09 Nov 12
Somewhat pointless repeating this here, but out of a sense of compassion I tell you again and again, and sorry, blunt I must be...
You (Christians) are all projecting onto the historically conditioned collection of Jewish and Christian writings, and onto the concept of "God" what you want and desire, arising out of your existential anxieties. Liberal believers are more refined but are still doing the same with abstruse theology.
Reason and established factual truth has little to do with it. Thus Hitler supported his evil schema with it and so did the Spanish Inquisition and racist Southern Baptists and the cruel slave traders before them.
And the good reformers and and fighters for the right on the other side (e.g. Wilberforce, Boenhoffer) using the same 'projections' for the good fight they themselves choose out of their own established value system. Some chose those values out of the parts of the Bible they selected and affirmed and used to support. All their own work in the end.
And thus also is your imaginary god-man friend, a further projection, to comfort your existential aloneness. Unfortunately this can tend to close all other doors of opportunity for you to become aware about your projections.
The sooner you realize this, the sooner you will begin to be more free in your awareness, to live more fully in the wonderful moment of now, where, what you might label as "GOD" might come thru the smallest scrap of quote or event anywhere.
Authentic free living will ensue more, with less dependence on others and their views and more openness. You are choosing your own values anyway if you could but see it, projecting that choice onto what YOU nominate as "GOD'S WORD", and you or your pastor's/priest's interpretations.
Life itself can be "GOD'S WORD", my luvs, including yours and all scriptures, art, literature, the burblings of your child, or the deep message in a film...
YOU are the CHOOSER.
09 Nov 12
Originally posted by Taomanactually, with all due respect, I have found scant evidence that Hitler was primarily
Somewhat pointless repeating this here, but out of a sense of compassion I tell you again and again, and sorry, blunt I must be...
You (Christians) are all projecting onto the historically conditioned collection of Jewish and Christian writings, and onto the concept of "God" what you want and desire, arising out of your existential anxieties. Liberal belie ...[text shortened]... burblings of your child, or the deep message in a film...
YOU are the CHOOSER.
invested with a religious zeal which motivated him to carry out atrocity. He seems
to have had an aversion to other peoples primarily as a result of German
nationalism, adoption of materialistic philosophies such as Social Darwinism
(eliminate inferior races and you perpetuate the Germanic) and his anti capitalist
stance. He really did believe that Germans were racially superior and that Semitic
and Slavic races posed a threat of racial contamination. This has practically nothing
to do with religion at all and I therefore conclude my friend that perhaps by levelling
this accusation against Christians and Christianity with little reason or factual truth
you may be projecting a historically conditioned perspective yourself and out of a
sense of compassion, I ask you to reflect deeply upon it.
One can find justification in chess even for a bad move 🙂
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
09 Nov 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieActually, with no respect what so ever, Taoman didn't say that "Hitler was primarily
actually, with all due respect, I have found scant evidence that Hitler was primarily
invested with a religious zeal which motivated him to carry out atrocity. He seems
to have had an aversion to other peoples primarily as a result of German
nationalism, adoption of materialistic philosophies such as Social Darwinism
(eliminate inferior race ...[text shortened]... you to reflect deeply upon it.
One can find justification in chess even for a bad move 🙂
invested with a religious zeal which motivated him to carry out atrocity.
What he said was "... Hitler supported his evil schema with it..."
Which is true.
The fact that he did (on record) use the Christian faith he was brought up in to
support his atrocities is both well known and, in as much as it's all on record in both
public speeches and his own written works, indisputable.
This doesn't mean that his faith was necessarily his primary motivation and Taoman
neither said nor implied otherwise.
So perhaps you should try reading what people actually say with a little more care and thought
rather than responding to some imagined version of what they have said.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
09 Nov 12
Originally posted by TaomanWhat (to you) IS god?
Somewhat pointless repeating this here, but out of a sense of compassion I tell you again and again, and sorry, blunt I must be...
You (Christians) are all projecting onto the historically conditioned collection of Jewish and Christian writings, and onto the concept of "God" what you want and desire, arising out of your existential anxieties. Liberal belie ...[text shortened]... burblings of your child, or the deep message in a film...
YOU are the CHOOSER.
And how do you/can you know that it exists?
09 Nov 12
Originally posted by googlefudgeI was merely pointing out that Hitler's motivation was not religious at all, regardless
Actually, with no respect what so ever, Taoman didn't say that "Hitler was primarily
invested with a religious zeal which motivated him to carry out atrocity.
What he said was "... Hitler supported his evil schema with it..."
Which is true.
The fact that he did (on record) use the Christian faith he was brought up in to
support ...[text shortened]... care and thought
rather than responding to some imagined version of what they have said.
of whether he supported his evil schema with it (Gods word) or not and cited the
reasons for his motivation. It appears to me that once again the materialist cannot
bring himself to contemplate the reality that it was materialistic theories or
versions/distortions of that which was really the primary motivating force for his
atrocities and thus in stating that 'Hitler supported his evil schemes', and ignoring
this fact, one is presenting a biased and distorted perspective, like I said, one can
find justification for even a bad move in chess as one can find justification for
presenting a perspective that is not wholly accurate.
So we can conclude that as you have publicly stated by drawing attention to the fact
that while not being his primary motivation, he merely used it as some kind of
pretext and this has of course has little bearing upon Gods word, its intrinsic value
or christians themselves, does it. If you are going to talk of reason and truth,
wouldn't it be better to present a reasoned and truthful depiction, just saying.
09 Nov 12
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieHeaven forbid that I should find justification for my bad moves! Hardly get any chess done. 🙂
actually, with all due respect, I have found scant evidence that Hitler was primarily
invested with a religious zeal which motivated him to carry out atrocity. He seems
to have had an aversion to other peoples primarily as a result of German
nationalism, adoption of materialistic philosophies such as Social Darwinism
(eliminate inferior race ...[text shortened]... you to reflect deeply upon it.
One can find justification in chess even for a bad move 🙂
Hitler was an avowed Christian. Obviously he is an extreme example of how we "choose" our particular slant on "God's Word" which undermines the infallible authority issue implied by the reference to any sacred wrings as being straight from God. Also the need and ever changing interpretations and argument about what exactly is "God's Word".
But he did say the following and the link below leads to other connections between Nazism and the Christian Church. I am not equating the two and realize that that all power-seeking movement did anything and distorted all for the sake of what it saw as its God given "destiny" - so often used by tyrants to support their causes. The issue is about how we project our desires onto the so-called objective, authorative "Word of God". Even at this moment you and I are arguing about it after millenia, so where is the final authority in that?
Better the authority that arises from within with one's own authenticity, as I see it.
Hitler:
"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."
"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)
(As full of delusions of evil grandeur as he was, he was a captivating orator.)
"Hitler's anti-Semitism grew out of his Christian education. Christian Austria and Germany in his time took for granted the belief that Jews held an inferior status to Aryan Christians. Jewish hatred did not spring from Hitler, it came from the preaching of Catholic priests and Protestant ministers throughout Germany for hundreds of years. The Protestant leader, Martin Luther, himself, held a livid hatred for Jews and their Jewish religion. In his book, "On the Jews and their Lies," Luther set the standard for Jewish hatred in Protestant Germany up until World War II. Hitler expressed a great admiration for Martin Luther."
More at:
http://www.nobeliefs.com/hitler.htm
If he was able to do it, we all can, and we do - that's the main point. We project what we want on these writings and onto our concept of "God". Much as we project ideas (right and wrong) onto the chessboard. 🙂
We must agree to differ here, dear robbie. Warm greetings, nevertheless.
Originally posted by TaomanThis apperars to me to be a distorted perspective, shall i also go and find references
Heaven forbid that I should find justification for my bad moves! Hardly get any chess done. 🙂
Hitler was an avowed Christian. Obviously he is an extreme example of how we "choose" our particular slant on "God's Word" which undermines the infallible authority issue implied by the reference to any sacred wrings as being straight from God. Also the need and e must agree to differ here, dear robbie. Warm greetings, nevertheless.
where he made reference to Darwinism and struggle? Well ok,
Adolf Hitler’s racial theories were based on social Darwinism. “The stronger has to
rule and must not mate with the weaker,” Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf. “Only the born
weakling can consider this cruel.”
‘ … struggle, selection, and survival of the fittest, all notions and observations
arrived at … by Darwin … but already in luxuriant bud in the German social
philosophy of the nineteenth century. … Thus developed the doctrine of Germany’s
inherent right to rule the world on the basis of superior strength … [of a] “hammer
and anvil” relationship between the Reich and the weaker nations.’
Keith, A., Evolution and Ethics, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, New York, p. 230, 1946
'No more than Nature desires the mating of weaker with stronger individuals, even
less does she desire the blending of a higher with a lower race, since, if she did, her
whole work of higher breeding, over perhaps hundreds of thousands of years,
might be ruined with one blow…When man attempts to rebel against the iron logic of
Nature, he comes into struggle with the principles to which he himself owes his
existence as a man. …No, there is only one holiest human right, and this right is at
the same time the holiest obligation…to see to it that the blood is preserved pure
and, to create the possibility of a nobler development of these beings. …and finally
to put an end to the constant and continuous original sin of racial poisoning, and to
give to the Almighty Creator beings such as He Himself created.’
Hitler, A. 1933
clearly Hitler is presenting a distorted view of Gods word and this should be
acknowledged as should his adherence to materialistic philosophies such as applied
Darwinism which resulted in the culmination of the so called, 'final solution', to state
anything else is a distortion of the reality.
we must acknowledge realities dear Taoman, yes he used a distorted perspective of
Christianity, but it was not, in my opinion, his primary motivating force, just sayin 🙂
Originally posted by TaomanIf he was able to do it, we all can, and we do - that's the main point. We project what
Heaven forbid that I should find justification for my bad moves! Hardly get any chess done. 🙂
Hitler was an avowed Christian. Obviously he is an extreme example of how we "choose" our particular slant on "God's Word" which undermines the infallible authority issue implied by the reference to any sacred wrings as being straight from God. Also the need and e must agree to differ here, dear robbie. Warm greetings, nevertheless.
we want on these writings and onto our concept of "God". Much as we project ideas
(right and wrong) onto the chessboard.
why is it not possible to simply let the word speak for itself? kind of the same as letting
the dynamics of a position suggest a course of action, but i agree, is it not true that so
called black holes are reputed to have a tendency to 'suck in', gravity and time and
transform these into different realities, is it not the same with those who are suffering
in spiritual darkness?
I need to go to work, sigh, such a reality! 😛
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
09 Nov 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell you look at the world through a distorted lens, and so the truth will appear distorted to you.
This apperars to me to be a distorted perspective, shall i also go and find references
where he made reference to Darwinism and struggle? Well ok,
Adolf Hitler’s racial theories were based on social Darwinism. “The stronger has to
rule and must not mate with the weaker,” Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf. “Only the born
weakling can consider thi ...[text shortened]... of
Christianity, but it was not in my opinion, his primary motivating force, just sayin 🙂
However while we are on the subject of distorting the facts...
I can raise (with rather more justification) exactly the same argument against Hitler's (and your)
use of Darwin's theories of natural selection.
Evolution by natural selection (as you well know) does not in any way shape or form support or
justify Hitler's or the Nazi's position.
All that 'pure blood' crap is totally unsupported and unsupportable by science (or materialism).
And the 'criterion' by which Hitler is judging 'strength' and 'fitness' are nationalistic and religious in
basis. There is nothing biologically 'weak' about Jews, or strong about Arian Germans.
And you know this because we have this stupid argument every few months.
So you are lying, again.
09 Nov 12
Originally posted by googlefudgeummm, it would seem that other writers are lying too, suck it up fatboy, is the assertion
Well you look at the world through a distorted lens, and so the truth will appear distorted to you.
However while we are on the subject of distorting the facts...
I can raise (with rather more justification) exactly the same argument against Hitler's (and your)
use of Darwin's theories of natural selection.
Evolution by natural selection (as ...[text shortened]... because we have this stupid argument every few months.
So you are lying, again.
of lying really the best you can do? Spok would be ashamed, sigh, so banal! so
predictable, so unoriginal!
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
09 Nov 12
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobie"Spok would be ashamed, sigh, so banal! so
ummm, it would seem that other writers are lying too, suck it up fatboy, is the assertion
of lying really the best you can do? Spok would be ashamed, sigh, so banal! so
predictable, so unoriginal!
predictable, so unoriginal!"
im sure jesus would be ashamed of all your slippery bible double speak.......cant remember jesus arguing himself around in circles and then into corners, but then he didnt have to keep checking with the j.w. elders to see what crazy rules they had for every life situation.
maybe googlefudge needs to sign off with something about wagons rolling, wolves howling or a neeeeeext, maybe that would give him the non predictability your looking for?
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
09 Nov 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWow you really do have trouble with reading comprehension and telling the truth don't you.
I was merely pointing out that Hitler's motivation was not religious at all, regardless
of whether he supported his evil schema with it (Gods word) or not and cited the
reasons for his motivation. It appears to me that once again the materialist cannot
bring himself to contemplate the reality that it was materialistic theories or
versions/dis ...[text shortened]... nd truth,
wouldn't it be better to present a reasoned and truthful depiction, just saying.
I was merely pointing out that Hitler's motivation was not religious at all, regardless
of whether he supported his evil schema with it (Gods word) or not and cited the
reasons for his motivation
How can you possibly know that?
Hitler cited all kinds of reasons for his actions, many of which were religious (as cited by
Taoman). Who are you to say that some 'reasons' were his 'true' reasons and that some
were convenient excuses?
Are you claiming to be able to read his mind? Are you choosing to believe some of what he said/wrote
and not other things he said? If so how do you decide?
If you can claim that his religious reasons were the excuses then why can I not (with equal strength)
claim that his 'material' reasons were excuses for his religious beliefs?
It appears to me that once again the materialist cannot
bring himself to contemplate the reality that it was materialistic theories or
versions/distortions of that which was really the primary motivating force for his
atrocities...
It appears to me that once again the theist/religionist cannot bring themselves to contemplate the
reality that it was theistic/religious theories or versions/distortions of that which was really the
primary motivating force for his atrocities...
Oh dear... Your argument cuts both ways.
So we can conclude that as you have publicly stated by drawing attention to the fact
that while not being his primary motivation, he merely used it as some kind of
pretext and this has of course has little bearing upon Gods word, its intrinsic value
or christians themselves, does it. If you are going to talk of reason and truth,
wouldn't it be better to present a reasoned and truthful depiction, just saying.
No you can't conclude that because that is not remotely what I said.
This is the part where your reading comprehension and truth telling eludes you.
What I said was "This doesn't mean that his faith was necessarily his primary motivation and Taoman
neither said nor implied otherwise."
"... Necessarily his primary motivation... "
This is not in any way shape or form the same thing as saying that "...he merely used it as some kind of
pretext..."
What it does mean is that Faith may or may not be his primary motivation, It was (or appears to be) ONE
of his motivations. It might have been a pretext, as could ANY of his other stated reasons or motivations.
And again...
So perhaps you should try reading what people actually say with a little more care and thought
rather than responding to some imagined version of what they have said.
09 Nov 12
Originally posted by googlefudgeTwo apparently straightforward simple questions, one about the nature of Source of all existence, the other about the nature of knowledge and how we know something. Mmm, might have to dodge those a bit.
What (to you) IS god?
And how do you/can you know that it exists?
Some statements that mean things to me:
- I am neither a theist nor an atheist.
- Gods and selves are mind borne.
- No thing exist by itself totally alone, but depends on parts and other things and qualities to exist.
My position on the God concept is that found in philosophical Buddhism, (and other religio-philosophies, particularly Taoism). Some say Buddhism is atheist, but is is more correctly the first statement I made above.
For me, something not experienced by me does not exist for me. That is not the same as saying it doesn't exist at all, but I cannot know it. This may give an indication of how I think about these things.
Over-simplifying one might say I seek to be open to a Mind-Like "God" in everything and in each living moment. I am definitely not a materialistic reductionist scientific person devoid of a sense of the Transcendent aspect of existence, - yet I respect science. Existence is not an "accident" to me, and there is THAT which is unnameable and ungraspable that is involved in every level of existence. I am happy to leave it alone as far as defining goes, and live out what arises and goes, trusting that I am THAT too, including so-called "negatives".
It would be simpler, I guess, for someone else or "authorative" book (of any religion) to tell me what to believe, but I don't buy the 'ignorance is bliss' line.
09 Nov 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieEdit: "...why is it not possible to simply let the word speak for itself? kind of the same as letting the dynamics of a position suggest a course of action.."
If he was able to do it, we all can, and we do - that's the main point. We project what
we want on these writings and onto our concept of "God". Much as we project ideas
(right and wrong) onto the chessboard.
why is it not possible to simply let the word speak for itself? kind of the same as letting
the dynamics of a position suggest a cour ...[text shortened]... ho are suffering
in spiritual darkness?
I need to go to work, sigh, such a reality! 😛
I have no problems with that at all, in fact that is my position. Whether it is a passage from the Bible or a zen koan, the same. The final "authority" is in me..what becomes a gestalt or arsing of significant meaning out of the encountering of words and events in my life, which includes not just one but many scriptures and writings.
We don't need this idea of the "authority" of "God's Word" - whatever authority it has is born within us as we respond to it. This is what happens exactly with you too, yet you and other Christians must insist on this "one and only" way of encountering authentically whatever you place under the label of "God".
This concept of the "Word of God" is unhelpful. Leave it alone and we are fine.
You find a passage speaks to you, inspires you, take it with thanks, even share it. Just lets get rid of the unhelpful and offfending arrogant triumphalism that goes with it - >> MY way, MY book, MY religion is the ONLY way "GOD" (the Divine, Tao, Buddha Nature, etc.) can encounter us and no other.<<
That is balderdash and unreal.
11 Nov 12
Originally posted by Taoman"And the LORD God said unto the woman, What [is] this [that] thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat." -- Genesis 3:13, KJV
Somewhat pointless repeating this here, but out of a sense of compassion I tell you again and again, and sorry, blunt I must be...
You (Christians) are all projecting onto the historically conditioned collection of Jewish and Christian writings, and onto the concept of "God" what you want and desire, arising out of your existential anxieties. Liberal belie ...[text shortened]... burblings of your child, or the deep message in a film...
YOU are the CHOOSER.