Religion is Everything

[marooned]

Translates thread: Why won't other people conform to my organized religion?

[Adam Strange]

Translates thread: Why won't other people conform to my organized religion?

Do you have cookies?

[gone]

Translates thread: Why won't other people conform to my organized religion?

I'm wondering this unironically

[Nobody]

Translates thread: Why won't other people conform to my organized religion?

My brain defaulted to this:

[Eliza Thomason]

Translates thread: Why won't other people conform to my organized religion?

No because i don't wonder that.

[End]

Yeah, ideal.

The most diseased subspecie of logic ever, it's optimism.

The requirement that faith be absolute completely disables the "But what if we're wrong?" voice that screams out in your head for a very good reason, and before you know it, generations have passed, over which adherence has dealt more and more damage to the world.


You know, I have a backup scenario for if it really does turn out your God is real. If he exists, then judging by the way I turned out, he obviously created me as a monster without a soul, or a demon or some shit, so my ass is going to hell no matter what, lol. In which case, I have nothing to be anxious about, since I have my whole life to prepare for the eternal agony of hell, and since nothing I do can prevent it, none of my choices matter. I don't have to worry - it's my destiny.

The less charitable reality for me is the one where he doesn't exist, because in that world, proper causality is in effect, our choices actually matter, and that demon of Choice gives us wrong-choices to agonize over. What if this crueller godless world really is the one we live in, huh? What if you don't actually have that bulwark of faith to back you up, and humanity really does have to deal with the consequences of that bad genetic practice? What then?

Sadly you have fallen to demonic logic. This can be but a temporary thing for you hopefully. As I've pointed out time and again many a true saint started and indeed lived most of their lives as beings seeming bound for deepest depths of hell. Yet either upon their death beds or by some strange twist of fate they became the greatest exemplars of the faith. Easiest case in point? Saint Paul. The most zealous, ardent, and downright effective persecutor of Christains became such a great evangelist that none have matched his work in that field since.

No because i don't wonder that.

:
The truth has no need to appeal to those who belong to the world. Either they see the truth and accept it, or they do not. Fun anecdote: The band "Stryper" got its name from a rather forced acronym. Mr. Sweet, however, had the right idea. You can either accept it or reject it. Those who accept will be saved. Those who reject will not by their own choice. I am quite thankful that I find the latter option literally and utterly incomprehensible...

[Socionics Is A Cult]

Sadly you have fallen to demonic logic. This can be but a temporary thing for you hopefully. As I've pointed out time and again many a true saint started and indeed lived most of their lives as beings seeming bound for deepest depths of hell. Yet either upon their death beds or by some strange twist of fate they became the greatest exemplars of the faith. Easiest case in point? Saint Paul. The most zealous, ardent, and downright effective persecutor of Christains became such a great evangelist that none have matched his work in that field since.


:
The truth has no need to appeal to those who belong to the world. Either they see the truth and accept it, or they do not. Fun anecdote: The band "Stryper" got its name from a rather forced acronym. Mr. Sweet, however, had the right idea. You can either accept it or reject it. Those who accept will be saved. Those who reject will not by their own choice. I am quite thankful that I find the latter option literally and utterly incomprehensible...

People do not choose what they believe.

[marooned]

No because i don't wonder that.

Some here write as if it is nothing. It shocks me when I read it, and I question if I have read mistakenly. But particularly in these times some have this view. It is hard to fathom, because religion, or God, is everything.

[ashlesha]

Sometimes I have thoughts during meditative prayer that I have to interrupt myself to write down. What?

I was only wondering if there was a venn diagram somewhere with "guns don't kill, people do" and "religion doesn't kill, people do." I think it sounds like an overall psychological bent toward a certain outlook maybe? Not making any particular point.

And um, yeah? I think about this while meditating, so what? I try my best bbl

[Eliza Thomason]

Translates thread: Why won't other people conform to my organized religion?

Because this is what you stated it. I know why people don't conform - why would you conform when you don't believe? I wonder why people actually think it doesn't matter. But then, I can remember a time which i wrote about here when I thought it didn't matter. I thought i already knew all about it, and though i sensed I was looking for something, i was sure it wasn't that. (But it was.)

[marooned]

Because this is what you stated it. I know why people don't conform - why would you conform when you don't believe? I wonder why people actually think it doesn't matter. But then, I can remember a time which i wrote about here when I thought it didn't matter. I thought i already knew all about it, and though i sensed I was looking for something, i was sure it wasn't that. (But it was.)

Translates post: People just don't yet KNOW they want to convert to my religion and if they made a decision not to it means they don't know enough about it.

[Computer Loser]

I wonder why people actually think it doesn't matter.

That sums up the problem in America today. Many of us are ignorant and apathetic about truth—but not when it comes to money, medicine, or the other tangible items. We care passionately about those things. But many people are ignorant and apathetic about truth in morality and religion. Are the people who have adopted the “whatever” theme of the culture right, or does truth in morality and religion really matter?

It really matters. How do we know?

First, even though people may claim that truth in morality doesn’t matter, they don’t really believe that when someone treats them immorally.

For example, they might claim that lying isn’t wrong, but just watch how morally outraged they get when you lie to them (especially if it’s about their money!). We often hear that “it’s the economy, stupid!” But just think about how much better the economy would be if everyone told the truth. There would be no Enrons or Tycos. There would be no scandals or scams. There would be no burdensome government regulations. Of course the economy is important, but it’s directly affected by morality!

Morality undergirds virtually everything we do. It not only affects us financially, but, in certain circumstances, it also affects us socially, psychologically, spiritually, and even physically.

Second, truth in morality matters is because success in life is often dependent on the moral choices a person makes. These include choices regarding sex, marriage, children, drugs, money, business dealings, and so on. Some choices bring prosperity, others result in ruin.

Third, all laws legislate morality. The only question is, “Whose morality will be legislated?” Think about it. Every law declares one behavior right and its opposite wrong—that’s morality. Whose morality should be legislated on issues such as abortion or euthanasia? These are issues that directly impact the lives and health of real people.

What about truth in religion?

If the atheists are right, then we might as well lie, cheat, and steal to get what we want because this life is all there is, and there are no consequences in eternity.

In biology class, we essentially teach kids that there’s really no difference between any human being and a pig. After all, if we’re merely the product of blind naturalistic forces—if no deity created us with any special significance—then we are nothing more than pigs with big brains. Does this religious (atheistic) “truth” matter? It does when kids carry out its implications. Instead of good citizens who see people made in the image of God, we may potentially produce criminals who see no meaning or value in human life. Ideas have consequences.

On the positive side, Mother Teresa helped improve conditions in India by challenging the religious beliefs of many in the Hindu culture. The Hindu belief in karma and reincarnation leads many Hindus to ignore the cries of the suffering. Why? Because they believe that those who suffer deserve their plight for doing something wrong in a previous life. So, if you help suffering people, you are interfering with their karma.

Mother Teresa taught Hindus in India the Christian principles of caring for the poor and suffering. Does that religious idea matter? Ask the millions whose lives she touched. Does the religious teaching of karma matter? Ask the millions still suffering.

The bottom line is this: regardless of what the real truth is concerning religion and morality, our lives are greatly affected by it today and perhaps even in eternity. Those who cavalierly say, “So what? Who cares about truth in morality and religion?” are ignoring reality and are blindly skating on thin ice. We owe it to ourselves and others to find the real truth, and then act on it.

[Socionics Is A Cult]

What about truth in religion?

If the atheists are right, then we might as well lie, cheat, and steal to get what we want because this life is all there is, and there are no consequences in eternity.

I fear my own conscience more than I fear God. Theists believe in God, and lie, cheat, and steal. God itself tells people to follow its commandments only to break them itself.

From Existentialism is a Humanism by Jean-Paul Sartre.

"Atheistic existentialism, which I represent, is more consistent. It states that if God does not exist, there is at least one being in whom existence precedes essence -a being whose existence comes before its essence, a being who exists before he can be defined by any concept of it. That being is man, or, as Heidegger put it, the human reality. What do we mean here by "existence precedes essence"? We mean that man first exists: he materializes in the world, encounters himself, and only afterward defines himself. If man as existentialists conceive of him cannot be defined, it is because to begin with he is nothing. He will not be anything until later, and then he will he what he makes of himself. Thus, there is no human nature since there is no God to conceive of it. Man is not only that which he conceives himself to be, but that which he wills himself to be, and since he conceives of himself only after he exists, just as he wills himself to be after being thrown into existence, man is nothing other than what he makes of himself. This is the first principle of existentialism." ~ Jean-Paul Sartre

From The Ethics of Ambiguity by Simone de Beauvoir:

"Before existence there is no more reason to exist than not to exist. The lack of existence can not be evaluated since it is the fact on the basis of which all evaluation is defined. It can not be compared to anything for there is nothing outside of it to serve as a term of comparison. This rejection of any extrinsic justification also confirm the rejection of an original pessimism which we posited at the beginning. Since it is unjustifiable from without, to declare from without that it is unjustifiable is not to condemn it. And the truth is that outside of existence there is nobody. Man exists. For him it is not a question of wondering whether his presence in the world is useful, whether life is worth the trouble of being lived. These questions make no sense. It is a matter of knowing whether he wants to live and under what conditions.

But if man is free to define for himself the conditions of a life which is valid in his own eyes, can he not choose whatever he likes and act however he likes? Dostoevsky asserted, "If God does not exist, everything is permitted." Today's believers use this formula for their own advantage. To re-establish man at the heart of his destiny is, they claim, to repudiate all ethics. However, far from God's absence authorizing all license, the contrary is the case, because man is abandoned on the earth, because his acts are definitive, absolute engagements. He bears the responsibility for a world which is not the work of a strange power, but of himself, where his defeats are inscribed, and his victories as well. A God can pardon, efface, and compensate. But if God does not exist, man's faults are inexpiable. If it is claimed that, whatever the case may be, this earthly stake has no importance, this is precisely because one invokes that inhuman objectivity which we declined at the start. One can not start by saying that our earthly destiny has or has not importance, for it depends upon us to give it importance. It is up to man to make it important to be a man, and he alone can feel his success or failure. And if it is again said that nothing forces him to try to justify his being in this way, then one is playing upon the notion of freedom in a dishonest way. The believer is also free to sin. The divine law is imposed upon him only from the moment he decides to save his soul. In the Christian religion, though one speaks very little about them today, there are also the damned. Thus, on the earthly plane, a life which does not seek to ground itself will be a pure contingency. But it is permitted to wish to give itself a meaning and a truth, and it then meets rigorous demands within its own heart.

However, even among the proponents of secular ethics, there are many who charge existentialism with offering no objective content to the moral act. It is said that this philosophy is subjective, even solipsistic. If he is once enclosed within himself, how can man get out? But there too we have a great deal of dishonesty. It is rather well known that the fact of being a subject is a universal fact and that the Cartesian cogito expresses both the most individual experience and the most objective truth. By affirming that the source of all values resides in the freedom of man, existentialism merely carries on the tradition of Kant, Fichte, and Hegel, who, in the words of Hegel himself, "have taken for their point of departure the principle according to which the essence of right and duty and the essence of the thinking and willing subject are absolutely identical." The idea that defines all humanism is that the world is not a given world, foreign to man, one to which he has to force himself to yield without. It is the world willed by man, insofar as his will expresses his genuine reality." ~ Simone de Beauvoir

[Socionics Is A Cult]

On the positive side, Mother Teresa helped improve conditions in India by challenging the religious beliefs of many in the Hindu culture. The Hindu belief in karma and reincarnation leads many Hindus to ignore the cries of the suffering. Why? Because they believe that those who suffer deserve their plight for doing something wrong in a previous life. So, if you help suffering people, you are interfering with their karma.

Mother Teresa taught Hindus in India the Christian principles of caring for the poor and suffering. Does that religious idea matter? Ask the millions whose lives she touched. Does the religious teaching of karma matter? Ask the millions still suffering.

Suffering for Jesus

Mother Teresa allowed suffering in her institutions with such depressing regularity one would assume she was sure suffering in the name of Jesus is a good thing. Teresa was not even sure God or Jesus exists.

Mother Teresa is thoroughly saturated with a primitive fundamentalist religious worldview that sees pain, hardship, and suffering as ennobling experiences and a beautiful expression of affiliation with Jesus Christ and his ordeal on the cross. Hitchens reports that in a filmed interview Mother Teresa herself tells of a patient suffering unbearable pain from terminal cancer: "With a smile, Mother Teresa told the camera what she told the patient: 'You are suffering like Christ on the cross. So Jesus must be kissing you.'" Apparently unaware that the response of the sufferer was a put-down, she freely related it: "Then please tell him to stop kissing me."[13]

Well-meaning people donate money to Mother Teresa's organisation and imagine that they are helping people. Few realise that donations sometimes help Mother Teresa's order of nuns to hurt people rather than help them. Hemant Mehta relates the following:[14]

Over hundreds of hours of research, much of it cataloged in a book he published in 2003, Dr. Chatterjee said he found a “cult of suffering” in homes run by Mother Teresa’s organization, the Missionaries of Charity, with children tied to beds and little to comfort dying patients but aspirin. He and others said that Mother Teresa took her adherence to frugality and simplicity in her work to extremes, allowing practices like the reuse of hypodermic needles and tolerating primitive facilities that required patients to defecate in front of one another. “[Western audiences] don’t care about whether a third-world city’s dignity or prestige has been hampered by an Albanian nun,” he said. “So, obviously, they may be interested in the lies and the charlatans and the fraud that’s going on, but the whole story, they’re not interested in.”

Donors expected what they gave would go to help poor people. It did not.[15]

A widow, Sarnakar said she was admitted to Nirmal Hriday a decade ago with tuberculosis. Medical care was basic, and Sarnakar recalled that many in the women’s ward did not survive. “The ones who die, they die,” Sarnakar said. “But for those who can get better, the sisters are very good to us.” They die if they don’t get medical treatment. The nun could have spent the money to make that happen, but she gave it to the Vatican instead.[16]

While Mother Teresa was a sadist, she wasn't as masochistic:

[W]hen it came to her own death, Teresa refused to be treated in one of her own unsanitary facilities that glorified and promoted the suffering and pain of others. Researchers said that when it came to her own treatment, “she received it in a modern American hospital.” Apparently for Teresa suffering was beautiful only if it was someone else doing the suffering.[1]

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Mother_Teresa

[Socionics Is A Cult]

That sums up the problem in America today. Many of us are ignorant and apathetic about truth—but not when it comes to money, medicine, or the other tangible items. We care passionately about those things. But many people are ignorant and apathetic about truth in morality and religion. Are the people who have adopted the “whatever” theme of the culture right, or does truth in morality and religion really matter?

It really matters. How do we know?

First, even though people may claim that truth in morality doesn’t matter, they don’t really believe that when someone treats them immorally.

For example, they might claim that lying isn’t wrong, but just watch how morally outraged they get when you lie to them (especially if it’s about their money!). We often hear that “it’s the economy, stupid!” But just think about how much better the economy would be if everyone told the truth. There would be no Enrons or Tycos. There would be no scandals or scams. There would be no burdensome government regulations. Of course the economy is important, but it’s directly affected by morality!

Morality undergirds virtually everything we do. It not only affects us financially, but, in certain circumstances, it also affects us socially, psychologically, spiritually, and even physically.

Second, truth in morality matters is because success in life is often dependent on the moral choices a person makes. These include choices regarding sex, marriage, children, drugs, money, business dealings, and so on. Some choices bring prosperity, others result in ruin.

Third, all laws legislate morality. The only question is, “Whose morality will be legislated?” Think about it. Every law declares one behavior right and its opposite wrong—that’s morality. Whose morality should be legislated on issues such as abortion or euthanasia? These are issues that directly impact the lives and health of real people.

What about truth in religion?

If the atheists are right, then we might as well lie, cheat, and steal to get what we want because this life is all there is, and there are no consequences in eternity.

In biology class, we essentially teach kids that there’s really no difference between any human being and a pig. After all, if we’re merely the product of blind naturalistic forces—if no deity created us with any special significance—then we are nothing more than pigs with big brains. Does this religious (atheistic) “truth” matter? It does when kids carry out its implications. Instead of good citizens who see people made in the image of God, we may potentially produce criminals who see no meaning or value in human life. Ideas have consequences.

On the positive side, Mother Teresa helped improve conditions in India by challenging the religious beliefs of many in the Hindu culture. The Hindu belief in karma and reincarnation leads many Hindus to ignore the cries of the suffering. Why? Because they believe that those who suffer deserve their plight for doing something wrong in a previous life. So, if you help suffering people, you are interfering with their karma.

Mother Teresa taught Hindus in India the Christian principles of caring for the poor and suffering. Does that religious idea matter? Ask the millions whose lives she touched. Does the religious teaching of karma matter? Ask the millions still suffering.

The bottom line is this: regardless of what the real truth is concerning religion and morality, our lives are greatly affected by it today and perhaps even in eternity. Those who cavalierly say, “So what? Who cares about truth in morality and religion?” are ignoring reality and are blindly skating on thin ice. We owe it to ourselves and others to find the real truth, and then act on it.

Some theists like you say that without belief in God, they would have no reason not to do "bad" things. I only hope that such theists don't lose their belief in God, for all our sakes. If you don't see doing a good thing as good because it is a good thing, then it suggests to me you are acting out of fear or selfishness. How can you claim that the "human being" is a higher animal if you are so base?

[Socionics Is A Cult]

Because this is what you stated it. I know why people don't conform - why would you conform when you don't believe? I wonder why people actually think it doesn't matter. But then, I can remember a time which i wrote about here when I thought it didn't matter. I thought i already knew all about it, and though i sensed I was looking for something, i was sure it wasn't that. (But it was.)

Why would people want to join a cult?