Hey New, > > Good post Curtis. Actually great. I appreciate your POV.
Thanks. It is really nice that you ask for my POV here. > > Several questions: > > Why atheism and not agnosticism? In my understanding agnosticism runs a gambit from believing in God but thinking he is unknowable, to what is practically an atheist. So agnosticism might fit although I think atheism is more precise. I wrote about why the term "atheist" isn't completely satisfactory. But I have a pretty good idea of the specifics of how the world's religious scriptures were written by men who created different God ideas. I haven't seen anything in any scripture that would make me think it was beyond the ability of men to create. So I don't share any of the theistic views, I am a-theist. That said, we still might find out there is a creator to the universe. I just don't think man has done so yet. I think we need to know a lot more about the mystical experiences we have induced with meditation and their causes. Humans love to take the content of their compelling subjective experiences at face value. In particular, we seem vulnerable to quickly believing the mystical experiences makes us "special" and the language of religion and spiritual traditions supports this elevated view of self. (even promoting it to "Self") I believe that this messes up a more humble approach to mystical experiences that isn't value ridden with traditional interpretations of their meaning. "I don't know" seems more compatible > with the latter.> I feel at least as confident as about the Santa myth so far. > In your POV: > 1) Where does karma stand? I don't believe in a mechanism that keeps track of actions and don't even understand what kind of moral equivalents the karma theories I came across are claiming. It seems like a ruse to maintain people in subservient positions by the ruling class. In India, who made up and maintained the rule, let me guess. Oh I know, the one who are mentioned as the highest caste in the system! And it turns out that challenging their authority will get you a harsh karmic payback. Karmic theories may arise from our sense of justice. For me, seeing natural disasters as just random, rather than a pay back for previous wrongs, seems more compassionate. So the karma theory doesn't help me. If it were true I don't see how man could know the details. It seems far fetched to me that men know such things. > 2) Can scriptures have a value in ethics, a la, the Jefferson Bible. As part of our human history they have been instrumental in all cultures in forming ethics, but we are starting to see where modern times may have moved beyond some of the religious views, think stem cell research and women's rights I a fan of the Bible and have read it thoughtfully a number of times. I don't think it provideds good as ethical guidance today. I think the Greeks may have given us much better tools to consider what kind of society we want to create together, which is the fruit of ethics. The Vedic scriptures seem great at laying out the many many variables in making ethical decisions. It doesn't seem to offer simple answers, but provides fuel for discussion. This discussion needs to take place in an atmosphere of humility where no one stands up and says "I know what God wants us to do". This is killing out ability to refine our ethics today. Religion is a start of the ethical discussion, not the end. I am a fan of Jefferson but think he may have elevated the importance of Jesus as an ethical teacher too high. We can do better. And modern man has done much better when he can rise above the standard laid out a long time ago. Look at all the progress we have made by departing from Biblical ethics, slavery, women's rights... > 3) How do you feel about chicks who scream "Oh God! OH GOD!!" at > the height of passion? Too good to answer only once: 1. Women are supposed to feel something when I am getting mine? Fascinating, that explains why they have been running away after. 2. I am sympathetic with women who feel that my mojo must have a supernatural origin. 3. Is that what they are saying? Damn, I always assumed they were calling out the name of their last boyfriend and kicked them out of bed. 4. I have never heard this. Do women say that before or after they scream "Who are you, I'm gunna press charges"? Thanks for the questions. If you care to weigh in with your perspective on all this I would love to read it. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible > > Jefferson accomplished a more limited goal in 1804 with "The > Philosophy of Jesus of Nazareth," the predecessor to Life and Morals > of Jesus of Nazareth.[4] He described it in a letter to John Adams > dated 13 October 1813: > " In extracting the pure principles which he taught, we should have > to strip off the artificial vestments in which they have been muffled > by priests, who have travestied them into various forms, as > instruments of riches and power to themselves. We must dismiss the > Platonists and Plotinists, the Stagyrites and Gamalielites, the > Eclectics, the Gnostics and Scholastics, their essences and > emanations, their logos and demiurges, aeons and daemons, male and > female, with a long train of or, shall I say at once, of nonsense. > We must reduce our volume to the simple evangelists, select, even from > them, the very words only of Jesus, paring off the amphibologisms into > which they have been led, by forgetting often, or not understanding, > what had fallen from him, by giving their own misconceptions as his > dicta, and expressing unintelligibly for others what they had not > understood themselves. There will be found remaining the most sublime > and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man. I > have performed this operation for my own use, by cutting verse by > verse out of the printed book, and arranging the matter which is > evidently his, and which is as easily distinguishable as diamonds in a > dunghill. The result is an octavo of forty-six pages, of pure and > unsophisticated doctrines. [3] " > > Jefferson frequently expressed discontent with this earlier version, > however. The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth represents the > fulfillment of his desire to produce a more carefully assembled edition. > > 3) How do you feel about chicks who scream "Oh God! OH GOD!!" at > the height of passion? > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > Thanks for that post Gary. So often Atheism is presented arrogantly > > as "the only rational POV", but people drop out of believing in God > > for as many reasons as people change their religions. It is a > > decision of heart and mind and can embrace a total person's > > capacities.... > > > Falling into atheism is not like adapting a belief, it is what is > > left when your beliefs fall off. The term is really poor because it > > sums up my experience as if my life is a negative denial of something > > rather than a positive affirmation of my life and my place in the > > world. I associate this POV with freedom and the solidity that comes > > from not assuming I KNOW things that I don't. It embraces my life as > > very mortal human sharing the planet with other vulnerable creatures. > > It is humbling to accept that "I don't know" our place in the > > universe and that the meaning of my life is something I have to choose > > for myself. > > > Good post Curtis. Actually great. I appreciate your POV. > > Several questions: > > Why atheism and not agnosticism? "I don't know" seems more compatible > with the latter. > > In your POV: > 1) Where does karma stand? > 2) Can scriptures have a value in ethics, a la, the Jefferson Bible. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible > > Jefferson accomplished a more limited goal in 1804 with "The > Philosophy of Jesus of Nazareth," the predecessor to Life and Morals > of Jesus of Nazareth.[4] He described it in a letter to John Adams > dated 13 October 1813: > " In extracting the pure principles which he taught, we should have > to strip off the artificial vestments in which they have been muffled > by priests, who have travestied them into various forms, as > instruments of riches and power to themselves. We must dismiss the > Platonists and Plotinists, the Stagyrites and Gamalielites, the > Eclectics, the Gnostics and Scholastics, their essences and > emanations, their logos and demiurges, aeons and daemons, male and > female, with a long train of or, shall I say at once, of nonsense. > We must reduce our volume to the simple evangelists, select, even from > them, the very words only of Jesus, paring off the amphibologisms into > which they have been led, by forgetting often, or not understanding, > what had fallen from him, by giving their own misconceptions as his > dicta, and expressing unintelligibly for others what they had not > understood themselves. There will be found remaining the most sublime > and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man. I > have performed this operation for my own use, by cutting verse by > verse out of the printed book, and arranging the matter which is > evidently his, and which is as easily distinguishable as diamonds in a > dunghill. The result is an octavo of forty-six pages, of pure and > unsophisticated doctrines. [3] " > > Jefferson frequently expressed discontent with this earlier version, > however. The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth represents the > fulfillment of his desire to produce a more carefully assembled edition. > > 3) How do you feel about chicks who scream "Oh God! OH GOD!!" at > the height of passion? >
