Do you believe in God?

[mu4]

Ok

[Socionics Is A Cult]

ive answered your questions with quotes from the Bible directly. However your points are statements without any context. Can you provide direct Bible passages that defend your case that God is pro slavery and rape? And then perhaps I can understand what leads you to believe such things.

Numbers 31:15-18

12 Then they brought the captives, the booty, and the spoil to Moses, to Eleazar the priest, and to the congregation of the children of Israel, to the camp in the plains of Moab by the Jordan, across from Jericho. 13 And Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the leaders of the congregation, went to meet them outside the camp. 14 But Moses was angry with the officers of the army, with the captains over thousands and captains over hundreds, who had come from the battle.

15 And Moses said to them: “Have you kept all the women alive? 16 Look, these women caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to trespass against the Lord in the incident of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the Lord. 17 Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man intimately. 18 But keep alive for yourselves all the young girls who have not known a man intimately.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29

28 “If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out, 29 then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days.

Genesis 9:24-27

Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done to him. 25 Then he said:

“Cursed be Canaan;
A servant of servants
He shall be to his brethren.”
26 And he said:

“Blessed be the Lord,
The God of Shem,
And may Canaan be his servant.
27 May God enlarge Japheth,
And may he dwell in the tents of Shem;
And may Canaan be his servant.”

Genesis 16:6-9

So Abram said to Sarai, “Indeed your maid is in your hand; do to her as you please.” And when Sarai dealt harshly with her, she fled from her presence.

7 Now the Angel of the Lord found her by a spring of water in the wilderness, by the spring on the way to Shur. 8 And He said, “Hagar, Sarai’s maid, where have you come from, and where are you going?”

She said, “I am fleeing from the presence of my mistress Sarai.”

9 The Angel of the Lord said to her, “Return to your mistress, and submit yourself under her hand.”

Genesis 17:9-13

9 And God said to Abraham: “As for you, you shall keep My covenant, you and your descendants after you throughout their generations. 10 This is My covenant which you shall keep, between Me and you and your descendants after you: Every male child among you shall be circumcised; 11 and you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between Me and you. 12 He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised, every male child in your generations, he who is born in your house or bought with money from any foreigner who is not your descendant. 13 He who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money must be circumcised[...]

Genesis 24:35-36

34 So he said, “I am Abraham’s servant. 35 The Lord has blessed my master greatly, and he has become great; and He has given him flocks and herds, silver and gold, male and female servants, and camels and donkeys.

Exodus 20:17

“You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.”

Exodus 21:20-21

20 If a man beats his male or female servant with a rod, so that he dies under his hand, he shall surely be punished. 21 Notwithstanding, if he remains alive a day or two, he shall not be punished; for he is his property.

Leviticus 19:20

20 ‘Whoever lies carnally with a woman who is betrothed to a man as a concubine, and who has not at all been redeemed nor given her freedom, for this there shall be scourging; but they shall not be put to death, because she was not free.

Leviticus 25:44-46

And as for your male and female slaves whom you may have—from the nations that are around you, from them you may buy male and female slaves. 45 Moreover you may buy the children of the strangers who dwell among you, and their families who are with you, which they beget in your land; and they shall become your property. 46 And you may take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them as a possession; they shall be your permanent slaves. But regarding your brethren, the children of Israel, you shall not rule over one another with rigor.

Deuteronomy 20:10-14

10 “When you go near a city to fight against it, then proclaim an offer of peace to it. 11 And it shall be that if they accept your offer of peace, and open to you, then all the people who are found in it shall be placed under tribute to you, and serve you. 12 Now if the city will not make peace with you, but makes war against you, then you shall besiege it. 13 And when the Lord your God delivers it into your hands, you shall strike every male in it with the edge of the sword. 14 But the women, the little ones, the livestock, and all that is in the city, all its spoil, you shall plunder for yourself; and you shall eat the enemies’ plunder which the Lord your God gives you.

Luke 12:46-48

42 And the Lord said, “Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his master will make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of food in due season? 43 Blessed is that servant whom his master will find so doing when he comes. 44 Truly, I say to you that he will make him ruler over all that he has. 45 But if that servant says in his heart, ‘My master is delaying his coming,’ and begins to beat the male and female servants, and to eat and drink and be drunk, 46 the master of that servant will come on a day when he is not looking for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in two and appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. 47 And that servant who knew his master’s will, and did not prepare himself or do according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. 48 But he who did not know, yet committed things deserving of stripes, shall be beaten with few.

1 Corinthians 7:17-24

17 But as God has distributed to each one, as the Lord has called each one, so let him walk. And so I ordain in all the churches. 18 Was anyone called while circumcised? Let him not become uncircumcised. Was anyone called while uncircumcised? Let him not be circumcised. 19 Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters. 20 Let each one remain in the same calling in which he was called. 21 Were you called while a slave? Do not be concerned about it; but if you can be made free, rather use it. 22 For he who is called in the Lord while a slave is the Lord’s freedman. Likewise he who is called while free is Christ’s slave. 23 You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men. 24 Brethren, let each one remain with God in that state in which he was called.

Ephesians 6:1-6

1 Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. 2 “Honor your father and mother,” which is the first commandment with promise: 3 “that it may be well with you and you may live long on the earth.”

4 And you, fathers, do not provoke your children to wrath, but bring them up in the training and admonition of the Lord.

5 Bondservants, be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in sincerity of heart, as to Christ; 6 not with eyeservice, as men-pleasers, but as bondservants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart.

Colossians 3:18

Wives, submit to your own husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.

Colossians 3:20

Children, obey your parents in all things, for this is well pleasing to the Lord.

Colossians 3:22

Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ.

Colossians 4:1

Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven.

1 Timothy 6:1-5

Let as many bondservants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and His doctrine may not be blasphemed. 2 And those who have believing masters, let them not despise them because they are brethren, but rather serve them because those who are benefited are believers and beloved. Teach and exhort these things.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

I meant to reply to this awhile back and got sidetracked. I talk with God all the time. He doesn't speak back through burning bushes, but He does speak. I hear Him when I read scripture, and sometimes I hear Him when I'm running or praying. I remember the first time I heard Him, in fact.

I had climbed the Peak, which is a local mountain hike that overlooks five states: Tennessee, Kentucky, North Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia. I sat on the top of the mountain and decided to meditate / pray, whatever. I wanted to do something "spiritual", although I wasn't really Christian at the time. I always loved reading about and contemplating eastern religions and studies.

So I sat in the stillness, overlooking the mountains and trees. I heard a voice, soft, still, and quiet in the corners of my heart.

SEEK

I don't know how to explain it. The word almost echoed around me - not audibly, but internally - as if my heart mirrored the acoustics of the valleys all around me.

I came down the mountain and was still confused over what had happened. I was moved to find a Bible. I hadn't opened a Bible in years at that time. I didn't have one, so I downloaded an app that had some random 30 day Bible study. I opened to the first page, and there was Jeremiah 29:13 at the top of the page:

"You will seek me and you will find me
when you seek me with all of your heart."

That scripture is the same scripture that my mother made and framed with needlepoint on the day that I was born. It's the same scripture that I opened to directly the next time I sat down in a church and opened a Bible for the first time.

This is just a small excerpt of many conversations and things that only fuel and ignite my faith.

I think there is a real danger with ideologies that say things like "Seek and ye shall find". There are many competing religions that say words to that effect, and they cannot all be true (they could indeed all be false): I think that kind of mantra is objectionable itself, but is basically geared to indoctrinating people. If the religion does not respect those who don't actually find anything, after years of searching, or if it does not respect those who find an answer that is contrary to the tenets of the religion, what value does the statement have?

You quote Corinthians, which says that Love "is not self-seeking" (amongst other things), but this seems contrary to a religious text which tells you that god is a jealous god, that you must worship god, that you must seek and find him (rather than the other way round), that god is Love, that you must fear and love god, etc.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

I haven't said anything of the sort about knowing anything "more" or "better" than you. I've just stated my beliefs as you've asked.

EDIT: To answer the questions you had, I had to first set the parameters of what I believe to be "love," and I actually confessed that I have not been able to love completely or perfectly.

I've also not stated anything about my ability to love or forgive more. I've stated that I've seen the power of God move in people to forgive and love in extreme circumstances. And that I have a hard time believing that I would be able to forgive or love the way that those individuals have.

When it is known that you (applejacks) believe that those who do not believe and worship your god will burn in hell, it would be a fairly safe assumption to conclude that you presume to have a position that is morally certain. Because otherwise that would mean that you consider doubt reasonable (whether for moral reasons, or for empirical ones), and/or Damnation to be questionable.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

[Aylen]

I think it's very difficult to debate faith and often the debates enter a realm of conflict that is more related to one's own existential crisis than the debate over the articles of faith.

I think it's more powerful and moving to show love and show forgiveness, and as such religion has always had a way of moving people because despite all it's lies, individuals who believe can sincerely love and forgive. And this sincere love is one of the most persuasive mechanism in the world.

I see the debate often frame itself in a way which reveals our need for love as well as the disconnect the lies we tell ourselves prevent us from this emotion.

"I can only love believers..."
"I can (only) forgive because god forgives me..."

And on the other side, the antagonism.
"I hate that religion shames me from loving(whomever)..."
"I hate the religion damns me to hell and believers think that about me..."

Religious beliefs are construction to turn neighbors, friends, lovers, family into bitter enemies, because the believers and non-believers are disconnected into us and them, into apostles and apostates.

What I believe is that you can love who you want, you can love and forgive because these are human facilities, and noone needs to be ashamed of having a sincere love, and noone needs to fear hell and damnation by god or merely in the mind of others.

And I've come to terms with my own fumbling around with these concerns, taking various perspective and sides.

I believe humans can sincerely love, accept and forgive to the best of their abilities. Some find it easier, while others struggle.

The hardest states of awareness for humans to achieve is unconditional love, acceptance, and forgiveness. When they do it is fleeting but it makes sense. How can humans reach these states of loving, accepting, and forgiving unconditionally when the very gods they worship cannot do it... I tried for years and have felt what it is like but then I fall back to "normal" levels of human relations. I still have moments though and appreciate the feelings when I have them. I think living in this world and sustaining that state over a lifetime is quite difficult unless you seclude yourself, alone, on a mountain without human contact. The types that hate humanity seclude themselves that way too though.

[mu4]

When it is known that you (applejacks) believe that those who do not believe and worship your god will burn in hell, it would be a fairly safe assumption to conclude that you presume to have a position that is morally certain. Because otherwise that would mean that you consider doubt reasonable (whether for moral reasons, or for empirical ones), and/or Damnation to be questionable.

I think this is not necessarily true, belief in the doctrine does not entail actual personal belief, people are capable of remarkable inconsistencies as well as internal conflicts.

Religious beliefs do not merely want it's followers to damn outsiders, they also create antagonism in these outsiders towards believers. Evangelical beliefs like Christianity also offer a nominal path of salvation for the outsiders(conversion). This is not accidental, but rather vectors by which these beliefs propagate and spread as well as rationale for some members to love and care and other members to hate and kill.

People are also incredibly sketchy on doctrine and it's practice, this of course creates shame and guilt, which of course needs to be forgiven, and is also part of some belief systems.

All these inconsistencies and loopholes allow religious belief to be a stable belief mechanism, one which is constantly in gridlock between good and evil, between belief and doubt. And this good and evil, belief and doubt, this tension is spring-loaded for the leaders of the belief system to command and control towards various ends.

Religion as a belief system also make us highly vulnerable to social control, because in the paralysis of one's own good and evil, one's own belief and doubt, we seek guidance not merely from god above but from authority figures on earth.

There are many good and decent religious people, this is a fact we cannot deny. They might follow lies, but following these lies is not easy, it is painful and crisis ridden and often they're seeking guidance like we all are about meaning, how to live a good life, how to love.

There is no solution to this problem I think except love and kindness, care and respect. This is what religious belief is unprepared to deal with, what doctrine seeks to steal and appropriate for its followers and no-one else.

We naturally react unkindly to this theft and appropriation, and we might react unkindly to individuals who voice these doctrine, but this is not a necessary response. We can respond with love to followers of these doctrines, because humanity cannot bear to live without love and it is something they deserve as human beings. Humanity has the capacity to offer love in response to their need, and we can reject doctrine with truth, and the practice of the truth, which is that love and forgiveness does not come from belief in some religious doctrine.

And by showing and doing this consistently, the lies become more absurd, the doctrines more untenable, and erode the grip of religious indoctrination on individuals.

[mu4]

I believe humans can sincerely love, accept and forgive to the best of their abilities. Some find it easier, while others struggle.

The hardest states of awareness for humans to achieve is unconditional love, acceptance, and forgiveness. When they do it is fleeting but it makes sense. How can humans reach these states of loving, accepting, and forgiving unconditionally when the very gods they worship cannot do it... I tried for years and have felt what it is like but then I fall back to "normal" levels of human relations. I still have moments though and appreciate the feelings when I have them. I think living in this world and sustaining that state over a lifetime is quite difficult unless you seclude yourself, alone, on a mountain without human contact. The types that hate humanity seclude themselves that way too though.

I see love, acceptance, forgiveness as always conditional, and it is not necessary to beat ourselves over it. It's not possible to love everyone, and we can only do the best we can.

[Aylen]

Thanks for the note and reference about the Tao Te Ching. I've never read it but would like to

I didn't mean to indicate that the Bible had been around forever. It had to be written at some point, and the many dates of the books' origin is not necessarily a rabbit hole discussion I'd like to get into. I just meant that God said His word would endure forever. So the Bible isn't going anywhere. I respectfully note your prediction, however.

My favorite translation of the Tao Te Ching is the Stephen Mitchell translation. It is the most feminine and beautiful, imo.

This first link I do not suggest because it has a lot of typos but it loads quickly. It has been around forever but last I checked there were still mistakes. I once took the time to compare this link chapter by chapter, to my hard copy of the book. I corrected every mistake for a friend. I was going to link it but can't seem to find the file at the moment. They did a pretty good job overall but the mistakes seemed important to me. http://acc6.its.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~p.../taote-v3.html

Second link is a scan of the actual book and took forever to load, for me, because it is so large (or google chrome ext is messed up again) but worth the wait. The book itself is very short, simple, and can be read in less than an hour or two, depending. I don't think this is anything in it that would be offensive to your beliefs .

Tao Te Ching

Neither include the "notes" at the end of the book. The notes are good but were not significant to my understanding the actual translation. It is very simple to understand.

[Aylen]

I see love, acceptance, forgiveness as always conditional, and it is not necessary to beat ourselves over it. It's not possible to love everyone, and we can only do the best we can.

Exactly.

[mu4]

My favorite translation of the Tao Te Ching is the Stephen Mitchell translation. It is the most feminine and beautiful, imo.

This first link I do not suggest because it has a lot of typos but it loads quickly. It has been around forever but last I checked there were still mistakes. I once took the time to compare this link chapter by chapter, to my hard copy of the book. I corrected every mistake for a friend. I was going to link it but can't seem to find the file at the moment. They did a pretty good job overall but the mistakes seemed important to me. http://acc6.its.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~p.../taote-v3.html

Second link is a scan of the actual book and took forever to load, for me, because it is so large (or google chrome ext is messed up again) but worth the wait. The book itself is very short, simple, and can be read in less than an hour or two, depending. I don't think this is anything in it that would be offensive to your beliefs .

Tao Te Ching

Neither include the "notes" at the end of the book. The notes are good but were not significant to my understanding the actual translation. It is very simple to understand.

Tao Te Ching is almost impossible to translate into English.

Every translation is in fact more a explanation/interpretation, line by line than an actual translation.

The way the book is written in Chinese is more like a mathematical formula.

Something like this which show Chinese with English, shows how much difference is in the translation vs the Chinese.

http://www.yellowbridge.com/onlinelit/daodejing01.php

1
道可道, dao ke dao
非常道。feichang dao
名可名，ming ke ming
非常名。feichang ming

trans 1
The Dao that can be trodden
is not the enduring and unchanging Dao.
The name that can be named
is not the enduring and unchanging name.

trans 2
The Reason that can be reasoned
is not the eternal Reason.
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.

trans 3
The Dao that can be understood
cannot be the primal, or cosmic,
Dao, just as an idea that can be expressed in words
cannot be the infinite idea.

These are all adequate translations but each is more a projection of the translators than the formula which is expressed.
The translation is the flower, the formula is the fruit. The concepts are ephemeral, the names placeholders.

You can even translate this particular area into

possible(expressible/knowable/etc) dao <> actual dao
possible(expressible/knowable/etc) name <> actual name

Or kantian translation
knowable noumenon <> actual noumenon
phenomona <> (actual phenomona(noumenon))

[Aylen]

Tao Te Ching is almost impossible to translate into English.

Every translation is in fact more a explanation/interpretation, line by line than an actual translation.

The way the book is written in Chinese is more like a mathematical formula.

Something like this which show Chinese with English, shows how much difference is in the translation vs the Chinese.

http://www.yellowbridge.com/onlinelit/daodejing01.php

1
道可道, dao ke dao
非常道。feichang dao
名可名，ming ke ming
非常名。feichang ming

trans 1
The Dao that can be trodden
is not the enduring and unchanging Dao.
The name that can be named
is not the enduring and unchanging name.

trans 2
The Reason that can be reasoned
is not the eternal Reason.
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.

trans 3
The Dao that can be understood
cannot be the primal, or cosmic,
Dao, just as an idea that can be expressed in words
cannot be the infinite idea.

These are all adequate translations but each is more a projection of the translators than the formula which is expressed.
The translation is the flower, the formula is the fruit. The concepts are ephemeral, the names placeholders.

I have read many translations including some pretty funny ones and I guess the one that fits me best is the Stephen Mitchell translation. I own various translated copies but I am always pulled back to that one. I have it on hand all the time.

If it literally translates as "the way" that just rings true to me on some level, as does the idea of a void. Not a "bad" kind of void that humans sometimes feel but a place that feels like home. I found it when I had pretty much had enough of spirituality. It all seemed so hard and so many rules even the new agey stuff. I am pretty sure someone else bought me a copy of this for a some holiday or maybe my birthday. My friend was studying asian and eastern religions/philosophies and was taking a classes so I am pretty sure it was them. I read it and I felt weight lifted off me. I have not looked back. I could say if I have anything close to a bible this is it. I look to it for reminders.

[applejacks]

When it is known that you (applejacks) believe that those who do not believe and worship your god will burn in hell, it would be a fairly safe assumption to conclude that you presume to have a position that is morally certain. Because otherwise that would mean that you consider doubt reasonable (whether for moral reasons, or for empirical ones), and/or Damnation to be questionable.

You are quite liberal with your assumptions, it seems. And this is why our discussion is not progressing. With each statement I make, you make an assumption about what I have said, or about what God has done, or what happened in the life and heart of Anne Frank. Your case is based entirely on assumptions.

Plus, we already established that salvation is by faith and not works, thus eliminating any doubt that I may consider myself superior in any way, especially after I confessed that I have committed some terrible things in my life.

So you assume incorrectly, as I personally believe you have done before.

[mu4]

I have read many translations including some pretty funny ones and I guess the one that fits me best is the Stephen Mitchell translation. I own various translated copies but I am always pulled back to that one. I have it on hand all the time.

If it literally translates as "the way" that just rings true to me on some level, as does the idea of a void. Not a "bad" kind of void that humans sometimes feel but a place that feels like home. I found it when I had pretty much had enough of spirituality. It all seemed so hard and so many rules even the new agey stuff. I am pretty sure someone else bought me a copy of this for a some holiday or maybe my birthday. My friend was studying asian and eastern religions/philosophies and was taking a classes so I am pretty sure it was them. I read it and I felt weight lifted off me. I have not looked back. I could say if I have anything close to a bible this is it. I look to it for reminders.

I would say most western(Zen/chan Buddhist interpretations as well) interpretations are a reversal of the Chinese in some manner.

Chinese writing and verbalization often leaves the meat unsaid but this is not a void, but rather the fruit. English and western languages and expressiveness are explicit in the way Chinese is implicit, but the text work both ways because there's an acknowledgement of the contrast present in the text.

When reading something like the Tao Te Ching one of the crucial aspects or reading it is "What is it not telling you?" The text begins by telling you that this is what's important but that it also can't tell you. I find there are often reversal of views often between Western "Taoists" and Chinese Taoists because of this. But these views are no better or worse.

[Aylen]

I would say most western(Zen/chan Buddhist interpretations as well) interpretations are a reversal of the Chinese in some manner.

Chinese writing and verbalization often leaves the meat unsaid but this is not a void, but rather the fruit. English and western languages and expressiveness are explicit in the way Chinese is implicit, but the text work both ways because there's an acknowledgement of the contrast present in the text.

When reading something like the Tao Te Ching one of the crucial aspects or reading it is "What is it not telling you?" The text begins by telling you that this is what's important but that it also can't tell you. I find there are often reversal of views often between Western "Taoists" and Chinese Taoists because of this. But these views are no better or worse.

This is interesting. "What is it not telling you?" is kind of my natural state. It is part of the reason I read between the lines, see underlying meanings that are not spoken, read the energy of words and not just the words themselves. I get way more information in energy than the written word.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

You are quite liberal with your assumptions, it seems. And this is why our discussion is not progressing. With each statement I make, you make an assumption about what I have said, or about what God has done, or what happened in the life and heart of Anne Frank. Your case is based entirely on assumptions.

Plus, we already established that salvation is by faith and not works, thus eliminating any doubt that I may consider myself superior in any way, especially after I confessed that I have committed some terrible things in my life.

So you assume incorrectly, as I personally believe you have done before.

Are you saying that you believe that those who do not follow your god will burn in hell, and yet you are not certain of the moral correctness of this doctrine? If so, then yes, I have understood you incorrectly, but it was not because of a liberal assumption of my part.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

Some good evidence to suggest that those who believe in an interventionist god are less likely to take responsibility for their own actions (which is a bad thing, both for them, and for everybody else):

Alcoholics Anonymous
Alcoholics Anonymous was the first "12-step" recovery group, with the aim of helping alcoholics stop drinking and stay alcohol-free. While AA has undoubtedly helped many alcoholics to recovery, it is problematic for many atheists, because AA relies on a belief in a supreme deity ("God") as an inseparable part of the program. It is also problematic for deists who don't believe in an interventionist god.

The steps are:
1. We admitted we were powerless over alcohol — that our lives had become unmanageable.
2. Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.
3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him.
4. Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.
5. Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs.
6. Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character.
7. Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings.
8. Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all.
9. Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.
10 Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong promptly admitted it.
11. Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out.
12. Having had a spiritual awakening as a result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to alcoholics, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.[

[...]
Alcoholics Anonymous leads to increased binge drinking
AA claims, based on its most recent (2007) survey, that 69% of its members have been sober for more than one year.

However studies have been conducted. A study, published in book form under the title Outpatient Treatment of Alcoholism (Brandsma et al., 1980), was a carefully designed, sophisticated, NIAAA-funded study of AA and three alternative therapies: lay-led Rational Behavior Therapy (similar to today's SMART Recovery program); professionally conducted one-on-one Rational Behavior Therapy (today called Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy); and professionally conducted one-on-one, traditional (Freudian-based) insight therapy. The study came to a number of conclusions:

The study showed that alcoholic men who went to Alcoholics Anonymous became 9 times more likely to subsequently “binge drink” than those who used a cognitive behavioral approach. What’s more, they were also 5 times more likely to binge than a control group who received no help with drinking. "Our study suggests further confirmation of this in our severe dropout rate from this form of treatment {Alcoholics Anonymous}. It is probable, as Ditman et al.'s (1967) work suggests and ours confirms, that AA is just not effective as a coerced treatment with municipal court offenders. (Brandsma et al., 1980, p. 84)"

[...]
12 Steps are too many
In 1997 Addiction specialist William Miller co-authored a paper which found that patients who reported knowing that someone was praying for them used significantly more substances after leaving treatment than those who didn't know someone was praying for them.

In 2009 William Miller and his colleagues presented findings from two controlled trials in which patients underwent drug treatment. Some of the patients received spiritual guidance as part of the treatment — learning such practices as prayer, meditation and service to others, all of which are central to 12-step programs. Others received secular psychotherapy. The results showed that those who received spiritual guidance reported being significantly more anxious and depressed after four months than those who received secular help. Miller asserted that there is a high incidence of suicide among substance abusers therefore the conclusion was the non-faith-based treatments like cognitive behavioral therapy or mindfulness-based acceptance and commitment therapy are the better choices for treatment.[30] The steps themselves are of varying lengths — an admission to self of being helpless is fairly simple, but inventory and restitution take far longer.

There is also the phenomenon of "Two Steppers". These are people who go through step one and step twelve, i.e. helping others. Not surprisingly this is controversial.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Alcoholics_Anonymous

[mu4]

This is interesting. "What is it not telling you?" is kind of my natural state. It is part of the reason I read between the lines, see underlying meanings that are not spoken, read the energy of words and not just the words themselves. I get way more information in energy than the written word.

The meaning is not even between the lines.

The Tao Te Ching is a particular text because it leaves almost all the defining to the reader. It does not define, it also does not negate, but it uses words as sort of conceptual placeholders.

In a sort of cheeky way it tells you to "Figure it out yourself" concerning the many topics it talks about, it was written with a understanding that practices and traditions change, that we do not stay the same, that everything said might be wrong and in every time, in every individual, we face big questions and often we must figure our own bearable answers to these questions. And also we must be humble to the limitations of our answers.

In that sense, it tells us it's ok/neccessary/possible to figure it out for ourselves.

[Aylen]

The meaning is not even between the lines.

The Tao Te Ching is a particular text because it leaves almost all the defining to the reader. It does not define, it also does not negate, but it uses words as sort of conceptual placeholders.

In a sort of cheeky way it tells you to "Figure it out yourself" concerning the many topics it talks about, it was written with a understanding that practices and traditions change, that we do not stay the same, that everything said might be wrong and in every time, in every individual, we face big questions and often we must figure our own bearable answers to these questions.

In that sense, it tells us it's ok/neccessary/possible to figure it out for ourselves.

I was speaking more broadly on what I do naturally when I said read between the lines.

I agree with "figure it out yourself". Everyone has the right to choose their own beliefs and interpretations of those beliefs.

I am probably going to respond to another post later. The one referencing, "seek and ye shall find". I have been playfully suggesting to others, who left christianity behind, that what Jesus meant was"seek and figure it out for yourself", for years.

[Aylen]

Why do you 'Satanists' make simple things more complicated? In your opininion, Serious Q.

[Aylen]

You have and are spending years 'waiting' for the big spiritual next level.

Sounds like you're being fooled. Sounds, 'Satanistic'

Despite TV quotes.

This is innuendo right? You can't seriously think I am a satanist.

[sycamore]

This is innuendo right? You can't seriously think I am a satanist.

I do think so actually, and despite the level of Satanism on here, I am here to help.

And by help, being with God means being happy, for sure.

Actual happy.

[Aylen]

I do think so actually, and despite the level of Satanism on here, I am here to help.

And by help, being with God means being happy, for sure.

Actual happy.

Seems you have had a change of perspective since we last talked. I am happy for you.

[mu4]

Plus, we already established that salvation is by faith and not works, thus eliminating any doubt that I may consider myself superior in any way, especially after I confessed that I have committed some terrible things in my life.

I'm not sure if either faith or works can save us, spiritual salvation comes thru some faith, but personal salvation does not.

If you've committed terrible things in your life, so has many others and they're all saved cosmically. This I believe.

Spiritual salvation is simple, there is a belief for all of us, from some teacher who saves us, thru faith, thru love, thru the myriad variations humanity has invented to give us some peace. Yet this is never enough is it? The earthly salvation nags at us, we lie restless ridden with shame and guilt, and often we are left unsaved, unforgiven on earth.

I don't know what you've done wrong, but we all can be forgiven a little on earth, by ourselves and others and loved as well.

I'm not a person who needs spiritual salvation, I have that covered, but I and many others they could use a lot of the earthly love and forgiveness and this brutal world needs a whole lot of the earthly love and forgiveness which humanity can provide. And I see this as a bigger than my life in heaven or hell, because this I cannot know and I have faith I will not be damned.

[Aylen]

You post on a site which claims freedom of expression and an avenue for 'difficult' conversations yet all it does is sensor,

This is what you support, and think about it, it is Luciferian perversion of actual truth, like most of the world.

I am quoting this so your opinion on this is heard. I am drained by this thread at the moment and will not continue. I have no need to defend myself for posting here.

[applejacks]

I think there is a real danger with ideologies that say things like "Seek and ye shall find". There are many competing religions that say words to that effect, and they cannot all be true (they could indeed all be false): I think that kind of mantra is objectionable itself, but is basically geared to indoctrinating people. If the religion does not respect those who don't actually find anything, after years of searching, or if it does not respect those who find an answer that is contrary to the tenets of the religion, what value does the statement have?

You quote Corinthians, which says that Love "is not self-seeking" (amongst other things), but this seems contrary to a religious text which tells you that god is a jealous god, that you must worship god, that you must seek and find him (rather than the other way round), that god is Love, that you must fear and love god, etc.

And I think there is real danger in the ideology of secular humanism, when clearly we are deeply, deeply flawed people.

I would agree that there are competing religions out there, and I would agree that they all cannot be true. But you cannot say that one isn't true simply because another has used the same statement or one similar statement. That in itself is not grounds to say something isn't truth.

You bring up both good and difficult examples from the Bible. I will try to answer them in order. I have only a little time right now, but I do want to address these, and not because I want to debate. It's because I love God and I think so many people don't understand who He is, or what His heart is. But trust me. My inner enneagram 9 does not enjoy debating. So please understand that I'm not responding just to "fight" this out with you. These are passages that should be analyzed, because on the surface they seem cruel and harsh. But that's not who God is.

Numbers 31: This is a hard passage for any of us with warm blood, but first understand that God takes no pleasure in destroying anyone.

"Do you think that I like to see wicked people die?' says the Sovereign LORD. 'Of course not! I want them to turn from their wicked ways of living!" -Ezekiel 18:23

However, the wages of sin is death. God has wronged nobody. We've all sinned and we all deserve death. That's important to understand. Second of all, God did not even spare His own people when they sinned by taking up pagan wives in chapter 25, which He had forbidden they do. He forbid it to protect the messianic line that would offer salvation to any and all. The Jews were a short covenant to bring about Christ. God needed a Sanctified group of people to do so. And in this case, the entire culture of people in Numbers chapter 25-31 were so evil and sinful that God could not tolerate it longer, and they were turning God's people to idolatry. Their evil was passing down from generation to generation. God's plan and purpose all along was the birth and sacrifice of Christ Jesus so that ALL would have the option to access grace through His sacrificial blood.


Deuteronomy: God is not pro-rape, nor is He letting a rapist off easy. Rape is one of the most vile, disgusting, and heart-wrenching acts of evil out there. God hates rape. Rape is absolutely cruel and to even think of a rapist, in present day, marrying his victim is absolutely horrifying. This seems beyond cruel to us because we know to value a woman far above and beyond her sexual history, and we do not treat women as property. But they did not back then. Women could not even own property in that time. Yet this was not because of God's design.

God designed women to be cherished and loved the way Christ loved and died for the church. He designed men to love women so strongly that they would die for them. God says a woman is "more precious than jewels; And nothing you desire compares with her." (Proverbs 3:15). So God, in His great love for women, gave one of two consequences to rapists a) if she's engaged, a man has already gave his word to care for her and make sure that she is provided for. Thus, the rapist was stoned. Or b) if she's not engaged, even though God wants to stone the rapist for what he did, He also wants to make sure she is cared for and not completely abandoned to starve without home and provision.

[ghost of forum past]

I was raised in a Church of Christ. It was ruined for me when I learned that (supposedly) the ever-loving and compassionate God that we worshiped would send people that didn't think he was real to hell. Is that not blatant hypocrisy?

My main thought on religion is that it is good if and only if it does not create more divisions within humanity. Taking a brief look at world history, I'd say that many major religions have failed this expectation.

I dislike being told how I should be living my life when my own principles make perfect sense. It bothers me that many religious people default to an old book rather than reasoning for themselves.

Also, the influence of religion in American politics today is disastrous (looking at you, GOP).

Despite my secular leanings, I can't deny that to a certain extent the moral teachings of Jesus have influenced my own principles that govern me.

Finally, on the main point of the OP, I would say that I don't believe in any God specific to any religion. I believe in perhaps a higher level of organization in the Universe than we are capable of comprehending.

[Taknamay]

I said I'm not sure, but I guess that depends on what is meant by "belief." I am totally sure all religions are false, and only some kind of deism or something similar is compatible with the world we actually live in.

I am an amoralist but I don't think that is directly related. There are plenty of atheistic moralists and I could probably conceive of a theistic amoralist.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

And I think there is real danger in the ideology of secular humanism, when clearly we are deeply, deeply flawed people.

What danger would that be? Why would being "deeply, deeply flawed people" especially negatively affect the "ideology of secular humanism", when religion is also man-made, but has the added factor of being built on obscure sand that does not allow itself to be reasoned with, and which treats this life as of little or no value compared to the afterlife?

I would agree that there are competing religions out there, and I would agree that they all cannot be true. But you cannot say that one isn't true simply because another has used the same statement or one similar statement. That in itself is not grounds to say something isn't truth.

I did not suggest that this was the case: I raised the contradicting religions because there are many which say "seek and ye shall find". That I happen to find them all false is of secondary significance to my point.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

Numbers 31: This is a hard passage for any of us with warm blood, but first understand that God takes no pleasure in destroying anyone.


"Do you think that I like to see wicked people die?' says the Sovereign LORD. 'Of course not! I want them to turn from their wicked ways of living!" -Ezekiel 18:23

Your view does not actually detract from the fact that the god of the Old and New Testament destroys many things, and threatens eternal suffering on humans. Regardless of whether or not god takes pleasure in destroying people, he is still described as fundamentally evil. I would actually say that a god that takes pleasure from causing unnecessary suffering would be less evil than a god that takes no pleasure from carrying out the same act.

However, the wages of sin is death. God has wronged nobody. We've all sinned and we all deserve death. That's important to understand. Second of all, God did not even spare His own people when they sinned by taking up pagan wives in chapter 25, which He had forbidden they do. He forbid it to protect the messianic line that would offer salvation to any and all. The Jews were a short covenant to bring about Christ. God needed a Sanctified group of people to do so. And in this case, the entire culture of people in Numbers chapter 25-31 were so evil and sinful that God could not tolerate it longer, and they were turning God's people to idolatry. Their evil was passing down from generation to generation. God's plan and purpose all along was the birth and sacrifice of Christ Jesus so that ALL would have the option to access grace through His sacrificial blood.

I do not believe in god, so whether or not we deserve death has no significance to me personally. I would say however that a god that states that the infiniteness of death is a just punishment for a finite amount of sin committed during a mortal lifetime is fundamentally evil. One that says that you must also suffer for eternity on top of the death is even more evil, if that is possible.

Deuteronomy: God is not pro-rape, nor is He letting a rapist off easy. Rape is one of the most vile, disgusting, and heart-wrenching acts of evil out there. God hates rape. Rape is absolutely cruel and to even think of a rapist, in present day, marrying his victim is absolutely horrifying. This seems beyond cruel to us because we know to value a woman far above and beyond her sexual history, and we do not treat women as property. But they did not back then. Women could not even own property in that time. Yet this was not because of God's design.

God designed women to be cherished and loved the way Christ loved and died for the church. He designed men to love women so strongly that they would die for them. God says a woman is "more precious than jewels; And nothing you desire compares with her." (Proverbs 3:15). So God, in His great love for women, gave one of two consequences to rapists a) if she's engaged, a man has already gave his word to care for her and make sure that she is provided for. Thus, the rapist was stoned. Or b) if she's not engaged, even though God wants to stone the rapist for what he did, He also wants to make sure she is cared for and not completely abandoned to starve without home and provision.

God is pro-rape, because he allowed the Hebrews to have sex-slaves, and obliges someone who has been raped to marry their victim. It was codified into their laws. I do agree with you about rape being fundamentally evil however.

God is also pro-slavery, both in the way he endorsed it as a practice for the Hebrews (what would now be considered a war crime, along with genocide and mass-rape), and in the way that he described believers as slaves to their master in heaven.

[applejacks]

Your view does not actually detract from the fact that the god of the Old and New Testament destroys many things, and threatens eternal suffering on humans. Regardless of whether or not god takes pleasure in destroying people, he is still described as fundamentally evil. I would actually say that a god that takes pleasure from causing unnecessary suffering would be less evil than a god that takes no pleasure from carrying out the same act.



I do not believe in god, so whether or not we deserve death has no significance to me personally. I would say however that a god that states that the infiniteness of death is a just punishment for a finite amount of sin committed during a mortal lifetime is fundamentally evil. One that says that you must also suffer for eternity on top of the death is even more evil, if that is possible.



God is pro-rape, because he allowed the Hebrews to have sex-slaves, and obliges someone who has been raped to marry their victim. It was codified into their laws. I do agree with you about rape being fundamentally evil however.

God is also pro-slavery, both in the way he endorsed it as a practice for the Hebrews (what would now be considered a war crime, along with genocide and mass-rape), and in the way that he described believers as slaves to their master in heaven.

false. And I just explained why God is not pro rape, nor hateful. Where did rape come from in the first place?

What God intends for good, man intends for evil. Man takes God's truth and perverts it. Ever since the beginning, man was unwilling to simply believe God. It's no different today.

God was the one that said you shall not commit adultery, nor have sex before marriage. It was man that sinned and created rape. It was God that provided justice where justice was due, and compassion where compassion was due. It is God that can see the heart. It is God that loves the unlovable and cares for the outcast.

You make no counter argument here other than to state what you've said over and over again with no explanation or logic.

[mu4]

false. And I just explained why God is not pro rape, nor hateful. Where did rape come from in the first place?

What God intends for good, man intends for evil. Man takes God's truth and perverts it. Ever since the beginning, man was unwilling to simply believe God. It's no different today.

God was the one that said you shall not commit adultery, nor have sex before marriage. It was man that sinned and created rape. It was God that provided justice where justice was due, and compassion where compassion was due. It is God that can see the heart. It is God that loves the unlovable and cares for the outcast.

You make no counter argument here other than to state what you've said over and over again with no explanation or logic.

Maybe god is not the perversion, but religion totally seems to be. I mean you look around you and see a world greater than you and all the wonder that comes with it, this is what most people call god or compels them to believe.

However the rules and doctrine which enslaves mankind, this is entirely man's creation. The various holy text, this is written by man and perverted by man.

You can believe in god and believe in none of man's doctrines, and I think part of you tries to say this if you read behind the lines.

Many variety of christian doctrine says people will go to hell for not believing in god, I believe in no such perversion and I don't believe in many other ones as well.

I'm not going to argue with you about belief in god since this is a personal thing and often really unspeakable sort of feeling.

But I do wonder the reason why you continue to believe in doctrine which seems rather absurd and downright evil sometimes, that's a attachment to a perversion of the truth committed by man. Done long before we were born, and inherited by the teachers of these doctrine. You might have been taught with love, kindness and good faith as they might have been taught, but many ideas are transmitted corrupted.

God doesn't tell you to rape or do other bad things, but doctrine, doctrine can be perverted by man, in all sects and creeds. Why follow doctrine at all when it is full of outdated ideas that seems so bad.

I believe that all doctrine will disappear, and it's up to us and future generation to learn how to live better and treat our fellow humans beings better than we have in the past and this require us to lose our attachments to the perverted doctrines of the past.

http://www.catholic.org/news/hf/fait...y.php?id=51077

Christianity itself is changing, reforming itself in the light of truth, struggling to rid itself of the corruption and perversion that occurred in the past.

If people are to be one together, it's time we stop trying to damn each other and kill each other in the name of doctrine. There are people who seek to do this today, from many sects and creeds, and they are unwilling to change, so they destroy.

Perhaps god intends us to change, intends us to grow and develop and cast away perverted doctrine, by showing us the truth some other way, not thru doctrine but more directly, thru our own experiences.

[Eliza Thomason]

I meant to reply to this awhile back and got sidetracked. I talk with God all the time. He doesn't speak back through burning bushes, but He does speak. I hear Him when I read scripture, and sometimes I hear Him when I'm running or praying. I remember the first time I heard Him, in fact.

I had climbed the Peak, which is a local mountain hike that overlooks five states: Tennessee, Kentucky, North Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia. I sat on the top of the mountain and decided to meditate / pray, whatever. I wanted to do something "spiritual", although I wasn't really Christian at the time. I always loved reading about and contemplating eastern religions and studies.

So I sat in the stillness, overlooking the mountains and trees. I heard a voice, soft, still, and quiet in the corners of my heart.

SEEK

I don't know how to explain it. The word almost echoed around me - not audibly, but internally - as if my heart mirrored the acoustics of the valleys all around me.

I came down the mountain and was still confused over what had happened. I was moved to find a Bible. I hadn't opened a Bible in years at that time. I didn't have one, so I downloaded an app that had some random 30 day Bible study. I opened to the first page, and there was Jeremiah 29:13 at the top of the page:

"You will seek me and you will find me
when you seek me with all of your heart."

That scripture is the same scripture that my mother made and framed with needlepoint on the day that I was born. It's the same scripture that I opened to directly the next time I sat down in a church and opened a Bible for the first time.

This is just a small excerpt of many conversations and things that only fuel and ignite my faith.

I love this. Thanks for sharing it. It gave me the chills up and down, and warmed my heart at the same time. God is good. Yes, if we seek Him, we find Him. You went on the mountain and in your heart you sought a spiritual experience, a seeking you did not state out loud, but just kept in the silence in your heart, and He who loves you and knows your every thought and every desire knew that, and He gave you your desire, through a special gift, a word, one word that had and would have special meaning to you, and would lead you to where your heart wanted to go. I love it. God does not intrude, but He waits for the smallest opening of our heart. And He speaks to people in so many different ways, in every different way, and its always delightful to hear of how He speaks to another. Also this is an example of how God's actions and His words to us are perfect simplicity. Truly, perfection.

[applejacks]

Some good evidence to suggest that those who believe in an interventionist god are less likely to take responsibility for their own actions (which is a bad thing, both for them, and for everybody else):


http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Alcoholics_Anonymous

"8.Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all.
9. Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.
10 Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong promptly admitted it.

A) That looks like taking responsibility, in my view. More so than many people on this earth.

and

B) This isn't the Bible. Are all these individuals praying to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, via Jesus? You are bringing up supposed evidence that may or may not even be associated with Christianity. This has no place in our discussion as it refers to Jesus.

[mu4]

"8.Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all.
9. Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.
10 Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong promptly admitted it.

A) That looks like taking responsibility, in my view. More so than many people on this earth.

and

B) This isn't the Bible. Are all these individuals praying to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, via Jesus? You are bringing up supposed evidence that may or may not even be associated with Christianity. This has no place in our discussion as it refers to Jesus.

AA doesn't actually work very well however.

8/9/10 actually don't mean anything. You can do this every day and get no where. It's in fact part of the cycle of abuse.

With addiction and its cure, the issue isn't the external harm that is done to others. This is actually what keeps us in the addiction, this pattern of harming others or harming ourselves, the purpose of 8/9/10 is to get us a token form of forgiveness so we can repeat this cycle of abuse on ourselves, people in our vicinity, etc.

See the basics of a program that should work better.
http://www.smartrecovery.org/

 

"Discover the Power of Choice!"

1: Building and Maintaining Motivation
2: Coping with Urges
3: Managing Thoughts, Feelings and Behaviors
4: Living a Balanced Life

Our Approach

• Teaches self-empowerment and self-reliance.
• Provides meetings that are educational, supportive and include open discussions.
• Encourages individuals to recover from addiction and alcohol abuse and live satisfying lives.
• Teaches techniques for self-directed change.
• Supports the scientifically informed use of psychological treatments and legally prescribed psychiatric and addiction medication.
• Works on substance abuse, alcohol abuse, addiction and drug abuse as complex maladaptive behaviors with possible physiological factors.
• Evolves as scientific knowledge in addiction recovery evolves.
• Differs from Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous and other 12-step programs.

SMART Recovery is a recognized resource for substance abuse and addiction recovery by the American Academy of Family Physicians, the Center for Health Care Evaluation, The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), US Department of Health and Human Services, and the American Society of Addiction Medicine. More information here!

I know a little about alcohol abuse since I used it to deal with my PTSD, and there is a certain pattern we fall into which feeds the addiction and a big part of that pattern is 8/9/10. That feeds the shame mechanism which creates the identity of the addict. The addict never escapes the self identification, they can never be forgiven, the addict is a defense mechanism which becomes the object of our blame which in turn perpetuates the addiction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycle_of_abuse

Drug addiction is a form of self-abuse that can involve others, it also goes thru the same cycle of abuse like other forms of abuse. Reconciliation is just part of the pattern, and it's a part that perpetuates the disorder instead of solves it. To truly solve the core of the addiction requires escaping this cycle and dealing with the nasty bits like ACTUALLY taking responsibility for our actions, this entail controlling urges and something desperately diffucult. Change.

AA starts of with powerlessness and ends with submission to control by others

1. We admitted we were powerless over our addiction - that our lives had become unmanageable
2. Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity
3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood God

This is denial made into a 12 step program. Yes there is reconciliation, there's always that, then calm, then tension, then incident, repeat until death.

[mu4]

More on the problem of the 12 step. The 12 step was created based on conversations with Jung, and in these conversations Jung remarked, “Show me a drunk and I’ll show you someone in search of God.”

However it is not God they need to find but meaning and when Jung used it, it was as much a pejorative on the nature of ordinary men rather than a solution.

"An ordinary man, not protected by an action from above and isolated in society, cannot resist the power of evil, which is called very aptly the Devil. But the use of such words arouses so many mistakes that one can only keep aloof from them as much as possible."

http://www.barefootsworld.net/jungletter.html
Original letter here.

God, religion, drugs, are of the same spectrum of psychological control mechanisms which man imposes on others, themselves and in all of these narcotics and instruments, lies the same goal, to keep us in control.

Jung saw in his letter this need for spirit, this same need in religion and drugs, yet he did not see that this need cannot be filled by either. These are but temporary salves for our pains as all salves are.

In my time I think that as individuals we undergo varied recurring crisis, each crisis a challenge to change and one we must undertake or else death in one way or another. The same is true for society thru the generations.

Religion, drugs, mental disorders and other problems are but cages to keep the mind in stasis, to avoid dealing with the crisis of meaning and existence brought before us, to keep us in its thrall until we die.

I believe that overcoming the crisis, we must make our own meaning, yet another salve, but one ours. And we must sometimes discard this meaning should we come into its thrall.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

false. And I just explained why God is not pro rape, nor hateful. Where did rape come from in the first place?

Well, god has laws on what is proper etiquette, including during wartime. It permits you to slaughter everybody, except the children, and the virgin women, who you are to take for sex slaves. This is clearly the case, because it does not say "Permit all married women to live".

Raping a servant is also considered less of an offence than raping a free person. Raping a servant is only considered a property crime, and is not considered a capital offence. This only makes it clearer that god is pro-slavery and pro-rape.

You should also consider the Tenth Commandment: it does not say "Thou shall not covet your neighbour" or "Thous shall not rape". It says "You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.": i.e. a wife in the bible is considered the chattel of a man. The crime of rape is an ethical transgression against the woman's husband (and god on a larger level) - and an act against the man's property.

fWhat God intends for good, man intends for evil. Man takes God's truth and perverts it. Ever since the beginning, man was unwilling to simply believe God. It's no different today.

God was the one that said you shall not commit adultery, nor have sex before marriage. It was man that sinned and created rape. It was God that provided justice where justice was due, and compassion where compassion was due. It is God that can see the heart. It is God that loves the unlovable and cares for the outcast.

You make no counter argument here other than to state what you've said over and over again with no explanation or logic.

The earliest evidence of marriage in history shows no evidence of religious influence: indeed, it comes in the form of marriage contracts, where two men exchange a daughter for six sheep, for example. It was man who invented god, not the other way round: you have no evidence to the contrary, so there is no need for a counter argument.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

"8.Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all.
9. Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.
10 Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong promptly admitted it.

A) That looks like taking responsibility, in my view. More so than many people on this earth.

and

B) This isn't the Bible. Are all these individuals praying to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, via Jesus? You are bringing up supposed evidence that may or may not even be associated with Christianity. This has no place in our discussion as it refers to Jesus.

But the evidence I cited shows that those who take part in the AA are 1) less likely to give up alcohol than a control group which continued to live as normal, and 2) more likely to drink more alcohol than they did before.

It was founded as a Christian organisation, by the way.

If this was a wider system of ethics (e.g. for running a country, or an individual's entire life), the results would be far more catastrophic.

[Hitta]

Existence is basically the splitting of a paradoxical state(infinity, aka God).

Infinity is split into two transfinite components: the conscious and the unconscious(though in a very odd way these could be construed as being interchangeable terms.... and in a odd way the boundaries are kind of an illusion as the self is kind of a complete embodiment of god). The conscious mind observes. Observation is one of the key components to existence. It resonates the impression of 'I AM'. There is a layer of different impressions that the person has about themselves that is always changing and .... surprise... is dependent on the unconscious mind. The unconscious mind, just like the conscious mind is layered. It is layered based on conscious proximity. The closer something is in proximity to conscious awareness, the less unconscious you are of that idea(you are more aware of your family than you are a black guy named Azael in Zimbabwe). The universe in itself is merely an appendage of the conscious self radiating outward like waves of energy that become less and less coherent the further you get away from the source.

In a sense one may consider this a solipsistic viewpoint, but it's really kind of the opposite of that. If you are a construct of my unconscious mind, then I am a construct of your unconscious mind, therefore all individuals are basically appendages of each other, and the unconscious and conscious space of all things combine together to create god.

Of course this is only part of the story, but in summation of what I'm trying to convey is that every single point in the universe(and alternate universes) has the entirety of god inherent within it.

[Hitta]