On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 10:41:07 -0700, in alt.atheism , stoney
<stoney@the.net> in <mn0ph19o3pedg3sos6m9co1jf7mne0kaoi@4ax.com>
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 12:56:41 GMT, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 13:42:56 -0500, in alt.atheism , James
<spamblock@com.com> in <11h419o2uedtj17@corp.supernews.com> wrote:

John Jenkins wrote:

Religion is undoubetdly part of human evolution. The religious part
of the brain persists and is shaping human development as an ongoing
process. This is easy to observe when you consider the myriad of
reigions that exist, all based on the rantings of schizophrenic men
that existed thousands of years ago.

Fear is the most basic drive we have, and the basis for it is the
avoidance of death. Assuming we're the only animal cognitvely able to
recognize the inevitability of our own demise, wouldn't religion be a
natural way of getting around the question?

I think that fear plays a role, but only one of many factors. Religion
is one way of explaining aspects of the Universe. I doubt that anyone
reading this could do all that much better give what was available
3,000 years ago.

What, I think, is being missed is what was given 3,000 years ago isn't
being acknowledged as being very obsolete and left in the dust bin.

Sorry, but that has nothing to do with the original comment or my
complaint. I object to judging of people from 3,000+ years ago in the
light of modern understanding and modern knowledge.

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 04:38:03 GMT, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 00:50:05 GMT, in alt.atheism , John Jenkins
<jjenkins@juno.com> in <77a7h1th7dtir2r0kc5ktlaqp1c2voj4jf@4ax.com>
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 12:53:52 GMT, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:29:16 GMT, in alt.atheism , John Jenkins
<jjenkins@juno.com> in <iks3h1llmuk5014c06aoap0pfuloems2t6@4ax.com>
wrote:

And so you extrapolate into the past and figure that the
schizophrenics invented the notion of God. Rather than thinking that
perhaps some of them today pick up on certain cultural notions. By
your logic schizophrenics invented radio and TV and satellites and so
on. After all, they talk about those as well.

No, there has always been the notion of deity. The schizoids of old
also picked up on the cultural notion. They just spent some time in
the desert and then came back and proclaimed they had talked to god.

Most of these types of people were probably put to death by the local
empire however a few would become successful. Once a religion takes
hold it spreads like a powerful virus.

Which is why all religions either die right off or get millions of
followers. Have you ever actually read something about the history of
religion? If not, do you think that ignorance is a good basis for
generating theories?

I haven't read to much on religion.

I have only seen shows on the
history channel about the history of religions. The show I saw was
about christianity. I have also investigated the website
prophetofdoom.net.

Lots of men along the way
decide it's their duty to add their 2 cents worth to the doctrine and
on and on it goes and gets more and more dogmatic.

I am not a pigmy standing on a giants shoulders. A giant can only
exist when there is a basis for extension of his acheivements. In
religion there is no basis for anything other then dogmatic diatribe
spewed over the millenia..

You misunderstand the metaphor, perhaps because you are unfamiliar
with the original. Those giants are all the thousands and millions of
people who have worked to gather the knowledge we have today about the
world. You write as though it was all so obvious.

No, I understand it. I think you misunderstood what I was trying to
say. What I meant was that concerning religion, there is no giant's
shoulders to stand on.

Not like mathematics or physics. All of
reilgion is based purely on speculation. So the idea of extending the
knowledge of it leads no where since there is no provable axioms.

Our connection to the universe is best described by the concept of
karma.

And you complain about religion?

It's the perfect simplistic elegance that covers all bases. If
you follow karma your mind doesn't have to be weighed down with the
absurd rhetoric associated with all organized religions.

How about you define karma for me just so I am clear on what we mean.
I am glad, though, that you found the one true religion and have
decided to share it with us.

Sure, karma is the concept in which how you act in the universe
directly effects how the universe acts to you.

If you are a bad
person, then bad things will happen to you.

Hinduism uses this
concept with the notion that you will be reincarnated to a form that
is based on your karma in your last life. Once you reach nirvana you
will no longer be reincarnated and you will have a perfect peace with
the universe.