purpose of removing all males who might propagate a new generation of Armenians, but for the purpose of rendering the weaker part of the population an easy prey.... As a preliminary to the searches everywhere, the strong men of the villages and towns were arrested and taken to prison. Their tormentors here would exercise the most diabolical ingenuity in their attempt to make their victims declare themselves to be "revolutionists" and to tell the hiding places of their arms. A common practice was to place the prisoner in a room, with two Turks stationed at each end and each side. The examination would then begin with the bastinado. This is a form of torture not uncommon in the Orient; it consists of beating the soles of the feet with a thin rod. At first the pain is not marked; but as the process goes slowly on, it develops into the most terrible agony, the feet swell and burst, and not infrequently, after being submitted to this treatment, they have to be amputated. The gendarmes would bastinado their Armenian victim until he fainted; they would then revive him by sprinkling water on his face and begin again. If this did not succeed in bringing their victim to terms, they had numerous other methods of persuasion. They would pull out his eyebrows and beard almost hair by hair; they would extract his finger nails and toe nails; they would apply red-hot irons to his breast, tear off his flesh with red-hot pincers, and then pour boiled butter into the wounds. In some cases the gendarmes would nail hands and feet to pieces of wood---evidently in imitation of the Crucifixion, and then, while the sufferer writhed in his agony, they would cry: " Now let your Christ come and help you!"
    This is the perversion of religion at its exoteric level. Relgion as I've come to appreciate it has three basic levels: the "exoteric" which is the outside and secular in nature, the "esoteric" which is the inner teaching or how a person can grow in their being, and the "transcendent" which is where a aperson has become themselves and not a sleeping reacting machine in Plato's Cave.

    I don't read anything religious in this account. All I read is the perversion of religion being used to glorify themselves and their actions.

    The need for "meaning" is different in society the "exoteric" and the "esoteric" direct experience of it. I know many Armenians like Gavur still feel it. It nourishes something inside that nothing coming from the outside can.

    I know it appears corny but I've learned from direct experience that the more one is able to learn about the science of "being" the more one realizes that they do not know.

    You are wary of religion because you are aware of the horrors of what I copied above. I am wary of the absence of religion since I know the changing nature of the motivations of cave life that lead to these situations and all that stands against it is the essence of religion, our inner connection to something higher that allows us to "understand" what we know.

    Comment


    • #82
      Nick - the existance of religion allows for these arbitrary distinctions, makes people care about such and causes horrors to be commited in the name of such (as detailed above in your quotes from Morganthaus book).

      You can claim that faith compliments religion all you want - but your wrong. Reason is based on the concept of doubt - of questioning belief and investigating and discovering truth/answers. Faith allows for no doubt.

      Douglas Adams (Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy):

      "I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."

      "But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves that You exist, and so therefore, by Your own arguments, You don't. Q.E.D."

      "Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

      "Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing."


      I highly recommend Sam Harris's book The End of Faith BTW - reviewed here -

      In this review of Sam Harris' The End of Faith, Kenneth Krause notes Harris' most important points about the destructive nature of faith. After pointing out that hundreds of millions of Americans hold beliefs clearly inconsistent with well-established scientific and historical facts, Harris turns to a discussion of how faith adversely affects our daily lives, directly motivates religious violence, and even threatens the future of civilization. The problem is not so much specific religious doctrines as it is the principle of faith itself--a principle which eschews reason and ends all meaningful conversation. Harris also blames religious moderates as much as fundamentalists for the ongoing religious conflicts of our times. Though Krause greatly appreciates all of these points, he ends by noting at least two deficiences of this book.


      The "light" of Platos cave is in fact knowledge - (empiricle, deductive and inferred) knowledge of the world - pure and simple. People can choose to imagine what the real world is like outside of the cave - but until you venture out and use the tools of reason and observation you will just continue to not have a clue. Faith is another word for saying - "I choose (to remain) ignorant"

      BTW - my "reason" tells me that your faith in Jesus (as Lord) and the views of Jews and Muslims on this issue can't both be right (and are entirely incompatable). Can you prove to me who is right on this Jesus as God thing? (And then we can talk about schisms within Christian thinking). BTW Qur'an 5:71-75; 19:30-38 says any who believe that Jesus was god are going to hell. (did you get that part SoSarkissian when you are thinking your god & religion as essentuially the same as Islam)?

      Also I would like to ask you to prove slavery wrong using the Bible as the only source of "truth" in this matter.

      ANd lastly I would like to ask Simone Weil how she knew that god was good and not evil - as all she saw in the world seemd to be evil - and she could only imagine the "good" - I feel that if she was in fact a person of reason and logic she would conclude god to be evil - but instead she abandoned reason to make up an answer for herself to ease her pain (heroin)

      Comment


      • #83
        Why bad beliefs don't die

        Comment


        • #84
          1.5

          I disagree. It isn't religion that causes friction but as Simone suggests the problem is the need for prestige. This need seeks to create an environment where power and force are the deciding factors to enforce prestige. When religion is secular it becomes a tool for power and force as justification for abominations.. IMO then it isn't religion that creates the need for prestige but the need for prestige that perverts religion for its purposes.

          You can claim that faith compliments religion all you want - but your wrong. Reason is based on the concept of doubt - of questioning belief and investigating and discovering truth/answers. Faith allows for no doubt.

          First of all we are dealing with two different directions. This direction of science is based on measurements in linear time or comparisons between before and after. It is how we test in science. The quality of "being" which is the concern of the essence of religion, on the other hand is the quality of a moment itself, the quality of "Now."

          I understand meaningful faith as described by Gurdjieff in his Aphorisms:

          34. Conscious love evokes the same in response. Emotional love evokes the opposite. Physical love depends on type and polarity.

          35. Conscious faith is freedom. Emotional faith is slavery. Mechanical faith is foolishness.

          36 Hope, when bold, is strength. Hope, with doubt, is cowardice. Hope, with fear, is weakness.
          You seem to be describing a combination of emotional and mechanical faith. Conscious faith is something we don't have as the disciples didn't have it. It must be developed if the ability has not already been atrophied.

          Conscious faith is a quality free of attachment. The doubt is that regular daily existence in the cave can ever satisfy the needs of the evolving human heart. Yet we feel something more and have faith as a necessary life line. It is like awareness of the never changing North Star in navigation that allows us to stay on course while what you are describing is just a form of attachment.

          Those like Sam Harris and Dawkins and those like me can only serve to give each other gray hairs. I just wish I had more Simone in me since she could handle them. She was a highly developed pain in the ass to them. Her brother Andre of course as a genius himself understood it and in a card to her wrote affectionately:

          "It will now be I think 23 years that you made your entry into the phenomenal world to create the greatest pain in the ass for rectors and school directors"
          Of course these "experts" couldn't understand her and she had no attraction to the secularism and BS they were spouting. Simone, you were a pain in the ass that truly annoyed the "Great Beast" and for that you have my undying respect and gratitude for showing me how it can be done.

          <The "light" of Plato's cave is in fact knowledge - (empiricle, deductive and inferred) knowledge of the world - pure and simple. People can choose to imagine what the real world is like outside of the cave - but until you venture out and use the tools of reason and observation you will just continue to not have a clue. Faith is another word for saying - "I choose (to remain) ignorant"
          That is another thing about those like Harris, They could never appreciate Aivazovsky. In fact if there is any way his spirit could be aware of this thread, he must have turned over in his grave. It is bad enough that Harris insinuates that reason could make objective spiritual art unnecessary but now even the sacred light is seen as representing nothing more than empirical evidence.

          Shahen Khachatrian writes in a brief bio on Aivazovsky:

          The magical aspect of light helps make the contact with the dreamlike quality of the Master's art. In the calm seascapes, man is either seen walking alone or sitting down with a thoughtful expression on his face, looking at the distance - towards the light. In the canvas entitled "The Mkhitarist Brothers on the Island of St. Lazare", for example, the island gives the impression of a ship in the sunset and the people seem to be travelers of hope and dreams.

          The concept of light is all important to Aivazovsky. The perceptive viewer will observe that while painting the waves, clouds or sky space, the Artist's emphasis is on the light. In Aivazovsky's art light is the eternal symbol for life, hope and faith. This is light the Creator, the concept of which has its roots deep down in Armenian culture and its continuity in the next generation of Armenian artists. The Artist had heard the songs of the medieval poets glorifying light in the Armenian churches. In his last works ("Amidst the Waves") the light descends from an unseen source as mighty ray that pierces the darkness and establishes hope.

          In the canvases depicting storms (which constitute more that half of Aivazovsky's legacy) man's solidarity to man is apparent in the struggle against the elements. Man does not give up; he triumphs. This is the expression of the popular trait of extreme optimism and resistance. The irony in Aivazovsky's romanticism is the faith that man (this tiny creature of the Universe) has in life and Nature. In the politically turbulent 19th century, it is this same unshakable faith that the Armenian people had in their struggle for self-determination.
          Even the Ar in Armenian means sun light. This light has a definite meaning If the world is the cave and the cave is in darkness, it is the sun or the light coming from beyond earth that offers hope for mean to be more than just a creature attached to the earth which is of course the meaning of the light in Plato's cave analogy.

          Objective good and evil does not exist on earth. Life on earth is just a continual result of the interaction of natural laws. Good and evil than is purely subjective and defined by the wants of a person. As Simone said:

          "It is only the impossible that is possible for God. He has given over the possible to the mechanics of matter and the autonomy of his creatures." Simone Weil
          The following is very deep and taken from an essay by Simone Weil but if you can follow it you'll see what is meant by Creation being a product of laws:

          The sea is not less beautiful to our eye because we know that sometimes ships sink in it. On the contrary, it is more beautiful still. If the sea modified the movement of its waves to spare a boat, it would be a being possessing discernment and choice, and not this fluid that is perfectly obedient to all external pressures. It is this perfect obedience that is its beauty.

          All the horrors that are produced in this world are like the folds imprinted on the waves by gravity. This is why they contain beauty. Sometimes a poem, like the Iliad renders this beauty.

          Man can never escape obedience to God. A creature cannot not obey. The only choice offered to man as an intelligent and free creature, is to desire obedience or not to desire it. If he does not desire it, he perpetually obeys nevertheless, as a thing subject to mechanical necessity. If he does desire obedience, he remains subject to mechanical necessity, but a new necessity is added on, a necessity constituted by the laws that are proper to supernatural things. Certain actions become impossible for him, while others happen through him, sometimes despite him.
          Cave life is the totality of expressions of objective mechanical necessity regardless of our subjective interpretations. The essence of religion offers a conscious alternative.

          You ask if the ideas of Jews and Muslims can be both right. Yes, but at a higher level. Look at the diagram in the following link. At the exoteric level, they will differ depending upon all sorts of interpretations. it is at the transcendendent level that is beyond us where they come together.

          http://www.integralscience.org/unity.html

          The article on belief you linked IMO gives a good indication IMO why we are so acceptable to the obvious absurdities of cave life.

          Comment


          • #85
            I'm soprry for all your wasted effort Nick - but I find nothing at all compelling or convincing about what you have written here.

            Briefly - If "prestige" supposadly "preverts" religion (total speculation/assumption on your/Weils part) and "prestige" is a driving force in man - then I would say once again - based on observation - that religin and religioous belief themselves are still (?) responsible and at the root of the problem because it is such that makes men suseptable to manipulation (perversion) by such things (as "prestige").

            "Conscious" faith is still "blind" faith and ultimatly false belief. Sorry.

            I wouldn't call Dawkins and Harris "Rectors" or "school directors" and I imagine they would have no problem pointing out the absurdities and lack of foundation of many of Weil's speculations. And I mean come now - she (basically) believed/accepted Catholiscim (as truth) - thats not really saying much (positive) IMO. She was very damaged in other ways as well. I'm fine with accepting that she may have had some useful insights - as often truly crazy people do - but to follow her "path" is quite a sad/bleak testament IMO and ultimatly very unfulfilling and negative. And I imagine that the "Great Beast" was/is pretty ignorant and unaffected by Weils existance (except perhaps in her fantasy dreamworld). And sorry miss Weil - the sea does not conciously cradle your boat or consider it when it performs its physical actions - and neither does the universe at large in regards to us...and if by "obideince" Weil is refering to the physical laws of nature then of course - but as for "laws" regarding supernatural things - and this discusion of obediance to god - well both arguments i find lacking (in interest to me as well as to foundation)

            And again - I just don't buy your cave anology (and proposed divine solution). You have given me nothing to make me think you have any better answers or insights or anyting really - quite the opposite. I believe I am wandering about freely outside of the cave dealing with reality (and accepting I will never know every detail of it) while you are stuck inside (with Simone Weil) imagining your ideal of what is outside the cave and thinking that life is only this damp dank little cave and rejecting what is outside the cave for your prefered imaginary landscape. Anyway - we can go on forever with this. Bottom line - it is upon believers to justify their (absurd) beliefs. I mean I could be arguing about the same with an Odin worshiper - if only I learned to rape pillage and plunder properly (saw the light as it were) to please father Odin and enter into Vallhala....well nice story dude - but I ain't buying it? Do you? If not - why are your (made up/invented) beliefs any more valid?

            Comment


            • #86
              1.5

              I don't believe my efforts are wasted. It gives me a chance to practice. I have to put your doubts into my perspective. I know you believe that faith does not allow for doubt but this is not my experience. To doubt is reasonable while skepticism is poison. The reason this is so is because doubt is intellectual and allows us to see errors. Skepticism on the other hand is an emotional attitude. By definition, a person is approaching experience from a preconditioned bias. It denies the impartiality necessary to use their intellect properly and to grow in understanding.

              Anyway - we can go on forever with this. Bottom line - it is upon believers to justify their (absurd) beliefs. I mean I could be arguing about the same with an Odin worshiper - if only I learned to rape pillage and plunder properly (saw the light as it were) to please father Odin and enter into Vallhala....well nice story dude - but I ain't buying it? Do you? If not - why are your (made up/invented) beliefs any more valid?
              You still are missing the essential point. If I was on a recruiting mission, it would be my obligation to convince you. This is not the case. If you or anyone else truly needs to understand and to experience meaning and purpose beyond what their lives give them, it is their obligation to develop their capacity for understanding.

              Matthew 13

              11He replied, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. 12Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. 13This is why I speak to them in parables:
              "Though seeing, they do not see;
              though hearing, they do not hear or understand. 14In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:
              " 'You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
              you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.
              15For this people's heart has become calloused;
              they hardly hear with their ears,
              and they have closed their eyes.
              Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
              hear with their ears,
              understand with their hearts
              and turn, and I would heal them.'[a] 16But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. 17For I tell you the truth, many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it.
              The conceit of men like Harris and Dawkins has achieved such an elevated plane that the very idea that they cannot understand through the eyes and ears normally used is absurd. Even now this common sense observation is being written off in certain parts of "intelligent" society as "elitist" and denying the equality of people.

              The result then is the effort to destroy the substance of these ancient tales, parables, and fables, in such ways that they become meaningless other than for political correctness.

              Yet the whole key is becoming aware of the necessity for a new personal psychological approach that requires these new ears and eyes. Naturally then the burden of proof shifts from the believer to the one wishing to understand. This burden is in going through the necessary efforts to acquire these new eyes and ears. Of course Harris, Dawkins et al will be roflao but this only shows how deep their sleep is.

              My concern is for the minority of the young that have the capacity to receive from these ancient sacred texts including the parables and fables, the deeper ideas contained in them. Having "felt" something, this minority automatically begin exercising these latent eyes and ears in themselves allowing them to experience what the Harris types are incapable of.

              When I visit the Armenian Seminary and get involved in discussions with some young seminarians, I see how much they already understand. Pardon me if I don't want to see healthy budding souls lost in favor of Burger King.

              "Religion in so far as it is a source of consolation is a hindrance to true faith: in this sense, atheism is a purification. I have to be atheistic with the part of myself which is not made for God. Among those men in whom the supernatural part has not been awakened, the atheists are right and the believers wrong." Simone Weil
              This is essentially what you do not appear open to and an understanding Harris seems incapable of. Though people use religion for self justification and consolation, it is not its purpose. When the essence of religion is not experienced for what it is, perversion is a normal result. In that case, the Atheist often makes more sense in practical matters.

              But the Atheist, not in touch with their supernatural part and fighting with all the conceit possible to deny and suppress it, are incapable of the eyes and ears necessary for understanding, making this "reason" of theirs, irrelevant in higher matters and nothing but the practice described in old Russia and Poland as "pouring from the empty into the void."

              Comment


              • #87
                OK Nick - then I am done discussing this with you (or shoudl I say I am more then tired of making real and true points while you wax away philosophically - though not logically or in any way providing evidence or anything for anyone to accept your rather outlandish and unsupported claims). In the end you say God (and faith) is the answer. Well obviously you can claim this all you want - and I could put up an equally unsupportable counter claim and stick to it - perhaps - let me see - bacteria is the answer. Yes it is our ignorance of the plans and actions of the great bacterial evermind - their evolutionary work in guiding our genetics etc etc and so on - our ignornace of these "truths" that keeps us in the darkenss of the cave. If we cannot accept that this unknowable thing is indeed the real truth and all else illusion - well we have no hope for wisdom - no possibility to "know oneself" etc. What you are proposing is no different. So yes - you are wastin MY time. And i will declare myself victor in this debate besides as you can bring no argument for you case.

                Comment


                • #88
                  Originally posted by Nick_A View Post
                  To doubt is reasonable while skepticism is poison. The reason this is so is because doubt is intellectual and allows us to see errors. Skepticism on the other hand is an emotional attitude. By definition, a person is approaching experience from a preconditioned bias. It denies the impartiality necessary to use their intellect properly and to grow in understanding.
                  Total BS and perversion of the truth BTW. You have no understanding of skeptiscsim (which entails rigourous examination of fallicious claims) and you misuse the term "doubt". If your beliefs can't be shaken by application of logic, evidence and reason then in fact you are not doubting but going through the motions and it is you who are (obviously) saddled with pre-conditioned answers. Your "reasoning" is so far from "reason" and your claimed "enlightenment" is so far from being anything of use or of value or close to any real truth to be just laughable to me (if it weren't so disgusting - trying to pass off such BS as knowledge and knowing how such can be abused to the detriment of mankind and the world)

                  Comment


                  • #89
                    Originally posted by Nick_A View Post
                    But the Atheist, not in touch with their supernatural part and fighting with all the conceit possible to deny and suppress it, are incapable of the eyes and ears necessary for understanding, making this "reason" of theirs, irrelevant in higher matters...
                    How utterly CONVIENIENT (yet worthless) to claim this. Yeah - you can't tune into the bacteria evermind like I can - so obviously you cannot possible know the truth! I really enjoy it when believers try to make this argument - I cannot know - I am incapable because I do not accept the supernatural - hahahahaha - I have dabbled more in the supernatural then you will ever know. I am cognizent of a large variety of supernatural traditions and beliefs - and have practiced such - including personally leading a Satanic mass on christmas day for example - oh yes - you think me unaware/unschooled in the supernatural - well you would be very mistaken to claim such things. I have a quite extensive library of sorcerous (spell) books and rituals covering many traditions - from ancient Egyptian to modern herbology and such. I've studied Crowley extensively as well as (that fruad) Mdm Blatasvsky (well enough to easily dismiss her as such). And I'm particularly proud of my collection of mythocological/religious texts and studies - again from a wide variety of (Western and non-Western) traditions. And I throw a mean tarot BTW (and not this modern/lightweight quick read either) - though I am admittedly very rusty. I've also participated in advanced TM practice including experiencing/witnessing Yogic flying. So again don't makes claims where you have no clue or idea. Don't dare to sugest that I am ignorant of any of these paths.

                    Comment


                    • #90
                      Yeah my heart has become calloused allright - to the lying BS of your and every religion. And talk about conceit - you drip of it - as do nearly all "true believers". You claim that I and other unbelievers are incapable of true knowledge etc (we are blind in the cave) - and that you and only others who believe as you do are capable of such - well - I make no such claims - I woudl like to think that every human has it in him the intelect and reasoning power to rise above believing these fairy stories as real and to shake off the shakles of religious belief. Its not so difficult really...as I assume you still don't believe in Santa...and i also assume that yoou don't accept Allah (or Zeus or Odin etc) and his word as yours - so you have already rejected some other claims to have monopoly on truth/knowledge and as being the ultimate unseen/unfelt/unprovable power etc

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X