I mean... it seems that religion could've been implemented just to see if people would blindly follow something while denying things that humans naturally crave seems to me to be...unnatural. How many religious zealots do things normal people wouldn't normally do, all in the name of a god? It just seems like one big test to me.

quote:Originally posted by Diamond Domino:

I mean... it seems that religion could've been implemented just to see if people would blindly follow something while denying things that humans naturally crave seems to me to be...unnatural. How many religious zealots do things normal people wouldn't normally do, all in the name of a god? It just seems like one big test to me.

I find that people who are going to do bad, find any excuse to do it, be it religion, politics, or a candy cane.

Who do you think gave us the test?

It's not a form of psychological control but it is used as a tool for psychological control.

It's also used as a tool for spiritual enlightenment.

I don't mean to sound outraegeous, but... do you think an extraterrestrial life form administered the test?

quote:Originally posted by Diamond Domino:

I don't mean to sound outraegeous, but... do you think an extraterrestrial life form administered the test?

Yes, I'll be writing about it soon.

I think it is used to control people. Somehow, all the flourishing cultures have very similar morals and ethics that stem from different religions. People decided that they didn't want to be murdered so they said that killing is wrong. They didn't want their shit stolen so stealing is wrong.

Look for "Thoughts in Captivity" in the totse text file section.

quote:Originally posted by Abrahim:

I find that people who are going to do bad, find any excuse to do it, be it religion, politics, or a candy cane.

Who do you think gave us the test?

Is that why many muslims suicide themselves to kill others and why you will find almost zero jains that will commit any violence whatsoever? Different religions teach different things and every belief has consequences.

Yes.

It can also make people very happy, but only to a certain extent, there is always more beyond organised control, and the role of the individual in mental expansion cannot be underestimated.

quote:Originally posted by Real.PUA:

Is that why many muslims suicide themselves to kill others and why you will find almost zero jains that will commit any violence whatsoever? Different religions teach different things and every belief has consequences.

Some Jains die of starvation or malnurishment. The Qur'an never asks people to kill themselves but instead says "kill not yourselves"

The four great religions where made to supress humans from evolving, spiritually and psychologically.

quote:Originally posted by Abrahim:

Some Jains die of starvation or malnurishment. The Qur'an never asks people to kill themselves but instead says "kill not yourselves"

And your point? You still have not explained the obvious behaviorial differences between the two given faiths based on you statement "I find that people who are going to do bad, find any excuse to do it, be it religion, politics, or a candy cane."

Jains - nonviolent

Many other faiths - violent

[This message has been edited by Real.PUA (edited 08-19-2006).]

It used to be.

quote:Originally posted by One_way_mirror:

It used to be.

Use to be? We may have cast off and replaced the Christian god and done away with most the illogical silliness, but many still hold the 'sacred' morals of Christianity, indoctrinated into them at childhood, in their hearts for no reason they can think of except that it's "just right". It still holds control over us, we just no longer believe 'god is love', we believe 'humanity' - whatever that is - 'is love'.

I hope I explained what I was trying to get across there well enough.



[This message has been edited by Raw_Power (edited 08-20-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by Raw_Power:

Use to be? We may have cast off and replaced the Christian god and done away with most the illogical silliness, but many still hold the 'sacred' morals of Christianity, indoctrinated into them at childhood, in their hearts for no reason they can think of except that it's "just right". It still holds control over us, we just no longer believe 'god is love', we believe 'humanity' - whatever that is - 'is love'.

I hope I explained what I was trying to get across there well enough.



You did, don't worry about that.

Unfortunately part of the brainwashing pack that children are exposed to includes christianity + the bible.

All excellent points, especially psychedelicious, that was right on, man. I believe that people have a conscience, but I don't believe it stems from some supernatural source, religion doesn't give humans enough credit. I just don't believe denying natural felings is a productive way to live.

quote:Originally posted by Diamond Domino:

All excellent points, especially psychedelicious, that was right on, man. I believe that people have a conscience, but I don't believe it stems from some supernatural source, religion doesn't give humans enough credit. I just don't believe denying natural felings is a productive way to live.

Depends on what you're reffering to?

quote:Originally posted by Diamond Domino:

All excellent points, especially psychedelicious, that was right on, man. I believe that people have a conscience, but I don't believe it stems from some supernatural source, religion doesn't give humans enough credit. I just don't believe denying natural felings is a productive way to live.

I believe conscience is a concept that has taken control of the mind through religion. It’s kind of like the secret police of your mind, every thought you have it watches over and the moment you think something it doesn’t like it induces self-loathing and disgust. It keeps us from being ourselves and has a hold over the freedom of thought, not just action.



[This message has been edited by Raw_Power (edited 08-20-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by Real.PUA:

And your point? You still have not explained the obvious behaviorial differences between the two given faiths based on you statement "I find that people who are going to do bad, find any excuse to do it, be it religion, politics, or a candy cane."

Jains - nonviolent

Many other faiths - violent



Jains harm themselves like I explained earlier, but what I meant by my statement was that Religion in my opinion is not the real cause for people to do anything harmful to themselves or others, it is just another factor like politics or anything else, if you strip all those things I find that some people might still perform violence and some won't.

quote:Originally posted by Drips:

The four great religions where made to supress humans from evolving, spiritually and psychologically.

Elaborate and provide proof?

I'd like to add that I think religion was generally created to explain certain things that were misunderstood or misinterpreted, and later used to conform people, for better or for worse, to a certain philosophy.

quote:Originally posted by Abrahim:

Jains harm themselves like I explained earlier, but what I meant by my statement was that Religion in my opinion is not the real cause for people to do anything harmful to themselves or others, it is just another factor like politics or anything else, if you strip all those things I find that some people might still perform violence and some won't.



So the worst thing a Jain will do is starve themselves in the most nonviolent way possible vs a muslim that will blow himself up with the intent of killing as many other people as possible. You dont see a difference there?

Jainism teaches the violence is always bad. Islam does not. Thus we see that different religions teach different things.

You see religion as being a excuse for the violence and the the cause itself. That might be true in many cases, but would you agree that some religions are more easily exploited for these violent acts?

I say it's more a form of emotional manipulation that people use to feel good about themselves. Much like virtually everything else in our current world - mass media and products to consume. Hell, that's basically all that's left of our lives, products and how to get them. Are you happy, Ford?

quote:Originally posted by Aft3r ImaGe:

I'd like to add that I think religion was generally created to explain certain things that were misunderstood or misinterpreted, and later used to conform people, for better or for worse, to a certain philosophy.

Bang on.

You could say that it was a collection of ideas created by astrominers/philosphers that was poorly understood by the masses.

later on some fucktards got the idea into their heads that religion was REQUIRED in order to maintain society in a peaceful state.

then some other fucktards came along and took over, and used religion to their own ends.

quote:Originally posted by Real.PUA:

So the worst thing a Jain will do is starve themselves in the most nonviolent way possible vs a muslim that will blow himself up with the intent of killing as many other people as possible. You dont see a difference there?

Jainism teaches the violence is always bad. Islam does not. Thus we see that different religions teach different things.

You see religion as being a excuse for the violence and the the cause itself. That might be true in many cases, but would you agree that some religions are more easily exploited for these violent acts?

I don't know what qualifies them as a Muslim if they disobey the book from which their religion comes from. The Qur'an specifically says not to kill oneself, and also says not to kill others but gives a small opening for direct self defense.

Buddhism tends to teach non violence but Buddhists around the world have been involved in alot of extreme violence such as the Mori clan in Japan and other groups. They are not following the teachings, I wouldn't qualify them as Buddhists, but they claim to be Buddhists.

The teachings of Islam seem to be much more easy to follow perhaps than those of Jains, many Jains seem to transgress.

If Jain doctrines teach total non violence to the point of starvation then it is in my opinion wrong.

The Qur'an on the other hand does not teach suicide or murder as being a good thing, but it does leave some openings in case of fighting back in an open war declared by the enemy / in direct self defense.

quote:Originally posted by Abrahim:



Buddhism tends to teach non violence but Buddhists around the world have been involved in alot of extreme violence such as the Mori clan in Japan and other groups. They are not following the teachings, I wouldn't qualify them as Buddhists, but they claim to be Buddhists.





another instance of religion being corrupted for alternative motives. in this case being war.

quote:Originally posted by Diamond Domino:

I don't mean to sound outraegeous, but... do you think an extraterrestrial life form administered the test?

AIGHT I WROTE DA ARTICLE ITS CALLED "ALL MAJOR RELIGIONS BELIEVE IN EXTRA TERRESTRIALS"

quote:Originally posted by Abrahim:

I find that people who are going to do bad, find any excuse to do it, be it religion, politics, or a candy cane.

Precisely.

quote:Originally posted by karma_sleeper:

Precisely.

I'm glad you agree! Where is it that we disagree?

quote:Originally posted by Abrahim:

I don't know what qualifies them as a Muslim if they disobey the book from which their religion comes from. The Qur'an specifically says not to kill oneself, and also says not to kill others but gives a small opening for direct self defense.

Buddhism tends to teach non violence but Buddhists around the world have been involved in alot of extreme violence such as the Mori clan in Japan and other groups. They are not following the teachings, I wouldn't qualify them as Buddhists, but they claim to be Buddhists.

The teachings of Islam seem to be much more easy to follow perhaps than those of Jains, many Jains seem to transgress.

If Jain doctrines teach total non violence to the point of starvation then it is in my opinion wrong.

The Qur'an on the other hand does not teach suicide or murder as being a good thing, but it does leave some openings in case of fighting back in an open war declared by the enemy / in direct self defense.



The fact that they identify themselves as Muslims, with Islam, and with the teachings of Muhammed and the koran. That's what makes them muslims.

Most muslims don't blow themselves up to kill others, but some do. Most jains dont starve themselves (to avoid killing things), but some do. You apparently think the two are equal..yet they are actually the opposite.

quote:Originally posted by Real.PUA:

The fact that they identify themselves as Muslims, with Islam, and with the teachings of Muhammed and the koran. That's what makes them muslims.

Most muslims don't blow themselves up to kill others, but some do. Most jains dont starve themselves (to avoid killing things), but some do. You apparently think the two are equal..yet they are actually the opposite.

I don't think it is completely fair to utilize examples of people who are not following the revelations of the book they are supposed to be following.

Like a man who calls himself a Muslim and drinks alcohol as defining what it is to be a Muslim.

A Jainist who is violent and kills.

By disobeying their religion, are they not disqualifying themselves as members of that religion?

You might say that the Muslim who kills is not disobeying his religion but according to the Qur'an he is indeed, and especially the one who kills himself. I find that terrorism is much more a Political thing than a Religious thing. Religion is being manipulated by Politics to create violence, rather than Religion manipulating Politics to create violence. If they were following their religion as they are supposed to, they would not kill nor would they brave suicide knowing what a horrible chastisement might await them. Those who kill themselves seem to be mostly ignorant of the Qur'an and its teachings, such would be the case of the Jainist who kills, or the Buddhist who does little that is Buddhist but identifies himself as Buddhist because he claims to believe in Buddha and his teachings with little knowledge of those teachings and while not following them, or the Christian who doesn't follow the examples of Christ, or a Jew who does not follow the commandments of God.

Attacking Islam through individuals and governments is not really accurate in my opinion, but it would be more precise to attack those governments and cultures instead of the religion they claim to follow but clearly do not apply.

The Qur'an and Jainism both do not prescribe violence, anger, cruelty, and other things like that. The Qur'an allows for self defense and the ability to defend oneself from an army in a state of war (declared by the enemy, because according to the Qur'an, Muslims are not allowed to start or declare a war or make any attacks or even hit a person or raise their voice unless in direct self defense for ones life or defense of ones life during a time of openly declared war in which no treaty has been made, and also the Qur'an says to take a peace treaty when it is given and not to start conflicts or wars or to be prodigals.)

Jains perhaps do not have the option to defend themselves, I'm not sure. Muslims do have this option, but they still do not have the option to murder civillians or themselves or anyone unless it is in self defense of their own lives in a moment of combat.

Is that so unreasonable of the Qur'an to leave this option opened? Is it not self detrimental to the Jains that they can not defend themselves if they are attacked? Which religion if followed is more effectively applied to the human individual leading to a more healthy and productive life? I would say Islam as it integrates spirituality into ones daily life without too many major sacrifices, and promotes a message of restraint and peace at the same time. In my opinion, Jains are going too far in their non violence. Non violence is a good thing but they are going too far as they are harming themselves in the process in some cases.

What do you think?

quote:Originally posted by Diamond Domino:

I mean... it seems that religion could've been implemented just to see if people would blindly follow something while denying things that humans naturally crave seems to me to be...unnatural. How many religious zealots do things normal people wouldn't normally do, all in the name of a god? It just seems like one big test to me.

I agree. I think that religion originally began thousands of years ago when someone realised that most people were generally stupid and made up a bunch of bullshit about judgement in order to maipulate people. Or, this person just wanted to use this to give people a sense of moral values. Either way, whatever this guys intention was, I think he responsible for a lot of bad shit. This is just a theory I have though.