Trading one problem for an accepted one—the art of conformity
“Faith is consent without evidence to that which is opposed by reason“—Jean Meslier
Enduring faith—bridled to a single, vulnerable moment in the past now sustained by layers upon layers of dismissal. Rarely any reasonable explanation will change the miracle (even by the obvious) in the mind of the believer.
A trauma or high point of conviction, an anchoring bias coupled with endless persuasion until it is the only option you know in depth—no other doctrine is welcomed now, for through the automatic rebuttal feature, faith is the closure of a once opened mind. For the child of the earth that could entertain a myriad of possibilities, now has but a few ways in which to conform.
Naturoglyphs in the canyon
Knowledge will not be had by dismissing even one errant point. There is only one, contradictory free, ultimate truth in the universe. Can we follow that path without waving off a bit here and there, but turn only where the evidence leads? It cannot be done post acquiescence to religious faith—and it will take natures children to realize it before the sidetracking of beliefs settle in to the long haul of conformity.
Since truths are simply chemically enhanced perceptions that warm the synapses, altering the chemical makeup is changing reality. This is also the true efficacy of prayer.
Inside our brains, the mind is drugs making up those realities and that, is what we believe is true and real. Religion is the result of a race—who can dispense the most candy by playing on the highs and lows of human survival. More candy—more truth. More trauma, more candy. They thrive on it.
By altering what nature has limited us to see by evolving for survival, adding more fizz is simply expanding our sphere of awareness. So, no perception is anymore real than any other, just more acute—and acute translates to truth.
Heaven would be simply endless endorphins in a stupor of pleasure (for the eternal body) resurrected in its perfect state, able to dispense at-will, whatever you will.
How gods morality is too different to be the author of mans
That god can inflict death and evil at will and still be “good” is evidence that mans morality did not transude from god, but in spite of him (if there was one)
If god is righteous simply because he says so, there is no difference between god and evil in which he would also be the author of his own immunity. He demonstrates this in scripture that his motives are just—inexcusable in the eyes of normal men, but often justified by obedience.
Deuteronomy 20:16 “But in the cities of these peoples that the Lord your God is giving you for an inheritance, you shall save alive nothing that breathes, 17 but you shall devote them to complete destruction, 18 the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites, as the Lord your God has commanded”
Even a mere atheist can recognize this brand of totalitarian evil, which is god in his own unique perfectness, being one in the same, inseparable from his evil. Gods laws are not our laws (thankful for that) At least we’re making an effort to be civil. What is it we’re being accused of anyway to be so… fallen? Seeking knowledge? Refusing to do his bidding? Nope
Killing for god is historically acceptable by his command, but really the antithesis of Christian morality is the vile act of unbelief in Jesus as savior of the world—John 16:9 If there is a god, his morality is not transferred to the hearts of men—yet we see historically that through belief in him, we too often justify being like him.
“As surely as I live,’ says the LORD, ‘every knee will bend to me, and every tongue will declare allegiance to God.—Romans 11:13
What type of creature would demand that as a final consummation?
“Thus saith the Lord—the change from the old law to the new law is hereby a superficial duplicity. I will come forth in the last days in the usual tyranny“—
Christianity is the worlds biggest bureaucracy. Even entering the comment thread of any Christian blog or website is evidence of that little fact. Getting a comment posted through moderation is tough, let alone making an attempt to address its religious managers, can be quite futile and rarely entertaining. Controlling what is allowed to print is a big part of The Way© the truth, and the fight.
Enter Parkinson’s Law
While the law can apply to nearly every field, the gist of the law is a mathematical equation illustrating “the rate in which bureaucracies expand over time, is in opposition to its connection with the people it serves“. Eg; As the end of the British empire declined it had the greatest number of staff to manage its fewest ever number of colonies. And now as we see with Christianity providing less and less of everything it ever promised, the number of wannabes dot the landscape as churches outnumber schools 10-1.
“The demand upon a resource tends to expand to match the supply of the resource”
Simply addressing the self serving pomps who stand guard is a useless frustration. Talking to those in charge of the various schemes is the ultimate in bureaucratic stonewalling. Fully insulated, barely functioning, promises promises, while those that receive the least benefit of the empire guard the gates in hopes they’ll be chosen to rule the earth (in eventual meekness, no doubt)
Another variation of the law is this—”The amount of time that one has to perform a task is the amount of time it will take to complete the task”
And since Jesus is never coming, they have all the time in the world.
Is it possible there is more to life than meets the eye?
I’ve heard it said many times (mostly by theists) that the atheist believes when this life ends, that’s it—it’s over. That life is evolved from the primordial ooze and has no meaning but evolution, or survival—one and done.
An atheist I recently encountered said “life has no purpose beyond this existence which makes every single moment we have here precious“. How would it possibly matter in the slightest what we see, where we go, what we achieve, or what we learn in this life, if in the end it’s lights out with no memory or collection of experience—period?
True there are no gods, but does that mean there is nothing at all? Is consciousness simply an organic process? Not only would that violate the laws of energy, but is even stranger than imagining a life in some heaven at the feet of a god. Atheism may not be the last stop on the tracks, but merely an awakening—a clean slate to see the universe though a different light.
This short span of measured time we call living is not really our normal existence. We have spent vastly more time dead than alive, which is by far our most natural state of being.
While existence here is an odd presentation, bookended by two unknowns, the mere fact that we don’t know is likely the only thing that could possibly entertain an infinite being. So, are we that, or just temporary processes of nature?
Life has a strange, but consistent way of offering us two wrong choices. Maybe in this case it theism vs atheism. Is there no other way?
So where is the consensus of atheist on some type of continuation, and if it’s truly over, what evidence led you to think that?
For anyone confused over flat earth theology—debunking conspiracy math
Insisting the earth is flat? It matters where you get your information, but some solutions are frankly simple, and can be done on your own if you choose.
Colorstorm is insisting the earth is flat—that if it was round the Suez Canal would have to be dug out 1666 feet to account for the curvature, and for water to flow 100 miles from sea level to sea level. Without that massive dig the Suez would have to flow uphill, both directions. This is christian-think™️, where belief is steady and the flat earth doesn’t turn.
Because there is a “crest” illustrated by curvature does not mean “uphill” on a gravitational sphere. If your mind is clinging to scientific conspiracy, listen carefully—The surface of the water is equipotential. It has the same distance to the Earth’s center of gravity. It is not necessary to dig 1666 ft in the middle of the Suez Canal, only sea level to sea level and follow the flow.
For something even simpler we look at the Bedford Level Experiment, where six miles of “flat earth” were demonstrated to be curved simply by using three tall platforms the same height, with one structure at the three mile mark. Then using a transit level showing the difference on the pole in the middle, confirming a crest.
Also, did you know gravity is a bit stronger at the poles, where centrifugal force is less than the equator? Yes, the earth is spinning. Did you know you weigh slightly less on mount Everest than at sea level because you’re farther from the gravitational constant? Eventually, as you leave the gravitational pull, away from the core you become weightless like a space probe.
Finally, easily illustrated by things we see every day, the columns on long suspension bridges are level, but not perpendicular to each other. They are closer to each other at the bottom than at the top, tilting slightly away from each other on the sphere.
But none of this matters to believers that ventured down the rabbit hole of conspiracy belief. The only evidence in Colostrums Bag© of tricks, is evidence that faith is a conundrical trap made for zealots.
At the core of religion we find it relates to science after all. After peeling back the layers we find…nothing. No substance, no proof, no matter, no bliss, but “under intense geographic pressure to believe”. Delusionite©, discovered years ago in the ancient Near East, now has been added to the periodic table. “We have conclusive evidence of its existence by the invisible features that affect all other matters through exhaustive explaining”
Having elements of stagnation, it appears mobile and spreads in viral epidemiology. Unfortunately it bonds easily with Pretendium©, which has no mass or atomic weight and easily crosses the blood-brain barrier, causing hopeless waiting.
Belief is merely a guru challenge—a psychological barrier placed before humanity. Until we can transcend it’s limitations, we are not collectively responsible enough to handle the truth, so we occupy our time in endless debate over who has the best imagination.