Webdiary - Founded and Inspired by Margo Kingston

Roger, I do think you are right. And I think that Nations are threatened by such powerful groups who really are accountable to none, if the shareholder is divided, or there is a dominant block. Transnationals seem to be able to elude the very laws of nations in which they operate and disappear in complex restructuring when the shit is about to hit the fan.

Nations are a structure of some benefit,and it could be debated such as by capitalist anarchists like Paul, because it gives some accountability through elections via information via press. Unfortunately sometimes nations seem like giant cheap labour markets for exploitation.

At least those still have their opium.  Religion and distraction (sport/entertainment/sex, not in that order) are two areas dangerous to remove from the underclass.

I listened to Prof Dawkins argue at the Ideas Festival in Brisbane on Radio National last night. Very interesting. He has approached the idea of religion from a scientific point of view, ie hypothesis formation based upon experiments and testing of data.  He points out that there is no scientific proof, just undiscovered facts and explanations. He also says to his credit that if there is ever proof he will be the first to genuflex , kneel and do homage.

Well, you can't get fairer than that. Religion never said there was proof, nor that it was a science. Now we just need religion to get out of science.

And John, I really like your values and it matters not what religion or not you are. All the same they do seem rather familiar.

I like CS Lewis . His last battle has the honest and noble enemy who worships the Tash being embraced by Aslan into Narnia2.  All that you did that was good in Tash's name was for me, all that is done bad in my name is for Tash.

I know that is not Organised Church doctrine as they want people to stick with the club for power's sake, but I think that was CS Lewis's way of saying intentions and deeds make the (in this case ) Christian, rather than deeds, and we are all "Christians" if our deeds are such.

Anyway, John, i would give you a triple A rating, and that is more reliable than anything S&P give.

As the kitchen says, the proof of the Pudding is in the eating, we gotta die to find out if we made the right  decisions, chose the right path, or if it even matters to us after death...

Jenny, these things can be of no importance to much of the world but of inestimable value to each one of us individually.

As much as John is concerned by the presence of politico-religious power (it has always been thus) perhaps he will accept that his greatest allies are those who don't want to change the world, only themselves.

Daniel, whether by design or by accident you have very clearly laid out the crux of the very problem that we are meant to fix by our actions.

You and John have stated the obvious but missed the solution. The world will not change by billions re-examining their belief system. It will only change by billions exercising their faith systems. That's me and you doing things not talking about them.

If we, by the million's, followed the selfless example of a Mother Theresa, for example. or an Albert Schweitzer or a Fred Hollows or a member of Medecin San Frontieres or a street counsellor in St Kilda or a visitor to countless hospitals every where and attended to the needs of our fellow humans what need would there be for belief systems because we would be living the life of Christ, factual or fictional, every day. 

That is the challenge! 

Daniel: "When are people going to accept the reality of the world and themselves and try to build a just, caring society, one that considers everyone to be of equal importance?"

A nice summary of Jesus’ teaching. Perhaps it is the religious institutions and the dogma that you reject?

There are great words of wisdom out there, to ponder what the realities are, what the meanings if there are any, and so on. There are so many writings including the main churches/religions, but also humanist, that all have such a common thread. But I haven't seen it as well expressed as you did, just then. Nice one. It shows you seek the same things that great people, truly great people have sort since we have had enough leisure to contemplate.

Consider: when asked what are the two greatest commandments" the love the Lord your G-d and to love your neighbour as yourself” was the answer given. Both are passive, caring, gentle.

It is the perverters of religious thought who have turned such into hating and controlling and hurting.

You are right, there are plenty around and that simple test – which group does it sound like, will tell you if they are perverters ... Methinks so many of the world leadership use religion, not just Salafy/wahabist Islam but also fundamentalist Hindu, Christian and Zionist. Even Buddhism I understand was changed to war religion/philosophy by the Japanese state.

Anyway, do we have to reject the idea of religion just because some pervert it and use it to manipulate?

Certainly it could be replaced by humanist philosophy. That would cater for the day to day and morality.

I do not know if it will help with the hard times, the slow dying, the heavy suffering, the cutting loss. Perhaps for those with loving people around it will be enough. Pity those who do not.

Is religion just used as a crutch then? Are those who hand over independence of existence – refuting there is no one but me and no time but now – less strong? Is the filling of religious temples during war and threat and suffering and loss just a sign of weakness? Seeking illusion? Yet it happens in every group, every religion. I wonder what the areligious like communists do at such times. Do they reinvent a special stone to hold, imagine a special place to seek comfort, think of and talk to a loved but dead relative? People who have been betrayed by the institution of religion, such as child abuse victims, I wonder how they seek sanctuary from fears, comfort when alone.

Sometimes I try and look at it from G-d's point of view. A bit of heresy here, eh? But to me G-d has a great sense of humour, that is part of love hmmmm " How many bloody times do I have to send prophets, and teachers and learning, leisure time and time of strife, how many times until they will listen and stop twisting the message, how clear do I have to be - stop fking hurting each other and pay me some attention......or maybe this free will thing was not such a good idea after all. ..... without effort of thought, it is nothing...without learning and questioning they just list in the sea of ignorant shopping channels....hmm, my next species will be better....oh sht, who let those fken nukes off everywhere? Next time, no bloody Y chromosome, hmm disappear it at adulthood, after rugby finals."

I just know (here is the extra boring personal bit) that for years I followed the inherited religion, then rejected that and had dream after dream of blackness and nothing … it is terrifying, awakening in a cold sweat ..Have you ever had it? For a year I withstood and then had to seek.

I have such admiration for those who can face the nothing of atheist belief. So then I read andread and found Bibles and read and read other religions, philosophy, things, other versions, cover to cover, analysed as usual each step, each history, each background cultural event ... fascinating . So much in texts is twisted for the cultural times. I reject the Nicean Creed as a political manipulation by Constantine, not something one can discuss as it is rabbited out each Sunday, but I notice that about 25% of the clergy also reject it in studies. hmmm. One has to choose what is closest to what one seeks and accept that, like people, one has to take the good with the bad when seeking G-d within. I am too great a coward to be a martyr for religious doctrine. Again, I admire those who are not such cowards for great values.

There. Tough guide at times but not impossible, one can but try and at least one can live by such values. The hardest thing was stopping myself when I came to a racist value I had held in the past and allowed as it was common with those around. Now I try to imagine I am of that group before I make a comment or accept a sweeping statement, and there are plenty out there.

My dreams of nothing stopped immediately. I had even forgotten about them until this thread started. Was it a calling or perhaps there was a clear psychological reason but it still, it was. It was like looking into the vast airless universe, nothing and darkness of death.

The really hard thing is it made me more sensitive to others' suffering. Reading the Gospels was like that, hard to ignore the clear message and teaching. This is an amazing change about. I used to be able to be tough as nuts and hard as the man of steel, dismissive as they come, they deserve it, they all are like that,  they are too different to worry about, there are too many anyway, a few less so what, sweep them all away into the sea ... etc . It is frightening to think about. I think it was a combination of elitist feeling growing up and fear. And so hard to keep the friends who all agreed and went along. Have they also changed and do not want to bring it up again as they too want to stay friends?

Why more sensitive I don't know. It makes it harder to ignore what is happening. One realises one is not special compared to others, and the only real fear is the final one. I think what happens when all is over and is there a reckoning? one wants to join with G-d but one gets there and there is the question... how can one say "there was nothing I could do".......because we do know, don't we, what is happening right now to so many. What could we do if we really cared about the stranger facing horror? The pain people are feeling..

Peace., sleep well.

Daniel writes: When one starts to look at religion, point out its inconsistencies, its musty anachronisms, its total lack of evidence, its complete unbelievableness, folks begin to complain. The more religious they are, the more they complain. "Don't take away our crutch," they cry, gnashing their teeth. If pressed, they typically resort to insult or feigned laughter to try to crush those who expose their beliefs for what they are: fantasies.

And earlier on this thread:
Richard, regarding your comment about the valuable insights you are getting from the Agony Aunts, I feel compelled to tell you about one of my fowls that died yesterday. It was white and quite old. When I found it it was stiff and cold.  I threw it into some blackberry bushes but not the ones that I pick fruit off for jam. Oh, no! I thought it might taint the jam, give it a feathery taste. You're a man of good taste. Do you think I did right?

P.S. I've got a sniffle. Perhaps it's dead fowl flu.

Seems to me you hoist yourself on your own petard on this thread Daniel me lad. A nice example of feigned laughter to try and distract from the issue of faith and crush those who expose their beliefs.

So 'tis you who resorts to laughter and ridicule and complaint because you cannot understand or cope with people who have faith or who chat about things that bore you. Just what is your problem?

Oh, never mind. I doubt you really know yourself. But whatever it is don't let it rule your life this way. And stop nashing your teeth. Dentists are mighty expensive these days.

Mike, I have never read Pagels but will do so with interest. 

The philosophical discussion that encompasses theology is strewn with contradictions. There are contradictions that stem right back to a dispassionate examination of the Godhead. The omni attributes are the Kekule's benzene rings of theological debate, no beginning-no end. The biggest theological contradictions arise from a consideration of omni-presence, God existing in all places at all times. I did write about this extensively in the old WD but apparently only to my own amusement, no takers in that debate.

I have named a principle for living, Humification,  in honour of our resident farmer's wife, Jenny Hume. Our Jenny would knowingly rather live as a follower of Christ even if He does not exist. We now know that Mother Theresa lived the same way for 50 years. The world's great philosophers (and I do not include Mohammed among them, I'm afraid) have always inspired and encouraged selflessness, courtesy, service and husbandry. Religion does not.

Perhaps there are really just too few Mother Theresa's and Jenny's for the rest of us to see the difference. Most people with spiritual inclinations have a fondness for religion. It does not challenge you to be all that different from the ones that have no religion. As Pagels notes, there is always a self-serving contrary view that you can take comfort in if you find a commandment you don't like; always a theologian or preacher to suit your needs and push your wheelbarrow. Makes you wonder why God started this push-me:pull-you contretemps.

Serving Christ, seeking Nirvana, connecting with Gaia is really very difficult. We do not like difficulties so we choose religion. Then we argue about it.