Why I Left Christianity

[Spideynw]

Originally Posted by Bill Shatner

Being sentient and having the ability to rationalise is what separates the human species from non conscious animals.

I am pretty sure a lot of animals are sentient (just because other animals are unable to communicate it to us does not mean they are not) and I know a lot of them can rationalise. We just have a higher ability to rationalize and we have opposable thumbs.

[Bill Shatner]

Originally Posted by ballz

That's what I've been trying to argue all along, but there are many here who claim not to be rational or sentient

Really?

I guess we know know that time travel is possible because anyone who thinks that homo sapiens are not conscious is clearly fresh out of the dark ages.

Originally Posted by Linzyhop

wow. talk about incapable of seeing anything outside the box.

if you choose to not believe in that stuff, then fine. i disagree with you on most of them.

Why would I want to look outside a box thats grounded in reality into a fantasy world filled with cloud fairies and other superstitious mysticism?

[hereticzero]

Thinking outside the religious box is the correct way to think, make choices, and decisions. How can choices be made within a repressive religion based on the writings of a book of fiction? I've seen a lot of snakes and none of them speak, much less offer me fruit or even a rock for that matter! Christians hijacked the god of the Jews for their own religion, yet they do not want to live like a 6,000 year old Jew but they insist what was taught to the Jews were also taught to the Christians. Circular two-dimensional reasoning based on rewards with no thought of consequences of following what someone else says is true. God brought the law to the Jew, not the Gentile Christians. If a Christian is confronted with the bible's inaccuracies, they will just tell you that you don't understand the scripture because you are not a believer, or if you are a believer, they will tell you that your spirit is not inspired by the holy ghost to understand the scripture--you are yet a babe in christ. They have a reason for everything; an excuse to explain the absurd notions, oddities, and discrepancies of their religion.

Demons are the creation of an over-worked mind. Demons are created to give a person the satisfaction of knowing it was a demon that made them do something stupid and not their own will. They have an excuse for their absurd conduct that places no blame upon themselves. There are no demons, there are no angels. Good people in the world are really good people and not possessed by angelic beings forcing them to do good works or revealing the will of god through their vocal chords. Angels are as much fantasy as demons. We humans are responsible for our good works and horrible evils that come upon this world, not god, angels, mary, jesus, Lucifer or whoever. Much of how we perceive paganism is the result of what we have been taught in church. Paganism existed before Christianity but that does not mean paganism is a true religion either, it still came about through someone else's fantasy.

What is a true religion? There are none. All religions are the result of someone else's fantasy being thrust upon our daily lives by the will of a small majority. A person learns to believe what he is told because of daily peer pressure from other religious members as well as the person's own family. It is a daily mental pounding into the mind all of the doctrine and theology of the religion until it starts to 'make sense'. Once the religious convert makes the statement that everything 'makes sense', he is hooked for life. Why? Because he or she is rewarded by the church for their belief. They are invited on picnics, fishing trips, camp outs, vacations, church services, and eventually they will more than likely marry someone of the same religion and raise children indoctrinated into the fantasy from birth. Those who are raised in the faith are less likely to leave the flock when they are older, their minds are completely sealed off from reality in favor of the alternate reality. After all, their parents would not lie to them. Would they? They are already susceptible to mind control from being taught, from infancy, such 'truths' as Santa Claus, Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy, and on and on. The world knows these figures do not exist and sooner or later parents usually tell their children the truth. They fall short of admitting the truth about god, Jesus, and Mary and they continue running after someone else's imagination. Why? Because they always have and because the religion has been around for so long, it must be true! The vast majority continue in ignorance because they are too immature to place their whole being into their own hands. Religion is a comfort food for the emotionally and mentally immature.

Why be born again? Why not just grow up and accept your own place in the universe and take responsibility for your own actions?

[SoFlaJDM]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Cause I'm not arguing the definition of the word mammal

neither am i... that was the definition for ANIMAL

nice try, you lose

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by SoFlaJDM

neither am i... that was the definition for ANIMAL

nice try, you lose

I'm pretty sure you lose this argument, unless you are illogical and unsentient, but then you wouldn't really know the difference would you?

[SoFlaJDM]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

I'm pretty sure you lose this argument, unless you are illogical and unsentient, but then you wouldn't really know the difference would you?

let's back up for a second here... you try to redefine the word "animal"

i post up the definition for "animal"

you unsuccessfully try to divert the conversation and declare yourself the winner.. good job bro

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by SoFlaJDM

let's back up for a second here... you try to redefine the word "animal"

i post up the definition for "animal"

you unsuccessfully try to divert the conversation and declare yourself the winner.. good job bro

No, sir, I did not try to redfine the definition of animal. I simply stated that we have qualities that surpass the definition of the word, thus taking us out of that class.

Animals are still animals, and I've not tried to redefine them as such.

[SoFlaJDM]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

No, sir, I did not try to redfine the definition of animal. I simply stated that we have qualities that surpass the definition of the word, thus taking us out of that class.

Animals are still animals, and I've not tried to redefine them as such.

according to the definition, you're flat wrong

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by SoFlaJDM

according to the definition, you're flat wrong

I don't believe scientific definitions account for the spiritual. I've already stated that, so that in no case makes me wrong. It simply puts us into a different discussion.

And science shouldn't define things by the spiritual.

[SoFlaJDM]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

I don't believe scientific definitions account for the spiritual. I've already stated that, so that in no case makes me wrong. It simply puts us into a different discussion.

And science shouldn't define things by the spiritual.

well, i say 2+2=5 and i don't believe anyone who says different, so that in no case makes me wrong

same thing

[hereticzero]

Animals have energy, a life force that is also shown by photographs. When animals die, their energy is also released to continue as something else. How can Christians not believe animals are also of the divine? All life in the universe is of the divine. How does anyone know what happens to the energy released at death? We don't know. But science can prove energy is not destroyed but changed into another state. Religion cannot even proved its most feeble claims concerning death. Where is christianity's proof concerning animals?

Conceit separates us from the animals. What does it mean to be sentient? Is it self-awareness? Studies by animal researchers have shown elephants are self-aware--some animals attack their own reflection in a mirror. Elephants did not, they demonstrated a self-awareness that what they saw was their reflection, even those who never saw themselves before recognized their own reflections. They were self-aware indicating sentience. Humans are also self-aware and sentient. Whales demonstrated some type of sentientcy yet they are also considered animals. Humans are animals, yet we believe ourselves superior to everything else. This superiority complex comes from our mental image of our place in the universe, not a god-given commandment to dominate the world. Our image of ourselves comes from our conceit. Humanity cannot accept himself as one of the animals so he has developed a grandiose portrayal of himself as a being chosen by god to dominate and run god's creation for him. With all of the bloodshed in the world, isn't it more apparent that man cannot even rule himself much less rule god's creation.

[ballz2wallz]

C. S. Lewis (a great Christian apologist) once said:

Once the old Christian idea of a total difference in kind between man and beast has been abandoned, then no argument for experiments on animals can be found which is not also an argument for experiments on inferior men. If we cut up beasts simply because they cannot prevent us and because we are backing up our own side in the struggle for existence, it is only logical to cut up imbeciles, criminals, enemies or capitalists for the same reason.

The point you may wonder (if you're unable to determine it yourself)? That if we are indeed equal to animals, then we would easily be able to treat other humans the same as animals. Yet still, we continue to hold human life in higher regard (because we are not merely animals).

How can one argue with that?

[hereticzero]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

C. S. Lewis (a great Christian apologist) once said:



The point you may wonder (if you're unable to determine it yourself)? That if we are indeed equal to animals, then we would easily be able to treat other humans the same as animals. Yet still, we continue to hold human life in higher regard (because we are not merely animals).

How can one argue with that?

We are animals but we also have the ability for compassion for others. All animals have some type of love and passion for each other. Humans express their love verbally more so than in simple mating calls. We sanctify human life over other life. We have free-will to do as we choose, we can control our passions for violence where other animals may not. Cannibalism is known throughout the world, we eat each other. The animals themselves do not do more or less than humans do when it comes to violence to each other. Somewhere in the long distant past, most of the world decided that we would not use each other for food. We came to this decision without the help of religion. Just because we are animals does not mean we are ruled by animal instinct or ignorance. Our brains have the capacity animals do not. I don't see the problem with humans categorized as animals. What category should we be in?

[Bill Shatner]

Originally Posted by heritic

Conceit separates us from the animals. What does it mean to be sentient? Is it self-awareness? Studies by animal researchers have shown elephants are self-aware--some animals attack their own reflection in a mirror. Elephants did not, they demonstrated a self-awareness that what they saw was their reflection, even those who never saw themselves before recognized their own reflections.

Unfortunately you're not telling the whole story. The test showed (or at least the results that were interpreted and published by the researcher) that one elephant out of several may be considered self aware.

The same study was done with orangutans and chimps in the seventees; the researchers "swore up and down" that they had determined that these animals were self awayre.

Subsequent testing showed that they had "bent the parameters" of the test so much that the tests had to be discarded.

In other words they saw what they wanted to see; nothing mere.

I would suspect we have a similar situation here.

When animals die, their energy is also released to continue as something else

The energy is released over time in many forms as the bodies decompose; generally into an assortment of gases and small enzymes.

Nothing more.

All animals have some type of love and passion for each other

This is a scientifically inaccurate statement.

Most animals do not have the neurological capacity to experience what we call "love".

Since the rationalization of emotional occurrences are homo sapien specific, even if an animal did experience rudimentary emotional love they couldn't rationally use it to affect their judgment.

Animals have energy, a life force that is also shown by photographs

"Auras" or metaphysical nonsense.

[hereticzero]

It might all be nonsense to you but man is still an animal whether he is a sentient and conceited animal or not. Man can't change what he is by nature, which is an animal. Some animals are more aware of themselves than others (I did not know the rest of the study, thank you) just as some humans are more aware of themselves than others. I don't see what the big deal is in whether people are animals. What would you class humans as? About the aura thing, I don't believe in auras and I'm not referring to auras when I speak about people and living things having energy that is proven in experiments. Take a photographic piece of paper in a black room. Place your palm on the surface for a about a minute--might be less. Then develop the paper like any other photograph and you should see the outline of your hand when the picture develops. The energy that is found in every living being is what causes the image to appear. An imaginary aura is not found in photos, though some people may refer to the image as an aura.

[Bill Shatner]

Originally Posted by hereticzero

It might all be nonsense to you but man is still an animal whether he is a sentient and conceited animal or not.

Who would dispute that?

Man can't change what he is by nature, which is an animal.

What is this ambiguous statement supposed to actually mean?

One of the primary distinctions between human animals and the rest of the lot is the ability to use rational thought to override our instinctual programming. For example those that sacrifice their lives to save others knowing that they will not survive.

It happens all the time.

The fact is, the further homo sapiens evolve the less our actions are controlled by our instinctual programming; eventually we will probably be left with simply the desire to procreate (to a degree much less than now) and the instinct to suckle.

Would we then begin to classify ourselves as something other than animal? Perhaps but I doubt it because no one cares - the idea itself is to trivial to be bothered with.

I don't see what the big deal is in whether people are animals.

I agree that it definitely not a big deal so why are we talking about it?

What would you class humans as?

In the same way that everyone else classifies them as:

Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Mammalia
Order: Primata
Family: Hominidae
Genus: Homo
Species: Homo sapiens

About the aura thing, I don't believe in auras and I'm not referring to auras when I speak about people and living things having energy that is proven in experiments. Take a photographic piece of paper in a black room. Place your palm on the surface for a about a minute--might be less. Then develop the paper like any other photograph and you should see the outline of your hand when the picture develops.

Having never done this I can't confirm it but I would guess that it's simple heat or chemical transfer that changes the chemistry of the photo paper which is, as we know, quite sensitive.

Hence why you must use a dark room to develop photos.

The energy that is found in every living being is what causes the image to appear. An imaginary aura is not found in photos, though some people may refer to the image as an aura.

So what?

Everything that exists is energy - there's nothing mysticalabout it.

[Linzyhop]

Originally Posted by Bill Shatner

Really?

I guess we know know that time travel is possible because anyone who thinks that homo sapiens are not conscious is clearly fresh out of the dark ages.



Why would I want to look outside a box thats grounded in reality into a fantasy world filled with cloud fairies and other superstitious mysticism?

because you've closed your mind off to seeing any of it. there's no point in arguing with anyone who's so against any type of possibility in that realm.

[Bill Shatner]

Originally Posted by Linzyhop

because you've closed your mind off to seeing any of it. there's no point in arguing with anyone who's so against any type of possibility in that realm.

Here's some other fantasies I'm "closed minded" about: pixies, leprechauns, gargoyles and unicorns.

Would you care to argue for those as well?

[Linzyhop]