Think for yourself

sent in by Barb

I went away to a Christian college when I was seventeen. It didn't take long to see that there were many types of Christians. I was most comfortable with people like me: people who didn't smoke, drink, dance,play cards, watch movies, listen to rock music or fraternize with the opposite sex.

I was least comfortable with the Catholics I met-- my church had told me after all that papists worshipped Mary and therefore would be spending eternity in hell. But these Catholics, some of whom smoked, drank, and regularly had sex, were also involved in the community, working at soup kitchens and pantries, tutoring low-income children, etc, things that my church had never encouraged or emphasized. My church was comprised of middle- and upper-middle class people who were comfortably sedentary in the knowledge that they were saved, and except for the occasional "outreach" to save more souls, they felt no burden toward disadvantaged people. What was required was obedience to a long list of "no-no's." What was discouraged was thinking for yourself.

There had been many things that struck me as wrong (the singular derision saved for gay people, for example), but I tried to pray away my concerns. And, like others here, when I dared ask for help, I was told that every day with Jesus is sweeter than the day before-- and that Satan was causing my doubt. Praying all the harder did nothing except make all the clearer the fact that the silence was deafening. It was heartbreaking.

This behemoth of religion that had promised me safety and security began to go ass-up-- it was the Titanic, and if I truly could save myself, it would be BY myself. So, I swam to the shore of reason.

So, I spent twenty years pointedly not going to church.

Then, I found the UU church-- a place that requires nothing of me but to think for myself. Pagans and athiests are welcomed. Gay people are embraced. I have found a community of "believers:" people who believe in the goodness of all people, who don't require answers, who are OK with not knowing.

I don't know either, and that's OK with me. Christianity was safe, like straitjackets are safe. I am free from the ties that had me bound and gagged. I pity the people who remain in bondage.

-Barb
Maine
USA
Joined at 7, then 10, then 13, then 16....
Left at 18
Was: Bible Presbyterian, fundy, evangelical, born-again
Now: Unitarian Universalist
Converted because: I was told the earth was round, and that Jesus was the way
De-converted because: Christian college showed me the many faces of X-ianity

141 comments:

.:webmaster:. said...

Welcome to the site Barb!

Anonymous said...

test

Marianna Trench said...

Hi, Barb! Like you, I tried to be a christian believer until I just couldn't swallow the myths and hypocrisy any longer, and then I eventually became a Unitarian. UU is a creedless church, but it has been my salvation because there's nothing sweeter than the freedom to think independently and maintain one's personal integrity. Thanks for posting!

Anonymous said...

test

Christine Robinson said...

Thanks for sharing your story!

Ian said...

Hi Barb, and thanks for sharing your story!

I especially liked your analogy of the Titanic. It's sinking, and all the crew members keep saying "Jesus is going to come and save us." when the lifeboats are in plain sight, ready to be used.

I considered becoming a unitarian universalist for a while, but decided to remain a lone wolf in terms of spirituality. I am a universalist though, in the idea that everyone, atheist, agonostic, buddhist, etc. will eventually be with God.

Jim said...

Hi Barb. Good to know that you have began to awaken to the fraud of religions. However One does not need to belong to any institution to be free. Freedom starts when you finally realise that God,Gods and or Goddesses do not exist. Never have, and never will. Best wishes Jim Lee

LadySidhe said...

Liked the Titanic and straitjacket analogies...those sound about right.

Welcome!

barb said...

jim lee,

I agree that no religion is required, but I consider UU almost "non" religion. It's like belonging to the Lion's Club, the Kiwanis... it's a "club" for people who recognize that doing good things for others is good for oneself, good for the community, and easier to do as a group. Lots more fun, too. Thanks for your comments! And for the others' comments too. So glad to have found this. BTW, my brother, also a sentient (ex-christian, IOW) being let me know you existed, so I'm grateful to him, too. Thanks Gary!

Chad said...

Hello my name is Chad, I have struggled with Christianity for the past 12 years. When I first became a Christian back in 1993 I had just lost my girlfriend and saw a 13 year dream of mine destroyed which was a beautiful farm that I had always planned on buying to have it sold out from under me and developed.

Out of all of this brokeness I needed a crutch, so I became a Christian. I heard all of the wonderful promises that came with this and I thought wow, happier times are hear again but, one thing that I am now saddened to admit is Christianity turned out to be one dissapointment after another.

It would take me forever to go into all the hurts and pains that came with being a Christian but, most of all is the way the Christian Church treats others who can't help it when they lack faith. It was always my fault, and I have a Spiritual Problem. Like for example I use to be a member of a Southern Baptist Church here in Tennessee. I went to the pastor there who was dealing with sickness and offered to lay hands on him for prayer. He told me that he would rather have one of his deacons do it than some new member of his church. I was highly offended by his comments and went to someone in the church and complained about it. I was told, "I realize that he (The Pastor) may not have one of the best People Personalities but, he is a man, and he's not perfect, the real problem you have is with God." That made me ever more angry. I don't hate this man but, I always noticed that the pastor of this church had his little cliq. They were the Holy Rollers. The ones who were Holier Than Thou. They make me sick looking back at them. Talking about Hypocrites. One of them use to fuss at me about finding a girlfriend. Don't worry about it, if it's God's will, you'll find one, Just learn to be content with Jesus only. The same guy who told me this was married and I remember at a church service he told his wife that he loved her and couldn't live without her and he doesn't know what he'd do without her. I got mad and walked out during service about to puke.

I also saw the ugly side of more Christians who were highly involved in the church. Backstabbing, Gossip, Looking down on others who don't share the same belief that they do, and belittling others who listen to Secular (Non-Christian) Music. I got so sick and tired of this Holier Than Thou Attitude and then finally I thought that I had found my answer in Christianity.

I found a small church with a pastor who was into the God wants you to be rich teachings. I thought that I had found my niche in Christianity. Depend on God to replace that farm that you never got, depend on God to lead you to a woman, & depend on God to get you a job, which is a story that brought me to where I am today.

Back about 3 years ago this preacher who was so annoited by the power of God prayed for me over a job that I had interviewed for, it was a stressful time in my life when I really needed FT work bad. I felt that God knew it and it only made sense for me to get this job. I read in the Bible where God tells us to test him in Tithes and Offerings and about how we'll have so much blessing that we want have enought room to receive it. After the pastor prayed for me to get the job, he told me, "God has told me that you're the one who will get that job," We were celebrating my road back to recovery and I also that same night called the 700 Club and requested prayer and the Prayer Counselor Affirmed it with me, "You've got that job", he said so I believed because the Bible teaches that if two or more agree on anything, it shall be done.

The next day I didn't get the job. I went into a rage with the employer and made a total fool out of myself. I went back to that same pastor and expressed my anger over the situation and all he had to say was, "Well, apparently this person was out of God's will and God couldn't use them to bless you". B.S., I have never heard such a lame excuse in my whole entire life, and then later on he told me, "Son you need to understand, the kingdom of God isn't like Burger King, Have it your way, get it instantly," More excuses. I finally left church for good. I was tired of sacrificing my sleep on Sunday Morning for a bunch of hype and do's and don'ts.

I don't hate all Christians, I have met some that are caring and understanding but the church as a whole is just a stuck up Religious Social Club.

I have now become more of a moderate. I consider myself a "Realist". Some one here may disagree with me on this but, I don't doubt the existence of Jesus Christ, I just don't think that he's involved in all of our personal affairs like some extremists believe.

I believe that God has given us our on abilities to make certain things happen. It is up to us to use our own judgment to find a job, it is up to us to find our own girlfriend and use our own God Given Judgment. There are some things in the Bible and that the Christian Church teach that just aren't realistic, there are some things the Bible teaches that just aren't practical.

I even get talked down to if I even mention Realistic Thinking or anything that has to do with personal pleasure. It doesn't even have to be that sinful. I could tell more and may later on but, I will wrap it up here.

Thank you
Chad

tigg13 said...

Hi Barb.

One of the things that a lot of churches do have and can be hard to replace is that sense of belonging to a community of (supposedly) like-minded individuals. The UU church can offer that kind of secure social environment without having to march to a dogmatic drum.

Have fun and welcome.

Anonymous said...

Hi Barb! Welcome to the site. It's great.

chad, I totally hear what you're saying. It's really frustrating. I remember being around some people that even if you made a comment about getting older or having an ache or pain they would act like you were the devil. I mean, like everyone grows old and gets worn out. If they can't even admit that reality, there's no way to admit any of it. I especially used to like how everyone would make their decisions based on what "god told them to do". I always wondered why he never told me anything. It's also interesting to not how what he tells people to do most always lines up with what they would want to do anyway.

SpaceMonk said...

"Think for yourself"

Best
advice
ever.

brigid said...

Hi Barb, it made me laugh when you talked about catholics. I am a former papist, and I remember when I was growing up the protestant kids would talk to me like I was a criminal. They told me that we put the pope above god, we put mary above jesus, and we put our prayer books above the bible. Then I would go home crying to mom.

It's funny now, but looking back on it, I wonder why people can't have a religion without poisoning a child's mind.

I have several UU friends.

Anonymous said...

Hi Barb!(and others) I am a Buddhist and I feel that Unitarians can benifit from our teachings, as you are now free to think for yourself. I invite you to check out a website that has many free material. Most importantly to you should know that, although our teachings also have things that are unable to be proven, like miracles Buddha has done, the heart of Buddhism is based on you experiencing these things on your own. It is possible through extensive practice to experience yourself as a young child and a baby and also your past life. I encourage you all to check out this site: http://www.justbegood.net/
There are many free mp3 downloads here: http://www.justbegood.net/Downloads.htm
I encourage you to listen to the Rebirth(Including Questions and Answeres). I reccomend this because I have met a lot of ex-christians and semi-christians who are still unable to free their minds entirely because of the fear that has been placed in them by Christian teachings of eternal Hellfire for not believing. Reincarnation is possible to prove for yourself, and will change your outlook completely when you know this. Buddhist don't usually tell others unless they seek this, since it takes a commitment and focus of mind and lifestyle to do this, but I encourage you to at least check it out.

Arthur said...

Mr. Buddhist, fair enough, but that's not my brand of Buddhism. At any rate I would discourage Barb from hastily adopting other unprovable beliefs. That's not thinking for oneself.

Past life, my goodness. Sure Consciousness has had "past lives", but no individual. Barb's gonna have to figure that out for herself over time. :-)

Ms. Buddhist said...

What did you do yesterday Arthur? You wrote this comment. How do you know? Because you remember doing it. But was this just Consciousness? How do you know you really did and not just consciousness? Obviously you have a memory of it so you know it was you right? This is the same when you experience your past life. I agree with you that you shouldn't believe in unprovable beliefs, however when you remember past life that is equally as unprovable as remembering writing your comment yesterday. Of course you can't just remember your past lives willy nilly, it takes much training of the mind through meditation. There are many Buddhist monks who know there past lives and have other things as well, but of course the point of buddhism isn't to develop these things and is not why you should be a Buddhist, but for ex-christians I know from watching other ex-christians when they develop and learn these things that they will finally be free from the dogma about Hell. This is through their personal experience, not having faith or belief, but through gaining direct knowledge.

brigid said...

I remember my past lives. One of them was Mary Colcannon. Have you heard the tale?

"And there, above the mantle, was the painting; Mary Colcannon; thief; harlot; public sinner; her fiery red hair fell to her waist, and there was no mistaking the fuck you in her enormous blue eyes. Her bosom spilled from her bodice like waves upon the rocks.

They chased her across the moors that day in May, she astride a red stallion named Azazel, with a bottle in one hand and a pistol in the other. They felled Azazel with a ball to the neck, and she rolled to the ground, laughing and cursing. They meant to take her alive, but as they closed round about her, she took aim and the leader dropped from his saddle. The volley of nine pistols tore her apart.

It was said that one of her lovers claimed her body and she was buried in a little grove of trees. On dark and moonless nights, even the wise and prudent have said they heard Mary on the moors, laughing and cursing."

boomSLANG said...

The belief in past lives becomes illogical when we consider that the world's population could one day easily become greater than the total sum of all deceased people in history. It seems there would be a shortage of "souls" to be "recycled".

I also find it ironic that the stories you hear of people who claim they have lived "past lives" most always include something about being a "King", "Queen", or "Prince" who "lived in a castle"---you never hear anyone say "I was a baglady who lived in a refrigerator box." lol.

xrayman said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
xrayman said...

Hey Kids, Not all hope is lost, Jesus does indeed answer the ultimate prayer once in a while. I am watching a country music awards show right now, and the group Rascal Flats just won a big award. Their lead singer gave big thanks to Jesus Christ his personal savior. Wow maybe we must all reconsider and pray just a little bit harder. I wonder how J.C, feels about their lead guitarist who last I knew was fucking a very hot Playboy Playmate.

Seriously Barb that was a great post and welcome to this site. I am saving your Titanic remark. Great Stuff.

Chad, that was a hell of a con job you feel for all those years my friend, may you never go back.


This life is it folks, we ain't never coming back.

5/23/2006 10:40

mq59 said...

Chad,

Apologies for the sleazy stupid stuff you ran into in all the churches.

Judging from your testimony, the three primary villains seem to be:

1. Prosperity teachings

2. The courtship cult (God will bring you your future spouse and looking means you don't trust God).

3. Cult-of-personality preachers (oh ick).

All three are quite unbiblical (#1 and #3 especially--#2 is merely obnoxious).

However, someone should have pointed out that Christianity is not Burger King at the beginning, so you wouldn't develop false expectations.

slingshot said...

mq, what do you mean that christianity is not burger king at the beginning? It is not easy? Can't have it your way? So many christians go to church, "get saved," and that's about all! They might attend church regularily, yet so many seldom do much beyond that. How few "repent of sin," or "obey the commandments," or read the bible? What for, if one is "saved?" If all christians were "repentant," the USA would not be such a "sinful" nation, since it is 80% christian! A lot of promise keepers just aren't keeping those promises, are they? Look at our pornography industry, divorce rate, teenage pregnancy rate, etc. etc. etc.. When I went to church, I found it a great place to meet women and get laid! Hallelujah! That's one thing I miss...

Christians are no better than anybody else.

Anonymous said...

Hello this is Chad again. Not long ago I got into a debate with a prayer counselor at one of these popular ministries. I told her about the hardship that I had endured during the Christian Life and she told me the real problem was my attitude. I got really angry with her and told her that it was very easy for her to judge someone else when she hadn't even lived their life.

Then she went on about, "well we live in a fallen world." and all of those excuses that everyone on here has probably heard, then I fired back on her and I asked her these simple questions:

1) Who tempted us? Satan.
2) Who is responsible for creating
Satan? God.
3) Knowing that we were going to
screw this perfect paradise and
Satan would be involved then why
did God not stop it?
4) And why should the whole world
past, present, and future gen-
erations be blamed for a crime
that we were not responsible
for?


Then I went on to tell her that this does not sound like a fair and just God who was responsible for the creation of Satan in the first place. I mentioned that innocent people and children are killed everyday and God stands by and does nothing about it. Then I'm told, "God didn't do these things", and then I told her, "you're right God allowed Satan to do these things and God did nothing about it." He did nothing I told her to help the innocent. It's almost like God and Satan are partners in crime.

I finally said that God set us up for the fall in the Garden of Eden, and since we are all guilty of Adam and Eve's sins then I guess the whole world should be in prison for Charles Manson and Ted Bundy's crimes. I could tell this deeply offended her and what really got her was when I said we were all just a bunch of rats in God's lab and he was poking and proding us. She finally said, "I don't want to talk about this anymore, I've got to go." I asked her, "what's the matter, can you not defend you faith?" She responded, "I just don't want to talk to you anymore". I told her that she was getting scared of the truth and couldn't handle it and by that time she had hung up.

The point I am trying to make is,I really do believe that there are a lot of christians in the world who aren't as confident about what they believe as they think they are. This is not the first time I have heard of this happening. I think what really happens to these people is they start having their doubts about what they have believed for so long and it makes them start thinking when you start breaking it down for them into realistic terms. It scares them, they want to run. I will admit the truth is scary, it really is.

B.C. said...

xrayman wrote: " I wonder how J.C, feels about their lead guitarist who last I knew was fucking a very hot Playboy Playmate."

From what I understand, LeVox has married the former PMOY (playable mate of the year)...So then, perhaps the more pressing and important question is 'What does Jesus think of you judging and poking your nose in other folks business?

Dano said...

We must be true to the logic that our heavenly father invested in us.

We created God in our image.

Every regular guy wants to get his hands on a playboy bunny with big T&A.

Therefore all God ever thinks about is T&A.

Jesus is the son of God.

Therefore Jesus would approve of any guy who could get himself a little "Playboy Playmate."

Dan (Just being logical, rational, and Godlike)

xrayman said...

Lighten up B.C. I was joking. I am happy to know Mr. Lovox is married now. I am so jealous of that son of a bitch it isn't funny. Oh yes I am really the type of guy to judge anyone who screws hot models. What I wouldn't give.


Chad,
At the lowest point in my life when I was withdrawling from alcohol, I was up at 3am one fine evening shaking in a pool of cold sweat. I was at total mental and physical rock bottom. This was my time to submit to Jesus. I too called the 700 club prayer counselor line. I prayed with all my heart for Jesus to come into my life. Well as I said in my original testimony I never felt the love or the power of Jesus, but I do remember the prayer counselor loosing patience with me and ending the call. My attempt to become born again failed miserably. Despite the fact my phone session with the Rev. Robertson's organization didn't go to well they were kind enough to send me some literature with a request for me to send them a little cash.

xrayman said...

By the way Chad I did manage to beat my alcohol addiction. It's been 15 years since my last drunk. My strong desire to turn my life around and sheer willpower within myself were the key factors in me beating this addiction. I did seek support from REAL people in my life(wife,parents, and friends), and despite what most of the folks in AA(who were of great support) say about needing the higher power, I did all this without any help from an invisible man in the sky. We must pool our resouces within ourselves and in the real word to solve life's problems.

brigid said...

mq? Hi, sweet meat, it's me again. Yeah, right, I love you too.

Reference your last post here: you keep trying to deal with people's problems with religion and you keep missing the fucking point. You talk about the "sleazy stupid stuff" in the churches, stuff like the prosperity teachings, the courtship cult, and the personality cult. This might be a shallow person's notion of a problem, but it doesn't come anywhere near it.

Your religion is total bullshit to start with, and your playing the advisor and the theologian is becoming more and more comical. Why the fuck do you think you are helping matters by bringing up a few piddling details? You are dealing in drivel, and ignoring the real issues. christians do this.

Your religion says that your deity made the first parents and put them into a paradise; he put temptation in their way; they took the bait and then god made this show of anger and tossed them both out on their sorry asses.

Do you love god yet?

Then god chose an obscure race of towel-heads to be his chosen people and gave them laws like the penalty for raping a slave is lower than that for raping a free woman, and it is okay to beat your slave to death, provided he lives till sundown. Yeah, those laws are there; study your bible. This is what paul called "our schoolmaster to lead us to christ".

Do you love god yet?

And what grieves me the most is that the towel-head's deity demanded that they kill helpless animals. What kind of deity wants people to kill for no reason?

Do you love god yet?

And then god hasn't had enough killing. He wants to butcher someone in a roman exection; this poor slob died for our sins because an all-powerful god somehow just couldn't do it on his own; the slob walked out of his grave and went up to heaven where he took his place as a god himself.

AND......if we fail to believe any of this, we deserve to go to hell and fry forever.

Do you love god yet?

I sure as the fuck don't. This is the sleazy, stupid stuff you should have mentioned. Guys like Chad got involved in dipshit churches, run by dipshits for dipshits, and I kinda feel sorry for him, but we all had to learn the hard way.

If you bother to answer this, try, for once, to provide something of substance.

Just one more thing: I know the war stories of the ot and no sane person would take them seriously. These are the writings of savages and barbarians. But tell me, when did your god start loving the world? John 3.16 says that your god loved the world. Just when did that happen?

Shannon said...

Xrayman, while a Playboy Playmate may have a large heaving bosom and her own money, still under all that silicone, she is all-woman or human, I should say. Mr. Lovex might get to screw her but he may be serving her and not the other way around. And she may be hard to please.

Anyway, I do find it amazing on how many people will stand up and thank a god for all the great, silly stuff in their lives. Such as Rascal Flats including Jesus’ blessing as a part of or as the whole reason that they won a made-up award. All because they can use their voices in a manner that others can’t?

Meanwhile, there are children who are in their beds praying and begging to god and jesus. They are doing this because they have been told that if they believe and take jesus in their hearts and pray, he will keep them safe. If they just believe, pray, and love him. Yet the door handle still turns and the door to their bedroom quietly swings open and the children eyes squeeze shut, tears stream down the side of their faces, and their bladders are released. And even as the blankets are being lifted, the children beg: “Please not again, please not again, please not again…”

bill said...

I told you...


I love it when Brigid posts. ain't nuthing better, and more soothing to the self, then hearing the real truth come out in such an eloquent manner.


Bill...still lurking still

bill said...

Shannon,

That last paragraph you wrote describes probably one of the most horrific nightmares a human being would have to encounter; and of course it begs the question, How could God/Jesus assist "people who have" with more...whilist the most defenseless innocents are ravished by the worse evils of life. Jesus should NOT help even one human being..ever, until ALL the children are saved from ALL of the evils of their worlds forever..and ever and ever. NO Way should ANY other prayer be answered...until these are. If the others are answered first...then it is proof positive that the whole pray to God/Jesus ritual is a bunch of Bull Shit. proof positive

brigid said...

Hi Shannon. My big sister still talks about a musical version of Tom Sawyer on television--this was back in the '70's. Early in the show, Tom is upset about how Huck Finn is being treated, and he sings about how, if he was god, he wouldn't let the sun go down until people learned kindness.

We have man-made laws, coming out of our sinful, impenitent hearts, which protect children. Human government does more than an all-powerful god ever bothered to do. This is self-evident; it doesn't need to be argued, that we can depend only on each other.

And bill, are you STILL lurking? Are you a wolf in the bushes, waiting for unsuspecting lambs? You won't eat me, will you?

bill said...

only in my wildest dreams, brig. only the wildest ones.

BC said...

xman, again, wrote: "Despite the fact my phone session with the Rev. Robertson's organization didn't go to well they were kind enough to send me some literature with a request for me to send them a little cash."

Well that sounds all too familiar. Those TV guys are always trolling the depths of human despair for more compliant victims, all the while remaining unaccountable to any governing body. I guess the FCC is too busy busting DJ's for poopy language.

Anyhow, man, no harm no foul... what a grammy winner does on their free time is their business and no one else. I'd still like pics if possible. That includes you, too, brigid.

btw, brig, you're not implying that a government comprised of duplicitous self-serving power hungry egomaniacs is more capable of leading me than God, are you? And if their only qualified in crafting legislation, Where did that ability come from, in other words, Who gave them the idea of Law in the first place?

brigid said...

Yeah, that is exactly what I am saying. god does not exist, and the political and social situation is the best we have. If a deity, or deities of some kind exist, they have shown precious little interest in what goes on here.

Are you actually saying that we need god to give us the idea of law? We are sentient beings and we have developed the idea of law all by ourselves.

Check out your bible, bc, and you will see that democracy and self-determination are not christian ideas. You may not like the "power hungry egomaniacs" that run this country, but I would sooner vote for the worst of them than for some zealot who thinks god is telling him what to do.

I cannot tell if you are serious about what you said in your last post. I think with my temper. Do tell me you were just being funny.

About the connection between law and god: I am a lesbian. Keep your godly laws away from me. I like those godless liberals just fine.

Shannon said...

BC

It seems that John Walsh was able to use to the government to set up some handy laws to protect children right after ‘god’ allowed Ottis Toole’s free will to trump Adam Walsh’s.

It also seems that the Polly Klaas Foundation helped to get the National Amber Alert System signed into law by President Bush 30 April 2003.

All these laws would be irrelevant if your god would protect those who can’t protect themselves.

Lsettr said...

Welcome Barb! See how interesting your little post has become! lol

Anyway, I see your many points and kudos to the straightjacket remark. I love that!

As to the later posts, shall I say what my mom says to me about such wonderful acts happening? We need another laugh, right?

"Well, praise Jesus!"

hehehehe....

ms buddhist said...

to boomslang who said that past lives are illogical, you are missing my point. Your past life is unclear to you simply becuase you don't remember it, but there is a way to develop your mind to a level in which you will come to remember it. So you don't have to go searching outside yourself for evidence to discover this. You can spend your entire life trying to rationalize what you believe in, but that will only bring suffering. And you may think that when you die your suffering will be over like xrayman said in his comment "This life is it folks, we ain't never coming back." But this is not the case. You percieve that when someone physical body is no longer in working order then there entire being is "dead". But this is just limited human perception, similarly you would believe that there aren't microscopic beings all over you right now because you can't percieve them. Of course science and technology has been able to show that we depend on them to live, so now everyone agrees they exist, but if the technology were not available to see and detect these things, if I told you that there were billions of living creatures on your body you would say no. And you would be wrong.
As for the worlds population becoming to large and there being a shortage of souls, this is wrong. There are more beings in existance than just human beings. This is simple unawareness of the world you live in. There are living beings around you everywhere that aren't human. There are more than 425 million insects per acre of forest. Who knows how many entirley in our world. In fact, there are about 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 bacteria and archaea living amongst us. So why do you single out human souls? Humans make up a extremely miniscule part of life in this existance. Not to mention we've only been here an extremely short time compared to all other life forms. Who knows how life first came into existance. There are theories but no one really knows. But we do know that matter in it's most basic form is just energy, so your and my energy is in human form for some reason now, but when you die, of course your energy will not. energy cannot die. Of course to try to explain scietifically it all would not work, just like before microscopes you could not sufficiantly describe microscopic life. But basically humans are a type of energy like any other life. By the way you live your life, the way you handle your energy, is how you become greater or lesser in your next material form. This is karma. So if you waste your energy being mean and destructive, or just being ignorant and in denial, this will bring you to a certain type of existance when you take on your next form, and when you focus and develop your energy, face up to your true presence in life, this will also. One goes down the other up.
But anyway, I just posted here originally because I recently met some ex-christians and became familiar to their situation, and the realization of their past lives was a big thing for them.

As for this comment by boomslang:"I also find it ironic that the stories you hear of people who claim they have lived "past lives" most always include something about being a "King", "Queen", or "Prince" who "lived in a castle"---you never hear anyone say "I was a baglady who lived in a refrigerator box." lol."

Obviously anyone can make up a story about their past lives. There are plenty books and stories about past lives and reincarnation and I would bet that at least 99% of them are frauds. They are trying to decieve gullible people for their own material gain. But of course don't believe these people. In Buddhist practice it is usually a rule not to tell others about your past life experience, esspecially non-buddhists, and it is strictly forbidden for any Buddhist monk. It is a monistic law. It would just bring about confusion and desire.

But in the end it is based on expereincing it for yourself. If you don't believe I can understand, but to say you know it to be wrong of course you cannot say. You do not know what is beyond you. A colorblind animal doesn't know color, but does it exist? Yes,but beyond that animals perception. At my level I can say for sure that color most certainly exists, as well as past lives most certainly exists.

It's all up to you though.

Arthur said...

Sorry. Sorry for the late answer and sorry for calling you Mr. Buddhist, Ms. Buddhist!

Ms. Buddhist, you wrote:

"What did you do yesterday Arthur? You wrote this comment. How do you know? Because you remember doing it. But was this just Consciousness? How do you know you really did and not just consciousness? Obviously you have a memory of it so you know it was you right?"

I don't agree. How do I know I really did it? I don't know that. Memories are quite unreliable, but even if I believed them to be reliable, what would I know? I would know my immediate experience of the memory and my immediate experience of the thought that the memory is trustworthy. I would still know nothing about the past. I don't believe I wrote anything. For practical purposes, in a way I would say I wrote it, but I don't consider this to be ultimately true. For sure I don't know I wrote it.

vipassana said...

Is this a prank?

"I don't agree."

Therefore, in your immediate state of "mind", you made a decision. Now, how in the flying duck's ass, did you make that decision, without any "memory"? Okay, what, you made a decision, with "untrustworthy" memory, great, so you undermine your own comment.

"How do I know I really did it? I don't know that. Memories are quite unreliable, but even if I believed them to be reliable, what would I know?"

You'd know your past experiences, its called memory recall.

"I would know my immediate experience of the memory and my immediate experience of the thought that the memory is trustworthy."

When you recall a memory, you retrieve the "experience" you encoded at that time. At the exact same time you engage in that cognitive process of recall, you are creating a "new" experience. If you want some lite reading, look up metadata and the Dublin Core element link. Now, if you have amnesia, and aren't capable of memory recall, sure, your memory becomes untrustworthy, and your reliability to make sound decisions in a world that requires stored information looks bleak.

"I would still know nothing about the past."

Yes you would, if you had "faith" in your memory recall, and your ability to "store" information, per your own experiences. If you deny your ability to "experience" life, and store memories, then, you might as well say you can't trust yourself to make logical decisions in life, as your past memories, build your future decisions. No information, means, you have nothing to use to form even basic language skills. The fact that you are actually typing a message, shows you have information and muscle memory.

"I don't believe I wrote anything."

Ah, yes, just because you believe something, doesn't make it real, or not real, okay. Well, if you don't believe you have a past, that is trustworthy, then, the millisecond after you typed that sentence, it totally lost all credibility as being verifiable, thus, your statements hold value only at the quanta level, and alas, since we don't overtly engage in decoherence as a means to interact with information, your statement becomes - meaningless, faster than we can give you credibility.

"For practical purposes, in a way I would say I wrote it, but I don't consider this to be ultimately true. For sure I don't know I wrote it."

Uh, according to your, I can only live in the immediate present, and there exists no information storage in the universe, i.e., absorbable matter, etc., you can't know "anything" for sure, even your own statement after you make it. In short, you introduce yourself to a new yourself every planck second.

Perhaps, you are joking, I mean, that statement had to be sarcastic - right. It mocks yourself, well, I suppose the earlier self, as you really never have a self-understanding.

I suppose that makes you totally "detached", a true buddhist approach to nirvana. I can see detachment from unnecessary stressors in life as being a good thing. However, in order to maintain sanity, one "must" anchor themselves to something, thus, there can't be total detachment - memories suffice for being that anchor.

Perhaps, I am missing the buddhist philosophy, can Mr/Ms or any other buddhist please enlighten me on the correct Dharma, well, if this isn't sarcasm or some joke, thanks.

vipassana said...

ms buddhist: "You can spend your entire life trying to rationalize what you believe in, but that will only bring suffering."

Before I trapse off, I just read your post. Are you suggesting that you didn't rationalize your belief? If you don't have rational thought, then, your thoughts become absurd, and are reflected in your words. If you do rationalize your beliefs, in order to convey logical communications, like you are attempting to do in your post, then, it appears you are engaging in the act of self-punishment and suffering.

I read a little further, and notice you get into energy and life forms, this is the ultimate form of rationalization, do you find that thinking on such matters, is "painful", or causes "suffering"? Are you presenting buddhist philosophy as the light the Buddha would have portrayed, it, or are you going along with the "no one can really know the past anyway", and thus, really never be capable of relying on the written word of "anyone", to include the Buddha himself.

Why so much illogic, the elegance of life, is that its all one, but even within the "one", one must realize their entanglement, with past, present, and future. To live in just the present, may be emotionally safe, but not physically safe. On a maslow pyramid, that means, a person living according to this philosophy must sacrifice the physiological layers, in order to attain the maximum emotional levels. There are behaviorists that would disagree with that philosophy, as the emotional needs do rely, even if only a little, on the lowest levels of physiological need.

I suppose, if someone were able to totally remove their physiological needs to the extreme, it would be called "death", and thus, I suppose that would lead directly to "nirvana". Is that how the philosophy works?

Anonymous said...

Hello everyone this is Chad returning to comment on some of the replies I have seen from my previous posts.

Xrayman, it's funny that you shared your testimony with me because believe it or not, the very first time I stumbled onto the Ex-Christian Site, It was your testimony that I first read. No joke! It reminds me of a thought that entered my mind the other day before I got involved in the Cultic Practices of the Christian Church. I had more successes in life depending on my own abilities. Thank you for providing your testimony once again to help me to remember how successful I was before getting involved with Christianity.

As for "brigid", I read where you said you kind of felt sorry for me. I do not want anyone feeling sorry for me. Like I mentioned to Xrayman, I knew what it took to succeed in life once before and I will do it again. The only thing left I can say is, it does take awhile to get all of the brain washing out of your head when that's all you've been exposed to for 12 to 13 years. It is hard letting go of those Cultic Teachings. I'm sorry if my testimonies of my debate with other Christians has bothered you. My main reason for doing so even though I knew that I would never change their beliefs was to take my anger and dissapointment out on them for spreading lies.
That's it. Take care.

P.S. I always post Anonymously because I haven't felt like getting around to completely registering.

Brian said...

I just want to say that I think the purpose of this board and the Ex-Christian Website are to make others who have left Christianity feel warm and welcome. We want them to feel just as accepted by us because they have been told how bad Non-Believers are and not to associate with them.

I've read several posts on here and some of you have done an excellent job but, however I am going to mention one name on here that concerns me and that person is "Brigid" I have never seen such hostility in my whole life. You are defeating the purpose of this. Instead of being warm, you are being downright offensive,critical,and hateful to certain people on here.

I know that you have a right to express your opinion but, what you are doing is making the rest of us look bad. We don't need to set a bad example for people who are new in here. I think the problem is more than your belief system, you are an angry person who needs to take An Anger Managment Course. Someone must've hurt you real bad and I am expecting to get jumped all over by you. Please try to act a little nicer in here. Let's show these Christian Idiots that we can be loving too.

.:webmaster:. said...

Chad, you don't have to register. When you go to post a comment, just click on the radio button labeled "other." Then you can type in a pseudonym of your choice.

xrayman said...

Speaking of past lives, does anyone remember that one blonde haired woman who got rich off celebrities by channeling some reincarnated soul named RAMTHA? I don't remember her name, but she was Oprah worthy when she had her 15 minutes of fame. She was mentioned on the Howard Stern show yesterday. That woman had the ultimate con job going and people paid her dearly for it. How do people fall for such bullshit?

ms. buddhist said...

This is funny, I really just intended to post one comment and leave it, but am now am on my fourth post.
First I want to adress arthur's comment saying that you don't know what you did yesterday. I am not trying to be mean when I say this, but you are just fooling yourself! You know for sure the comment you wrote. If you didn't know you wrote that comment the other day, you wouldn't have even responded. Why do you think I was refering to you and not someone else, unless you know you made the comment and no one else? Even in a dream, you can be someone else in that dream, and when you wake up you know that you were that person in the dream. Wether the dream exists or not is another thing, but you know for sure that you became someone else in that dream because you experienced it. Yes, philisophically you could question wether or not past reality actually exists, but experiences you cannot question becuase they are exactly what make you who you are. They are the only real thing. If you did not know for sure your experiences of memory then you would never be able to function. When you woke up today Arthur, how did you know how to get out of bed, brush your teath, use a computer, drive, eat, talk, or question what I am saying? You do know.

And to vipassana who said "I suppose that makes you totally "detached", a true buddhist approach to nirvana. I can see detachment from unnecessary stressors in life as being a good thing. However, in order to maintain sanity, one "must" anchor themselves to something, thus, there can't be total detachment - memories suffice for being that anchor."
I agree with you about needing an ancor and detachment from unnecessary things being good. But it is not about detachment really. I think this is the kind of thing that a lot of people try and fail at. Trying to detach themselves from things. They think that when they do that then they will not have to worry about the things anymore. But the idea is not really try to detach, but to be aware. This is because of what you said about needing anchors. If you focus on being aware rather than detaching, the detaching will effortlessly come to you the more aware you become. Like a baby should not try and detach himself from his mother comfort and attention even though it is an attchement. This attachement is helpful for the level of awareness of the baby. When the baby grows up a bit, and becomes more aware, he will be able to loosen from his mother and go off on his own. So of course there are good attachments and blind detachment can be very damaging. In fact, I think Christianity can be like this in a way. Many of you being ex-christians, you may remember a time when having your belief was helpfull for you, or at least know someone who it has been helpfull, but then later it becomes harmfull.

Also vipassana, this notion of having certian attachments can address your comment: "Are you suggesting that you didn't rationalize your belief? If you don't have rational thought, then, your thoughts become absurd, and are reflected in your words. If you do rationalize your beliefs, in order to convey logical communications, like you are attempting to do in your post, then, it appears you are engaging in the act of self-punishment and suffering."

Why did Buddha bother to teach others when he knew that teaching is a meaningless attachment? This is very simply the act of selfless loving kindness. Yes, this is not really helping the Buddha, but the buddha is not trying to avoid anything or to detach from things. The main goal is to be aware. So when I said "You can spend your entire life trying to rationalize what you believe in, but that will only bring suffering." I just ment that if your goal is based on actively seeking answers and proof outside yourself you will always end up failing to find what you really want, like if you based your belief of reincarnation from the RAMTHA lady xrayman mentioned, or based your hope of salvation in some event that was said to have happened in the passed. Of course you can use rational thinking and it's very neccessary to live and avoid confusion, it's a helpfull attachment in our world. Of course I could spend forever trying to rationalize this and then of course there would be no end.

brigid said...

Well!!!! Now I have to respond to some excuse for a man named brian!

And you have never seen such hostility? Stick around, cutie, you aint seen nothin' yet. And you should have said "never HEARD such hostility". Aint you never had no learnin?

You said I was not being warm; that I was being.......what did you say......I was being "offensive, critical, and hateful". Look, shit-for-brains, we do not ask for evangelists to come wandering in here, okay? Nobody here invites the fucking campus crusade to come slobbering in here to pant out their jesus saves horseshit. No, I am not warm. I am "offensive, critical and hateful" and I am getting worse every day.

And let me ask you who the fuck started this? Hmmmm? Who started this shit about how sinners need to go to hell? Who wrote romans chapter 1? Who made people like me into freaks and perverts? Do not ask me to be "warm". No, by all the gods, I am not warm. Why don't you tell the xians who come in here to be warm? Why do you not tell them to accept us as who we are instead of preaching a bunch of shit that died out with the roman empire? Why don't you tell them to not be "offensive, critical and hateful". Don't tell us, asshole. We didn't start this fight.

boomSLANG said...

"This is funny, I really just intended to post one comment and leave it, but am now am on my fourth post."

If it turns out there's a fifth post, hopefully it will have a conclusion that's coherent and relevant to something. If the crux is that Buddha is "God" and "reincarnation" is the way to "enlightenment"---well, I can't envision too many people here who have already given up one irrational belief, replacing it with another. Shalom.

Rot8ing Anode said...

Ahh Brigid, I think Brian was addressing your tactics of opposition to christianity, not the reason behind your opposition. Sure, we have all been frustrated with Christians and Christianity overstepping its bounds in our individual lives. Some here are severely scarred by the church and its minions, but if you let that consume you and fill you with anger, you are no better than any angry "God Warrior" who justifies their actions of hate and intolerance by pointing the finger and saying "he started it". Now don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with being critical of someone's point of view, as I am being with yours. But if you wish post a critique of anyone and be taken seriously, as opposed to being turned off simply because you seem like a frustrated child, angry at the world, you might consider an alternate approach with a bit more tact. As far as being offensive, you can easily do that to someone with a different point of view just by voicing yours. Case in point... It seems you were quite a bit offended by Brian's remarks, and he was quite polite in his analysis. I too may offend and risk another foul tyrade by calling you out on your actions, but we are not doing so to start a pissing contest with you, we have good reason.

1) Your posts serve to blatently reinforce any Christian notion that Freethinkers, Atheists, Agnostics, etc.. like ourselves, are somehow posessed by demons, angry, and not at peace within ourselves and from the point of view in which we comprehend existence.

2) This in turn hinders the cause, this site, the anti-christian/religion movement. It reflects poorly on us as a whole, and if you are truly as angry as you claim, I doubt that you would want to aid the Christians in making us look bad.

3) It is just plain immature and rude. If you truly are as pretentious as you appear on paper, I wish you the best in gaining the experience in life to overcome that hangup. If you are simply being difficult because the internet is a security blanket and you have fun rubbing everyone the wrong way, I wish you the best in finding a more creative and useful outlet for your energy.

J. C. Samuelson said...

IIINNNNCOMIIINNNNG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

***crouches and heads for cover as the EXC-BRIGID missile drops from the sky***

Arthur said...

@Vispassana & Ms. Buddhist

Hope you don't mind if I reply to both of you together. You had similar objections, I think.

It was not a joke. I just differenciate between what I view as the ultimate truth or what I can really know and day to day life including the illusion of a personality. On the latter level you are right, on that level I know lots of things and base my decisions on that knowledge. Ultimately, however, there is no "me", meaning an independent entity that does things or is ultimately responsible. This is not "true" Buddhism, it's Zen Buddhism or mysticism in general. Talking about it can get confusing because of the two levels which lead to seeming contradictions such as pathless path or gateless gate. On the one level you do things, on the other level impersonal experiences just arise to nobody. On the one level you remember the past, on the other level an experience of a memory arises in the Now (for nobody). Only the second level is ultimately true. I live my life on the first level of course, it cannot be lived anywhere else, but try to remember the existence and ultimate truth of the second level at the same time. It's not hard to see why you will often hear teachers of nonduality say this cannot be spoken about. All I'm really saying is that what I truly know is that Experiencing is and that I see no reason to believe in responsible "agents" that created themselves. In other words, all I'm saying is I don't believe in free will like Brigid, and apart from that I think Descartes was wrong saying "I think therefore I am". He posited that as self-evident but it's not. Only Experiencing is self-evident.

bill said...

uber..

Laughing out Loud ! This is going to be good.

bill said...

rot8ing, I, myself, feel that brigid expresses herself just fine, thank you. Everybody's different. I am sorry that she does not express herself the way you desire. If everyone "talked" like you do, it would get quite boring. As for the Christians thinking we are possessed, because of the way she types words..well, they are going to think that anyhow, even about YOU. Your opinion of what is rude and immature, is that...Your opinion. Some agree and some do not. I don't. Brigid, EXPRESS YOURSELF ! as you always do. We stand in awe of You. wait, no...that's a Jesus song. Have a nice fucking day. and I mean fucking. (bill)

vipassana said...

Ms Buddah: "If you focus on being aware rather than detaching, the detaching will effortlessly come to you the more aware you become."

I think the word detachment has a much Buddah connotation. However, I can see how removing "unncessary" attachments in life, by becoming "aware" of destructive behaviors, such as envying or coveting in such an avaricious manner, that it "consumes" a person, and they "lose" balance in life...

Many that become consumed, attempt to exert a lot of energy, trying to project their influence into the "future", eventually, enough energy spent on such matters can emotionally, and physically bankrupt a person.

The wisdom, is awareness, but also detachment. Information fills our lives, it runs through our neural processors, if a person gets caught in a loop, and they refuse to exit, well, it appears they run the risk of burning up the motor. If they don't burn up the motor, they have little capacity to process new information, as they sit in a perpetual neural spinning hour-glass (computer analogy).

When a person, can become aware of these type looped thoughts, and they accept "awareness" as a legitimate function, they can "detach" themselves, awareness becomes the exit function. Its amazing, however, the number of people who run these type of nueral loops. One could surmize there are many reasons for this type action; environmental, heredity, etc.

And, yes, christianity as taught in much of its doctrine, does push people into this type of thinking process - a never ending logic loop, circular reasoning, that never has an escape. As a matter of fact, "fear", social isolation, etc., is used to ensure no one attempts to establish the validity of the "exit" function. Curiosity is the natural function we have, that persuades us to get beyond such loops, as curiosity pulls us to ingest new experience and knowledge... however, natural curiosity can be quelched with yet another stronger primal aspect to humanity - fear.

It would seem to me, that even though a person is aware of their environment, it many times becomes very "difficult" to determine, where dead ends and loops exist. Its why so many people are caught up in religious doctrine in the first place. Each of us have a threshold for running loops, in regards to information discovery, and information processing.

Once our threshold is met, we begin to seek new information, and to build more "awareness". Seminaries are noted for teaching, how to keep logical loops in play. Each time a person discovers an answer, the theologian associates that "answer" or "awareness" to that which can not be "known", thus running a "new" endless loop.

On Buddah, I suppose one could consume themselves even in Buddhism, and perpetually ask themselves "what would buddah do?", that would not seem to be a healthy alternative after leaving one endless loop.

Perhaps, some of the sayings of Buddah are food for thought, but with thought, one must process it, store it, and use it to make sense of the greater picture.

Someone mentioned, reincarnation. Reincarnation in itself, can be seen as a "loop"? Its hard for me to accept "loops", as having a valid function, unless there is a product for each iteration. I really don't accept the wash machine method for soul cleansing, as, talking about soul in an illogical sense, leads to nothing less than a loop itself, the same with "consciousness", unless its brought into the realm of knowable information, and "awareness", else, even that topic becomes a discussion of endless loops.

xrayman said...

Brigid, If you ever change we will slap the shit out of you !!!!! You have provided me with some quality entertainment since I started reading your posts. Stay the way you are. Don't you ever stop the "LISTEN SHIT FOR BRAINS" diologue. And I love lesbians !!!!!!!

vipassana said...

Arthur: "Ultimately, however, there is no "me", meaning an independent entity that does things or is ultimately responsible."

Okay, its beginning to make more sense. And, as much as I agree with some of your insights, I am still drawn to categorize our reality - call it the only way I can communicate effectively, as "forms" seem to be necessary when discussing such matters. This appears to be the crux of the communication barrier.

Do you suggest that "true" reality, is a formless matter, yet, everyone lives in the form to experience formlessness?

Do you believe in independent thought? Or, do you attribute independent thought as nothing but the byproduct of the true formless reality? There is a difference.

There is all that there is, but then, there is the combination of the pieces within all that there is. Do you believe reality is a "synergy", where the sum of the pieces of our categorized reality, become "more" than the whole - consciousness? Or do you believe, the pieces make the whole, no more and no less, i.e., a conscious entity does not exist, etc.

I see, you explain that free will doesn't exist, because Nature, Is, Consciousness, etc., is dominant over our lives, thus, we are truly not in control of our destinies. In the bigger picture, perhaps, I can see your logic. However, you pick a flavor of ice cream from the store, there are many options to choose from. Although, it could be said, that there were a finite number of selections, and thus, there wasn't truly "free will" in an infinite sense, a person still had "free will" within his finite understanding and awareness of his "immediate" reality, no?

I think it hard, to discuss matters in the "whole" other than in ambiguation.

Can a person in a "finite" world, with only "finite" information, create a conceptualization for an "infinite" entity, such as "true reality"? One could speculate, that you are only choosing between the few "finite" options are are available in our limited understanding of the "true" reality. The cosmological ice cream store, may have only given you a few flavors of ice cream to choose from, just because you are in the store looking into the glass case at the ice cream doesn't mean you have an "awareness" of the size of the store, or the other flavors that you can't see at the other end of the counter, because of limitions of visibility.

To say, Is, exists, i.e., the ice cream store exists, etc., makes total sense, to say, one knows all about the details of "Is", in every detail, makes the claim that someone is omniscient.

I agree with your dislike for Descartes' statement "I think, therefore I am". I see it as, "I am, therefore I think". Even more, I see, "I am, therefore, I store information about thinking, by placing my information onto objects, to include my own brain, hence, the ability to think about ones' thinking.". Without some form of projection, we would never have survived as a species. Albeit, projecting ones' own internal information onto another verbally does get annoying, in an emotional sense.

Salvatore said...

Dear Rot8ing Anode,

I can see what you're saying. In effect, we (ex-Christians) must portray a polished image of the non-Christian side of life, thereby making for an inviting occasion for the fundie to cross the line, jump aboard, or whatever metaphor seems fitting.

However, many ex-Christians (including me) continue to be angry over their "pilgrimage of lies." And sometimes tearing into another individual, albeit verbally, is sometimes frankly the only satisfactory method available.

Think of the colossal deception that is being perpetrated the world over! Religion is essentially the biggest bottle of snakeoil ever sold!

Yes, I agree with you -- it's best to be civil, courteous, and Dale-Carnegie-like; however, sometimes people (e.g., Brigid) aren't out to "win friends and influence people"; sometime they just need to vent the painful poison and hurt feelings that have plagued them for who knows how long.

Besides, if there is no "grand purpose" or "design" to the universe, then who ultimately cares if we're all non-theists and in a nice little unified group? We'd just argue about something else (like politics and taxes).

The "conformity factor" of organized religions is one of its oppressors. As we've come to realize religion for what it is (namely, a farce of pandemic proportions), let people be. Sure, Brigid's caustic technique will hurt our ability to "convert" believers to "our side." But ultimately, so what?

Don't get me wrong here -- I'd love to see Religion peacefully eradicated from the earth -- where reason-based societies rule in freedom.

But, to attempt to "correct" Brigid right now, where she is, having experienced the pain she has and does, I think is not worth the potential converts we'd allegedly get if she were civil in her dealings.

The woman needs to vent. Let her vent.

Thank God for this site (pun intended)! God only knows how the churched-people are so oppressed in their stodgy congregational ways that the only way they can vent is to quietly backbite and tear eachother apart.

Who knows? Maybe an oppressed religionist will see us openly venting the full wrath of our frustrations and anger and think, "God, I would love that sort of freedom of expression!" ... and then convert to "our side."

If Christians are offended at us, so be it. May we be free to express ourselves.

Respectfully,

Salvatore

Arthur said...

I used to consider myself some kind of newbie to this and now I'm giving you a Satsang *g*. I won't promise to give infallible answers, but maybe "my" understanding is mature enough. Maybe a good test...

Do you suggest that "true" reality, is a formless matter, yet, everyone lives in the form to experience formlessness?

Well. I would put it this way. The formless and the "formful" are one. No individual lives in the form to experience formlessness, but the One, the Unmanifest, manifests as forms in order to experience Itself.

Do you believe in independent thought? Or, do you attribute independent thought as nothing but the byproduct of the true formless reality? There is a difference.

If you mean by independent thought that someone owns thoughts, no. Thought itself, as everything else, IS the One, not a byproduct.

There is all that there is, but then, there is the combination of the pieces within all that there is. Do you believe reality is a "synergy", where the sum of the pieces of our categorized reality, become "more" than the whole - consciousness? Or do you believe, the pieces make the whole, no more and no less, i.e., a conscious entity does not exist, etc.

No synergy. There aren't even any pieces. Consciousness can't be divided into pieces.

I see, you explain that free will doesn't exist, because Nature, Is, Consciousness, etc., is dominant over our lives, thus, we are truly not in control of our destinies. In the bigger picture, perhaps, I can see your logic. However, you pick a flavor of ice cream from the store, there are many options to choose from. Although, it could be said, that there were a finite number of selections, and thus, there wasn't truly "free will" in an infinite sense, a person still had "free will" within his finite understanding and awareness of his "immediate" reality, no?

It may seem like free will to the individual, the reason being that the individual doesn't know the future.

Can a person in a "finite" world, with only "finite" information, create a conceptualization for an "infinite" entity, such as "true reality"?

No, one can call it all kinds of names such as the Unmanifest or God, but it can't be conceptualized. That's what the 2nd commandement (no graven images) may actually be about.

One could speculate, that you are only choosing between the few "finite" options are are available in our limited understanding of the "true" reality. The cosmological ice cream store, may have only given you a few flavors of ice cream to choose from, just because you are in the store looking into the glass case at the ice cream doesn't mean you have an "awareness" of the size of the store, or the other flavors that you can't see at the other end of the counter, because of limitions of visibility.

To say, Is, exists, i.e., the ice cream store exists, etc., makes total sense, to say, one knows all about the details of "Is", in every detail, makes the claim that someone is omniscient.


You make the mistake of first taking the vantage of the Absolute and correctly saying it's omniscient but then going down to the level of an individual form, wondering how the form could be described as omniscient.

I agree with your dislike for Descartes' statement "I think, therefore I am". I see it as, "I am, therefore I think". Even more, I see, "I am, therefore, I store information about thinking, by placing my information onto objects, to include my own brain, hence, the ability to think about ones' thinking.". Without some form of projection, we would never have survived as a species. Albeit, projecting ones' own internal information onto another verbally does get annoying, in an emotional sense.

All of those sentences you started with "I am" were from the POV of the individual though. God simply is and nothing else. There's this atheistic argument that if God is perfect why did He create the world. He didn't. He is the world and at the same time He is beyond the world. God is like a television screen. He is the underlying substance that makes the pictures possible. He IS the pictures while at the same time being beyond them and totally unaffected by what happens on the screen. And He is all actors and actresses on the screen. Another analogy is to equate the manifest world with a divine play with God playing all the characters Himself. You don't have to use the word God or make it male to be sure.

That's what I would call Nirvana in Buddhist lingo. To know your true nature as the Beyond, the Witness, Awareness of your own play that cannot harm you. That also creates detachment. When you watch a movie and believe what you see is really happening you will be unnecessarily attached to what you see. When you know it's only a movie you will watch it with a certain detachment but can still enjoy it. And what's also important: Anything can still happen in the movie. Because you know it's a movie doen't mean it's all peaches and cream from then on.

The outlook changes and takes the sting off life. Otherwise, as they say: Before Enlightenment, chop wood and carry water. After Enlightenment, chop wood and carry water...

And BTW, as for "reincarnation", that's when you identify with form again. That's why they say those who have attained Liberation won't be reincarnated again. You don't need to wish for reincarnation to be forever. When a movie ends, the screen doesn't dissolve.

boomSLANG said...

Chop wood and carry water. Very nice, Grasshopper.....okay, so essentially, "God" is everything and nothing; and "God" is everywhere and no where. Interesting. I'd love to know what makes this God a "He", then.

barb said...

Salvatore said:
'The "conformity factor" of organized religions is one of its oppressors. As we've come to realize religion for what it is (namely, a farce of pandemic proportions), let people be. Sure, Brigid's caustic technique will hurt our ability to "convert" believers to "our side." But ultimately, so what?'

Exactly. Like I said before, I'm not out to deconvert anyone. And, as I understand it, this site is for "us," not "them," and if they are offended, I'm content to stay here just with you guys.

Besides, we're a rainbow, right? Christians live as though there's only one way to live (smile, never admit to heartache unless it's the heartache over another's sin, never admit weakness or anger); we know better, and celebrate diversity. I have enjoyed so many perspectives proffered here-- I learn so much-- not just from the people who know the bible inside and out, but from the people who teach me that it's OK to let go of the enlarged capacity for guilt, that it's OK to be angry.

So, big warm hugs to Brigid. Without her this world has fewer colors.

-Barb

south2003 said...

Some cannot beat this "reward and punishment" mentality - collecting brownie points

I did! Once I woke up and started to be who I am and gave credit where credit was due, the phonies came out the wood work like termites. You see, I stop turning the other cheek and immediately realized who were behind the mask. In some from or another, every last one of them is a fundie. I realized how intolerant they were, how bigot and mean they were, how critical and demeaning they were and it made me literally sick to my stomach knowing that I was a part of that group. When you are in it, you don’t see the havoc until you get out. So finally you get out and start thinking for yourself do they stop breathing down your back? NO. Hello, how many times must we tell them we don’t need the blood cult as the quintessence to our lives? Do they listen? NO. So they get what’s coming.

Listen Brian, for once stop pleasing and brown nosing thinking that you have to be political correct to these fucks that come on here - mind you - no matter how "well we behave" and no matter how "eloquent we present", they feel pity for us as if we have sores. I say FUCK em all. If they don't like it then stay the hell OUT! (pun intended)

Holding on to this idea that we "MUST" live our lives according to whomever - goodness it is fucking bizarre.

Love you Brigid!!!

Arthur said...

@Boomslang

Grasshopper? Sorry, don't get this.
I did say you don't have to call it God or make it male. It was a long post, but if you comment you should read everything. ;-)
Call Yourself whatever you want!

barb said...

One more thing: Brigid said:

"It's funny now, but looking back on it, I wonder why people can't have a religion without poisoning a child's mind."

And Brigid, I pointedly do not force my son to go to my or any church. (He's 6). What I do hope to do is accompany him to explore any he might have interest in. Recently in the car we had this conversation...

J: My birthday is right by god's!
Me: Your birthday is right by jesus' (J's bday is Dec 24).
J: God is jesus' son.
Me: No, some people believe that jesus is god's son. I don't, but some people do.
J: I don't believe it either.
Me: When you get older, you can decide what you believe.

This may seem so normal to some... but to me it was a defining moment in parenting, because I was TOLD that JESUS WAS THE WAY, and I believed it like I believed everything else adults said. So, despite the fact that I make mistakes all the time in parenting, I'm so happy to be stopping this one major mental health mistake-- that of passing on the mind warp.

-Barb (who is contentedly overhearing husband and son enjoying flatulence jokes)

Anonymous said...

I agree with that Brian Guy, Brigid you are hateful. It's easy to talk real tough when you're hiding behind a computer. People always get mad when they hear the truth about themselves, and I think Brian hit the nail right on the head with you. Did God pee in your Cheerios? People like you make me want to be around Christians again.

Please do yourself a favor, grow up and get some therapy. I'm sure you'll pitch another fit over this like the immature baby that you are but, that's ok. It doesn't really matter because it is your opinion. Go ahead slam me, it doesn't matter and to tell you the truth I'm not going to respond to what you have to say so don't waste your time. Unlike you I am confident about who I am. And I'm not a Christian. Way to go Brian!

Justin said...

Brigid, I have been reading your posts and trying to absorb your “colorfull” outlook on life and it’s players. And I must say, you’re quite a lady aren’t you? (that was sarcasm) You kiss your mother with that mouth? What is your problem? How much more foul can you get? (That was not a challenge by the way). I am pretty sure you topped the scale on the raunchy, foulmouthed lesbian scale.

What I also find amusing is how everyone eats up your droppings and then tells her how good it tastes. Give me a break. Do yourself and all of us a favor and clean up your act. Show a little respect for yourself.

Mary said...

I personally enjoy reading brigid's posts. I might not always agree with them, but she isn't afraid to say what she thinks(perhaps more of us should be that way). Anyway, if what brigid posts offends anyone maybe they should just not read what she posts.

barb said...

Justin said:
'What I also find amusing is how everyone eats up your droppings and then tells her how good it tastes. Give me a break. Do yourself and all of us a favor and clean up your act. Show a little respect for yourself.'

Respectfully I say, I am not eating Brigid's "droppings." That's what I did when I was in the church and had no options.

What I'm saying is, I have options now, and Brigid's opinions are among my options. Like any image, you can look away if it's offensive to you. It's entertaining, and, indeed, sometimes sustaining, to me. It's possible that only women would understand this.

-Barb

-

boomSLANG said...

Arthur: "I did say you don't have to call it God or make it male."


Uh, call WHAT God? Yes, it was a long post, notwithstanding, what exactly is "it"? You've touched on "consciousness" and you've capitalized a few common words....e.g.."Itself", "One", "Enlightenment", "Beyond", etc.... basically the same way a Christian will use upper case letters for "Faith" and "Truth", as if it has some special "Higher" meaning.

Also, you were the one saying "He" this and "He" that. That's why I addressed the gender thing. I don't believe in gods, so obviously, the only time I use the word "he" is in reference to a male person. Is your "God" a person?.....does "He" have a penis? Just trying to make heads or tails out of your position.

vipassana said...

Arthur: "I used to consider myself some kind of newbie to this and now I'm giving you a Satsang *g*. I won't promise to give infallible answers, but maybe "my" understanding is mature enough. Maybe a good test..."

Satsang, and looking within, is mature to the one who perceives and searches, maturity comes to the one in their own time, however, portraying ones' inner voice to another, is truly the test of awareness.

Arthur: "Well. I would put it this way. The formless and the "formful" are one. No individual lives in the form to experience formlessness, but the One, the Unmanifest, manifests as forms in order to experience Itself."

Thus, you speculate "The One" has "Intent" - to carry out its "Purpose".

And, "The Ones'", "Purpose" is to experience "Itself".

"This", gives you "Meaning", for all that you are "Aware" of.

However, your sphere of awareness, can not possibly extend to "All" that is. Thus, you assign "Meaning" to "The One", where "The One", could actually be "One of Many". Equally, as plausible, "The One" as you describe may have no Intent or Purpose at all.

If you subjegate yourself to "The Ones'" Intent and Purpose, and this anchors you to a cosmological "Meaning", then, removal of "The Ones'", Intent and Purpose, in effect "removes" any cosmological Meaning, and all that really remains, is the "meaning" you arrive at, based on your level of "awareness" and "knowledge" at the time you query an answer for "meaning" in your life.

Is it possible to "derive" knowledge of "The One", based on one persons' sample? Is it possible, that "one" persons' sample of the whole, doesn't necessarily provide the "True" picture, but only a small experiential glimpse of the True Reality. Again, one would have to know "all", in order to speculate on the "Whole".

Arthur: "If you mean by independent thought that someone owns thoughts, no. Thought itself, as everything else, IS the One, not a byproduct."

So, we are not currently communicating for ourselves, "The One" is communicating through us, and we are just the medium by which it communicates? Well, that is thought provoking, how does one tell if it pleases "The One"?

Arthur: "No synergy. There aren't even any pieces. Consciousness can't be divided into pieces."

So, cloth isn't made of woven thread, and woven thread isn't really made of fibers, and fibers aren't really made of molecules, and molecules aren't really made of atoms, etc. So, what we experience in reality, isn't "Real", its all the same stuff. Don't we define "different" stuff, based on its "unique" properties? How does one ignore the physical attributes of reality, and chalk them up as equally the same across the board in the universe?

Arthur: "It may seem like free will to the individual, the reason being that the individual doesn't know the future."

However, if "The One", knew the "Future", then, the Intent and Purpose of Experiencing Itself, becomes a moot point, right.

It appears that according to the "Intent", and "Purpose" of "The One", that there is little Meaning derived by using humanity as a communications conduit, if it already knows the future. Well, unless we start giving it a personality, and say its bored, or amused by its own actions.

In order for free will to exist, one must assert that humanity is not being "Deliberately" led towards certain actions (in any manner), and that humanity is not limited in its choices or options in any given situation (finite options).

I don't believe in Infinite, "Free Will", not because I believe we are being "Deliberately" led, according to the notion of "The One", but based solely on the grounds that we are limited in our options in life, and our options are truly based on the information we hold within our organic material. Free will, means we can make choices in our lives, without being influenced. The fact that humanity is not omniscient, and is "highly" susceptible to environmental influence, (we wouldn't exist without that influence) suggests that humanity in no manner has Infinite or Uninfluenced "Free Will".

I don't see the need for "The One" to support the notion that "Free Will" does not exist. The day that humanity can become omniscient, and deflect Nature to the point of having "Zero" influence, is the day that a person can suggest they have complete and utter "Free Will".

The religious who found their doctrine on "Free Will", and the Adam and Eve story, obviously miss the point, that their own god, placed an "option" in the garden that could never be chosen, thereby "limiting" their options, and then directly influences them by allowing a serpent to coax Eve into eating the apple. Free Will, to me is a dead topic, however, the justice system runs on such a premise, thus, one must understand at least the reality they physically conform to.

Arthur: "No, one can call it all kinds of names such as the Unmanifest or God, but it can't be conceptualized. That's what the 2nd commandement (no graven images) may actually be about."

However, although we can't conceptualize such an entity, we can give it "Intent", "Purpose", and derive a Universal "Meaning". That's pretty deep conceptualization from a non-omniscient perspective, wouldn't you say?

Arthur: "You make the mistake of first taking the vantage of the Absolute and correctly saying it's omniscient but then going down to the level of an individual form, wondering how the form could be described as omniscient."

Can we agree, that a "non-omniscient" form, can't in fact, conceptualize in great detail, the "Intent", "Purpose", and "Meaning" of "The One".

Regarding the term Absolute, what does that mean to you?

You speak from the vantage of first person, the "individual", who is not "Absolute" nor omniscient, how are you capable of knowing "The One" is "Absolute". Do you suggest that your thoughts again are not yours, but, some "Absolute" entities? If that is the case, then by its injection of its "Absolute" information into your mind, you have become "Absolute" equally. Are you making that stand? Doesn't that make "everyone" equally Absolute, if they are also receiving some inherent signal from "The One".

Arthur: "All of those sentences you started with "I am" were from the POV of the individual though."

And yet, you speak from the same POV, and thus, it appears we both are speaking equally on this topic. Unless, you believ you have somehow tapped into the "Absolute", and no one else has.

Arthur: "God simply is and nothing else."

Therefore, your initial statement where you assert you know "The Ones'", Intent, Purpose, and derived "Meaning", is no longer valid. This means of course, that "The One", may not necessarily be "Experiencing" Itself, because that lends credibility to "The One" as having much more going on in its "Existence", than just "Being".

Arthur: "There's this atheistic argument that if God is perfect why did He create the world. He didn't."

Again, first person "non-omniscient" POV, how do you know that "The One" did or didn't create the world? You are not capable of speaking on behalf of an entity or consciousness that exceeds your ability to understand. I do not portend to "know" (be capable of referencing) information, that exceeds the bounds of my experience, and information recall capability. Those who make comments about something they can't possibly "know", appear to many as someone who has a need to "influence" others for their own purpose(s).

Arthur: "He is the world and at the same time He is beyond the world. God is like a television screen. He is the underlying substance that makes the pictures possible. He IS the pictures while at the same time being beyond them and totally unaffected by what happens on the screen. And He is all actors and actresses on the screen. Another analogy is to equate the manifest world with a divine play with God playing all the characters Himself. You don't have to use the word God or make it male to be sure."

Do we need to give "It", Intent, Purpose, and Meaning? These three elements, are what prevent me from accepting the concept of a "god". Its not possible, for someone to make statements on behalf of the underlying substance of this universe, unless they are capable of soaking up, the entirity of the substance to make a big picture announcement.

An apt analogy, would be your screen play. If you were only capable of watching one pixel/dot on the television screen, do you believe you would have the knowledge required to give a play by play account of a movie, that had over 10,000 individually animated pictures/frames?

Moreover, if you were capable of imagining the billions of dots that were missing, perfectly, on each of over 10,000 individually animated pictures/frames in order to "label" the movie... do you believe you could read the mind of the movie director? Who is to say, that the movie director, was the only coordinator for the making of the movie, perhaps, he got ideas from "other" contemporaries to help him out.

The bottom line Arthur, is, that is a lot of "knowing", and its called "omniscience". One can not say anything "Absolute", unless they claim "omniscience", and if a person were to do such, they would become the movie director.

Arthur: "That's what I would call Nirvana in Buddhist lingo. To know your true nature as the Beyond, the Witness, Awareness of your own play that cannot harm you."

However, does this concept require "The Ones'" presence in any shape or fashion? I'd suggest no. A person who has never Witnessed the Beyond, does not have an Awareness of harm, fear, etc., thus, internal peace is possible.

Arthur: "That also creates detachment. When you watch a movie and believe what you see is really happening you will be unnecessarily attached to what you see."

Agreed, let me reword. "When you watch a sermon and believe what you see is really happening you will be unnecessarily attached to what you see."

Arthur: "When you know it's only a movie you will watch it with a certain detachment but can still enjoy it."

Agreed, let me reword. "When you know it's only a sermon you will watch it with a certain detachment but can still enjoy it." I find that many people who attend church, do indeed watch the sermon for sheer entertainment, and nothing more. Unfortunately, we get those who can't tell the difference between fiction and non-fiction, and we get people who act out in biblical character.

Arthur: "And what's also important: Anything can still happen in the movie."

Well, actually, a movie is already made. "The One" already knows the ending, as "The One", in essence is the movie director, who wrote the movie, I'm thinking "The One", isn't going to be surprised how the movie ends. Also, humanity becomes the characters on the screen, and its apparent that although humanity may not know the next frame coming, we both know, that they don't have the "Free Will" to change the next frame.

Arthur: "Because you know it's a movie doen't mean it's all peaches and cream from then on."

Agreed, let me reword. "Because you know it's a sermon doesn't mean it's all peaches and cream from then on." Well, true, life is what it is, and nothing someone shouts from a pulpit is going to change the underlying truth of our existence.

Arthur: "The outlook changes and takes the sting off life."

I know what you mean. The moment I had enough information in regards to hell, heaven, religion, etc., I threw it all out the door, and the changes took a lot more than just a little sting off life. Do you know what its like to believe in a literal hell, and then, realize or become "aware" that hell really doesn't exist? Oh, the relief, is unexplainable.

Arhtur: "Otherwise, as they say: Before Enlightenment, chop wood and carry water. After Enlightenment, chop wood and carry water..."

Either way, our reality and existence carry on, no matter how enlightened we become... Life is what happens, when carrying water and chopping wood, being aware of the journey is Enlightenment...

Arthur: "And BTW, as for "reincarnation", that's when you identify with form again."

I thought we are all just one big lump of the whole, the "I" and "Me" don't really exist, or... is there another type of "form" other than "The One" universal consciousness.

Arthur: "That's why they say those who have attained Liberation won't be reincarnated again."

Those who are stuck in an endless neural loop, and pushing out a repetitive and unchanging variable, moment after moment, will indeed need to finish out their movie, I suppose its fitting that those who believe in reincarnation seek closure in some aspect.

Arthur: "You don't need to wish for reincarnation to be forever. When a movie ends, the screen doesn't dissolve."

Agreed, let me reword. "You don't need to be a movie producer to identify the screen. However, it takes a gifted actor/actress to sell the script of a movie without a producer readily available for guidance.

J. C. Samuelson said...

All this talk about whether Brigid needs therapy and so on is a waste of everyone's time and does a discredit to the idea of free speech (see below). Furthermore, is this not a thread whose subject is "Think for yourself," an ex-timony by Barb? Can we not save the psycho-babble drivel for another place?

How many here think Ann Coulter (the ultra-right-wing pundit) is full of joy, polite, and politically correct?

That's a trick question.

What I'm saying is that you don't have to be nice & polite to have the right to communicate what you think & feel. While sometimes tact is called for - and FYI Brigid has been known to be tactful in some cases (I'd link it if I remembered the threads)- other times it isn't.

When fundies come in here, many times they think what they are saying is reasonable, and can't understand why we react so strongly. What they can't see is how insulting much of it is on both an intellectual and personal level.

Brigid, to me, dispenses with the bullshit and says what's on her mind. I say, bravo! Whether or not I agree with everything she says has nothing to do with it.

There's a saying attributed to Voltaire that many here may be familiar with...

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

So, to all the nay-sayers out there, I say get over it. Celebrate the fact that Brigid - and all of us - has the freedom to say what she says.

Now, as to Mr./Mrs. Unknown Brigid Critic...

"It's easy to talk real tough when you're hiding behind a computer."

Even easier when you hide behind an Anonymous user name, wouldn't you say, hmmm?

Much love to Brigid, and to all who use the freedom they have to express themselves any way they like!

brigid said...

As I recently told a woman here named Patricia: "I have more enemies than South Dakota has grasshoppers; most people hate my insides, and I have been called everything but a white woman".

Let me make a brief response to my puny little enemies. Your opposition means nothing to me. Nothing. It is pretty goddamned obvious by now that anyone worth 2 flying fucks into hell is going to like me. Strong and intelligent people like me. Weaklings do not.

And which one of you accused me of hiding behind a computer? Listen, swine, I'll meet you on the street; anytime; anyplace. I'll meet you on Boston Commons at high noon and give you 30 minutes to draw a crowd.

I have been taking college courses for a few years now, and what I have seen in the classroom turns my stomach. Pale, shivering, trembling little milk-sops; little rabbits; little weasels, hiding behind their phoney, spineless ideals, pissing their pants at the first sign of challenge. This is exactly what I am reading here. The stench takes my breath away.

You creeps have told me that I am just not doing the right thing. The "right thing" is to "encourage ex-christians" and I have been doing that. I will never make nice to a pack of dark-age cretins whose mothers should have used a coat hanger. The sub-human trash who come slithering in here out to be roasted on a spit and served with grey poupon.

I cannot keep the names straight, but one of you shit-for-brains said I needed therapy. Your fucking-A right I need therapy. Living in this world, surrounded by whiners and snivelers; shit, I lost my marbles years ago.

Thanx to all my allies, especially you, 'geek. Let me try to remember a few more names: Barb; Mary; South; Xray; Salvatore and Bill.

south2003 said...

Holding on to this idea that we "MUST" live our lives according to whomever - goodness it is fucking bizarre.

So justin, did I sound like a foulmouth heterosexual.

Arthur said...

Wow, Vispassana, that's a hell of a lot. Maybe I should save your last comment to my harddrive for consideration, but we're going to have to leave it here. I can't afford to take the time to consider and comment each of your points.

Just a few things: First of all, I don't want to sell anything, but maybe I have slipped into making some unwarranted assumptions. It's one hundred percent certain that experiencing is happening, and it's pretty sure that there is no "doer". Maybe it would be most honest to leave it at that.You don't need the concept of the One to do away with free will, sure. Darwin is enough, or trying to predict your next thought. The fact that we have no free will is really nice, IMO, a pretty nice "religion" by itself. No fame, no claim, no blame, as the nonduality teacher Leo Hartong puts it. A dose of pantheism does appeal to me, though. Maybe I should make it into my personal religion and not be to bold about it, IOW, sell it as the Truth.

BTW, yes, I once believed in a literal hell too. Not THAT long along, actually. It is then very important to find out how to be "saved", everything else pales besides that. Problem: The bible and other sources don't provide a unamimous answer. Even when you think YOU are saved, in everyday life it happens that you picture the friendly person in front of you in hell because you believe that person is not saved. That's horror.

boomSLANG said...

Seeing a strong-willed person come walking out of the ashes of Catholism and it's barbaric teachings gives me hope. It gives humanity hope. Especially when you consider all of the shame and guilt that she(Brigid) must've felt, knowing that she was a lesbian--knowing that she had to literally suppress who she really was inside. I admit that when I first read her posts that some of the language was a bit over the top, however, when I started to read between the lines I saw a sensitive, intelligent, and witty person there. And yeah, I see some underlying anger at times---on the other hand, "anger" is very cleansing emotion. It's also a necessary step in deconverting from one of the worst cults known to man----Christianity. Considering what she's been through?...I'd be angry too. And y'know what?...I'd much rather see her, or anyone else, vent here as opposed to keeping that anger on the inside, ruminating on it, and then taking out on someone else---just like the sick bastards who lurk in the dark shadows of our society. Thanks, and thank you Brigid.


PS: 'Don't like what you see? Scroll down or "Click off"!(Of course, you can always present objective evidence that Biblegod exists, and then maybe we'll all change our tune, but I promise, none of us are holding our breath)

brigid said...

Arthur? Reference your post of 11:56 AM. Honey, I do not believe in free will. Maybe you are recalling something I said and I just expressed myself poorly.

I am a hard determinist. We have no more free will than an amoeba. This does not subtract anything from our worth or dignity, it enhances it. If we are superior, we must be superior; we have no choice. Those who crawl to their churches have no choice; they must be weak and ignorant.

Do you know that fruit salad we call "goldie"? He repeats himself a lot--hasn't had an original thought in years--and he says that only a belief in god confers free will. Atheists are at the mercy of the DNA, we "dance to its tune". I told him that I dance to my aria, not to the dirge of his jew god. I did not get a reply.

Nice talking to you. Hey, who says I'm rude?

Hello South, and yes, you have a mouth like a cowpath.

brigid said...

And for all you schoolmarms out there who think I have the morals of a Russian whore, I will have you know that boomslang just reduced me to tears. All day long I have to keep my guard up in this lousy world, and then someone is nice to me and I go to pieces.

And see? I didn't say fuck once. So go fuck yourselves.

Wade said...

Let Brigid be. When I started coming to this site well over a year ago, Brigid’s post DID encourage me. I do not think it is a matter of how we represent “our side”. I thought the point of being a freethinker was “we don’t have a side”.

I was accused by a xian friend once of just “changing sides”. My reply “I am on no ones side; I have removed myself from the game”.

Brigid doesn’t speak for anyone but Brigid and that’s the way it should be.

J. C. Samuelson said...

As an example of how we can disagree but still support each other, I disagree with Brigid on the subject of determinism but love her to death. :)

To me, determinism (genetic or otherwise) reduces personal accountability. It also precludes the opportunity for growth. If we are determined by factors beyond our control, we are neither responsible for the results nor capable of change.

Ironically, it also contradicts the idea that there can be any such thing as a "convert" of any kind.

We might have a genetic predisposition to certain types of feelings, behaviors, and so on, but we are not wholly determined this way. Our environment - including our social group - and our thoughts have as much effect on our lives (perhaps more, taken in combination) as our genes.

brigid said...

'geek, hi. I owe you the courtesy of a reply:

About personal accountabity and the possibility of growth and change: those things are themselves "programmed" into us. What has made me what I am? I have never willed myself to be intelligent or strong. I cannot choose to be stupid or weak.

About being a "convert": I cannot choose to be an atheist or a christian. A christian is what I was; an atheist is who I am, and there is no act of choosing for either.

Look at how I opened: "I owe you the courtesy". I do not choose to feel that way. I like you and when someone treats me well I owe them my gratitude and whatever kindness I can return.

I might be guilty of playing with a loaded deck. By appealing again and again to determinism, I can never be wrong. I would keep saying that everything can be defined by one thing.

I know that you don't believe I am a thief or a liar; I am not a criminal; I hate the cruelty and violence in this world as much as the next woman. But these are just my feelings. I cannot will those feelings.

The free will/determinism argument goes on forever; I know that. Tell you what.....I will be around for maybe another hour. Write back if you can.

brigid said...

'geek, I failed to make it plain that determinism is more than genetics--we are determined by our culture and our environment; our families, and our (gasp) religion. When all these things act together, I do not see a whole lot of room for free will.

Marianna Trench said...

Wade said, "Brigid doesn’t speak for anyone but Brigid and that’s the way it should be."

Amen! (Oops. Old habit. Well, you know what I mean.)

I enjoy Brigid's post. Sure, her language is sometimes, umm, "colorful" and not how I (usually) express my opinions, but so what? If it offends you, just skip past them. She does, after all, put her name on every one of her posts, so it's not confusing like the many Anonymouses we get here (i.e., Is that Anonymous the same as person as other Anonymous? No, not that one; the other one!)

Or, everyone who reads these comments could just grow up. We're all adults here, so I don't think she'll corrupt any innocent youth. The point I want to make is that there are no words that should be off limits here. Being able to express yourself how you want is one of the freedoms you gain when you break the bonds of religion.

brigid said...

It is becoming really touching to read these posts--I can't keep my eyes dry. Thank you wade and marianna.

Justin said...

south2003 said: Holding on to this idea that we "MUST" live our lives according to whomever - goodness it is fucking bizarre.

So justin, did I sound like a foulmouth heterosexual.

Nope, you still sound like a "i feel sorry for myself" lesbian who thinks she is oppressed by men, when in fact she isn't, who whines about eaquality and then bitches when she gets it because no one is recognizing her or making a fuss over how progressive she is for being gay.

That's how you sound.

Dave8 said...

Information aesthetics is superfluous, unless one finds great meaning in the art of information, and then, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

If a person is looking for "truth", in an effort to better understand another persons' experiences, aesthetics holds little to no relevance. Perhaps, one who places a high value on aesthetics, should attempt to look behind the artful words, and start turning the pages of the persons' life, before they guess the plot of a persons' story.

Actions speak louder than words. This sandbox, allows us to play with information. Its much wiser to test information in a virtual environment, than to allow untested information to run a persons' actions in life. Trial and error, is a poor way to learn. I have yet to see someone get a physical black-eye from this sandbox.

If information becomes directive in nature, then apparently, one is asserting authority over another person. This takes the sandbox and makes it a control platform, for either good or ill purposes. Seeking and communicating to expand ones' sphere of awareness, doesn't require control, or authority. The only person I know, who has authority and control of this virtual sandbox, is the WM, and that's fitting, as he owns the server, and responsibility for the information presented.

As long as there is at least one person, with whom we interact with, the growth process is established, and this forum has purpose. If a person, like "goldie" makes comments on a recurring basis, and no one ever responded back to him/her/it, or even attempted to understand the meaning of the words, then its obvious that the post itself is of little value in a growth process.

In that case, "goldie" is just a mere troll, and can grow just as well on his personal computer without the need of the Internet. Its communication between people, that makes information valuable. I try not to allow aesthetics interfere with my growth process.

The WM identifies those who are the weeds per se, in the growth garden. I dare say, Brigid has had more than enough responses from friends, to suggest that she has brought the potential for growth to the table for many.

I don't have a lot in common with Brigid, I am a late thirties heterosexual male, but I do learn about her as a person, and she reminds me that we all have our own unique value in this life. Care and concern are growth enablers, and Brigid has provided that consistently to those whom she connects with.

She has outdone me, in this area, and dare I say, outdone many others, who forget the human side of our natures. Its great to delve into theoretical physics, and the like, but real life is here - today. Some of us become so logical, we lose sight of the human side of growth, Brigid's words force me to look past the outer appearance. Perhaps, if one of religion can learn to see past their own aesthetic stereotypes, they can possibly continue down that same path of thinking, and eventually see their way past their stereotypical bigotry.

If Brigid has done nothing more, than alienate those who refuse to see past the window dressing in life, then, I don't see any harm done. Those who want to "grow", will look beyond aesthetics. Those who don't have a desire to grow will just sit back and attempt to stagnate the growth process - using aesthetics as an excuse.

Dano said...

I submit that God (Whatever force that created us) is not watching us and approving or disapproving of what we do with our reproductive organs.

As life has evolved for the last 4 billion years nature has tried and discarded millions of reproductive methods. As we speak, throughout nature, there are as many different methods of reproduction as there are species.

Scientists have just discovered that chemical changes take place in a woman's body as she conceives and gives birth that tilt the odds in favor of her giving birth to males with the tendency for homosexuality for every birth of a male preceding. Kind of like nature is saying "Enough studs already"

Subtle, and some not to subtle, biological processes that determine the sex of progeny are evident throughout nature. There are pairings of excessively sexed males with females, with little or no sex drive.

You will find species or sub species that are hermaphroditic.

Homosexuality is found throughout nature. Some species use the male as a throwaway item good for impregnating the female and then relegated as another item in the "diet" of the female.

What I am trying to get at is this: Anyone who thinks God is sitting up there on his throne approving or disapproving of what we do with our sexual organs is simply giving in to the "....petty moralities and its feeble theologies...." of religion. ( Quoted from ( A righteous anger) posted Friday, May 26, 2006 sent in by Alan

http://exchristian.net/testimonies/

Dan (If God only approved of one male and one female doing it in the missionary position we all would be in trouble)

Dave8 said...

Ubergeek: "To me, determinism (genetic or otherwise) reduces personal accountability. It also precludes the opportunity for growth. If we are determined by factors beyond our control, we are neither responsible for the results nor capable of change."

Hi, haven't talked with you in a while. Uh, been out doing chores, dontcha' know :-)

Determinism: "Determinism is the philosophical conception which claims that every physical event, including human cognition and action, is causally determined by an unbroken chain of prior occurrences. No mysterious miracles or totally random events occur."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determinism

Determinism or indeterminism correlates to "free will".

The more deterministic the less the "free will" to make decisions in life.

Developmentally speaking, no one had a choice at birth, thus, as each of us are born, we have "zero free will". There really is "no" accountability at that point, this is recognized by both natural and spiritual legalists.

Ubergeek: "Ironically, it also contradicts the idea that there can be any such thing as a "convert" of any kind."

Our decisions to become converts or to not become converts (which is semantic), all relies on our experiential knowledge we gain in life. We have no "free will" to become a convert, if we never have an experience that provides us with the concept of convert. Our experiences in life, give us information, which opens the door for more options to be made, however, the options we have, were "determined" by a prior experience.

Ubergeek: "We might have a genetic predisposition to certain types of feelings, behaviors, and so on, but we are not wholly determined this way. Our environment - including our social group - and our thoughts have as much effect on our lives (perhaps more, taken in combination) as our genes."

However, our social environment, is based on human interaction, and each of the people in that group, are who they are based on their causal experiences in life. Their experiences, cause us to gain new experiences, thus causing us to have "determined" options in life.

Determinism, doesn't necessarily mean predeterminism.

Predeterminism: "Predeterminism is generally the philosophy that all of the events of history, past, present and future, have been decided before the advent of temporal existence."

I don't ascribe to a "god" nor do I know of anyone who knows all of the past, present, and future, who can manipulate it to "cause" our actions in life. Therefore, I don't personally ascribe to predeterminism from the vantage that our lives are already written in the book of life, and we no longer have to be an interested party in our everyday endeavors.

However, since we can't know the future, either, we make decisions in life based on neurological function, and past experience, thus, our lives are determined from our past, not our potential present, nor our future. Therefore, our past "causes", or "determines" the options and choices we have for the "future". We can not have total "free will" as non-omniscient temporal beings, we only have the "free will" to make decisions, based on our unique pasts. A person may not smoke in their life, because they choose not to, based on previous knowledge/experience, they "do" have an option/choice, based on their past, and the number of options their past provides them.

Ironically, there is heated discussion amongst the scientific community regarding the past, present, and future in regards to physics. It is argued, if one can determine the true natural laws of the universe, then its conceivable to predict future events based on the information a person receives in their life.

Stephen Hawking, claims that its possible to predict the future, if natural laws are known, thus, "First Cause", and "Predeterminism" become possible. He offers the term in his book, A Brief History of Time, "scientific determinism" as a more descriptive meaning to his premise. However, Hawking admits that determinism "In principle" can not be absolutely rule-out, with the current level of knowledge we have. Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity is based on cause-effect, or deterministic affect.

Quantum physics supporters, are attempting to challenge the laws of general relativity, by removing the cause-effect element, by stating that some changes in the universe, "immediately" change other aspects, thus, there are circumstances without cause-effect relationships.

Anyway, until humanity claims omniscience of "all" physical laws, determinism is clearly the most tempting view for many people, because they can validate cause-effect in their everyday lives. This doesn't mean that quantum mechanics may not hold some key answers to our universe, but there is some serious growth that needs to occur in this realm of theoretical physics before many choose to believe that there are "effects" in this universe, that appear "random", and thus, have no direct "cause" and "effect" relationship. Personally, I have reservations on some scientific authors, and how they come to their conclusions, or non-conclusions, as it may turn out. Have a great one... :-)

barb said...

Dave8 said,

"...but I do learn about her as a person, and she reminds me that we all have our own unique value in this life. Care and concern are growth enablers, and Brigid has provided that consistently to those whom she connects with."

Yup. My sentiments exactly.

Evelyn said...

Brigid is who she is. You can choose to read her posts or skip them. I'm not reading all of the posts about Buddhism as it no longer interests me. If you see Brigid's name on a post, skip it!

ms. buddhist said...

boomslang, why don't you just kill yourself? That is an honest question, why not? What is it you live for? Everything you do is worthless and you will always be in a state of confusion. I guess there is still fun to have for you in life, but is it really fun? Like why do you come to this site, for entertainment or knowledge? If you come for knowledge then you will fail because you will never get it. Even if you read books, what does anyone know? There will always be doubt and confusion in your heart doing this. It is completely hopeless. You obviously don't come for the enjoyment because all your post are just sad and bitter. Any place you go for enjoyment is hopeless as well. OK, so you listen to nice music at a concert, or make love,so what is that? The more you go out and look for enjoyment and entertainment, thats just yourself saying "I am suffering! I need something to cover my suffering!" But of course you know you will fail to cover your suffering fully, and so you look for something else. "Maybe this will work!" you say. "Maybe if I go do this or that." But this is hopeless. Completely and utterly hopeless. And what does it matter what you do in life anyway? So you go watch a movie and you like it, what does that matter afterwards? You just hope for another movie to come, and then another or something else to come along and keep your pitiful suffering state somewhat covered up.
That is why I asked you the question of why you don't just end it all. If you die, there will be nothing to worry about, nothing to search for and nothing to be synical about or angry about or sad about. The reason why you don't kill yourself is two things, hope and doubt. You hope that some knowledge you will find or some enjoyment that will make it all worth it, and doubt what you know is true, so you want to continue living to be sure. But is all hopeless and doesn't matter a bit. So, basically you put faith in that, if you don't find something in life to fully cover your suffering, which of course you will never find that, at least you can take solice in the fact that when you die you can"rest in peace." That's why you are horrified of the notion of yourself entering into some other life agian. I admit, from your point of view, it is deathly(mind the pun) horrifiying. So you don't have to burden yourself with it. That is your choice at your level. But I posted my original comment about experiencing your past lives, not because I was trying to present another illogical belief, but invite those who are obviously in a lot of pain and suffering in there lives to an EXPERIENCE that can dramatically change them and give them a sense of clarity. I'm not saying to trust in that when you die you will be born again. I wouldn't trust in that either. But, obviously if you find it neccassary to constantly defend your reason for Christianity being wrong and tell everyone about it, you must be dealing with a huge amount of doubt and fear, or else you would just leave church and that would be the end of it. You would just go live your life.

if you think that past lives is a bunch of nonesense. OK. Neither of us can prove or disprove this with words, so that is that. When you die and don't come back then you will prove it. I say it is possible you can enter the mind and find out the truth about this. You don't believe it, ok, you try and prove me wrong all you want. Go crazy.

As for this comment you made:
"If the crux is that Buddha is God and reincarnation is the way to enlightenment---"

This shows your confused state perfectly. Who said Buddha is God? I know I certainly didn't. And reincarnation has nothing whatsoever to do with enlightenment. I don't know where you got all that from. : ) You could reincarnate millions of times, that wouldn't get you to enlightenment. lol

Unfortunatly, I'm not going to satisfy your hope of having a "coherent and relevant conlusion", but you will never find that. If something ends, you just start something else, so it will never end untill you come to your own conlusion yourself. Good Luck. : )

boomSLANG said...

Miss buddist asked: "boomslang, why don't you just kill yourself? That is an honest question, why not? What is it you live for?"

Miss Buddist(answers for me): "The reason why you don't kill yourself is two things, hope and doubt."

LMAO! A "oneway debate", wouldn't ya know it?

Then, in true strawman fashion, Miss buddist gave a generic caricature of the Atheist worldview(again, answering FOR me by presupposing on my behalf):

Miss Buddist: "Everything you do is worthless and you will always be in a state of confusion."

Oh really, now? So just to be crystal clear---what you're saying is that YOU have "knowledge" that all MY personal experiences with the people in MY life are "worthless"?...my friends?...my family? This just shows what a mindless twit you are.

"I guess there is still fun for you to have in life, but is it really fun?"

...F%ckin'-A-right---if you were in arms' reach, I'd bitch-slap the taste right outta your mouth---THAT would be "FUN"....no "confusion" there.

It amazes me how people like you don't get the concept that the fact that life ends, IS what gives it it's meaning. The complete cessation of the mind..i.e the "self", is nothing to "fear"..or have "guilt" about. It's something you won't even experience. Honestly, did a person who died at age 45 have less meaning in his/her life than a person who lived to be 90? Did they have 50% less "to live for"? What about animals? Dogs don't go to f%cking "doggy-Nirvana" when they die, so gee, why don't we just slaughter all dogs? Let's just put 'em all out of their "misery" because their existance is finite. Anybody with the slightest bit of OBJECTIVE common sense should be able to figure out that if something were to exist "infinitely" it would ultimately serve no purpose. I would contend that THAT is your "purposelessness".

Miss Buddist: "Unfortunately I'm not going to satisfy your hope of having a 'coherent and relevant conclusion', but you will never find that."

Obviously, not in anything with your name signed to it.

Miss Buddist. R.I.P.

Arthur said...

Brigid, you're definitely not rude. I can testify to that.

It was me who expressed himself poorly. When I said I don't believe in free will "like Brigid" I meant "like Brigid doesn't either". It's exactly like you say. Not only do we have no more free will than an amoeba but no more free will than the river it swims in. I'm also a (die) hard determinist, the other positions just don't make sense. Two years ago I did't even know the word "determinism". It's really stunning. Both totally obvious and hard to believe at the same time.

ms. buddhist said...

Boomslang, When I said that everything in life is worthless and you will always be in a state of confusion, I was reffering to all life, not just you. I am like this too. But you are are farther and deeper in obviously because you are in a state of denial. : )

You said: "It amazes me how people like you don't get the concept that the fact that life ends, IS what gives it it's meaning." But I do understand this, thats exactly the point I made in this comment: "So, basically you put faith in that, if you don't find something in life to fully cover your suffering, which of course you will never find that, at least you can take solice in the fact that when you die you can"rest in peace." That's why you are horrified of the notion of yourself entering into some other life agian."

But you don't fool me at all with this. The funny thing is you don't even fool yourself.lol That's why you are so angry. And that's why you think you will gain enjoyment from smacking me. : ) You try and fool yourself into thinking that because your life will end, that will put meaning somewhere. "This life is the only one so I better make it worth something." you say. But you know it never will. That is obviously why you are so angry and depressed. And you know you would be better of dead. If you didn't come back, that is.

Speaking of anger, it's obvious from your comments you are dealing with a lot. I'm sorry for you about that. But where is it that you feel that anger? Can you see it? Hear it? Touch it? Smell it? Taste it? Where is it? This is anger is not material, and is not your body. It is you.

And as for your other comment: "What about animals? Dogs don't go to f%cking "doggy-Nirvana" when they die, so gee, why don't we just slaughter all dogs?"
You are a very confused person. : (
What makes you think you are better then a dog? If you ask me, honestly I know a lot of dogs that seem much better being then you. Far more. What are you? What makes you, you? The fact that you have a brain able to do complex things? Thats not you, thats just your brain. So what if you can talk and read. If I gave a dog a human brain they could do that too. Same if I gave you a doggy brain you couldn't anymore. What you think is you is nothing more than parts and pieces. I don't know you personally but from what I get from you, you are far less than most dogs I know. Of course the possibilities of what you can do in a human form is more than what a dog could possibly do in their form, but it can go both ways, like it is possible to be far more aware with your human form than a dog form, but also far more stupid and confused than a dog could ever be.

Well, it's been nice, but this will be my last post. Boomslang, feel free to write a comment angrily disputing everything I said in this post. I won't respond, but I'm sure it will give you a deluded sense of meaning by putting things to an end. Go for it! : )

Vipassana said...

Ya', know, I leave for a minute of quiet time to do research, and someone obviously with a chip on their shoulder can't help but continue to nurture their insecurities regarding the soul washing machine.

Ms. Buddhist: "Speaking of anger, it's obvious from your comments you are dealing with a lot."

How omniscient, lets call you god, or is it Buddah? There is the possibility, that anger is justified, and is quite a natural response to actions in life, oh, lets say religious bigotry, and expand that to nagging illogical belief systems that someone wants to impose onto others. Look up the word projection, it appears you are dealing with a lot, as you appear to have a need to continue this dialogue without supporting facts. A diaglogue without rational thought, is fruitless, and your vastly growing orchard of information isn't producing any fruit.

Ms. Buddhist: "I'm sorry for you about that."

If a person has justifiable anger, then there is nothing for you to be sorry for, unless you are the one instigating anger on purpose, now, you wouldn't be attempting to make someone angry on purpose would you? Doesn't that affect your Karma, albeit, I have no idea what Buddhist flavor you are, as you seem to be sincerely confused on many of the notions of buddhism.

Ms. Buddah: "But where is it that you feel that anger? Can you see it? Hear it? Touch it? Smell it? Taste it? Where is it? This is anger is not material, and is not your body. It is you."

We are deterministically influenced, however, yes, once a person realizes the influence, they are no longer bound by its control. Hence, what may appear to you Ms. Buddhist as "anger" on a post, may be nothing more, than someone inquiring as to your factual support for your belief system. You project anger onto others, because you actually believe some people are harvesting "anger", you may want to readjust your radar. Some of the words being used, may not be anger, they may just be "sharp" sarcasm, to exploit the obvious inconsistencies in your belief system. Sarcasm, and ridicule of an illogical belief system, doesn't denote "anger" on ones' part, especially if they are fully aware of their actions, and their underlying purpose.

Ms. Buddhist: "And as for your other comment: "What about animals? Dogs don't go to f%cking "doggy-Nirvana" when they die, so gee, why don't we just slaughter all dogs?"

Okay, since you are now asking questions, as you have failed to provide any consistent answers that can be verified, let me propose that we are deterministically influenced by nature, and many people growing up, through recursive learning methods, early in their infant years, assign value to life.

Your question, why don't we just kill puppies, since there isn't a doggy nirvana, presupposes that there is a nirvana. I have yet to see anyone claim "Nirvana", to be a supported belief. People, don't kill puppies in general, not because they believe or don't believe in Nirvana, they typically don't based on internal values, learned early in life.

If you want to believe in Nirvana, and base your killing or non-killing sprees on your buddhist philosophy in life, then, that's your choice. Nirvana does not exist for many people, thus, killing or non-killing is in no way connected to your philosophy, so, drop the assumptions.

Perhaps, you are going to state I'm angry? Well, wouldn't that just be fun, I suppose you can say whatever you want about anyone, that doesn't make the statement factual though, does it. As a mere observer, I'd really like to know your logical support for your belief system, if you don't have one, then you have nothing to offer but a belief system based on conjecture.

If you want to continue to submit conjecture, then great. However, why don't you just support the persons who posted their testimony in a humane way - that doesn't require you to have a logical or illogical belief system. Your actions are a reflection of your belief. Some people, after being burned by illogical belief systems, aren't looking to jump back in on the rebound, they are looking for something solid and consistent that they can "trust".

You, haven't provided anything in the form of a belief system, that a person can really "trust", with any great confidence. So, rationally speaking, why don't you just console, get to know their story, and make observations, like someone who really cares about them, and not about ones' own personal philosophy.

Bentley said...

I got it ms. buddhist! it's boomslang he is possessed by SATAN!!!!!!!!

I'll perform an exorcism on ole boomie!

Satan!!! Satan!!! this is Ben the peglegged priest COME OUT!!! COME OUT!!!

In the name of Buddha, Come Out!!! I know you're in There, speak to me Satan!!! #@%^&*(^%$
growwrawwwall, hissses and foaming at the mouth, ears smoking! g0 AWaY, lEaVe mE AlOnNe!!! yOU PhOnY pRieSt!!!! #8^&$%@

In the name of JESUS COME OUT, COME OUT!!!

nO! nO! nOT tHe NaMe oF jESsuS! Oh nOoOoOoOoOoOo!

I command you in the precious name of Jesus to come out!!!!

pLeASe nO!!! nOt jEsuS, nO nO!!! iM lEAvInG tHe bODy ooooOOOOOOoOOOOoooooo~~~~~~~~~~~~

Go Back!, Back!!! into the pits of Hell where you belong, you evil doer of the world, you ole serpent, you deceiver!


Feel better boomslang? It took the name of Jesus to get him out, but it works every time.

Praise be to Jesus!!! the Healer, the saviour, the resue man, the invisible super hero on a stick, the mr. fix all, the light of the world.

Satan is the source of all evil being done in the world today!!

I'm beginning to believe that Buddha may be a fake tho<:-P

boomSLANG said...

Miss Buddhist said: "Boomslang, feel free to write a comment angrily disputing everything I said in this post."

Angrily? LMAO! On the contrary--- I'll be HAPPY to dispute your mystical mish-mash of an an "argument"---an argument which amounts to nothing but strawman and ad hom. And here, I'll even say it again for your "next life": That's---N-O-T-H-I-N-G but strawman and ad hom. ZERO. ZILCH. NADDA. You have NOTHING to objectively support your worldview. The End.

Miss Buddhist said: "I don't know you personally *but*...."

Check this out---There IS no "but", you pompous bitch. FINALLY, you're right about something(YAAAAY!)---you DON'T "know" me "personally", but interestingly, you continue to project your sterotypical opinions as if you have some kind of absolute "knowledge" about me, and how your worldview is "correct". Your approach is NO different than any of the Christians who stumble in here babbling about their convictions. (Notice the word "CONVICTION", and then compare it to "neutrality", 'think you can operate a dictionary?)





To Miss Buddhist(and ALL dualists/religionists)--- I would contend that the experiences I have with the people I love are every single bit as valuable to me, as yours are to you; I would contend that I have just as much compassion for my fellow man as you do(probably more because I don't believe I'll get another chance in some other life); I would contend that I find just as much joy in the activities that I like, as you do in the ones you like. However, a crucial difference is--- I can fathom my own non-existance, and hence, I have come to terms with all those things that I enjoy coming to an end. Conversely, I would contend that YOU, the Dualist, cannot...and that's why you cling to your convictions---convictions based purely on nothing but subjective wishfulfillment. And please, before Miss Buddhist or anyone else starts foaming at the mouth--- just because I "accept" my "finality", does NOT mean it produces a perpetual "warm and fuzzy" feeling inside. What it means is--UNTIL I see compelling evidence that life continues after death--whether it be floating around in the clouds with my dead friends and relatives, or whether it be having a converstation with a butterfly who used to be my uncle-- I will believe what makes the most sense based on the OBJECTIVE evidence before me.....and I will believe that evidence REGARDLESS of whether I like where it points, or whether I don't. No evidence; NO belief. 'Don't like it?.."CLICK OFF!"

To close, Miss Buddhist said: "And you know you would be better off dead."

Awwww, isn't that special? Your Buddha would be so proud of you. Just for that, you'll come back as a cockroach. And God knows, I love to stomp those f%ckers out.

(Hi Miss Buddhist!....I seeee you! LMAO!!!) BOO!

ms. buddist said...

WOW boomslang! Thank you! You are right! How could I have been so foolish. I am ashamed of all my stupid comments I made earlier about past lives and Buddism. I see now it's all just a LIE and I was the one who was fooling myself, not you Boomslang. I am no longer practicing Buddism now, it was all just a buncha CRAP!! I was such a fool. Thank you again boomslang for showing me true enlightenment instead of that phony balony GARBAGE I was spewing out like an idiot. Your the greatest. : )

carol said...

It is so pathetic that people like Ms Buddist think that life has no meaning unless there is some magical place to go to when they die. Makes me want to puke and scream at the same time.

Of course she is the typical superstitious turdlet. When Boom disagrees, mocks and way outhinks her, she says he is angry and depressed, but offers nothing concrete to support anything she believes. Then she gets mad and stomps off, vowing never to return. But alas, she comes back, and still not with any kind of legimate facts or arguements. She does go into a sarcastic rant that further proves her lack of anything relevant to post. She is correct on two points, however, she is an idiot and a fool.

Hi, Boom! Glad to see you going strong.

Hi, Brigid! I don't always agree with you, but you sure do always make me laugh. Like others have said, those that don't like her posts don't have to read them.

Whoever recommended the Fundies Say the Darnest Thing website:
http://www.fstdt.com/
thanks tons. I spend almost as much time there as I do on this site and all my friends here should check it out.

Hi to everyone, Carol

barb said...

Carol,

DARN you for repeating the fundy link... I've wasted HOURS today, albeit some time spent laughing, and most of it was spent disgusted and rolling my eyes at the foul pomp that accompanies some of that ignorance. Feeling like I need a twelve step program, because if I did a fearless inventory right now I'd have to own up to some of the same self-righteous logic-free drivel.

carol said...

Barb, are you serious?!

Marie said...

"a place that requires nothing of me but to think for myself"

I find this to be a dangerous statement.

All that is required of you is thought, nothing more?

Will thought, in and of itself, earn a pay check? Will thought alone nourish a relationship? Will thought alone clean a house? Will thought alone find buried treasure?

barb said...

Ah, Marie?

Not sure what you mean. Please
clarify, if you have the inclination?

barb said...

Carol,

If you mean, am I serious claiming I've wasted my time, then, yes, I'm serious. If you mean, darn you Carol, then, no, I do not "darn you." I'm spoofing it. And despite myself, I'm enjoying that you've brought me back to it.

Wishing you well,

-Barb

barb said...

Ok,

I'm new here so I may not be aware of the how things are perceived...?

Carol, I posted in jest...? And wouldn't dream of posting- truly- to criticize anyone. I DID spend hours, and did "curse" you, in jest. That site is addictive. Please know my intentions: I do not want to disrespect anyone... if I do it's through ignorance, or to make a joke, or as happens (no excuse) if I'm drunk (rare, but it happens!)... did I say rare...

Principally, if my initial post did not say it enough, I'm on the side of more knowledge, more opinions, more ideas.. not less.. And of owning up to the idea that I did damage by perpetuating the fundy ICK. That's why I mentioned the 12 steps... I could be held responsible for being as damaging to society as an alcoholic.

Hoping I've made myself clearer, but I'm open to claiming more..

Barb

Apollo said...

Marie: "All that is required of you is thought, nothing more?"

Without thought, we are slaves to our environment, to be controlled and manipulated.

Marie: "Will thought, in and of itself, earn a pay check?"

Yes, there is such a thing as intellectual property, however, I can see the confusion from the religious, its a foreign concept to be sure.

Marie: "Will thought alone nourish a relationship?"

Thoughtful: "Considerate of the feelings or well-being of others."
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Well, I suppose a relationship doesn't necessarily have to involve the consideration of feelings and each others' well-being. However, if these factors weren't involved, I'd consider that an "abusive" relationship, kinda' like the relationship found in religiously exclusive groups.

Marie: "Will thought alone clean a house?"

If one doesn't have a thought that determines the house is dirty, then obviously the lack of thought, will prevent the house from ever getting clean.

Marie: "Will thought alone find buried treasure?"

If a person hasn't had time to think about what is truly valuable in life, they will not increase their chances of finding that treasure, by mindlessly digging themselves into holes.

Marie, if you aren't thinking when you make posts, are your posts worth making?

Apollo said...

Ms. Buddhist: "WOW boomslang! Thank you! You are right! How could I have been so foolish. I am ashamed of all my stupid comments I made earlier about past lives and Buddism."

Digha Nikaya, 16: "Make an island of yourself, make yourself your refuge; there is no other refuge.
Make truth your island, make truth your refuge; there is no other refuge."

Ms. Buddhist, many of us, have made ourselves our island of trust, and refuge, and have accepted that there is no other refuge. Thus, the refusal to seek refuge in any religious shelter, even when enticed with eternal torment.

To thine own self be true, as there is no other truer refuge. If your words don't ring true, to some, perhaps, its because many are still seeking to find shelter and refuge within. Perhaps, if you attempted to support their journey inward, instead of pointing outward, your advice and wisdom would be more appreciated. Perhaps, many Buddhists would agree with Buddah, but, I suppose there is the oft chance they would reject such insights.

H.H. The 14th Dalai Lama: "Sometimes one creates a dynamic impression by saying something, and sometimes one creates as significant an impression by remaining silent."

It requires wisdom, to know which of the aobve two roads is most valuable each time they face a fork in the road, take the wrong road, and the impression given, may not be the one intended. I am not a Buddhist, but I do realize the necessity for study.

Bodhidharma: "Only one person in a million becomes enlightened without a teacher's help. If, though, by the conjunction of conditions, someone understands what the Buddha meant, that person doesn't need a teacher. Such a person has a natural awareness superior to anything taught. But unless you're so blessed, study hard, and by means of instruction you'll understand."

I suppose if I wanted to present myself as a Buddhist, it would be wise to understand the philosophy. Enjoy your belief, look inward, and allow others the same opportunity.

brigid said...

arthur,thanks so much. We are on the same page about free will--no shit , I sat here and laughed myself silly. I do not know why........but one of my great pleasures is clearing up these needless disagreements. I crave a good fight, but not when it is based on misunderstanding. I am having trouble spelling, please 'scuse me.

Hi to carol and to all those who were nice to me. I do not always deserve it.

Hope to see you all tomorrow.

brigid said...

justin....about self-pity.

No, I felt sorry for myself when I was a catholic. I am free now. Get it? Hmmmm? No? Too bad. Now you are my enemy. Oh dear, oh dear , oh dear.

Hi to evelyn....damn, I an having a terrible time keeping the names straight. Sorry. I am surrounded by allies and I do not wish to forget them. Thank you.

carol said...

Barb, I do not know who signed my name and wrote that "are you serious" comment. No doubt some under handed fundie.

That site is absolutly hilarious as they are so fuckin stupid. They don't deserve anyone's respect. Thanks for your post and you can pretty much say anything you want on this site, so don't worry too much about offending anyone. Most of us here are pretty think skinned, except for the trolls who get hurt when we dis their imaginary fake savior.

I am not a parent, but I do disagree with you answer to you son about believing in jeebus. You should definetly point out that all religions are based on myth and legend and there is no proof of any kind of gods or superstitious beings. And there is no historical proof this jeebus character even existed. Immerse him in science, nature, etc. There is too much of a risk to children from influence by fundies if they don't have the knowledge and background to dismiss the lies and brain washing.

Happy Memorial Day, everyone!
Carol

J. C. Samuelson said...

Hey all,

Took the Memorial Day weekend off. I try not to come here too much during the weekends.

Anyway...

Brigid, thanks for the clarification. You're right, I was reading what you wrote as genetic determinism only, rather than determinism as defined by the sum total of all factors.

Dave8,

Thanks for the fine description of determinism in general. Personally, I think a discussion of determinism is largely philosophical.

Yes, it's true that we don't have any choice at birth so in that sense we are determined. However I believe the jury is still out regarding how much of an impact genetics have, so in that sense when we are born we have a potential future.

So we go on to talk about other factors - our family, other social influences, and so on - that in a sense determine the options available to us due to experience. As the range of experience broadens, so to does the range of options, or so the argument goes.

I'm not sure this tells the whole story, and it fails to consider those individuals who do/accomplish things previously never dreamed of, i.e., those who think outside the box, as it were.

What I'm saying is that while everything you say is true and I can accept it as applying to the bulk of humanity, I think the "box" of determinism (which is really what we're talking about) is one among many self-imposed limitations.

Have you ever met someone who had tremendous success doing something you would've thought impossible, only to have them remark "I didn't know I couldn't"?

brigid said...

Kids, Hi.....this thread is going south real quick, and I just wanted to say hi and thanx to all my allies, happy summer and be good and have fun. Mistress is taking me for a week on the beach and me is gonna get fat, dumb and happy. See you!!!!!!

ms. buddhist said...

Hey Carol, just some helpful advice, next time you sign your name as someone else, you should probably learn how to spell! lol lol : ) It's buddHist not buddist.

But anyways, I think you are right, I am a fool and an idiot. I said I woudn't respond but yet I did. I'm just very angry and confused and I am oviously unable to give any objective reasons for what I believe. Thats because it's all just wishful thinking on my part. : ( Buddhism is just a fraud. Nothing more. All of you probably know the truth about that already, but I am no where near that level of clear thinking and intelligence. I don't even know why I am even kidding myself now thinking that I can discuss things with you guys. But now I am not going to full myself with Buddha and nirvana trash anymore. In my first post I gave this website: www.justbegood.net/
I feel like a total moron now because I can see the stupidity of it now. But I am posting it again because I think it can be good for a lot of laughs about how blatently absurde it is. : ) To show that Buddhism really is just a pile of dung full of lies and stupidity and unprovable claims which make no sense. I still have a lot of work to do to free my mind from all the experiences I had while practicing Buddhism, obviously formed by my own stupidity. Wish me luck and thank you all for helping me.

boomSLANG said...

Boy, I've never seen anyone turn around so quickly in the deconversion process. First, it was ad hom and strawman attacks on the Atheist position because someone challenged the BuddHist position. Then, when asked for objective evidence instead of more false arguments, the counter-rebuttal amounted to such things as "you're better off dead"...and "you should learn how to spell".

Now we see a caricature attack on BuddHism, and it's only been what?....4 days later? Now THAT'S deconversion! Welcome to reality, ms.Atheist!

ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!

Dave8 said...

Ubergeek: "Have you ever met someone who had tremendous success doing something you would've thought impossible, only to have them remark "I didn't know I couldn't"?"

Hey Uber, excellent insight. Is there a ceiling to our becoming?

This conversation could get deep, in that direction, but it all seems to lead back to nature.

We live a finite number of years, thus, we are temporaly given a ceiling and must accept that we do have limits according to our level of current knowledge. However, there are no absolutes, what a person thought was a ceiling of 30 temporal years to become, is now a ceiling of on average 80-90 years in our lives. We as humanity definitely have more "potential" to become more than those who came before, no doubt.

There are many flavors of determinism, each with its own way of trying to seamlessly mesh with other philosophical musings, especially that of morality, and politics, etc. I am not a separatist, one who believes they can stand on a philosophical stance, and declare it as ultimately the best truth, and yet, in another categorical area, say morality, have an entirely different and contradictory philosophy. There are some who make that claim, I just can't bring myself to believe that the pieces of our reality, can be studied independently, and promoted as "truth", unless it blends in with the other pieces to form a coherent picture.

Perhaps, this sounds abstract, but, my ignorance of the whole, allows me to imagine I have an infinite number of possibilities to become. Its non-omniscience that gives us the option to envision the possibilities in life, we don't know we can't become, until we try, and many times, we can become when we try, because we envision our goals based on naturally supported laws.

There are those who may want to envision a becoming that can't be realized in the natural sense, and thus have set an unattainable and low ceiling for their growth in this natural universe.

In a more real sense, I believe we become every second, with or without our volition of effort. Nature changes us, but yet, we have options along the way that Nature provides, its up to us to make decisions based on the pieces of information we are provided.

There is much heated debate about information theory, and the implication that everyone potentially has a GPS receiver, tuned into Nature, and as it whispers we have the choice, or so we think, to either act according to the direction or attempt to move away. From my experience, it seems that the more a person attempts to move away the greater the dissonance within ones' own being. So, in a more abstract sense, when we make a decision, one could surmize that we are moving along a path that Nature provides us, on a wide road per se, and although we can move back and forth on that road, (decisions in life), the road still exists.

Again, much heated debate on that personal theory, as there are some scientists who believe there is no "time" dimension, and a one way highway, there are those who believe that the road I described in really more like a parking lot, and Nature becons a person from an omnidirectional station, and a person has ultimate free agency to move in circles, slightly move in any direction, etc. Perhaps, there is a little truth to both, I seem to want to limit our free agency to a wide highway going along a time dimension, but I can't deny the temptation to believe that we can move laterally as we attempt to sidestep Natures' unyielding pull towards its epicenter.

Sorry for all the abstraction, I find that I think better outside the box :-) Tis' why I see the temptation to not build a ceiling, except in the form of our temporality, and physical structures, but, I don't kid myself that humanity doesn't have the ability to create a greater range of motion to make decisions through better medical care, and genetic engineering.

Mathematicians, are truly the artists that portray our findings in more concrete terms. I see reality, as a map, and the few that feel the desire to become able to map it all out. There are those who attempt to become in polar direction to Nature, that, well, I'll leave it there, many of us have seen what happens when people move against Nature psychologically, etc.

Knowing I have no absolute truths, only notional explanations of my experiences, let me finally say, I believe Nature to be the great orchestrator, and those who move through reality the musicians, creating "informational" music along the way, and that information (information theory) is sensed from Nature, and Nature seems to react in-turn, to guide using its own transmission of information.

In that form, I don't consider myself a "fatalist".

Fatalism: "A philosophical doctrine holding that all events are predetermined in advance for all time and human beings are powerless to change them."
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Again, I believe we have a range of motion in regards to movement and according to our awareness and informational base, some have a deer path, some... have a six lane high-way, and then some... are more omnidirectional, the range of motion though, does differ and I do ascribe that there are some that are less capable of becoming than others... but through their "informational" ignorance, they may just become in their limited sphere, more than someone with unlimited possibilities...

I find that I can do pretty much whatever I want, and its both a curse and a blessing. I suppose there are pros and cons for those living in the confines of a deer path, and those living with total range of movement. There is potential for ranges to move, and can be studied if one cares to look at human development from infant, to dotage.

I don't buy god(s), not do I worship Nature as a god, or even believe Nature to be more than just the harmony that "all" forms and objects dance to, the musical theorists writing the symbolic notes, in the form of modular math, seem to be diligent in mapping the changes of Nature to see if there are recurring patterns or absolute anchors. I just tend to see the whole, as is, and nothing more.

On morality, I would contend, that its based on personal coherence with the music, and judged according to the majorities' range of motion. Those, who have less range of motion, are obviously said to be the least moral, range is subjectively understood, and many religious tend to want to force people into a small range of motion, and then declare they are immoral ;-) Take care...

ms. buddhist said...

Yes, thank you boomslang, it is shamefull the way I presented myself earlier, acting like a complete fool, just rambling on and on... and here I go again. I am such a pathetic twat. I will keep trying to be more like you boomslang and others like you. You are all so knowledgable and clear thinkers. Buddhism I know now is just pure trash and nonsensical bullcrap. You should be extremely proud of your deconversion of me. Great job and keep up the good work!

Bentley said...

Hi ms. buddhist! I wonder what it was that made you see the foolish ness? We've all been there, we tend to go beside ourselves and delve into something that will offer an easy escape from reality. A way out! Death insurance or death assurance. We all want to be the one that is RIGHT! We want to be the one that has the correct religion or beliefs, it's mainly all about the me inside, like "I am correct, but everyone else is a fool", but eventually we will see that it was us inside that became the fool, because we bought into the lie that we ourselves prefer to believe for our own sake.

We look to others for assurance to validate us, to re-assure us that we are ok and we look to others for acceptance from the insecurity instilled in us from our childhood.

I think it was simply brilliant for you to admit that you have seen how foolish all the stupid beliefs and religions are, and I hope you were not just yanking our chain, if not, then welcome aboard and please share your insights with us. Believe me you'll see things intirely different without the silly beliefs and dogma's common sense will over take your brain and great wisdom will flow from the area's that was cluddered and fogged over by silly beliefs, you already sound very intelligent.

Please tell us that you're really being serious, it sounds like you are.

Dave8 said...

Wow, I looked back at my post, oh the spelling and transition errors, hopefully, some of the communication made sense. Anyway, determinism before I leave to me, exists... our perceptions (nature (informational processability) & nurture (experientially stored information)) provide our range of motion, and that range of motion leads us to accept the notion of free agency... to become.

A flower blooms, does it bloom because it wills itself to bloom freely, or does Nature whisper to the flower and persuade it to become... A flower never knew it couldn't become, and it became... to non-flowers, the flower becomes beautiful to many, to the flower, it is what it is, no more, no less... if it knew different, one could suggest the flower harbored pride, but I don't perceive flowers having pride...

I perceive flowers having a very narrow range of motion..., they tend to move towards clustering photons to be nourished. Flowers... tend to act or behave according to the informational instructions that reside in their cellular structure... Flowers, bloom and "become", many who become "aware" of the flowers' becoming, appreciate the becoming itself, as beauty, a job well done... That which becomes according to Nature, is beautiful...

It takes people their entire lives, to know, the song, and to follow it to their becoming... but once reached, they bloom, and are just as beautiful.

Okay, hopefully that makes more sense, but, still abstract, but, I tend to live in the abstract. Take care ;-)

Dave8 said...

Just a final thought, death, appears to be a Natural part of becoming... its not to be feared...

Hence, religions market hell, and denounce the validity of becoming, according to ones' Nature (gay, etc). Religions take what is beautiful, and infuse confusion where there should be clarity... They take the becoming, and attempt to strangle it, and force it into a box... it hasn't worked yet, and never will, if Nature continues to have a voice...

I always feel warmth, knowing, that those who attempt to strangle others, and themselves fail to become, according to their potential range of motion, will always be haunted by Natures' silent whispers... It is unfortunate however, that those who fight off Nature, do seem to find their outlet with others they covet... those who are naturally becoming... Perhaps, its this covetous recursion of self rationalization, that drives some clergy to seek out children...

J. C. Samuelson said...

Dave8,

Don't worry your post (the one you were looking at critically) was fine and communicated an abstract idea reasonably well. I have the same problem with abstract concepts sometimes.

Anyway (and this will be my last post on the topic), the perception I have of determinism vs. free will is certainly influenced by my own attempts to transform myself. You're right that it does create some internal dissonance, caused by the attempts to overcome what we would probably agree is programmed ideas and behaviors (nature's silent whispers?).

In other words, I don't want to believe in determinism. I want to believe in a virtually limitless range of options and potential. But what I want to believe and what is really the case are, as we would all agree, mutually exclusive.

Cheers!

ms. buddhist said...

yeah Ben, I honestly don't even believe I was niave enough to by into all of that Buddhist rubish. I thought I was experiencing real things when I practiced for all those years, but now I know it was all just imaginary. What a dumbass I am!! : ) I am just going to forget all that stuff now though, because it's all utter trash and delusion worth nothing. Obviously if I want to know about reality and the truth I can just use my five senses(not my moronic LIE of a sixth sense that I was fooled into believing I had) to discover it. And if I can't discover something with my five senses obviously it's not there. SIMPLE!! SO SIMPLE! It's kind of sad though in a way, but in another way it is very freeing. I know that I am from the absurd LIE of samsara, and Dzogchen and all that other foolish deciet, rebirth was seen as a bad thing in Buddhism so now I am free from that. I no longer have to care about coming back, or even worry about the stupidity of karma, because when we die we just die, anyone can see that, and if you think otherwise you are a blind and thoughtless asshole. No more Vajrayana or any tantras or even meditation at all for me. Enlightenment was just a big fat ugly LIE, perpetuated by those evil monks who stupidly put themselves in a self imposed prisons which they call "monastaries". How could anyone be so foolish!? Don't they know their is a big world out thier to enjoy. They say "there is no pleasure without pain', what idiots. I feel bad for them really. But now I am on the clear thinking path. I am in reality now, thanks to you all. Who knows how far down I could have gone into the imaginary experiences and bullcrap as a buddhist if I didn't come here and be deconverted and shown the true nature of reality. That was close.

boomSLANG said...

Anyone can go to heaven!!!!..just be good!!!!


This mission statement taken from the BuddHist website known as "Just be good."
http://www.justbegood.net/

More---

"Quote: "A religion that welcomes questions and investigations into it's own teachings."

Clearly untrue, as we saw, and STILL see, people foaming at the mouth because their world-view was challenged; because they had nothing to offer in the way of objective evidence that a "Buddhist God" exists.

Quote: "A religion that teaches us to take responsibility for all our own actions."

Hmmmm....is it really "teaching" you?...or is it coersing you with reward/punishment? Well, I guess for those who need to be coersed into doing what is right, coming back as a gerbil is pretty good incentive to "just be good". The ol' excercise wheel would become pretty monotonous. LMAO!!!!!

Here's a novel approach: How 'bout "just be good" because you're worth it?... and because you know that doing unnecessary harm to others is wrong.... why?... because you wouldn't want unnecessary harm done to you. Wow! Brilliant, eh?

Quote: "A religion that is very much in harmony with modern science."

That's good for a full-on belly laugh! "Science"?..please! lol! I'd love to see the science journals that state in concise language that "thought" lives anywhere outside the brain, let alone that "thought" is recycled over many lifetimes and in various life forms.

Speaking of the "five senses", Osiris isn't dedectable using the "five senses"; Santa Claus isn't detectable using the "five senses"...so, does that mean that both are likely to exist? I swear to shit...it's f%cking hilarious how people will lose their marbles when people are skeptical of their beliefs, yet, they are EVERY bit as skeptical of other's beliefs. That's why Atheism/Agnostism--a postion of neutrality---is the logical choice. Let us all welcome our new-comer Ms. Atheist...(formerly "ms Buddhist")

ms. atheist(formerly ms. buddhist) said...

I know boomslang! Isn't it pathetic!! I told you that site would be great for laughs! Your rationalization is simply brilliant boomslang! I used to think that Buddhism was right and my mind had been poisoned by false experiences by evil monks, but as an outsider now, I can see so clearly now how much of a crux it really was. I mean...science backs up these claims about as much as they do the flying cupcake on the moon! Can you believe those frauds try to give thier half assed examples to back up "rebirth" with their fake "research!

Quote: "There are in fact many well researched and documented cases of rebirth." lol LMAO!!!!!!!!!!

Quote:"Several well known and reputable authorities on this subject are Carol Bowman, Thomas Shroder, Dr. Jim Tucker, Dr. Ian Stevenson and Dr. Raymond Moody." They have links to these so called "authorities where they try to fool people into believing that people actually remembered their past lives.

The worst thing about though is that most of them are CHILDREN! They obviously manipulated these children and fool them into thinking they were someone else. Honestly that isn't even funny, just wrong. Maybe they should take their own advice and "just be good" instead of telling children to lie or fooling them into believing they were someone else. It's amazing the number of times they did these things, thousands and thousands of "cases", in which they falsely concocted extremely complex scemes to fool gullible people. They better pray to their Buddha God that rebirth really is just phoney, or they'll come back as a pile of crap!!!!!! And these so called "researchers pretend to not even be involved with Buddhism or any other fairy tale religion, in order to perpetuate their deciet further!

And your COMPLETELY right boomslang. we should be good, not because of Buddha's dumbass lies, just because we KNOW it's right, we don't need anyone to "teach" us that. And the whole crux of "sensing beyond the five senses" you are also right about. It's trash, shit, vile, all in one.

I wish I were as smart as you boomslang. I'm working on it, but am still a dimwitted loser so far.

boomSLANG said...

The Energizer Buddhist: "Several well known and reputable authorities on this subject are Carol Bowman, Thomas Shroder, Dr. Jim Tucker, Dr. Ian Stevenson and Raymond Moody."

Yeah, I think I've heard of all those guys before......all those scientists. I think L. Ron Hubbard was a scientist too, right? And Sylvia Brown?... she's definitely a scientist whose methods shouldn't be scrutinized.

The Energizer Buddhist: "The worst thing about (it) though is that most of them are CHILDREN. They obviously manipulated these children and fooled them into believing they were someone else."

Yeah, and that's weird, because children are generally NOT very gullible, are they? I mean, you could never convince a child that there's monster in the closet, or something like that...no, no....NOT children. Yeah, those darned little kids are just too rational-minded for stuff like that.


LMAO!!!!!!!

ms. atheist (formerly ms. buddhist) said...

First, I would respectively ask that you not call me Energizer Buddhist or anything Buddhist. You may have some deeply intelligent reason that I cannot grasp yet(it's happened before), but honestly it just makes me feel very bad. I am Ms. Atheist now and I would like to be reffered as such.

So we both agree that these so called "researchers" and "scientists" are nothing of the sort. But I would go even further than you on this. I think what really happened is these people were normal people, and they got normal credentials, like head of phyciatry at american university, medical doctor, PHD's and what have you, and later on they became prey to Buddhist missionaries feeding them lies, and so they felt it neccessary to make up false evidence to support their garbagebag religion.

Quote: "Yeah, and that's weird, because children are generally NOT very gullible, are they? I mean, you could never convince a child that there's monster in the closet, or something like that...no, no....NOT children. Yeah, those darned little kids are just too rational-minded for stuff like that.
LMAO!!!!!!!"

Well, LMAO is not really something I'd do when I hear about children being fed delusional lies and deciet. I guess I will learn to do that when I fully free myself from my Buddhist dogma. I totally agree with the point you made though. I personally think their parents should have thier children taken away from them. You should read how deep they go with some of them. It's absolutely disgusting.

They're put together in such intracite ways and with such detail that many gullible people fall for them(like me before). These Buddhist folks are some of the most decietful people, and are quite good at fooling gullible people.

Oh, another hilarious claim that joke buddhist site was that Buddhist are actually HAPPIER than other people!!!! What MORONS!!!!!!!!!! LMAO!!!!I can't believe I fell for all their garbage for so long!!! Now they make just want to scream and puke at the same time!!! And, of course, we know they will take their false claims and try to pretend like real science supports them. They even put together abunch of "researchers", and "scientists" to try and claim that Buddhist are happier and science proves it! No doubt they poisoned their brains with Buddhist propaganda before the so called "study". Here it is for a lot of good laughs if you can stand the stupidity of it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3047291.stm

But even if they were happier,(which they aren't of course) when you are successful in manipulating people at such a great rate, that would make you happy!

Now that for sure deserves a big LMAO!!!!!!!!!

boomSLANG said...

...::stiiiiill going!::...

Ms Buddhist, or Atheist, or whatever-the-hell you are for today--- that's all so very interesting.....but of course, it's relevant to nothing concerning how to arrive at objective truth. There is no conclusive objective scientific evidence that "thought" exists anywhere out side the mind. NONE, ZIP, ZILCH = )

But wait!--- golly gee, Buddhism makes people "HAPPY"!!!!!!! Yippeeeeee! Yaaaay!

And of course, the belief in the Toothfairy makes children "happy"; the belief in Allah makes Muslims "happy"; the belief in the Great Pumkin makes Linus "happy"; the belief in UFOs makes ufologists "happy", and the happy list goes on, and on, and on, and ON....just like the Energizer Bunny. For christ' sake.....HEROIN makes JUNKIES "happy"...so?...so the f%ck what? As an "Atheist", you should know that none of that means squat when it comes to finding objective "truth". You're not quite there yet....give it more time......::wink::... think ~ anger, anger, anger, anger! LMAO!

hadduB said...

If the intent of a religion or belief is to be happy at any cost, then, get all of those scientists and doctors together to perform mass labotamies, then, everyone becomes happy, with no expectations beyond drooling on their own shirt. LMBFAO!!!!

ms. athiest(formerly ms. buddhist) said...

I'm really hurt by you keep making references to me as a buddhist. You have deconverted me so please call me simply ms. atheist.

But I can't agree with you more, and your saying exactly the point I was trying to show, of course you are much more intelligent then I am obviously, so you make it sound much better. Thank you for agreeing and putting it into a clearer and more intelligent form. You must be a professor at a big university or something. Your intelligence is astounding!!!! I am awe struck be it. Definitly not a fool like those morons at BBC who did that article. How could someone be so blind like that!! I mean, so what, they are happier than other people, obviously there are far more important things then that!!! Like truth.

Quote: "As an "Atheist", you should know that none of that means squat when it comes to finding objective "truth". You're not quite there yet....give it more time......"

I'm not sure what you mean by this. I know that its partly because you are far beyond me intellectually, but if you recall I wasn't arguing for that trash, I was arguing against it. Very much against it. Because you and others have shown me the way to real truth, and I will no longer fall for the Buddhist lies. Why do you still show hostility and meanness to me when I clearly am no longer a Buddhist? I have totally rejected all Buddhism and you still think I am supporting it. I will try harder I guess, I'm sorry.

I agree with you hadduB, if lasting happiness is the goal, then we might as well just give mass labotomies. That's basically the state the f%ckin foolish Buddhist monks are anyway. I've seen them. They wake up early in the morning, eat only two small meals a day, don't watch tv or even listen to music except in rare ceremonies, wear the same damn thing everyday, shave off their head like idiot retards, and just basically sit still for most of the day "meditating". What a crux. And that stupid "study" has the nerve to say that they are happier!!! F%ck that trash!!! I'd rather be alive and doing something meaningful than to be "happy". To make my life worth something, like find a cure for aids or throw the worlds biggest party, something meaningful so when I am on my death bed i can look back and say that I lead a meaningful life.

Those retarded and blind buddhist are stupid cowards by thinking they are better than others just because they are happier than everyone else!! MORONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They just live a fairytale world thinking that they don't have to do anything to be happy.

Thank you so much for saving me from that garbage. One thing that really kills me about that website is that they have the nerve to quote famous people to perpetuate and promote their filth. like taking the words of a great scientist and taking them out of context and twisting them around to pretend like he actually supported their insanity.

Here's how those dopes worded it:

Quote from www.justbegood.net
"In one of the suttas, the Buddha held up a cup of water and said that there are countless living beings in the water. For a long time, nobody understood what He meant, but today we can see through a microscope that there are in fact countless micro-organisms in any cup of water. Thus there may still be many things the Buddha said that we have still yet to fully comprehend.
Albert Einstein :
"Buddhism has the characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic religion for the future : it transcends a personal God, avoids dogmas and theology; it covers both the natural & spiritual, and it is based on a religious sense aspiring from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity."

Pathetic rubbish. Was Albert Einstien a Buddhist? HELL NO!!! Obviously he didn't have a clue about Buddhism and their insane beliefs or he never would have even mentioned them!! Buddhism is a sickness just like Christianity!!! The cure is Athiesm!!!!

Vipassana said...

Okay, Ms. Buddhist/Ms. Atheist, you are on this happy trip, and although you claim to be a 'real' Buddhist, I have some serious doubts as to your actual understanding of your own Buddhist philosophy, as Buddhism is "not" a religion, per se. So, since you seem to have a need to promote the "product" of happiness, which is, of course totally subjective based on a persons' awareness and range of options in life, why don't you proceed to teach us, how to come to this ultimate happiness.

And, just because I haven't seen you mention anything literally worded in any form of the readings of Buddah, I'd like to hear it in "Buddah's" words, not yours. Start with dukkha, and explain what that term means.

In the Sutta-Nipata, when the Buddah is asked to explain the difference between opposing or different metaphysical beliefs, he responds... "Apart from consciousness", he says, "no diverse truths exist. Mere sophistry declares this "true" and that view "false"."

In short there Ms. B/A, it appears Buddah suggests that all beliefs, and statements are sophist in nature, and the only real topic to discuss is the central theme of consciousness.

"sophism: a deliberately invalid argument displaying ingenuity in reasoning in the hope of deceiving someone"
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Now, obviously, Buddah seemed to believe he found the real truth, because he was capable of removing himself from "existence", and presenting the "real" truth, and of course, because he wasn't really in "this" reality, he couldn't possibly be considered a sophist himself.

So, where many religious people suggest that they have the "one" true "god", and everyone elses' is wrong, we get Buddah, who suggests that he has true enlightenment, and everyone elses' philosophies are mere sophist dialogues.

Both belief systems, have taken a stand, to state that they have the "one" true philosophy/religion, and everyone else, is... well, misguided at best or demon possessed at worst.

Your Buddah, is just as revered as the Pope, or any other major religious figure based on his words alone. What makes your Buddah, the "one true" philosopher? I mean, what is it that your Buddah had, that the entire rest of civilization seems to have missed for the past five or so thousands of years?

Again, perhaps you really do know the writings, but then, I suspect you wouldn't make the comment that Buddhism makes people "happy" and thus, its just gotta be the right flavor of ice cream, as if, no other philosophy/religion can make the same claim, Buddhism, doesn't own a "happy" patent, there Ms. B/A. And, isn't it possible to be happy, and ignorant of ones' own philosophy at the same time? Sure. That means, there Ms. B/A, that just because someone calls themselves a Buddhist and happy, doesn't mean than they are happy because of the Buddhist philosophy. To make such a statement would be sophist.

There are plenty of christians running around stating that they are happy as larks themselves, yet, they have no clue what their bible states, and many declare they don't really have to know their bible, in order to find happiness. Is that your same line of reasoning? If so, then what makes one person a Buddhist and another person "not" a Buddhist. Once the philosophy/religion is thrown to the side, what makes anyone different from the next?

You are a Buddhist, because of Buddah's Philosophy, if you don't follow Buddah's philosophy then you are something else. So, lets hear "how" you explain "Buddah" to be the one "true" philosopher, where everyone else just seems to be practicing sophistry in life, like those religions claiming to have the one "true" modern day prophet, etc.

Again, looking for your explanation of the underlying tenets of Buddhism, to support your claim that all of those smiling people being reported as Buddhists, are happy, because of Buddhist philosophy, and not for some entirely different reason, like... strong family bonds, etc.

If you sidestep the questions presented, then its pretty obvious that you have a level of ignorance of Buddhism, that doesn't compel me to believe you are a "true" Buddhist, you are just a Buddhist in name only. I look forward to your comments, so that I can ascertain your level of knowledge in the matter that you seem so obviously enthralled with.

Vipassana said...

Ms. B/A stated: "Albert Einstein :
"Buddhism has the characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic religion for the future : it transcends a personal God, avoids dogmas and theology; it covers both the natural & spiritual, and it is based on a religious sense aspiring from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity."

Albert was a scientist who believed in a unified philosophy in life, can you please explain how one becomes "unified" while using the title "Buddhist", in an exclusive manner, or is that just a label on the way to true unity.

Perhaps that's why Albert stated, "Buddhism has the characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic religion for the future." instead of claiming that Buddhism is "The True" cosmic religion of the future. Its a paradox of the whole vs. the pieces that many scientists and philosophers have debated even before Buddah lived. So, don't attempt to use Albert as a stool pigeon for Buddhism as being the "One True" philosophy in life. It appears he saw promise in the future for "anything" that was more geared toward "unity", than creating separatist movements, but, it appears you are using Buddhism to make statements that "separate" it from all other philosophies and beliefs - care to explain the obvious contradiction.

ms. atheist(formerly ms. buddhist) said...

DON"T CALL ME MS. BUDDHIST YOU DOPE!!!!! MY NAME IS MS. ATHEIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Maybe if you would keep up with what's been going on with this post you would have realized that I have been DECONVERTED a long time ago and have since been adamatly apposed to the false teachings of Buddhia and have been making that more than clear in my posts! Judging by your name "Vipassana", you seem to be already brainwashed by the evil Buddhist teachings already, and thats what is clouding your mind so you don't see what's clearly going on. WAKE UP VIPASSANA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!! By the way the whole "Vipassana" crap and it being taught as some universal meditation is a complete sham!!!! This is just the first step, and when you fall for that, then the evil moron Buddhist's will start to infect your mind with all type's of bullshit and fairytale garbage!

And it's clear from your post you are a half-brainwashed idiot because why the hell would you spend all that time asking me questions about Buddhism and me being a true Buddhist if quite clearly I've been deconverted. Go have fun or go do something meaningful with your life!! You don't want to be on your death bed and see that you wasted time asking an Atheist about Buddhism.

BUDDHIISM IS GARBAGE AND BUDDHA IS AN EVIL TWAT!

That clear enough?

And in your last post you stated that I stated Einstiens quote about Buddhism. Yeeaah....but did you miss the point that i was bashing it and not supporting it? Why are you thinking that I support this! Clearly if you read the whole post I was adamatly against it. My do you insist on arguing? Just shut the f%ck up!!! WE AGREE!! I have nothing better to do since I quite Buddhism, I just spend some time crying, look for something to do so I won't be so sad, and then come to this site and vent, but what the hell is your problem!! Obviously the statement by Einstein wasn't supporting Buddhism in the least, and certainly Einstien was NOT a Buddhist and he didn't know the idiotic practices and claims they had, or else he would have been opposed to Buddhism as he was to all the other dumbass religions. He wasn't advocating Buddhist filth at all!! WE AGREE. But those f%ck face Buddhist use it to to fool gullible people into buying into their trash all the time. This website uses that same damn quote right on their homepage!!!

http://www.e-sangha.com/

Einstien must by puking chunks in his grave!! If he were alive to see this he'd probably backslap the taste out of their sh%thole mouths!!!!!!!!!

Vipassana, I highly encourage you to stop with Vipassana if you are involved with it at all, I hope you are just using the literall word and not referring to the practice, because it is just the beginning of a slippery slope to evil and braindead stupidity and fairytale imaginary experiences. DON'T FALL FOR IT! It may seem when you get deep into it that you have some amazing "insights", and experience things, but it is all lies!! There is still time to get out if you are in it at all, beacause you clearly are not deep into it yet. But you don't want to go down anymore. Just get out. NOW!!!!

ms. athiest(formerly ms. buddhist) said...

Oh, in my stupidity I forgot to mention something to you Vipassana. Instead of wasting your time with "Vipassana" or anytype of meditation, foolishly thinking that you will somehow magically gain some sort of "insight" or "happiness"(aka braindeadmoronness), you should just go get a labotamy as haddub reccomended, because it's the same thing, or probably better!

boomSLANG said...

.....:: stiiiiiill going! ::......

The Energizer Buddhist.....

.....:: stiiiiill going! ::.....


" Ahmmm, Ahmmm, Ahmmm " LMAO!!!

Vipassana said...

Ms. B/A: "...Instead of wasting your time with "Vipassana" or anytype of meditation, foolishly thinking that you will somehow magically gain some sort of "insight" or "happiness"(aka braindeadmoronness), you should just go get a labotamy as haddub reccomended, because it's the same thing, or probably better!"

Vipassana: "If you sidestep the questions presented, then its pretty obvious that you have a level of ignorance of Buddhism, that doesn't compel me to believe you are a "true" Buddhist, you are just a Buddhist in name only. I look forward to your comments, so that I can ascertain your level of knowledge in the matter that you seem so obviously enthralled with."

Well, makes sense to me, all I am hearing is noise, enjoy your life there Ms. _________ Apparently, you have nothing to offer, except reverse psychology, in the attempt to entice people to read a few sites, that you present from a negative perspective. In either case, you presenting those sites from a pro of con stance, the fact that you present them shows your intent. Your inability to show any underlying knowledge of the information seems much more enlightening to me. By the way, Buddhists are Atheistic towards the christian supernatural concept of a god. So, you deconverting really hasn't made that much difference in your philosophy. In the overarching religious schema, Buddhists slide towards a more Agnostic view, but, we happen to be talking about xtianity here, so, you are right at home.

Atheist: "Someone who denies the existence of god."
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

There is no need for you to respond, you have added zero value to this thread, as you haven't supported your view of being a Buddhist, or a newly accepted Atheist, just a bunch of reverse psycholgoy, talking in the negative openly as if your unsupported claims have weight. Most people, do have a reason for what they believe, well, except for obviously you. You can keep your view, even if its unjustified, just keep it to yourself. Ciao

ms. athiest (formerly ms. buddhist) said...

BOOMSLANG PLEASE STOP!!!!!!!!!!! : (

WHY ARE YOU DOING THAT!!!!!! MY NAME IS MS. ATHEIST!!!!!! PLEASE JUST STOP REFFERING TO ME AS A BUDDHIST!!!!!! I FEEL BAD ENOUGH ALREADY, PLEASE DON'T RUB IT IN!!! PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I really don't know what I am doing wrong!! I was honest enough to admit my stupidity of believing Buddhist lies and yet you still are mean. It really hurts me. Seriously. I just don't get. I know I'm stupid but not that much to miss whats going on so badly. I really have no choice but to give up I guess. I just don't undertsand anything else I can do.

Vipassana, I really....AAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHY!!! WHY!!!! What's wrong with me!!!!

I'm not even going to read the entire post you made becuase I can see you still think I am a Buddhist!!!!

I AM NO LONGER A F%CKING STUPID ASS BUDDHIST!!! WHY IS THAT SO HARD TO BELIEVE THAT I HAVE BEEN DECONVERTED??!!!! WHY DO YOU INSIST ON MAKING ME A BUDDHIST STILL!!!!

I try to point out stupidity's of Buddhism and you think I am agreeing when I clearly am NOT!!

I AGREE WITH YOU ALL!!! I AM AN ATHEIST NOW!!!! WHY IS THAT SO HARD TO BELIEVE??!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I have not made one comment even close to supportive of buddhism since I have been deconverted and yet you still want to argue with me!! Why can't I just agree with you!!!! Why do you think I disagree with you?!!! I AGREE WITH YOU!!!

BUDDHISM IS TRASH!!!!! GARBAGE!!!! PURE SHIT!!! THE BUDDHIST TEACHINGS AREN'T EVEN VALUABLE ENOUGH TO WIPE MY OWN STUPID SHIT OFF OF MY STUPID ASS!!!!!!! HOW MORE CLEAR DO I HAVE TO BE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You know tears are streaming down my face right now? THEY ARE!! You think I'm just being sarcastic or using reverse physcology? I'M NOT!!!!!!!!!!!

My entire structure has been changed since you all deconverted me, and I am just admitting it!!! You all destroyed all the things earlier that I thought were correct, and I ADMIT THAT!!!! And I thank you!! But I just don't get why you think I am just joking!!!

I know I'm stupid and ignorant! I am working on changing that! But when you all say such hurtful things even when I say I agree with you and try to show the different lies of Buddhism, it really gets me down.

Thankfully for you all though, you won't see my ignorant postings anymore. I am going to slit my wrists and die. I just don't know what else I can really do. I'm not joking, not that any of you care. Not that you really should care though, actually you are probably glad. I know I don't offer any good discussion here. I try, but I am just not as clear thinking and smart as you guys. I wish I were. I wish I could come back to life as one of you, or someone with your level of intelligence, but anyway, I know that will not happen.

Well, it was really nice to know you all. I wish you would have accepted me as an atheist, but I know it was just my fault for not being clear enough and smart enough.

Also Vipissana, I am serious about you and practicing that stuff, stop now or you'll end up like me. A depressed ex-buddhist slitting her own wrists because she can no longer stand the pain of her own ignorance and stupidity





!#@#%%$!#$!&!^&@(!&^!^@!!#$$!#!$!!!!!!!@*&!!

Bentley said...

Ah cmon ms Atheist, I believe ya, I'll be your friend and so will the others, you're very intelligent to see and openly admit that you were wrong, I've been wrong many times, but not about silly childhoods beliefs, we were all raised to belive some bullshit, where ever we live, anywhere in the world, religions and beliefs and customs are prevailent all over the entire world, the only reason that christianity got started in the US is because some jackass pilgrims brought over a stinking bible and thought that it was a god's will that they survived the stinking boat trip over here.

We all love ya and we need you to share your experiences and your new found wisdom, please don't be angry, we need you! We need more people like you, the world needs more people like you! With unconditional Love, Ben

Anonymous said...

ms. athiest (formerly ms. buddhist) wrote:

"Thankfully for you all though, you won't see my ignorant postings anymore. I am going to slit my wrists and die. I just don't know what else I can really do. I'm not joking, not that any of you care. Not that you really should care though, actually you are probably glad. I know I don't offer any good discussion here. I try, but I am just not as clear thinking and smart as you guys. I wish I were. I wish I could come back to life as one of you, or someone with your level of intelligence, but anyway, I know that will not happen.

Well, it was really nice to know you all. I wish you would have accepted me as an atheist, but I know it was just my fault for not being clear enough and smart enough."

To ms. athiest (formerly ms. buddhist,
I don't believe you will slit your wrists! You don't seem suicidal to me.
I believe your last post was nothing more than an attempt to get attention, but if you do come back as one of us who is your favorite?

J. C. Samuelson said...

Ms. Atheist,

No need to get so worked up. This is an Internet forum and as you know all views will generally find expression one way or another.

In fairness, you did come off pretty strong to start with, and wittingly (or unwittingly, more likely) were insulting to one or more members of this forum. As an adult, you should expect some strong reactions, and not expect to be taken seriously right away when you do a 180 in the middle of the thread (from Buddhism to Atheism).

As far as I'm concerned, however, you are welcome here as a Buddhist or Atheist. Just make up your own mind, and remember that no one else here needs or desires converting/convincing.

Anonymous said...

Christianity never promised safety or security, it does however promise forgiveness for sins and life, Jesus said, "I've come to give you life, Life more abundant"
If it promised life then there wouldn't be any myrters. You might say well they didn't get life either especially life more abundant but they maybe they did...what if you are wrong? what if the Bible is absolute truth? did you really read it or did you just believe what others said about it? I dare you to read it and try to prove it wrong.

Anonymous said...

Islam never promised safety or security, it does however promise forgiveness for sins and life, Mohammad said, "I've come to give you life, Life more abundant"
If it promised life then there wouldn't be any myrters. You might say well they didn't get life either especially life more abundant but they maybe they did...what if you are wrong? what if the Qu'ran is absolute truth? did you really read it or did you just believe what others said about it? I dare you to read it and try to prove the Qu'ran wrong.

boomSLANG said...

Miss Atheist/Former Buddhist

Your sarcastic driveling reverse-caricatures of Atheism are about as convincing as a horsefly telling us it no longer likes the taste of shit. BTW, yeah, I AM an Atheist, but not everyone here is---furthermore, the one thing most of us have in common is that we are EX-christians. So hey, why don't you start the official "Ex-Buddhist" website? That would be PERFECT for you! You can comfort those who finally escaped the religion of Buddhism. Remember?...those self-delusional thoughts?.....well, NO MORE! Yeah, you can tell them that any philisophical "system" that is built around rewards(Nirvana!) and punishment(...::Meow, meow::...::Moooo::....::bok, bok, bok::....::oink, oink:....gobble, gobble, gobble) is bankrupt from the get-go. Not to mention, your former God/boss could really stand to do some situps. Ohhhmmm~ ohhhmmm~ ohhhmmm~

swabby429 said...

MS Atheist former Ms Buddhist,

What school of Dharma did you study? You appear to have plenty of hostility.

On the surface it appears that you haven't even skimmed the Eightfold Path.

Most of the Buddhists I know, myself included, are atheists or lean that direction. The Dharma is used as a guidepost for ethical behavior.

In fact, Shakyamuni advocated that his students should test his teachings for themselves and not take any of them simply because they might appear in some scripture, be practiced as a social convention or tradition, and certainly NOT on blind faith.

Your commentary doesn't ring true to me at all.

BTW: I follow the Gelugpa school of Vajrayana. I carefully checked out my Sangha and found the members to be peerless in integrity, compassion, generosity and empathy.

I know other Buddhists who are Theravedans and others who follow Mahayana. They are of impeccable character as well with spotlessly clean ethical behavior.

I'm sorry you choose to use slanderous terms on a site such as this.

By the way, I am an ex-Methodist, I have had an enjoyable journey on my life's path. My experiences with Gelugpa and the monks I count as very dear friends are among some of the most positive and wonderful I can even imagine.

Metta,
JJ (aka swabby)

Archived Testimonial Pageviews this week: