And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying—Rev 21:4
Imagine heaven—where happiness is the law of the land—that eternal bliss that is all void of sin—with no more yang to counter the yin—no more descending to disrupt ascending—all tears are preempted no sadness therein.
It would quickly digress to the color of grey—an atrophic undefined purposeless way, pure numbing apathy of colorless color, all black or no white, oddly no contrast of what wrong or what’s right. Heaven can’t happen and stay heaven—without hell, so saddle up long for an infinite spell. Opposition is the only that makes being, worth being.
The way to even recognize joy is to have anxieties with which to compare and the opposite’s true too. So quite possibly in heaven we will need to peek through our fingers at an occasional Wild-West hanging or inquisition? Where heavenites gather around mesmerized in *hathos, a morbid curiosity for their burning brothers (out of necessity of course) to gather around just so often to keep themselves grounded to the doldrums of trial free living—how sweet it is at the foot of a gentle tyrant—it could be worse, right? With no opposite to give joy any perspective, death would be the unlimited bore—if the Christian heaven were real.
And only look at those miserable wretches—but don’t touch. Even compassion is stifled in the demands of this heavenly bliss. Rigid, rote, and care-less or else—unable to even water the tongue of the sinner, “because between he and thee is a great gulf affixed“—Luke 16:22 you will look, but only because you will have to remain happy, or else.
*Hathos—A pleasurable sense of loathing, or a loathing sense of pleasure, aroused by a certain necessity to watch.
It may feel good to think you have free will, but do you?
If we are born sinners by nature and regardless of our effort—subject to sin, we would have no freewill to be “sinless,” especially since we are intellectually damaged long before we understand concepts of evil in a religious sense.
Adam and Eve were created with the capacity for disobedience, but the real crime would be god creating men and women who are gullible, easily tricked by whimsical rules, clever speech, flattery (and shiny things) Whose fault is that?
”it is God that worketh in us to will and to do“—Phil. 2:13
Since god is using sin to accomplish his will, is it possible that sin is not evil at all, but merely a label of semantics—a certain set of arbitrary rules for the game? Only by the establishment of these random rules in which the human mind is ineptly programmed to adapt, sin would be the plan all along, manufactured by god.
As a non believer in any religions god, do I have the freewill to truly believe? Simply giving my mind to appease society or my own insecurities would ultimately be pretending to believe.
Then, if I do decide to believe—who cares? Hundreds of thousands of churches closed for the pandemic…I never noticed. Me thinks they have overrated their necessity.
How modern religion has built its own proverbial maze of in-house testing
Since religion has no natural predator, tests of faith now are strictly done in-house. No torches or late night chases into the grottos, religion is now the predator. With greater protection than an endangered species, Christian Faith can now part the seas of opinion simply by making claims. It is a strange case where the vast majority can claim persecution at the drop of an idea—or any opposition of its attempt to legislate as hate speech.
The church has always thrived on being the martyr. The apostles were all supposedly killed for their beliefs—but not really. They were most likely killed because they were pushy, annoying pomps—end-time zealots preaching the fall of society.
Now the pre-testing comes with a handy coloring book and performed early and often by a team of trained, in-house experts.
Poisoning the well Warning each child about just the right kind of doubt and how to combat it, squelching dissent years before most can be trusted think on their own, and by graciously withholding information.
As christianity now endures the most violent oppression in history—that internal, self deprecation that insures the acolyte and initiate are bonded forever as the worthless, dependent sinner.
“Investigations into the beginnings of religion have accumulated steadily throughout the past century. It is only by great efforts of censorship, by sectarian education of an elaborately protected sort, and the like, that ignorance about them is maintained.”—H. G. Wells
The honest test of faith would be an early, liberal arts education, exposing the young to a wide variety of disciplines to nurture their minds as they grow. The truth is there is no faith when the religious tale is all they are allowed.
Columbia River Ferry at Inchelium, Wa
Pandemic Picnic #7 Blue Day!
Split so many ways, todays religion is the greatest test of faith.
Working their way back to Jesus by reading old theists, the New Theists© are determined to true the tried and failed—like running the hamster wheel backwards will make a difference. But no worries, it hasn’t gone far. Just superficial arguing.
While theism is belief in god, atheism is simply pointing out how that’s not The Way by its perpetual stall. We’re on our own here which is proven daily. The trick is to break the spell of faith as a destination and drop the dead weight that has kept humanity—waiting.
Each new generation inherits a deeper pool of contradictions to proudly buoy their faith. Then with the mental fortitude of a champion juggler, prove they can believe against all odds.
Not so long ago Christianity began its final, divisive act. Not against the unbeliever (far too watered down now for that) but against each other. Every man creating his own doctrine and defining his own god and idol. “A multiplication of beliefs acts as a division of belief; and in proportion as anything is divided it is weakened”—Thomas Paine
Every Christian seems to know the others are believing it wrong. Maybe it’s time to realize themselves are included. But that is the way of the church—it’s what happens when starting with an errant premise.
“Religion, by such means, becomes a thing of form, instead of fact—of notion, instead of principles“—Thomas Paine
Faces in the fires
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.
How to remain morally consistent in a pandemic
I would not accept your right to pollute my breathing space to enrich your own life, nor would it be consistent to allow any individual to seed illness on me without my consent.
I’ve met some very inconsiderate people these past few days who have violated my personal office space and encroached my social safe zone. After a few intrusions my office is now locked.
The fact is nobody knows if they have it or not til it manifests, but many are openly pretending no exposure to the virus and have put me at risk.
In what universe is it morally acceptable to condemn others to death on the grounds that one himself is supposedly willing to die?
Avoiding the virus
How overcoming doubt does not strengthen faith but merely lowers the bar
About a year ago Loy used the words, “maturing in faith”. Another reassuring catch phrase is, “deeper faith” or “deepening faith”, but what actually is the cognitive process of obtaining a deeper, more mature faith and why is it important to put effort to it? Why deconstruct doubt to reconstruct faith when you know it simply requires additional mental wrangling and dismissal of, or in many cases, spoliation of evidence?
Isn’t maturing in faith actually an increased commitment to self doubt after another exhaustive mental tug-o-war and rewording? Or, is it merely preserving bias longevity by simply ignoring doubt, bypassing evidence to cradle another attempt at belief into a smoother, steadier, methodical release of DHEA or relaxin? Maturing in faith is simply re-accepting your surrender, giving another try at reforming your thoughts—relax, god is testing your ability to lose an argument between your true self and your anchoring bias.
Painting on a house near me
Redoubling efforts to challenge doubt conforms one to a far more meaningful faith. One that frees your mind from the burden of original thought, for all religion creates copycats—soldiers of prepackaged t.v. dinner dogma by convincing yourself it’s actually a freewill thought. The choice is yours, but in trying to keep faith most will succeed. The reward is in the backslapping and camaraderie of thinking you get it, when you don’t.
Maturing in the gospel is simply an erroneous effort that lowers expectations of the benefit gained through faith.