beliefs per se, are not signs of a “weakness”,
but what is the effect or point of a belief can be a sign of weakness…
now many use this belief in god as a crutch or as a means of showing
dominance and use of god in this fashion is a weakness…
if you need a belief in god to maintain your self worth, then that
is a weakness or if you use your belief in god to show how superior
you are, yes, that is weakness… and most people use god in this way…
the question I have always asked is this, would you still believe in god
even IF there was no punishment for non belief?
most people have belief because of the punishment aspect of
religion and that is weakness… holding a belief because you would
get punished for holding another belief… that is weakness,
so it comes down to the reason, WHY, does someone hold that belief
that makes it a weakness or a strength…
Christians will claim they are among the most family-oriented peoples. I will agree they aren’t exactly bastards. They do have fathers. But isn’t it a little weird that they subordinate themselves to an imaginary authority that is God? Does that not indicate that they have lost the connection to their roots? Does that not indicate they no longer have their own tradition?
I would say that Christian tradition is an example of what forms when a folk, a homogeneous group of people, degenerates into a rabble, a heterogeneous group of people. This degeneration can be brought on by many causes but let’s say the major one is the mixing of people of different origins (e.g. ethnicities, castes, etc.) Christian tradition, then, would merely be an attempt, brought on by fear of anarchy, to make heterogeneous group of people cooperate with each other. It’s a made up tradition to which everyone fearing anarchy submits.
Is hypocrisy a weakness? Not necessarily. But it often is.
Hypocrisy entails duplicity. In the case of views, it entails having two sets of views: one set of views which represents everything one truly believes in and one set of views which represents what one does not really believe in but is useful to pretend to believe in. The former is usually kept private and hidden obviously because this is what is necessary in order to make the second useful.
Now, the problem with duplicity is that it consumes a whole lot of energy . . . it almost requires two separate brains in order to make it a powerful strategy that can work in the long-term. So in theory, duplicity can be strength, but in practice, it isn’t.
Sooner or later the person ends up confusing the two sets. One starts believing one’s own lies. And to make it worse, this isn’t achieved by eliminating the first set altogether and then replacing it with second set. No, this is achieved by suppressing the first set, which consumes a lot of energy, though a lot less than maintaining the two sets does.
Can you now see how weak this approach is?
It’s an energy drain.
I would say this is the problem Christians suffer from. They have two traditions within themselves: the original one, which they suppress because they fear anarchy; and the pragmatic one, which they express because it alleviates their fear of anarchy.
I don’t know. That would require precise knowledge regarding what sort of actions are initiated by their brain. Nonetheless, we can assume that most people by their nature are more inclined to be scientific than to lie. So you can expect the presence of scientific instincts, rebelling against practices such as prayer, that are suppressed, and thus stunted in their expression, by personal interests such as fear.
First some background for those readers who have not followed the thought exchanges Manni and I engaged in recently.
Manni … and many other ILP members, yourself included … have had a significant/beneficial impact on both the reservoir of my thoughts and my thought processes. If nothing else … brought old thoughts to the surface again … and subjected them to regurgitation.
I’ve enjoyed not only her concrete expression … her metaphors as well. The one that comes to mind at the moment is … “you don’t seem too badly infected by the virus”. First time I heard/read the word “virus” in a spiritual context … fascinating … explosive…
Manni is a self professed Pagan … Pagans prefer a “Nature” based world view. I’m a Catholic who believes Catholicism is also a “Nature” based world view … though much more esoteric and abstract in it’s expression of “Nature”. Admittedly, this last comment may be a personal attempt to defend clinging to my faith.
I chose to defer any comment to Humunculus … since his post triggered Manni’s comments. Seems he is either too busy or too pragmatic to respond.
On with what caught my eye … will only cite one example … wanting to leave some for other interested readers:
the individual consciousness is bursting at the seems with data … memory … instinct(s) and so on … ergo … information overload. Though the capacity of the individual consciousness is likely unlimited … most of the capacity resides in the subconscious.
our readily accessible consciousness is a terribly muddled mess … the “diamonds” residing among the clutter … the waste … the superfluous and so on.
the escape into the wilderness … what an attractive thought … escape from all the clutter, waste, confusion and so in our individual consciousness. The result being … hopefully … discover the true basics concerning human life.
Manni’s thought reminds me of everything I know about the abundant empirical evidence involving the hermit … the reclus … the ascetic … the flowering of monasteries, convents, temples, Guru/devotee relationships and so on.
If believing in a creator is a strength and not believing in one is a strength, then what weakness is there when to achieve strength, they had to fight?
So… A final time before I really pull my dick out of things: Either ban me outright and get it done and over with, or I will rip you all to shreds. This is the last time you moderate me for bullshit reasons.
You all really should have listened the first time I said things; the first time I taught you all. But to drag it to this extent? Inexcusable.
I’m tellin’ ya, when they falsely moderate me when I’m in the midst of throwing down, or in the midst of making a point… When they falsely persecute me, some times I really wish they would just kill me already.
Not necessarily. That belief can simply be based on what one has seen, despite what one has not seen and despite what cannot be seen. Faith.
It’s not actually illogical to believe in a creator since there is creation if it’s based on a mature belief which has been questioned and gone through the fire, so to speak.
But perhaps what you’re actually asking is the belief in a personal loving god who is going to do it all for you, always be there for you, like a surrogate father.
Belief only becomes weakness when it is used as a crutch - when that belief or a god becomes a crutch out of fear because one has no sense of self, no sense of self-determination or autonomy.
Belief in a creator can either work for one or against one.
One can also turn that around, I think, and say that “disbelief” in some kind of creator can be seen under certain circumstances insofar as particular individuals are concerned as some kind of weakness also ~ when it comes down to having a fear of sensing some kind of connectedness with something larger than ourselves.
That’s nice, descending one; but I’m ascending and I’m not letting this go.
That jackass Mannikin had my posts removed that were pertinent responses to his Original Post. He fiddled with Magsj’s emotional responders under the guise of their actions being perfect all-the-way-around objective lessons, but they forgot the emotionality of stepping between a predator and his prey, for one, getting caught up in someone elses fight, for two; and I guess, falsely persecuting and abusing power becomes the distant third here. That the little bitch coward had to run and cry for help and actually got it.
Hey, can I get some help here with this, too? I need help because I’m getting my ass kicked by overwhelming odds. I’m outnumbered, bullied and kept down and just because some pissy little pussy got it in his head while his head was up his ass, I’m faulted by the faulty moderation in faulty methodology?
And my posts get erased? That were vital and pertinent parts of the conversation?
You had to have known I wasn’t going to let that be and get away free, what double-standard are you all trying to pull, anyway?
You said this wasn’t my blog, and you are correct, but you did call me to take part in this thread and anything to do with a creator in the sense of God is my business and I do take over.
This is mine. I owned it. I killed it. I answered your stupidity question. I dominated.
And, fuck the mods and fuck Magsj in particular. Fuck only humean and fuck the fixed cross and felix da kat whether theyre mods or not, cause fuck’em anyway and fuck Carleas who, if he had a pair and a brain in his head might actually be dangerous.
Paul Tillich said that: "The courage to be is rooted in the God who appears (namely, one’s self)when God has disappeared in the anxiety of doubt.”
― Paul Tillich, The Courage to Be
The so-called God who appears is namely one’s self. It’s possible, to me, that when one is ready to give up the notion of a god (disbelief) or at least the infantile notion of a personal loving one who is available at all times, one is finding strength or becomes strong in standing outside of a god and becoming his/her own person, his/her own god.
Of course, that doesn’t necessarily mean that everyone who decides not to believe in God are strong.
That would depend on who they are. There is nothing egotistical about wanting to grow up even if one has to put god aside or destroy that god.
