Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
dog·ma
ˈdôɡmə
noun
a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.
So where do you draw the line between good dogma and bad Dogma?
Quote:
Originally Posted by granpa
So Dogma is bad when religious people do it but it's okay when atheists do it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by granpa
It seems that some are more equal than others
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel
that's the double standard I keep pointing out.
The phrase "more equal than others" from George Orwell's Animal Farm only "makes sense" if preceded by "All ____ are equal but..." but I have not claimed that all dogma is equal. I specifically (and, I thought, very clearly) claimed that some dogma is worse than others. In fact, I gave one example of something I thought was good dogma: "Love thy neighbor as they self." This is asserted as incontrovertibly true by someone deemed to be an authority. In this case the authority is religious, so I thought this clearly established that religious dogma could be either good or bad (and same for any dogmas that might be uttered by an atheist). And then I took a stab at explaining what it is that I think makes some dogma better or worse that others. As of yet, no one has argued against my examples of good/bad dogma.
So Tza (or anyone) can you explain more specifically where my efforts failed? How am I exhibiting a double standard? (Notice I'm not insisting that I'm innocent of holding a double standard. I'm asking for clarification on how my views count as a double standard.)
The phrase "more equal than others" from George Orwell's Animal Farm only "makes sense" if preceded by "All ____ are equal but..." but I have not claimed that all dogma is equal. I specifically (and, I thought, very clearly) claimed that some dogma is worse than others. In fact, I gave one example of something I thought was good dogma: "Love thy neighbor as they self." This is asserted as incontrovertibly true by someone deemed to be an authority. In this case the authority is religious, so I thought this clearly established that religious dogma could be either good or bad (and same for any dogmas that might be uttered by an atheist). And then I took a stab at explaining what it is that I think makes some dogma better or worse that others. As of yet, no one has argued against my examples of good/bad dogma.
So Tza (or anyone) can you explain more specifically where my efforts failed? How am I exhibiting a double standard? (Notice I'm not insisting that I'm innocent of holding a double standard. I'm asking for clarification on how my views count as a double standard.)
Thanks.
It is based on the theist idea that atheists think the same way: on faith -belief; on Dogma -what they are told in their Books of Authority (Dawkins,usually, or Darwin (1). Therefore, when we critique the way they think, they will see it as a double -standard.
It was surprising for me, when I first encountered it, to see that Theists think in terms of belief - or not. Weight of evidence and probability based on that, and degrees of how much credence we may put into this or that idea, based on that evidence, is foreign to them.
Belief is all. and evidence is either to be clung to like Holy Writ (even if wrong) if it supports the belief. Or dismissed out of hand if it does not. And of course they suppose we think like that, too. Once this is understood, one ought not to be astonished at the argument-method. Though, in fact, I always am.
P.s I Got the 'more equal than others' idea. It implies that we are claiming a privilege of thinking in a way that none of our opponents are (so we supposedly think) allowed to. Thus, Double Standards. This again derives entirely on Faith and the way evidence has to dance to its' tune.
While the initial way they characterize how we think is good old Projection, simply ignoring or dismissing any correction of this is a characteristic of rejecting any information that does not fit their beliefs.
Oh, and if the Evidence comes from the Bible itself, we are Interpreting it wrongly. The Correct Interpretation coming, you may not be too surprised to hear, not from the written text, but from Inspiration. Delivered direct to the believer's brain by God.
(1) so don't be surprised if they suppose that the Big Bang and a something from nothing Universe is Atheist Dogma out of Origin of Species.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 01-26-2018 at 04:16 PM..
The phrase "more equal than others" from George Orwell's Animal Farm only "makes sense" if preceded by "All ____ are equal but..." but I have not claimed that all dogma is equal. I specifically (and, I thought, very clearly) claimed that some dogma is worse than others. In fact, I gave one example of something I thought was good dogma: "Love thy neighbor as they self." This is asserted as incontrovertibly true by someone deemed to be an authority. In this case, the authority is religious, so I thought this clearly established that religious dogma could be either good or bad (and same for any dogmas that might be uttered by an atheist). And then I took a stab at explaining what it is that I think makes some dogma better or worse than others. As of yet, no one has argued against my examples of good/bad dogma.
So Tza (or anyone) can you explain more specifically where my efforts failed? How am I exhibiting a double standard? (Notice I'm not insisting that I'm innocent of holding a double standard. I'm asking for clarification on how my views count as a double standard.)
Thanks.
You have every right to be astounded at any accusations of applying a double standard. Your posts are uniquely and artfully crafted to NOT apply a double standard. You are the most neutral and honest poster on this forum besides being the best explainer of very complex issues. Like Nate, I am not remotely surprised by the disingenuous faux outrage and accusations coming from the usual suspects.
This is a dangerous post because of the recent reaction to my views leading me to leave this forum. Unfortunately, religious beliefs are the ones most directly connected to the social-psychological needs that drive selective perceptions and cognitive dissonance. They are also very emotionally volatile and tend to be a source of spark and tinder in social settings. My experiences on this forum over many years led me to expect intelligent, non-violent, and open-minded reactions until recently. My complete views have been thoroughly presented in my many existing posts, but I personally find the retention of magical thinking and ancient ignorance about Christ and His role sufficiently troubling that I want to provide a concise alternative narrative summarizing the Christian aspects of them.
Perhaps an anonymous example of a somewhat irreverent summary of the magical thinking typically passing for faith in Christ will make my concerns about the prevailing Christian narrative clear. Under Christianity we are to believe that God essentially said:
“I'm going to create man and woman and they will commit original sin. Next - I'm going to impregnate a teenage girl with myself as her child so that I may be born as a human. Later - I will kill myself as a blood sacrifice to myself so I can forgive them and save them from the sin I originally condemned them for.”
If this actually makes any intellectual sense to anyone, I would be astounded. I am fairly certain, though, that the fundamentalists among us will simply quote:
1 Corinthians 1:18
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
Intellectually, I have no problem with the cross but the current magical interpretation of its significance is simply preposterous, IMO.
To summarize and repeat my view of things Christian, I believe that Christ came to fix a deficiency in US as a species. We were NOT achieving anything remotely like agape love for life or one another. Jesus was our "designated hitter" and He achieved a Grand Slam demonstrating pure agape love under the most egregious circumstances even up to His death. He told us that God IS Spirit and that God IS agape love so God's Holy Spirit IS agape love. Christ brought God's Holy Spirit of agape love to His HUMAN consciousness. His teachings about the TRUE NATURE of God were so contrary to what our ancestors' religious leaders believed about God that they rejected Him and demanded His crucifixion.
Jesus had already said when you see me you see the Father so He used the opportunity to UNAMBIGUOUSLY reveal and emphasize the TRUE NATURE of God.
John 10:30 King James Version (KJV)
30 I and my Father are one.
He voluntarily submitted to the brutality of our ancestors. He endured their brutality because "they knew not what they did," (also known as ignorance). He loved them and all of us including His torturers and murderers (and smote no one!). "No greater love . . ." This was supposed to be unambiguous proof of God's TRUE NATURE if you had faith and believed that Jesus embodied the true nature of God and was the Son of God.
But our ancestors were too steeped in the beliefs about blood sacrifices to appease a wrathful God. They interpreted His loving sacrifice of His life to our ancestors' brutality as a blood sacrifice to God!!! This was not really their fault and was fully expected by God and Jesus. Knowing what they would do to Him is what made it a sacrifice for Jesus. The sacrificial mindset is ancient and crosses generations and cultures. It is a primitive and long-standing belief in the need to assuage God and was practiced frequently by our species' ancestors, not just the ancient Israelites. This mistaken belief about God’s motives and actions in Christianity is the result of reading the OT under the veil of ignorance (blind minds) Christ came to lift.
2 Corinthians 3:14-17
But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.
15But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.
16Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.
17Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
It was this very spiritually immature and primitive belief about appeasement through sacrifice that was described in the fable about Noah. According to the flood story, Noah actually sacrificed the very animals he was told to save from extinction!! That caused God in frustration to acknowledge that our beliefs were the result of our species' evil imagination and spiritual immaturity (Youth).
Genesis 8:20-21 (King James Version)
20And Noah builded an altar unto the LORD; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.
21And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth
God is God is God, period, but the ONLY TRUE REVEALED GOD for Christians is the one revealed by the example and teachings of Jesus Christ, NOT the one described by our ancestors in the OT. The OT told us to expect Christ who would reveal God to us. It is the God that was believed in by our ancient ancestors that is the problem corrupting Christ's Gospel. It is why Christ’s loving sacrifice and shedding of His blood to their brutality was mistakenly thought to be a blood sacrifice to appease God.
There was never any price to pay. There was no atonement. There was a need for our species to achieve "at-one-ment" with God. To do that our species had to evolve spiritually enough to attain "perfect resonance" with God's consciousness (Holy Spirit of agape love) in a HUMAN consciousness which NONE of us were capable of achieving (sin = missing the mark). Our species would have remained eternally separated from God because of our sins (missing the mark). But by the time of Jesus, the "schoolmaster stage" under the Law using fear of God as motivation had produced our species' ability for self-control of our baser urges - the beginning of wisdom. Jesus pointed out that now the “fields were ripe for the harvest” and capable of being motivated by agape love instead of fear.
Romans 7:6 King James Version (KJV)
6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
While Jesus was with us in physical form only those who were actually around Him had the benefit of His Holy Spirit (human consciousness), teachings and example. Upon His physical death, Christ’s HUMAN consciousness was "born again" as Spirit (as ours will be upon our death). As a "resurrected" Spirit in a spiritual body, His human consciousness became available to all human consciousness as the Comforter sent in His name to guide us to the truth God has "written in our hearts" under the New Covenant. THAT is how His Holy Spirit is available to all human beings despite their beliefs. Some consider it their conscience. Most ignore His guidance and follow their own self-interest but He is available to all of us.
John 16:7 King James Version (KJV)
7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.
John 14:26 King James Version (KJV)
26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
Christ's torture and death were inevitable during the era in which He brought His message of reconciliation and His commands to "love God and each other" and repent when we don’t. Unfortunately, the blood sacrificing religious leaders were expecting (and demanding) a wrathful, smiting King and God as the Messiah to lead them out from under the Roman rule. Jesus was NOT who they expected. They could NOT allow Him to influence the people. Even Judas probably believed Jesus was the Son of a smiting, powerful God. He probably thought Jesus would be forced to display His Godly powers once they tried to scourge and kill Him. When Jesus didn't display His power and smite His torturers, that is probably what drove Judas to despair.
2 Corinthians 5:18-19 New International Version (NIV)
18 All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: 19 that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation.
In other words, Jesus had achieved what we could not, bringing God's Holy Sp[irit of agape love to His human consciousness reconciling our entire species to God. Our sins (failures) became irrelevant. Now as long as we follow Christ's instructions to love God and each other every day and repent when we don't we obtain the cover for our imperfections (sins/failures) of His perfect agape love for us all (called Grace). If we do NOT follow Christ's instructions to "love God and each other" and repent when we don’t we will reap what we sow, but no more and no less than we sow.
God Bless you all in Christ's love.
So in short, you are sticking with your guns, "Jesus is THE ONLY way"?
So in short, you are sticking with your guns, "Jesus is THE ONLY way"?
Yes, but it is STRUCTURAL, NOT theological. The ONLY human consciousness to achieve perfect resonance (Identity) with God's consciousness is Jesus the Christ so His consciousness is the ONLY connection our human consciousness has to God. It is strictly structural based on the phenomenon of consciousness NOT theology or ideology or magic or "precepts and doctrines of men." Each and every human consciousness has this connection to God THROUGH the consciousness of Jesus, period.
It's Your Thread, Mystic, so nobody is more entitled than you to post your views.
It might help, Cardinals old mate, to note that it is not so much that Jesus is the Only way, but Jesus is the Best way, so far, It's like this.
In order of developing evolution of the human spirit through religious example,
Egyptian and Babblonion religion
Hinduism
Greek and Roman religion
Zoroastrian religion
Islam
Judaism
Buddhism and Taoism
Christianity.
That is the last revelation: there are no more revelations. The suggestion that atheist Humanism might be the next step on the learning curve Mystic gave the same sort of reception you Cardinals, Mate will probably give seeing where Islam rates in terms of Enlightenment.
Yes, but it is STRUCTURAL, NOT theological. The ONLY human consciousness to achieve perfect resonance (Identity) with God's consciousness is Jesus the Christ so His consciousness is the ONLY connection our human consciousness has to God. It is strictly structural based on the phenomenon of consciousness NOT theology or ideology or magic or "precepts and doctrines of men." Each and every human consciousness has this connection to God THROUGH the consciousness of Jesus, period.
Since none of us can directly experience or analyze your mystical insight, none of us can say, with certainty, that you are wrong about this. But I think it would be foolish for anyone to simply accept your word on this unless, of course, they have a mystical experience of their own that leads them to the same conclusion. I don't see any scientific or logical reasons to accept your views about the role of Jesus.
Although I have no basis for telling you how to interpret your own mystical experience, I am going to take some liberties and engage in some speculations that, in principle, could nudge you toward a different interpretation. (Or, at least, it could give the rest of us some interesting options to consider.)
I think I recall you saying that, after your experience, you searched around for a way to make sense of it, and you eventually settled on the Jesus narrative as the best fit. This suggests to me that the experience, in and of itself, did not come pre-packaged with any one particular necessary interpretation. Based on this, then, you ought to accept that other interpretations are logically possible, and you ought to accept the logical possibility that, ultimately, the interpretation you are giving us is not actually the best one (in the sense that, there could be an interpretation that, if it occurred to you, then you might feel compelled to switch to the new interpretation).
Your experience does not, in itself, specify that Jesus is the perfect resonance with God, nor does it specify that Jesus is the only perfect resonance with God. I am reminded of a passage from Illusions, by Richard Bach: "Here is a test to find whether your mission on earth is finished: If you are alive, it isn't." Since you are presumably still alive, then maybe your current interpretation is a step on a path, rather than a final destination? Just a thought. Anywayz, I am simply not convinced that Jesus is the perfect resonance, and even if he is, I'm not convinced that he is the only perfect one.
I think your story would work just as well this way: On a spectrum ranking "nearness to a perfect match" resonance with God's consciousness, Jesus is sufficiently high enough on the scale such that his words resonate with lots of other people, and in this way it tends to "pull" people toward the higher end of the spectrum. (Probably so do the words of Buddha and lots of other people.) Basically, if I am, say, a 6 on the scale and I interact in the right way with someone who is 8 on the scale, then the resonance of my consciousness will shift toward the higher end.
Of course there are lots of assumptions here, and I don't actually accept very many of them, but one assumption in particular that I'd like to challenge is the idea that there is one-and-only-one perfect "wavelength" (so to speak) that counts as God's perfect consciousness. If I were to go very far down this path, I'd be more likely to suggest something more like this:
A bunch of pendulum clocks mounted to a wall can all start out at different points in their pendulum arcs, but over time they will all end up in sync. This is not because any one particular clock was "more powerful" or "more perfect" than any other and thus drew all of the other clocks to match it's rhythm. No - rather, the nature of the swinging-pendulum dynamics is simply such that, through micro-vibrations in the wall, all of the chaotically swinging pendulums will eventually slip down the thermodynamic gradient until, eventually, they all end up in sync. The particular rhythm that they all settle into is not a magically pre-ordained point, but is, instead, something that can be mathematically described as an "attractor" that depends on the overall holistic nature of the dynamic system. Instead of there being a "thing" that "pulls" the individuals into sync, there is simply a rhythm that, due to their interconnected nature, all of the clocks will eventually settle into. Maybe Jesus (and, perhaps, some others?) happen to already be in (or very close to) the rhythm that others will, in the long run, eventually adopt. Thus instead of "pushing" or "pulling" we have something more like a natural "evolution toward"...
And your mystical experience might be a temporary "leap ahead" (via means that we currently don't have a good way to mathematically model) into something close to the attractor point.
I'm not at all sure that any of this really makes much sense, but...just some thoughts.
It's Your Thread, Mystic, so nobody is more entitled than you to post your views.
It might help, Cardinals old mate, to note that it is not so much that Jesus is the Only way, but Jesus is the Best way, so far, It's like this.
In order of developing evolution of the human spirit through religious example,
Egyptian and Babblonion religion
Hinduism
Greek and Roman religion
Zoroastrian religion
Islam
Judaism
Buddhism and Taoism
Christianity.
That is the last revelation: there are no more revelations. The suggestion that atheist Humanism might be the next step on the learning curve Mystic gave the same sort of reception you Cardinals, Mate will probably give seeing where Islam rates in terms of Enlightenment.
I think my personal opinion is that,
If someone believes that it's their faith, that Jesus is the ONLY way, or Jesus is God, or Jesus is the Son of God, or Jesus is Lamb of God, or Jesus walked on water or Muhammad flew on a horse or a cow or a monkey is their God etc - then I respect the faith and I have no issue with it.
But, when someone tries to preach or convince me with whatever their believe is, WITHOUT ME GENUINELY INQUIRING ABOUT IT, then perhaps this person is opening up a door of criticism.
And once we take this route - then neither party will EVER be able to convince the other - no matter what kind of logical, theological, scientific and tangible evidence is provided.
Now let's analyze this post here,
Quote:
Yes, but it is STRUCTURAL, NOT theological. The ONLY human consciousness to achieve perfect resonance (Identity) with God's consciousness is Jesus the Christ so His consciousness is the ONLY connection our human consciousness has to God. It is strictly structural based on the phenomenon of consciousness NOT theology or ideology or magic or "precepts and doctrines of men." Each and every human consciousness has this connection to God THROUGH the consciousness of Jesus, period.
I have two points to start with,
1 - If someone has established that perfect conciousness to God thru Jesus, then what's the point of living his here anymore? Such a person should immediately commit suicide and go to paradise. Why pay taxes to uncle same when Jesus has supposedly guaranteed paradise for you already?
I think a Christian won't test his faith. Why because? There is an element of doubt deeply rooted somewhere in the guilty consciousness.
And faith actually shatters into pieces if it's based on doubt.
But seriously, if I was personally guaranteed a spot already reserved for me in paradise, I would not live here for one more day.
2 - If Jesus is the only way then according to my logic, he came too late on the scene. There is an entire mankind who lived and died before Jesus was even born. So if there is such a God who is so unjust that he created this entire humanity in the pre-Jesus era and kept it in dark, never had them stand a chance, then such a God does not meet my understanding of God's characteristics.
If there is a God then, he must be just, and hence the idea of Judgement day.
Anyway, to cut it short,
IMO, The right way to say it is this.
"Jesus is not the only way, but the best way FOR ME
You are results oriented. Process is what it is all about. learning to apply the principle. love in life.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
