Showing posts with label commentary religion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label commentary religion. Show all posts

Monday, September 26, 2011

Is Religion necessary?

What is it about Religion that does us any good? IS it really necessary? Is it, would it be, possible, to achieve it's aims without it?


Aside from the considerations of reward or punishment (Heaven or Hell), just what does it do for Humans? If you are religious, you may not be able to understand this construct. But that is okay. Maybe it's not for you to stand on your own, to be vincible without a need of being fearful or so many things that religions absolve us of. Do we really need that absolution?

The religious side of this argument will typically take a side supporting religion (reasonable in a religion vs no religion argument). However, their argument will always go through a format that includes religion having always existed, or from a basis of God theory. I won't go into this here, as that isn't the point, here. I only bring this up because to argue against what is stated below, pretty much requires taking the point of view of "God is, therefore living with no God is isn't", or some sort of prevarication on that order. But that doesn't fit in this argument, although that has never stopped a deist from using it and typically doing very well with it as no one knows how to argue against it, because you are trapped within the Möbius strip ("loop") of religions argument.

So, moving along....

Belief in an outside force, a "Higher Power" as it were, gives Humans something they can't seem to find anywhere else. But actually, they can. You see, it's really just the easiest, lowest common denominator kind of thing to want and nature has solved that issue for us. It's been around forever it would seem, because it was the easiest, most obvious, and so our evolutionary history was such that it either fell easily into it, or it was designed to fit it. But it allows us to go beyond our own concerns. Naturally. Without need to turn to a superficial extreme.

We are the only creatures as far as we know that can comprehend our own demise or our own death and existence. Either that, or we are the only ones that care about it, or fear it. Perhaps some animals have the same capacity to, but just figure, "Oh, Hell, so what?" Rather than celebrating living life, most people seem to want to pray about living it or to avoid losing it. Belief in an outside force gives us license to exceed our expectations of our capabilities, to go beyond simply caring for our own survival, which is a primal instinct if ever there was one.


Add to that a fear of reprisal if we act wrong, go against strictures, break commandments, and/or, the pleasurable consideration of Just or excessive and eternal rewards after we leave this physical form, and you have the makings of what is supposed to be "amazing" behaviors. Such as heroics. A mother lifting a car to save a child, a husband saving his wife in some "super" Human way, so that it must have been undo-able, a "miracle". I love magic as much as the next guy, but sometimes we can just exceed expectations.

 Many amazing things have been done and explained through religion.


But also many horrific things, I don't really think I need to make a list of them all, but the major ones come to mind easily: The Crusades, The Spanish Inquisition, Nazi concentration camps (Nazis weren't Godless Communists, they hated them, much of what they did came out of a Christian based fear and a hatred of Jews, and Blacks), Genocide, torture, Missionaries, Fascism, Neo-Nazis, and... 9/11.


And many smaller ones:  sexual abuse of women and children by religious authorities, Catholic indulgences in the Middle Ages, ritual mutilations, and simply cutting people out of their religion or religious rites for abusing or breaking the rules, or sometimes and not infrequently, for very poor reasons based solely upon the religious authority's emotions or greed at that time. Or sometimes, simply sexually based as in jealousy. Even between God and an unknown object of dislike (think of Salieri in the movie, Amedeus).


Trying to stamp out natural Human functions such as sexuality, one of our most basic functions, in point of fact, what we were designed for, is defective thought, founded in theory, untenable in practice. In denying sexual expression or restrictions of Priests and Nuns from marriage, has lead to enough sexual abuse on it's own to fill a book in its various ways.

But do we need religion to achieve the depravities of Humanity? No, we can figure out how to abuse one another without an organization telling how to do it professionally and at an organizational level, which mechanizes abuse. Nor do we need religion to raise us up to the heights of what we can achieve. Because we have naturally built in, most of what religion gives us anyway. Religion is just the sugar on the crust of Life for many people. But sugar does give people diabetes or hypoglycemia when it is abused, and religion, has quite obviously supplied the same enhancements around the world and throughout history.

Religion simply institutionalizes and attempts to restrict the unrestrictable, those things we find natural, in a sad attempt to guarantee how we act. And that really doesn't work so well, especially when you consider that if you take away the all powerful aspects of it and replace it with logic and compassion, you eliminate much of the bad and enhance much of the good. Where in Christianity, Judaism, Islam (any of the desert religions (as opposed to jungle religions, some of which are worse only in different ways)) we are told that these are the rules and you don't break them. But immediately, if only in your mind, you are lean toward breaking them; albeit it, that feeling is hidden in the darker departments of your personality; yet, it is still there.

In one of the few more rational forms of philosophy, Buddhism for instance doesn't give adherents codified rules such as "you never do" this or that, but rather that you try to "walk the middle way" or try to stay on the "Path of the Middle Way". These are not absolutes but guides. They are also instructed that when you are told something that doesn't make sense, you should use your own mind and think about it and make your own decisions. Which is where the Zen thought came from, "If you see the Buddha on the Path of Life, kill him." Not something you would hear a Christian ever say about Jesus. But strangely, I would have to assume Jesus would understand it, and smile knowingly. Yet, many of his followers would be tempted to become irate or dangerous.


These two things, using critical thought and a lack of supreme "commandments", are of major importance in managing Human behavior. This is why critical thought is a major component of training with Buddhist Monks and should be a major element in all Human education above and beyond the way disciplines through which it is taught.

Often in the education of our children, we completely forget why we teach "reading, writing and arithmetic". It is to of course to teach those important things, but more so, far more so (and understand and let me repeat this), MORE SO, it is to teach critical thinking. We have far too much of a lack of critical thought around the world.

When you add in religion to a lack of critical thought; or worse, add critical thought into a damaged religious orientation, only bad seems to come of it. But if we teach children critical thought, with a good basis in philosophy without religion attached and all the dysfunctional fantasy that comes along with it, I believe we would have a far more stable society, world wide.

Still, its not just critical thought that we need to grow and properly and fully develop. Critical thought leads to creativity, which leads to thinking "outside the box". Yes, one could argue that religion is thinking outside of the box, but the trouble there is that it is not, definitely not, based on fact or critical thought processes. Just the opposite, which is why "faith" is so important. In fact, you have to discipline yourself to believe regardless of what proves to you to be incorrect in the course of things. Discipline is good, but to apply it to not being rational or evolving, is simply dangerous. As we have seen.

So now you have to ask yourself, what good does religion really do for us in the end?


Carpe Diem!

Thursday, May 26, 2011

A Christian vs. an "unbeliever" Argue the point - Special Ed.

Currently there is an ongoing argument on a Facebook page. I posted about the nutbar Harold Camping, an innocent comment, an update if you will.

My cousin responded with another innocent comment. Then her friend, someone we've both known since high school, for my cousin she may have known her earlier even. I responded to her friend. Then she responded to me and that, was where things began to go downhill.

A religionist's view of the Godly

I feel that most Christians, most religious types in general, have an idealized idea of Life, God, and religion. Pretty divorced from reality, which is the purpose. To explain away the unknown, the fearful you cannot do anything about. They cannot accept that we are bags of water, made of meat, are really no more important than any other life form, other than we have an opposable thumb and can rationalize and consider our own death. Two things that have lead to great things, I agree.

But does that make us so important just because we can invent God to explain those things we cannot truly stand to consider? Okay, No is the answer. People seem to have a need to be lead. So, follow this. Life is precious, because it exists. Magic exists because we do not understand physics, or because we have imaginations. Religion is based upon magical thought. Buddhism in my mind is not, but even there, over the centuries, people have forced it into that box also.

Try to forgive the grammar, the rambling and such, as this was not written to be published but was a live interchange between two very disparate people.

Just remember, Ghandi, wasn't Christian. And no, that has no bearing on anything here....

This can't happen

Here, in it's ongoing entirety, regardless of how badly it makes me look, is what transpired:

I initially posted:

Word has it that Harold Camping has said that there will be earthquakes all around the world on May 21, 2011 at 6 pm in each country's time zone, meaning the earthquakes would be at different times. In Karibati it's already May 22, 2011 and there were no earthquakes. :)

Then my cousin posted:

And we are both still here :-)

And then, her Christian friend posted:

He is a loon....and he has given Christians a bad name, as people tend to like to view us like he is...but we are not, and the Lord will return...but we all know that we do not know when, and only God knows. He is not slow, as many people think...He is giving people time to repent and be saved, because he takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. But, yeah...this guy's a nutball...But do not mock the Lord because of some crazy guy. Just sayin....

http://www.wayofthemaster.com/flash/goodperson.swf

Since no one does know when the time will be...or when they will take their last breath....we are all one breath away from eternity with God or eternity in Hell. And that is what is true. ♥

I responded:
O'Sensei Morohei Ueshiba Founder of Aikido
Being essentially a Buddhist, an Aikidoka (or, Aikidoist) and for all intents and purposes an Atheist [author's note: I might say I'm not, but then "believers" get carried away because they cannot understand my reasoning].... I mock mostly a nutcase. Camping now says that this will all happen in October.

The friend responded:

And people will do the same thing they did with this last one...sad innit? Sorry you are those things.

I replied:

You do realize that is condescending, right? I was raised catholic, head alter boy, born again christian, studied religions and the bible, for more than the first half of my life, have a BA in psychology, phenomenology, and studied classical and Asian philosophies and physics. I have a fairly good idea of what is going on. :) I welcome you to believe whatever you like. Please don't think I'm uninformed or have made poor decisions on eschatology, revealed religions or magical thought by way of organized religious organizations.

She replied:

I know you were raised Catholic, as was [your cousin and my friend]...and I am sorry for that as well. It is a religion based on works, and you guys are not the only ones that have come out of it messed up about Christ, and that makes me sad for ya. It is not condescending at all...I truly am sorry that you are in those things, because they are lies and I hate to see anyone roped in and perishing. It is tragic, and needless, and that is just as sad as the people who buy into the Camping garbage.

Basically, them's figtin' words, and so I then replied:

Uh, really? So, I appreciate then "intent" behind your words, but you really don't see what you are saying in the way you are saying what you are saying. If you see what I'm saying. :) Catholicism is messed up, but it has done some people some good. It has also lead people astray, and has lead to the murders of millions over the centuries. Another well intentioned organized religious movement based upon yet another "desert religion" such as Judaism, Islam and Christianity. You have to take many things into consideration if you are going to randomly believe in a form of thought.

Christians form their beliefs off of the bible, but if you look into where the bible came from, how it was put together, what books they left out, destroyed in th interim until the bible became the law of the land at pain of death, and the murders perpetrated upon those who believed in the books that were not included in the bible because they portrayed Jesus too much as a man, you have to question the basis of your primary word, and the beliefs that came from those, and the changes put into place over the centuries in using the bible as a form of thought control.

As you are sorry for me because of my believing in the best of Buddhist thought, and it's own inquiry upon itself. "If you see Buddha upon the path kill him", refers to what the Buddha originally said, which was when you are taught things previously unknown to you, especially in absolutes like the God concept, question it and use your own mind to see what is foolish.

And so, in reciprocation, I have to feel sorry for not only all those who are addicted to religious and magical thought but to desert religion believers in particular. There is something about religions born of a tough environment such as the desert, with highly ignorant peoples, as those were, in ancient times where knowledge in general had much to do will fear of the unknown and a omnipotent concept to protect them, that begets such convoluted beliefs. Asian philosophies were far more succinct and avoided the magical far more than those more ignorant tribes of the deserts in the middle east.

Emperor Constantine

Constantine's Council of Nicaea

The council of Nicaea and Constantine himself, as were the missionaries throughout history, were a blight upon humanity. But then, people should have the choice to believe whatever nonsense they want to believe, but merely because the nature of the human makeup, requires tolerance, otherwise, we degenerate into murder and what we see in the Muslim fundamentalist terrorists.

Christopher Hitchens and brother Peter

Of course I wish everyone well in their endeavors. I'm just saddened, as is Christopher Hitchens and his type, by the lack of rational minds throughout the cultures of religious organizations and individuals. Hopefully in the end, religion will eventually die out and Humankind will be elevated to the sane and useful. We waste far too much time, money, and resources in elevating individuals and organizations (who don't pay taxes) on religious considerations when ethical and philosophical would be far more useful.

I'm awaiting her reply....

I got her reply....

Like I said...it is really sad. :-( So much knowledge and so little of it applies nor can save. Maybe you aren't used to someone being genuinely sad for the state of your soul, but I truly am. The cross is foolishness to those who are perishing. And that is really heartbreaking to me. And to God, as well. He will convey that when you meet Him face to face, I am sure.

I guess I will just leave you with this, and then we can have different conversations...;-))

http://www.wayofthemaster.com/flash/goodperson.swf

I hope you will take it seriously, but if not...I tried. ♥


‎1 Corinthians 1:18 -- For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

Like I said, ain't gonna happen, too bad....
My reply:

It's good that you have found something in your life to give you focus and direction. For myself, justifying something from within its own paradigm doesn't supply support something that is necessarily real. If you have ever read the Urantia book, it too is justifiable in it's own logic and amazing texture and sophistication. Yet in looking at how it was created and from whence is sprung into this world, it becomes obvious what happened and just how much it should be given credence, or not.

We all need something to hold onto and have a belief of something beyond ourselves, which lightens the burden. Since we have to get through life and be as highly functional as possible, which is also best for culture and the species, I laid to rest my desires to correct or rectify those of false faith decades ago. False in being misinformed and believing fiction.

What I found was that it is important to enjoy the journey, to find a way to be happy in life. Since we all live within a delusion anyway, I'm not sure how it matters whether it's true or real or not. As long as we do our best to do no harm, then we can consider it good. Things sound far better from the outside looking in. But once you get on the inside looking out, you see the problems.

The old adage that a prophet is never listened to in his own village, supported by the story of Jesus, that is to say, Yeshua, has a great deal of relevance. It was pretty disillusioning to find out how easily the bible falls apart once you look at who, how and why it was put together. It was built for the purpose of controlling a crumbling regime, it's that simple. Same with the Qua'ran (Koran).

Faith is a strong force, we just need to be careful that we are aware of what we aim it at. I asked my mother once, why she believed some of the nonsense she believed and she said, my parents taught it to me so I know it is right. Yet, she was happy in her own delusion. In the end, however, it was what destroyed her. That and mental illness I suppose. Drugs were just a symptom. Christianity is dysfunctional unless you pick and choose what makes it work for you, but if you pay attention to what is taught and what is written, it falls apart pretty quickly; that is why the new testament was put together, because the old was completely dysfunctional.

Well, you see, you can't quote from something to justify its existence, relevance, or truth. You have to go outside of it. Learn how it came to be. Otherwise, you set yourself up for being misled. Who controlled the bible for millenia? What is the meaning of the words back when it was written, and before, for the parts that were word of mouth until they were written? What was said, misremembered and incorrectly written? Who changed what for their own purposes.

How do you know what you believe, based upon "the word" really is the word? I suspect, if Yeshua (Jesus actual name, if you called him "Jesus" he wouldn't respond, you see, anymore than you would if your name was Yeselda and someone called you, Jane). came back now, he wouldn't even recognize what he started, certainly he wouldn't recognize who Jesus is, by name or intent.  It's an amazing book, don't get me wrong, but not to base religions on. I think for myself, I would just prefer to find a more positive life evoking way of viewing the world. I find it sad that those middle eastern religions are so death oriented, so self consuming.

Again, I don't mind people believing what ever they want, I just react to their trying to place judgement upon a fellow delusional human in saying their delusion is superior to my own and thereby, feel "sorry" for me. And that's about it. So, if nothing else, we can agree to disagree. The problem is, you can't do that, can you. Not really. It's intrinsic in the religion. Once you organize a religion, you begin to kill what was good about it and those in charge get their own agendas and greed takes over, greed of money, power, spiritual eletism and a creedo not to question. 

At this point, someone else joined in:

OK, I'm going to say something. Firstly, nobody should apologize anyone else for being the way they are. That isn't very enlightened, next; Dude, you quoted someone to make your point too. I personally thing that if God is infinite, then all that is real and potential is God. Science studies the body, and the mind cannot be contemplated to full understanding because there is more information than any collected of human minds can understand. Let alone ascended beings.

Now, if there is a "God" separate from the physical universe and consciousness network of all sentient and tran-sentient life forms, then it would be divorced from the whole by not "being" the whole. It would be assumed that to create and not be the creation at the same time, you are limited in your connection. If this is so, we can assume it is possible for a Supremely powerful being to exist eventuated the actual creation of the universes. 

This being could create "realms" such as heaven, hell, purgatory, and more. However, the concept of God has been developing and becoming more and more complicated which each genetic evolution of our species. So at some point, our future assumptions of God will out ride the assumed "Creator God' manifest state and move into a "Non separate-non creator entity." This would be a God that always has been that IS the mono universe of universes which has not created anything, but has been and always will be all the could be. 

In the fourth dimension, and moments and events are happening at the same time in different geographical locations. The universe was never created, it has always been, therefor there is no need for the presumed God creator to exist outside our own creation of this entity. This God does in fact exist, but the only effect it has on the universe, is that which the human thought creators allow it to effect based off the rules we give it. This changing from one mind structure to the next.

My reply:

I suspect there is some validity in this contention. :)

His reply:

I think I covered everything I was wanting to say. There is a God if you want there to be. Outside of the mind, there really is no need for a true "God" outside some form of Chief operating executive keeping the form of all existence in tac...t. However, there would be no "body" form separate from the universal structure being maintained. A universal "spirit operator-consciousness collective" is completely possible. The soul within the machine. Outside of this, there is no need for a "Mother/Father" entity. Additionally, I doubt something like this entity or any other has a single gender if holding to this dichotomy at all.

My reply:

I like to think about the ants, and yes this is off topic but interesting. If they have a supranatural communicative connection, beyond sound, body language, etc., would that neural net connection be considered by them, to be their God? It would take on a form for them, that could be construed beyond themselves, even though it is only them. Yes?

His reply:

That is what I am implying yes. We create what we think God is. If there is a God, No species, no matter the time period, will ever fully understand this metaphysical, meta mind being. For it is not separate from the creation. The creation it self may also have no limit on the whole yet there is limit to individual forms within the design. Similar to a Mandelbrot fractal.


My comment:

Nuff' said. There will be no agreement with the nice Christian lady and the weird Buddhist guy. People are different and there will always be those who think their reality presupposes another's. It's what makes this world go around. And that's okay. The trouble comes in when others want to force their beliefs in whatever way they find appropriate. We need to be able to agree to disagree. 

Or there simply is, no hope.

Thursday, April 21, 2011

Is religion child abuse?

"Is religion child abuse?", someone asked the other day.

No, I don't really think religion is intrinsically child abuse.

However....

I definitely think it lends itself, by design, to allow it. And in some situations, to even demand it.

Abraham attempting to kill his son, Isaac.
Interesting how all protrayals of this show an Angel 
stopping Abraham, thus glossing over the fact that a crazy
old man was going to kill his son, for God. God used to be such a hoot.


You see, it is a philosophy for a way of life for those who are needful of such things and who are without a type of enlightenment that would not find it, unnecessary. And because of that, and considering there are never enough rules to cover all situations appropriately, it leads its followers into making incorrect actions at times and also, it supports paranormal  beliefs in such things as to hold people back from rational thought, to expect action or consideration from without oneself, rather than from within oneself.

Which is always an unsafe way to proceed. If you always only expect help from within and without external support, when no support is reasonable, available, or offered, there is nothing less to your considered action or plan.

If however you allow an external expectation, in the larger external considerations in life, you can theoretically, go further, do more, and exceed even your own limitations and expectations. The trouble there is if you come to depend upon it, or expect it to help you in some way. If you decide an action upon a consideration of external expectation, but not upon an expectation for external help, you can do the work of the extraordinary.

It is inherent in Human nature, to require a belief in something bigger than the self. Yet, to believe in more than only the self, is questionable at best and destructive at worst.

Confused?

As soon as Humans were able to think rationally, it was only partially rational. We did not suddenly become aware and high functioning, that came with time, evolution, or at least, if you don't buy evolution, through development. The functional part became rational, for the things that were observable, were attainable. I see a fruit, I grab it, I eat it.

But those unobservable or unattainable things, then brought para-rational thought. It was needed and practiced. And thus was born the paranormal, the spiritual, and the non-corporeal, supernormal, thought.

From that could only come one thing, that there would have to be generally acceptable understandings among the group, of what these thoughts were. Rules would then have to be applied; un-agreed upon at first. Rules would have to be standardized, and that would have lead to self-importance and later, ritual. Which leads to generational acceptance and incorporation; assimilation to the core of the group.

Communicating to other groups would show disintegration in the common understanding and rigidity would have to be enforced. Enforcement would not work, so ultimate enforcement would then be needed and from that, the importance of the thoughts to be believed would be made more grandiose; by design and necessity.

This would be cyclical and lead to the harshest of punishments for disregarding the codified rules. All this would lead to a deepening of all elements involved in the original thought (the original sin); that being, that rational thought would be applied to irrational observations and imagined synthesis of misperceived observances.

This would lead to... religion. Because of what religion therefore is based upon, it would have to lead sooner or later to incorrectly applied actions, and since they are at least once removed, reactions. This would then have to lead to the ultimate punishments being meted out for the misperceived slights against the greatest and highest principle in the creation of this form of thought, that being, God or GodHead. Again we would run into the different groups, the different Gods, the different expectations, and two groups, adamantly opposed where the ultimate punishment would have to be brought to use. There is also in that, the fear of the unknown, the unknown group, the cohesiveness to the group against all others, the world, the fears from without.

Due to environment, totally autonomous religions would evolve and when two of these contact one another, it would be obvious that only bad could come of it, unless the religion were either based entirely or mostly in reality or rationality, or they were designed in such a way that they were extremely tolerant. But this form of development does not lend itself well to tolerance by initial and ungoverned design. Because these ways of thinking, are based in survival and that has to do with life or death, so these thoughts too, would have to lead to life or death.

So basically, any religion becomes a questionable pursuit as one has to, too far and too frequently, ignore the tenets of one's own religion, merely to make it functional or, to "please" one's GodHead, in order to follow the beliefs; yet also in order to be able to survive from day to day, and not be killed by outsiders finding you extremely annoying, or come to grow inured to your religious beliefs, thereby finding it necessary to pick and choose whatever you liked from the core belief, simply so you can live with it and yourself, with the core belief existing in a book, scroll or some other unalterable form or medium (which could be word of mouth down through the ages).

In the creation of some solid state reference (Bible, Quaran, etc.) you have then opened up another avenue for discontent and argument on context, meaning and requirements, that would lead to factions going off on tangents (Opus Dei, Muslim terrorists, etc.). In an attempt to make it rock solid and unarguable, you have put it down in a form that allows for interpretation according to linguistic variations, living language differences and twisting words to your own devices and ends.

All of which is why I liked Buddhism when I first leaned of it. This isn't an article on pushing Buddhism. I'm just saying it worked for me.

It too has many of the ritualistic elements. But I find to pick what makes the most sense from it and live life to live life with the Buddha Dharma as guide, works very well. Buddha having said, to paraphrase, "think". You are supposed to use your mind, know what is wrong, or right. The Tibetan Buddhists monks have, as part of their development, debate as an integral part of becoming Enlightened. Critical thought, is a major component. Sad that this has been warped in places by organized religious paradigms. But if you can stand aside and "see", you can see where these paths lead the wrong direction and avoid them.

And so, my long time contention that organized religion is intrinsically, bad. I would alter that now to say that for the masses, for the uneducated and ignorant, it can be helpful. Up to a point. But one needs to know when to shed off the childish and move on to an adult understanding of the Universe.

So, is religion child abuse? No, not intentionally. I don't think so. But it lends itself to the possibility. You've heard how power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Religion, is power. The ultimate power over Humans. Always has been. Those in charge have done great and horrible things. Imams have asked for Jihads, for murder. Catholic Priests have abused children as we know now; stories of babies buried beneath nunneries from Nuns impregnated by Priests in the middle ages are no longer hidden horrors. Yes, religion has done good. But does it outweigh the bad? Honestly? That will never be known.

Ritual, as in music, acting, sports, or anything, is there to get you up off the ground floor. But at some point, hopefully, you are above that. Even if you want to argue you still need ritual (push up, weight training, etc.) to maintain what you've achieved, you need to ramp that up to a higher understanding and level, to a more professional level possibly. But you don't keep doing the basics you did in grade school, if you want to make it to the Olympics. You'd have no chance of even getting picked for the team.

Think about it.

Monday, March 14, 2011

Scientists drill to Hell in Russia - Proof?

Amazing?

It all took place in 1960 in Siberia where they allegedly bore a 14.4km hole and the recording was unveiled in 1989 at an American radio station.The sounds may be disturbing.
From ScienceRay

Sounds of Hell?
Well, the only word I can think of for this is "Poppycock"! First of all, they drilled over fourteen miles into the earth's crust? In 1960? According to wikipedia:

"The Kola Superdeep Borehole (Russian: Кольская сверхглубокая скважина) is the result of a scientific drilling project of the former USSR. The project attempted to drill as deep as possible into the Earth's crust. Drilling began on 24 May 1970 on the Kola Peninsula, using the Uralmash-4E, and later the Uralmash- 15000 series drilling rig. A number of boreholes were drilled by branching from a central hole. The deepest, SG-3, reached 12,262 metres (40,230 ft) in 1989, and is the deepest hole ever drilled, and the deepest artificial point on the earth. For two decades it was also the world's longest borehole, in terms of measured depth along the well bore, until surpassed in 2008 by 12,289 m (40,318 ft) long Al Shaheen oil well in Qatar, and in 2011 by 12,345 metres (40,502 ft) long Sakhalin-I Odoptu OP-11 Well (offshore the Russian island Sakhalin."
Kola Superdeep Borehole, 2007

So, Poppycock, I say, poppycock. By way of denunciation, I found this article from Truth or Fiction web site, which is pretty interesting and pretty entertain and pretty damning of the above contentions.
The article that tears this apart and explains it all, from Truth or Fiction.

What this really points out is how religions can allow nonsense to seep in. It's Human nature really. But people WANT to believe. In reading this article, I WANTED to believe, just because it's nice to think there is something outside of our humdrum daily lives that is more than, bigger than, extra cooler than, reality, daily life, our usual rut.

Just beware of nonsense and remember the old adage, that if it sounds too good to be true, its not.

Friday, November 5, 2010

Religion directs eating habits, fashion, what else?

I always wondered about the Hebrew strictures against certain eating habits. I had always just chalked up to the necessary best actions for being healthy in the desert... thousands of years ago. Now that we have cooling systems, which makes these mostly (or more accurately, completely) superfluous.

Yet, people continue to follow those rules. Well, I guess you can make use of anything if you follow it as a discipline. But why?

Now I'm seeing that God also had fashion sense? Considering how religious types handles these rules, that means there really has been a "Fashion Police". Scary. That, it seems to me, borders on the ludicrous. Here's a few examples:

Leviticus 19:19
"Keep my decrees. Do not mate different kinds of animals. Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material."

Okayyy.... well, the animals thing makes some sense. Even the plants thing CAN make sense. In some cases however its just ignorant as planting the right things with the right things, can keep away certain pests. But, perhaps not in the desert?

Deuteronomy 22:10 - American Standard Version
"Thou shalt not plow with an ox and an ass together."

Um, whateverrr....I think we've been there.

Deuteronomy 22:12
"Make tassels on the four corners of the cloak you wear."

Aren't tassels, kind of, last season? Worried about our fashion? Really?
And finally:

American King James Version
"You shall not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woolen and linen together."

Yeah, so you really are worried about our fashion. And you said that before. You've just got to be kidding me.

God, the all knowing, all seeing, omnipotent, omniscient, architect of the Universe, worries about our fashion? How come there is nothing in those "holy texts" for the people in the future. How come there is nothing about evolving the religions. How come they are so specific to regions on this planet rather than referring to the entire world's people? How come religions seem to be only as inclusive as the general Human population in that region was at that time? Nothing, shows knowledge of beyond, or the other side of the world even. Like, "Love your brothers and sisters in China," or something.

I'm just asking.

Biblical references from bible.cc