Post: #51

(04-01-2019 05:25 AM)Mage Wrote:  please show me any statistics that show that their number is higher then among secular childcare and education workers.

There's a real lack of self-awareness about what you're doing here. You're picking on a particular group in order to draw a connection when the most obvious connection is the fact that priests have to be celibate and hence it attracts closeted gays who use their power advantage to prey on altar boys...and are then protected by the good-ol'-boy network of the clergy. This is in fact a huge reason why so many people lose their faith and leave the church, some of which becoming atheists. If you have a hard time acknowledging the gravity of that situation then you're seriously out of touch.

(04-01-2019 05:37 AM)infowarrior1 Wrote:  How would an atheist/materialist deal with the prospect of ever increasing darkness for future humans and eventual nothingness?

How each of us deals with the knowledge of death is an individual thing. Religion offers a form of denial. The red-pill blue-pill metaphor was coined based on presenting two different views of the world, one false, but comforting, and one harsh, but true. As Cipher said in the first Matrix movie:



So don't be surprised if some here who have shed our fairy-tale notions of women reading hundreds of dry essays on evolutionary psychology aren't also empiricist about the way the rest of the world works.

Post: #52

Doesn't the God pill contradict the Red pill, which sheds light on the hypergamous nature of women, and why they act like that? As a sexually dimorphic species where males are assigned the provider/protector role, and are of less value since a male could theoretically impregnate several females a day whereas females have to carry the fetus in the womb for 9 months which leaves them semi-incapacitated, it's clear as to why women are more selective of the partners they choose to mate with.

The Red pill is a testament to evolution and natural selection, women act on their biological impulses which push them to seek out males of high genetic quality and status (which implies having resources) so that their children are fit for this world. This is the basis of the Red pill, which contradicts the God pill as the Abrahamic religions denounce evolution. You could still believe in a God and accept evolution, just not the Abrahamic God.

Post: #53

(04-01-2019 09:24 AM)keusi12 Wrote:  Doesn't the God pill contradict the Red pill, which sheds light on the hypergamous nature of women, and why they act like that? As a sexually dimorphic species where males are assigned the provider/protector role, and are of less value since a male could theoretically impregnate several females a day whereas females have to carry the fetus in the womb for 9 months which leaves them semi-incapacitated, it's clear as to why women are more selective of the partners they choose to mate with.

The Red pill is a testament to evolution and natural selection, women act on their biological impulses which push them to seek out males of high genetic quality and status (which implies having resources) so that their children are fit for this world. This is the basis of the Red pill, which contradicts the God pill as the Abrahamic religions denounce evolution. You could still believe in a God and accept evolution, just not the Abrahamic God.

Evolution says nothing about metaphysics or God either for or against. It is not the concern of Science to speculate about metaphysical issues. The evolution vs. "religion" debate is actually a debate between evolution, which is a fact, and an ancient creation myth created by bronze age poets. Many Hindus, who believe in God, don't have any problem with evolution, since it tends to verify their ancient texts.

Post: #54

I am lurking here to get a rest from the God Pill thread.

It is very relaxing.

Post: #55

(03-31-2019 07:36 PM)mickeyd Wrote:  Okay well how can you reconcile basically everyone on here agreeing that getting laid is a good thing? how can we reconcile going out drinking, or smoking a joint here and there and spending tons of money on nice things and expensive trips and enjoying the hedonistic life while not giving really giving a damn about everyone else? Why do we all agree that pushing homos up in hollywood and whatnot is sick but the alpha studs can go out and get a new girl every night and thats okay? Good for the goose but not for the gander. Not saying that we cant "sin" but no one on here is attempting to be some ultraconservative virgin boy.
All i see is a steaming pile of hypocrisy from all the christfags and moral authorities on here.

That is a fairly good question. I think it has to do with an individuals personal relationship with God. There is a group that is commonly referred to as Carnal Christians. A good many of them find that life empty after a while and become more devout. I was kind of having this discussion with Bosch in the GodPill thread. Remember that Jesus did not come and preach to the righteous, instead he preached to the whores, the thieves, the tax collectors, and other wicked people. In my experience people who have seen the dark side of themselves appreciate God more than those who think themselves holy.

It is my personal assumption that many people on the forum who support Christianity are Cultural Christians. They support Christianity but are in fact Atheists. I think this is why Atheists who dislike Christianity piss them off so much.

Post: #56

(04-01-2019 09:24 AM)keusi12 Wrote:  Doesn't the God pill contradict the Red pill, which sheds light on the hypergamous nature of women, and why they act like that? As a sexually dimorphic species where males are assigned the provider/protector role, and are of less value since a male could theoretically impregnate several females a day whereas females have to carry the fetus in the womb for 9 months which leaves them semi-incapacitated, it's clear as to why women are more selective of the partners they choose to mate with.
The Red pill is a testament to evolution and natural selection, women act on their biological impulses which push them to seek out males of high genetic quality and status (which implies having resources) so that their children are fit for this world. This is the basis of the Red pill, which contradicts the God pill as the Abrahamic religions denounce evolution. You could still believe in a God and accept evolution, just not the Abrahamic God.

The Blue Pill is a cultural thing created and perpetuated by a mass media that is entirely bought into a Victorian Era Feminist idea.

People of the Abrahamic faiths have until fairly recently been VERY red pilled. Hell... Abraham himself had a wife and a mistress at one point. In fact it was his wife who demanded that he get a mistress. If you read the Bible itself, the actions of women are often not very good.

(04-01-2019 09:32 AM)Sherman Wrote:  Evolution says nothing about metaphysics or God either for or against. It is not the concern of Science to speculate about metaphysical issues. The evolution vs. "religion" debate is actually a debate between evolution, which is a fact, and an ancient creation myth created by bronze age poets. Many Hindus, who believe in God, don't have any problem with evolution, since it tends to verify their ancient texts.

This idea that the Bible was intended to be some kind of scientific text is for idiots. Evolution talks about how the plants and the animals came to be diverse. The Bible talks about who is responsible for the creation of life, and the natural order of things.

The Creation Story is often misunderstood because it's poetry and allegory. It is my belief that people who follow the 6 day creation theory misunderstand the Bible. Even ancient peoples understood that the Creation Story is not telling us HOW the earth was made or life created.

It is my thinking that Creation through Evolution is the most accurate.

Post: #57

(04-01-2019 01:55 AM)Mage Wrote:  

(03-31-2019 05:56 PM)Valentine Wrote:  What the fuck did I just read. All atheists are homosexuals and pedophiles in the making, okay mate

This is obvious. The western generation before embraced atheism and the current western generation embraces LGBT and all sorts of cuckery and fagotry. It is all interconnected and only a willingly blind person will deny it.

This still doesn't explain why there are so many homosexual pedophile priests in the Church if religiousity is positively correlated with lack of sexual deviance. Unless you're trying to say atheism somehow still corrupted them.

It's quite ironic saying that cuckery stems from atheism as well when the whole turn-the-other-cheek routine is exactly what's led Christianity to the sorry state it's in today.

(04-01-2019 01:55 AM)Mage Wrote:  

(03-31-2019 05:56 PM)Valentine Wrote:  Anyway, my problem with these ancient religions is that whilst they do offer a decent moral and lifestyle guide for people lacking one, they are incomplete guides with gaping holes, some harmful beliefs and are unable to sufficiently adapt to modern times.

Right now the Church supports open borders, accepts gays and covers up rampant child abuse. Regardless of whether they're "true Christians" or whatever, most Christians still follow their guidance and end up perpetuating their own self-destruction through welcoming mass immigration or turning the other cheek constantly.

Certainly Christian Churches have degraded. But atheist leftists are welcoming open borders and gays much more and they are the origin of these sentiments. It is obvious.

And atheist right-wingers are anti-immigration and against sexual deviance. Not sure your point here.

(04-01-2019 01:55 AM)Mage Wrote:  

(03-31-2019 05:56 PM)Valentine Wrote:  In contrast a rational moral and life guide you create through your own learning can more readily adapt to encompass the various novel situations that modern life is creating. If the current market conditions do make marriage a terrible deal and both partners being virgins almost impossible then how is the advice still relevant? The inability for the guides to adapt to modern circumstances make it untenable today, and if you start adapting certain rules like men should be virgins untul marriage or keep the sabbath holy then you might as well admit you/re not following the religion, you're just using it as inspiration for your own system.

Inability to adopt to modern circumstances? Well since the modern circumstances are political correctness and catering to globohomo overlords and welcoming migrant bulls in your family this rant about not adapting to modern circumstances just proves my point.

Broken marriages and lack of virgins is the consequences of atheism. Damn right no faith should adapt to that. Strange how selective you are accusing Church of preaching the "obsolete" message of marriage and men's virginity but you do not accuse atheism of spreading the "modern" message of frivolous divorce and females losing virginity before marriage.

If Christians actually followed virginity until marriage then most women would leave by getting picked up by Chads who actually have some game and the men would remain incels for life. The number of Christians would dwindle in a generation, and that's what I'm talking about it being maladaptive. I've not heard any realistic solution that would fix this situation and also be in alignment with Christian teachings.

I do think a self-created moral system which is inspired by Christianity might work because low notch count women are proven to be better scientifically, but you'd need to throw away stuff like the rule that men should remain virgins also. We know better now, so we can combine our Red Pill knowledge with some useful teachings from the past.

Post: #58

(04-01-2019 11:13 AM)EndsExpect Wrote:  

(04-01-2019 09:24 AM)keusi12 Wrote:  

The Creation Story is often misunderstood because it's poetry and allegory. It is my belief that people who follow the 6 day creation theory misunderstand the Bible. Even ancient peoples understood that the Creation Story is not telling us HOW the earth was made or life created.

It is my thinking that Creation through Evolution is the most accurate.

Poetry was actually accepted in the ancient world as a valid source of knowledge. The Greeks took Homer seriously. That is one of the reasons why Socrates was killed. He was proposing a new source for knowledge: human reason.

Post: #59

(04-01-2019 09:32 AM)Sherman Wrote:  

(04-01-2019 09:24 AM)keusi12 Wrote:  Doesn't the God pill contradict the Red pill, which sheds light on the hypergamous nature of women, and why they act like that? As a sexually dimorphic species where males are assigned the provider/protector role, and are of less value since a male could theoretically impregnate several females a day whereas females have to carry the fetus in the womb for 9 months which leaves them semi-incapacitated, it's clear as to why women are more selective of the partners they choose to mate with.

The Red pill is a testament to evolution and natural selection, women act on their biological impulses which push them to seek out males of high genetic quality and status (which implies having resources) so that their children are fit for this world. This is the basis of the Red pill, which contradicts the God pill as the Abrahamic religions denounce evolution. You could still believe in a God and accept evolution, just not the Abrahamic God.

Evolution says nothing about metaphysics or God either for or against. It is not the concern of Science to speculate about metaphysical issues. The evolution vs. "religion" debate is actually a debate between evolution, which is a fact, and an ancient creation myth created by bronze age poets. Many Hindus, who believe in God, don't have any problem with evolution, since it tends to verify their ancient texts.

Exactly. Some religions don't have issues with evolution, the Abrahamic ones do though. To swallow the Christianity/Islam "God Pill" you need to backpedal on the red pill unless you say that evolution is compatible with your religion, which it's not.

Post: #60

Funny, we get banned if we say something they don't like in the Godpill thread but they can come into our Atheism thread and start arguments?

Post: #61

(04-01-2019 11:28 AM)Sherman Wrote:  Poetry was actually accepted in the ancient world as a valid source of knowledge. The Greeks took Homer seriously. That is one of the reasons why Socrates was killed. He was proposing a new source for knowledge: human reason.

Socrates was executed because of his political beliefs, not religious. A brief google search will confirm this. Also, Socrates was not an atheist. In fact one of the charges against him was "introducing new Gods" and "Corrupting the Youth". The real reason for his trial and execution was the fact that he was against the Athenian Democracy and instead favored Oligarchy.

Also... Poetry has different goals. The Poetry of the Bible is designed to display the character and majesty of God and nothing more. The suggestion that the Bible is attempting to explain natural phenomenon such as rainbows is ludicrous. Such people are also stupid enough to believe Harry Potter is real. If you read the text, rather than explain a rainbow it is telling us to remember the Covenant God has with us when we see a rainbow.

(04-01-2019 12:27 PM)keusi12 Wrote:  Exactly. Some religions don't have issues with evolution, the Abrahamic ones do though. To swallow the Christianity/Islam "God Pill" you need to backpedal on the red pill unless you say that evolution is compatible with your religion, which it's not.

People who believe this are simply Low IQ.

Post: #62

(04-01-2019 12:57 PM)EndsExpect Wrote:  

(04-01-2019 11:28 AM)Sherman Wrote:  Poetry was actually accepted in the ancient world as a valid source of knowledge. The Greeks took Homer seriously. That is one of the reasons why Socrates was killed. He was proposing a new source for knowledge: human reason.

Socrates was executed because of his political beliefs, not religious.

According to Plato's Apology, the charge of atheism was an important part of the indictment:

"Then, by the gods, Meletus, of whom we are speaking, tell me and the court, in somewhat plainer terms, what you mean! for I do not as yet understand whether you affirm that I teach others to acknowledge some gods, and therefore do believe in gods and am not an entire atheist - this you do not lay to my charge; but only that they are not the same gods which the city recognizes - the charge is that they are different gods. Or, do you mean to say that I am an atheist simply, and a teacher of atheism?

I mean the latter - that you are a complete atheist."

http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/apology.html

Keep in mind that when we read ancient texts, we doing so with a modern mind, and so tend to project our own presuppositions (which they didn't share) into their texts.

The First Apology of Justin Martyr is actually quite interesting because it gives insight into how ancient people actually thought.

He was defending himself and responding to the Roman authorities charge of atheism against Christians. In his defense, he claims a similar charge against Socrates.


"....And when Socrates endeavoured, by true reason and examination, to bring these things to light, and deliver men from the demons, then the demons themselves, by means of men who rejoiced in iniquity, compassed his death, as an atheist and a profane person, on the charge that "he was introducing new divinities;" and in our case they display a similar activity."

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ante-Nice...Chapter_31

Post: #63

Consider myself agnostic but I find religion in the West to generally be a positive thing in most people's lives.

The "moral decline of the west" and the loss of religion in the West seem to be directly correlated.

But I do have questions that I do have answers to just yet

We're people better off, happier, better people etc in the era of Christianity than they are today?

I don't really know the answer to that. There are so many large differences that it's impossible to understand.

200 years ago
-Life expectancy was in 30s.
-Women wouldn't have been able to work most of jobs.
-Male to Female Ratios are improving as far as we know. Are men really more lonely now?

I have to disagree with those who with the God Pill who think we will revert back to a god fearing society. Something tells me this is kind of a new normal and we're are just kind of adjusting to it. I'm open to being convinced either way at this point.

Post: #64

(04-01-2019 12:47 PM)Fortis Wrote:  Funny, we get banned if we say something they don't like in the Godpill thread but they can come into our Atheism thread and start arguments?

Different blasphemy laws.

Try discussing intelligent design.

Post: #65

(04-01-2019 02:01 PM)godzilla Wrote:  I have to disagree with those who with the God Pill who think we will revert back to a god fearing society. Something tells me this is kind of a new normal and we're are just kind of adjusting to it. I'm open to being convinced either way at this point.

I think the notion that the West is going to return to a Middle Ages Christian universe in wishful thinking. It's not going to happen. And Islam only offers a frozen dogma backed up by violence, which in the long run doesn't work. When Nietzsche said "God is Dead", he didn't literally mean that. He was referring to his feeling that Christian doctrine had been killed by the enlightenment. Keep in mind that Nietzsche, living in the 1800s, already had a clear understanding of what we are going through now.

My personal opinion is that the way out is to develop psychological disciplines that go way back to ancient times. Buddha recognized that speculation about metaphysical entities is not relevant to the human predicament. There is a strong tradition for this in the West and the East. The Stoics focused on one's mental psychology and the use of reason to obtain happiness. The East has developed techniques of meditation and yoga that are more advanced than anything in the West. Both the West and the East have developed copious literature on how to live an ethical life, control negative emotions, and confront powerful desires. We can't change death but it is technically feasible to be happy.

Post: #66

(04-01-2019 12:47 PM)Fortis Wrote:  Funny, we get banned if we say something they don't like in the Godpill thread but they can come into our Atheism thread and start arguments?

Think of it like the argument clinic in Monty Python. Folks can get it out of their system here and no one has to get banned.

Gentle reminder to everyone though, personal attacks are still against the forum rules.

Post: #67

I don't see the point in being atheist or a member of a religion.

I belong to the church of the self, in that we are all powerful with our time here on Earth, with the ability to shape our lives in any way that we see fit. I have a friend who is deeply religious and believes that God has given him every opportunity and every success in his life - I'm like dude, you're just hard working and personable, and likeable guy - you've given yourself all of your success.

Yes, things happen out of our control every day of our lives. But - how we choose to react to those circumstances dictates our life's trajectory and the person we become.

I am spiritual, I believe that there is more than the self as well, I meditate daily. I think about how all of This came to be, and how small I am in the grander scheme of things. And then I remember how much power I also hold. Its a contradiction of beauty, and I don't really mind being on some middle ground when it comes to this stuff.

It honestly doesn't matter to me if there is a God or not, because I would carry myself in the same way. I don't impose my views on others, I love having conversations with both hyper religious and atheists alike. As long as they aren't trying to influence my decisions, we can converse and debate and I can see your point of view.

I believe that we all share in a human experience, and right now, that's enough for me.

Post: #68

(04-01-2019 08:27 AM)questor70 Wrote:  

(04-01-2019 05:25 AM)Mage Wrote:  please show me any statistics that show that their number is higher then among secular childcare and education workers.

There's a real lack of self-awareness about what you're doing here. You're picking on a particular group in order to draw a connection when the most obvious connection is the fact that priests have to be celibate and hence it attracts closeted gays who use their power advantage to prey on altar boys...and are then protected by the good-ol'-boy network of the clergy. This is in fact a huge reason why so many people lose their faith and leave the church, some of which becoming atheists. If you have a hard time acknowledging the gravity of that situation then you're seriously out of touch.

(04-01-2019 05:37 AM)infowarrior1 Wrote:  How would an atheist/materialist deal with the prospect of ever increasing darkness for future humans and eventual nothingness?

How each of us deals with the knowledge of death is an individual thing. Religion offers a form of denial. The red-pill blue-pill metaphor was coined based on presenting two different views of the world, one false, but comforting, and one harsh, but true. As Cipher said in the first Matrix movie:



So don't be surprised if some here who have shed our fairy-tale notions of women reading hundreds of dry essays on evolutionary psychology aren't also empiricist about the way the rest of the world works.

That would be true if God didn't exist. Then again The Red Pill is what is true.

And if God exists then the Blue Pill is the bliss of Oblivion whilst the Red Pill is the possibility of Judgment after death which is its own harshness.

I posted the evidence's of why I believe he exists in the God Pill thread.

Post: #69

(04-01-2019 03:34 PM)Sherman Wrote:  The East has developed techniques of meditation and yoga that are more advanced than anything in the West. Both the West and the East have developed copious literature on how to live an ethical life, control negative emotions, and confront powerful desires. We can't change death but it is technically feasible to be happy.

^^^ THIS

The most peace I ever experienced was after I listened through one of Eckhart Tolle's books on CD. I know if I decide to really immerse myself in that school of thought again I will probably be able to get back to that mindspace again. I remember when Roosh briefly flirted with Tao. A while back I was playing through the Kung Fu TV series and it was like a breath of fresh air.

The fact is that conflict is a two-way street. The yin and the yang. The more people here express their frustration/anguish with the way the world is, it's a sign of their attachment, and this attachment is the root of suffering. Even something as simple as hating on SJW entertainment like The Last Jedi, Captain Marvel, etc... is giving power to suffering through this attachment or desire to control. Politics is the very definition of conflict, and that tug of war NEVER ENDS. The internet is really a CONFLICT ENGINE. I mean, think about it. Even here, in a walled garden, you see conflict. God pill vs. Material pill. Conflict is exhausting, especially the hit-below-the-belt way it's expressed online. There's just no way to maintain this sort of conflict. You'll eventually burn out. Nobody ever wins any of these dumpster fires. They're just wars of attrition.

Best to say your piece once, try not to repeat yourself, and move on.

(04-01-2019 08:24 PM)infowarrior1 Wrote:  ...if God exists then the Blue Pill is the bliss of Oblivion whilst the Red Pill is the possibility of Judgment after death which is its own harshness.

That reflects a gambler's take on life, which feels kind of immature. "If daddy finds out I put the hand in the cookie jar, I will be punished. But if daddy left mommy, then I can steal cookies as much a I like!" Where's the remorse? It's just fear of punishment that drives you at that point, otherwise you have nothing internal to limit you. No compassion for others who might want their share of cookies. No ethics for having promised not to take the cookies and broken that promise. Just fear of punishment. If doing the right thing is intrinsically good and something to aspire to it's not necessary to use the threat of punishment as a motivator.

The best way to live life should be one that leads to good outcomes within your own lifetime. The way you can tell if how you're leading your life is working is how happy you are feeling. You know the lyrics of NiN Hurt:

"Everyone I know goes away in the end"

Certain lifestyle choices naturally lead to negative outcomes. Linsay Lohan trainwrecks. Wolf of Wallstreet and Scarface trainwrecks. Rarely do live-hard-and-fast types not die-young. Bad shit tends to accumulate onto people with bad attitudes. Not that bad things don't happen to good people or that crime never pays, but I do strongly believe in the general power of karma despite being effectively an atheist. You go through life building friendships and that pays off ala It's a Wonderful Life. You build enemies and you wind up dead with a knife in your back or at least alone and lonely. Every day you make a deposit of positive or negative energy into the world that has a butterfly-effect on you and everyone else connected to you.

So most religious doctrine (at least the good stuff) is merely stating the above common sense.

Pinocchio is the best cautionary tale when it comes to the above. We start out in life driven by very little other than the pleasure principle. It takes time for us to think more about cause and effect and to be concerned with how others are impacted by our actions. We have to burn our hand in the fire first. And kids think they're immortal and are inherently risk-taking. This is the way the cycle of life goes. Modern life is effectively Pleasure Island as technology allows adults to live an extended adolescence.

It doesn't take religious doctrine to understand these pitfalls of human nature.

Post: #70

This is an inspiring video where the Yogi Coudoux gives a demonstration. He is over 6 foot tall and he puts himself in a box 15.7 by 16.9 by 20 inches, and it is then submerged in water. This guy is a real yogi and it shows the power of a disciplined mind and the reality of authentic yoga.






https://retreat.guru/teachers/8169/yogi-coudoux

https://www.facebook.com/yogicoudouxji

Post: #71

(04-01-2019 03:34 PM)Sherman Wrote:  

(04-01-2019 02:01 PM)godzilla Wrote:  I have to disagree with those who with the God Pill who think we will revert back to a god fearing society. Something tells me this is kind of a new normal and we're are just kind of adjusting to it. I'm open to being convinced either way at this point.

I think the notion that the West is going to return to a Middle Ages Christian universe in wishful thinking. It's not going to happen. And Islam only offers a frozen dogma backed up by violence, which in the long run doesn't work. When Nietzsche said "God is Dead", he didn't literally mean that. He was referring to his feeling that Christian doctrine had been killed by the enlightenment. Keep in mind that Nietzsche, living in the 1800s, already had a clear understanding of what we are going through now.

My personal opinion is that the way out is to develop psychological disciplines that go way back to ancient times. Buddha recognized that speculation about metaphysical entities is not relevant to the human predicament. There is a strong tradition for this in the West and the East. The Stoics focused on one's mental psychology and the use of reason to obtain happiness. The East has developed techniques of meditation and yoga that are more advanced than anything in the West. Both the West and the East have developed copious literature on how to live an ethical life, control negative emotions, and confront powerful desires. We can't change death but it is technically feasible to be happy.

True. Things never can be the same as in the past. As water that flows past the persons feet is not the same as the water that passes through his feet earlier and so forth.

The Middle Ages can no more return to Classical Greece and Rome as we can return to the Middle Ages.

Christianity being the ever present survivor I suspect will as a result of its interaction with Modernity will have a different face than previously.

Post: #72

(04-01-2019 08:37 PM)questor70 Wrote:  

(04-01-2019 03:34 PM)Sherman Wrote:  The East has developed techniques of meditation and yoga that are more advanced than anything in the West. Both the West and the East have developed copious literature on how to live an ethical life, control negative emotions, and confront powerful desires. We can't change death but it is technically feasible to be happy.

^^^ THIS

The most peace I ever experienced was after I listened through one of Eckhart Tolle's books on CD. I know if I decide to really immerse myself in that school of thought again I will probably be able to get back to that mindspace again. I remember when Roosh briefly flirted with Tao. A while back I was playing through the Kung Fu TV series and it was like a breath of fresh air.

The fact is that conflict is a two-way street. The yin and the yang. The more people here express their frustration/anguish with the way the world is, it's a sign of their attachment, and this attachment is the root of suffering. Even something as simple as hating on SJW entertainment like The Last Jedi, Captain Marvel, etc... is giving power to suffering through this attachment or desire to control. Politics is the very definition of conflict, and that tug of war NEVER ENDS. The internet is really a CONFLICT ENGINE. I mean, think about it. Even here, in a walled garden, you see conflict. God pill vs. Material pill. Conflict is exhausting, especially the hit-below-the-belt way it's expressed online. There's just no way to maintain this sort of conflict. You'll eventually burn out. Nobody ever wins any of these dumpster fires. They're just wars of attrition.

Best to say your piece once, try not to repeat yourself, and move on.

(04-01-2019 08:24 PM)infowarrior1 Wrote:  ...if God exists then the Blue Pill is the bliss of Oblivion whilst the Red Pill is the possibility of Judgment after death which is its own harshness.

That reflects a gambler's take on life, which feels kind of immature. "If daddy finds out I put the hand in the cookie jar, I will be punished. But if daddy left mommy, then I can steal cookies as much a I like!" Where's the remorse? It's just fear of punishment that drives you at that point, otherwise you have nothing internal to limit you. No compassion for others who might want their share of cookies. No ethics for having promised not to take the cookies and broken that promise. Just fear of punishment. If doing the right thing is intrinsically good and something to aspire to it's not necessary to use the threat of punishment as a motivator.

The best way to live life should be one that leads to good outcomes within your own lifetime. The way you can tell if how you're leading your life is working is how happy you are feeling. You know the lyrics of NiN Hurt:

"Everyone I know goes away in the end"

Certain lifestyle choices naturally lead to negative outcomes. Linsay Lohan trainwrecks. Wolf of Wallstreet and Scarface trainwrecks. Rarely do live-hard-and-fast types not die-young. Bad shit tends to accumulate onto people with bad attitudes. Not that bad things don't happen to good people or that crime never pays, but I do strongly believe in the general power of karma despite being effectively an atheist. You go through life building friendships and that pays off ala It's a Wonderful Life. You build enemies and you wind up dead with a knife in your back or at least alone and lonely. Every day you make a deposit of positive or negative energy into the world that has a butterfly-effect on you and everyone else connected to you.


So most religious doctrine (at least the good stuff) is merely stating the above common sense.

Pinocchio is the best cautionary tale when it comes to the above. We start out in life driven by very little other than the pleasure principle. It takes time for us to think more about cause and effect and to be concerned with how others are impacted by our actions. We have to burn our hand in the fire first. And kids think they're immortal and are inherently risk-taking. This is the way the cycle of life goes. Modern life is effectively Pleasure Island as technology allows adults to live an extended adolescence.

It doesn't take religious doctrine to understand these pitfalls of human nature.

I agree on your statement about religious doctrine. As those are Wisdom gleaned from Human Experience.


And I agree that fear of punishment alone shouldn't be necessary. For the enlightened few. But for the many. Why not Might Makes Right?


Many evil men have climbed to the top on a pile of bodies like Genghis Khan. And lived charmed lives for the rest of their days due to their competence in wielding organized violence and annihilating their enemies completely.

Living the ideal thug life with his harems and rich foods.

No Karma happened to him in this life. And he died contentedly and peacefully surrounded by his sons.

For centuries those descendants did as they pleased until it eventually fell apart due to dynastic decline and infighting.


Perhaps all positive morality is Might Makes Right in a Godless universe.


As for the rest of your comment I don't find anything else to disagree with.

Although I think the fact that people need Christianity like somehow its a crutch to make people moral is an erroneous argument.

That may be part of the appeal and utility. But its much more than that.

Its quite an erroneous assumption that Christianity is all about doing good deeds to pass the muster of the last judgment.

It really depends on the assumption that Jesus is who he claims he is and that he is raised from the dead. And that believing in him will save man who is imperfect from ultimate destruction. For failing to be God's Image as he should be.


As well the existence of the God that Christianity is based on.


Because at the end of the day no man is perfect enough to pass muster.



Only those with faith are truly justified. And that requires the existence of the supernatural.


If Christ did not rise from the dead. All Christianity is a lie.

Post: #73

I'm not sold on the idea that atheism = degeneracy.

Some of the more conservative countries out there are communists (or ex-communists) which had a ban on god for decades. Russia, Belarus, Vietnam,etc. All more conservative than even deep south Bible belt USA. The women are better looking, more feminine, more traditional, etc.

My main issue with the god pill though is on 2 fronts.

1.) It priortises the eternal over the present. Implications: issues like the soft white genocide taking place in the Western world take a backseat to saving souls. Also, we're all God's children afterall so that shit really doesn't matter.

2.) See above. I refuse to accept universal equality. It's very obvious that certain branches of homo sapiens evolved further than others as is seen in countless over species.

Lastly, I'd never trust a man who proclaims the funky ideas he gets in his head are from G-d. That's played out poorly too many times throughout history.

I know you born again types will argue that said ideas need to align with the scriptures. But one can find a scripture to justify anything.

Post: #74

I have very little religious knowledge (13 years of state education failed me terribly) so I'm sure the wise folk on this forum can answer me this one;

I've always wondered why God (or Gods) don't unambiguously reveal themselves so that their followers would no longer have any doubts? I am not a God, but if I were I would want people to know about my presence. It's only fair. What about all those people who were alive before Jesus? are they unfairly damned? And all those on pacific islands who had no chance of hearing 'the good news'. Expecting people to just 'have faith' without evidence is a bit harsh and risks God losing a lot of otherwise very good people.

I've prayed (and will do again) but I confess it's normally because I find myself in a position where I'll take all the help I can get and want to cover all my bases. I'm sure the Creator who made me will understand this.

Post: #75

Favorite Atheist Meme.