2009年5月28日木曜日

Addendum to the Previous Critique

Other parts of the Bible do mention about those topics but basically this is just a critique on the Ten Commandments. If you think it's a perfect and exhaustive list, please think again.

A Critique on the Ten Commandments

 Most Christians will agree that The Ten Commandments are the most perfect set of moral rules ever created. This is old news to a lot of people but I think that for a lot of the people that read this it might not be. The Ten Commandments have nothing to say about 

child molestation

rape

genocide

slavery

homophobia

women's, gay, whoever's rights in general


Also, people like to say that the Old Testament is not really the thing you should follow but that's where the Ten Commandments show up. Why are people saying both? Maybe the argument is that the Ten Commandments are so powerful they supercede whatever Covenant they happen to be in but I don't think most people are thinking that far. 

Basically, the thing needs to be updated. These are Bronze Age rules. We need something a little newer than that.

2009年5月23日土曜日

Places I've Never Been To But Want to Visit



By the way, just zoom out on the map below.

2009年5月22日金曜日

2009年5月20日水曜日

Euthyphro's Dilemma

The Euthyphro dilemma is found in Plato's dialogue Euthyphro, in which Socrates asks Euthyphro:

"Is the pious (τὸ ὅσιον) loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?" (10a)


In monotheistic terms, this is usually transformed into:

"Is what is moral commanded by God because it is moral, or is it moral because it is commanded by God?"

The dilemma has continued to present a problem for theists since Plato presented it and it is still an object of theological and philosophical debate. 


My Thoughts:

1.) Some people might think that this is not a problem because whatever is "hereditary" in the universe is that way because God said so...and so God can still be considered the answer here...however..This is still not a complete or acceptable answer. 


2.) No one usually thinks this far so who gives a fuck anyway, right? 

3.) This is the part that I heard mostly when I was a kid and maybe as I get older the kinds of people that say the following are leaving my friend group but (and this is something that I've always hated and not understood) some people will say that you're wrong or just not trustworthy when you've done research like this because God is so apparent to them. It's so easy and natural. Something MUST be wrong we a person that has to do all this book learnin' (objective research). These kinds of people only trust people with instincts that lead them to their spiritual conclusion because that's how they did it. So the thing that is so frustrating here is that they can't fucking listen. The more you research and the more knowledgeable you become the less of a reliable resource you are to these people. It makes you go insane sometimes. 

4.) The counter-argument to this (and this is similar to the previous one) is that God cannot go against his nature and so this throws a wrench into the works but still...this is only hearsay really. How the fuck do you justify that claim? 

2009年5月3日日曜日

Part 2

same thing. I think that if people are going to view then viewing this idea of God would be best viewed outside of any filter...outside of any religion. If God exists, then he/it/she whatever exists outside of religion just as a flower is not a Christian idea ....it's just a flower. You can look at it from all points of view but mainly it's just a flower. If there is a metaphysical force keeping the universe together that we are in contact with personally or not at all then it just exists...outside of religion. 

End Transmission.

Part 1

The only thing I have to say about "personal event" making/helping people believe in the Christian or any specific God is that I think it's quite suspect that if something supposedly "supernatural" happens in someone's life they automatically thank the God they know most when if it's supernatural it could have been anything. It could have been Buddha. Who knows? The main contradiction here I find is that Muslims and people of other religions will call whatever they see as "supernatural" and ascribe that event to the god they know the most already. One argument against what I'm saying right now could be that "well I prayed for this to a specific god to happen and it did so obviously it's real" however this kind of thing is said by all people of any faith really. If Christians were the only people getting their prayers answered I would be impressed but that is just not the case. Why do Spanish people always talk of seeing saints but Protestants never do? It should be the same religion.


Protestants will just say that those Spanish Catholics with their saints are just crazy but the same is said the other way around and the amount of confusion within one religion is just too much for me. There should be one central source in one religion...especially if it's monotheistic. You could say the source is Jesus but at the same time why are these Spanish Catholics and Catholics in general always talking of seeing saints in visions or Mother Mary? Why are those visions crazy but those of Jesus are not? It's just nuts to me. 

To me, the way I view religion is general is man trying to cope with the knowledge of his own death. That's how it was created kind of. A lot of it today is just remaining from a time when people did not have a scientific worldview. Bronze age mentalities in the nuclear age will just not go well for too long. If there is a God in the sense that the Judeo-Christian-Muslim says there is then I'd say that all religions are just filters ...ways of seeing the