On May 25, 5:30 pm, sdr <sdrodr...@sdrodrian.com> wrote:

The religious argument is a complete and
total hypocrisy: As a child I was taught that
the world was 6,000 or so years old (the
Bible said so, and God "wrote" the Bible).
Then IN FIRST GRADE I was shown pictures
of dinosaurs which "had lived 65,000,000
years ago!" (I guess God didn't know about
dinosaurs when He was "writing" the Bible...
nor that the earth revolves around the Sun
& other incidentals like that, apparently.)

The universal experience is that everybody
knows that The Bible is chockful of LIES, and
yet almost every single one of those same
persons then goes around saying that "the
Bible speaks The Truth" (!). It is therefore
pretty undeniable that RELIGION is purely
politics (it's not even ethics or morality, or
see those money-grubbing TV Evangelists
and child-molesting priests): POLITICS,
that's what keeps religion alive among polls
who today know perfectly well there ain't
no gods, ghosts, or pixies ... and that there
never were.

DISproving the "existence" of God is as
pointless/useless a task as trying to make the
FOUR points of a triangle come out the same:
There never was any "proof" of God.

Hypocrisy: How can one say God exists (proof
positive) and in the same breath claim Faith
(which is what one needs in the absence of
proof)...?

Insanity: People who have "seen God" claim
God has eyebrows (then God sweats, stinks,
soaps up, wears underwear, and probably shops
at The Gap).

O God, your obedient servant:

S D Rodrianhttp://poems.sdrodrian.comhttp://physics.sdrodrian.comhttp://mp3s.sdr...

All religions are local.
Only science is universal.

And, by the by, just so you know: The difference
between good men and men of evil is that "good
men do not commit evil EVEN in the good cause."
Although... naturally, this is physically impossible
in this world; so if you spot a MFer trying to kill me
by all means shoot the fkn *****: Best thing
you'll ever do in my life.

Thank you for your post.

Without spiritual values, the atheist is sunk. The conundrum of the
mind manacled, defiance based, spiritually sick atheist is this. They
need spiritual values to be at peace - yet their own defiance blocks
them from seeking and finding these values.

The atheist that only has a foundation of ego and hate will never find
peace. If any theist questioning their faith should wonder onto
alt.atheism, for instance, they could see this for themselves with
many spiritually sick example members and their projection of this
spiritual sickness and self hate onto others.

What is missing in these atheists lives?

Do they need to get religion?

Not necessarily.

As we see, many people claiming to be religious are just as bad off as
atheists or sometimes worse.

"People that practice religion are worried about going to hell -
people that practice spirituality have already been to hell and don't
want to go back."

Spiritual values is what they are short on.

Such atheists full of defiance and devoid of spiritual values are
'dogmatic skeptics', whereas atheists that are open to spiritual
values are of the order of 'skeptical skeptics.' The spiritual based
atheists have not forgotten 'All Deities reside within the human
breast' as Blake wrote. There is a world of difference between the two
types of atheists...a night and day difference. The spiritual based
atheists 'deifies humanity and peace' the defiance based atheist
'deifies their ego' and loses any connection with humanity and becomes
a haggard, shell of a human.

A lot of atheists I run into make their intellect their God. They do
not know that academic smarts are not the same as peace smarts. Until
they can transcend their ego they will never find the answer (peace)
they seek. It is the same for those that think money is all that is
standing between them and happiness. So it goes for the ego and
intellect based person that is devoid of spiritual values. Always
remember...one thing only goes so far with giving a person a good
life. Seek balance. Spiritual growth as well as humans are not
perfect, but we can all do better at being humane if we try.

See:

http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=4.0

There are many flavors of atheists...natural atheists, personal
atheists, explicit atheists, implicit atheists weak atheists, strong
atheists, discovery atheists, reactionary atheists, indoctrinated
atheists and of course the bad ***** atheists with attitude aka BAAWA
varieties. But the defining characteristic that leads an atheist to
peace is whether they are a 'spiritual based atheist' or 'defiance
based atheist.'' I have to laugh sometimes when I read the fantasies
of atheists that think atheism will take over the world. It would take
a different brand of atheist to persuade many to change if they
investigate the online atheists of the usenet to any degree.

In short you must become spiritual based atheists to offer something
to the religious crowd instead of the defiance based atheists that
many of you are.

What is a defiance based atheist?

Let me give you an example via some discussion with 'N'

If we look at N's youth he showed defiance from the start. He knew at
a young age God was repulsive without even studying and told his
parents what to do when it came to marching orders.

N: "Dragged to Sunday school 3 times, hated the songs, thought God
was repulsive, refused to go ever again."

V: Now at adulthood, 'N' carried this defiance with him and refuses
to let others think for themselves and demands all think as he does or
else.

N: "Theists like you (V) should be given electric shocks every time
they use parables. That is my new policy."

V: As Professor Peter Kreeft remarked on the subject of morality:
First level morality could be called survival morality - lets not hit
each other on the head so none of us will die. Second level morality
could be justice morality - lets not hit each other on the head
because it is not fair or not right. Third level morality could be
called 'transcend the ego' morality - lets not hit each other because
we love each other.

N: "Professor Peter Kreeft is a Christian. This is an atheist
group. Why would you think someone who bases their morality on the
Bible and the supernatural has anything relevant to say to an atheist?
Why are you promoting Christian values? Some agnostic you are. Some
freethinker you are."

end

I did not know Professor Kreeft was a Christian.

I had listened to a
lecture series from the library on the Philosophy of Religion - Faith
and Reason he authored. He gave no indication of what religion he was.
I did not need to know his religious convictions to come to a
conclusion about what he said. I look at what was said and not at who
said what. 'N' demonstrates how the mind manacled, defiance based
atheists gets blinded by prejudice and ego at every turn.

Atheists say they operate on truth and not by faith.

If we look at the
3 examples Kreeft gave, all 3 can be tested by practical application.
Even the 'transcend the ego' concept can be tested by any freethinking
atheist. All they have to do is practice kindness and being charitable
to humanity as opposed to practicing hatred and ill will.

Then they
can test this out for themselves. Even if the atheist does not wish to
test level three morality, level one and two have nothing to do with
spiritual values. Yet the mind manacled, defiant atheists throws the
whole lot out because they get blinded to the discussion due to
prejudice and small minded thinking.

No, 'N', a good agnostic is open to the discussion from all sides.

A
proper atheists and theist would be as well. For how could an atheists
claim to serve truth, when they shut their mind to the discussion and
block out anything that their ego demands them to.

I guess in your
mind a good atheists is a yes man that runs by herd instinct and
nothing else.

No judging truth on it own, truth is defined not by
testing, but by guilt by association in your mind 'N'.

Freethinker is a popular term thrown around atheists and agnostic
circles. I use it myself to describe myself.

http://www.freethoughtforum.org/about/freethought.aspx

I've only used 'N' as one example here and he not singled him out.

If
I wanted to write a book on the subject I could have offered you an
almost endless supply of examples.

For instance. I posted on the
subject of "Peace Tools for Atheists, Agnostics and Believers" to the
'alt.atheism' to open up some dialogue

on what tools are available for
the atheist or agnostic to use to generate inner peace in place of
organized religion. All the tools and concepts I discussed were
available for any person to use without the belief in God.

In my post I covered many tools from simplicity, compassion, classical
philosophical studies, ethics, mindfulness, reciprocity, charity,
accepting impermanence, developing gratitude and contentment, cutting
back on craving and desires, working with natural law, balanced
living, etc. I illustrated how I use freethinking to take tools for
peace wherever I find them without prejudice and evaluate the tool on
it own and not under guilt by association. All the tools I discussed
were available to use without the belief in God.

I received the following responses to my post on inner peace tools:

"I've never been not at peace. What you offer makes me physically
ill. It's like a nasty man come round to tell little kiddees he has
candy for them if they touch his pee pee. You know, most of the
atheists I know are as good as children are at discerning
misrepresentation. You aren't trying to help anyone but your own
self. Go away, we have no interest in touching your pee pee."

"First of all, this is a newsgroup, not the freaking public library.
Keep it short and to the point. Second, you're full of *****."

"Stop posting your vile polemic deliberately nasty, lying Christian? ...

Without spiritual values, the atheist is sunk.