look at this guy taking the bullshitting seriously.
sins are a made up concept, like religion.
they don’t exist.
and since we were talking about the christian cult specifically that started with this guy.
other religious cults could’ve defined their sins like drinking alcohol,killing a snake or having sex with the wrong person.
the catholic sins were only defined later when they wrote their bible fantasy book.
so nobody sinned before that.
And since there is nothing as divine law there is nothing to violate.
people also call it “natural law”
No they don’t.
natural law is the law of nature, that exists and has nothing to do with religious nonsense but instinct, which originated from evolution.
but of course, evolution is in itself a concept a patient suffering from religious mental disorder can’t grasp.
Hmmm. Upvote or downvote? You make solid points. You are defending a position in good faith. Yet “mental disorder”?
Your mentality and eagerness to stake a position and defend the bastion hurts as much as helps.
catholic sins were only defined later
You are making an artificial distinction. Catholicism can be, but shouldn’t be viewed as a thing with a start. It’s part of a continuum. Judaism>Christianity>Islam. Catholic sins weren’t defined later. Like all culture, they evolved from earlier sins. Even calling them Abrahamic Religions as we do is making the same error. The tradition didn’t just emerge, it evolved from predecessors and it has descendants.
natural law is the law of nature, that exists and has nothing to do with religious nonsense but instinct, which originated from evolution.
Aside from the above linking culture, specifically religion to evolution in a real tangible way, please consider that natural selection over time takes random mutations and selects for reproductive fitness. It doesn’t care about what is “good” it only cares about what is most advantageous until new offspring can extend the continuity. We tend to think of this in terms of physiological of biochemical traits, but that’s a narrow view too. Our minds are a product of evolution. Our thinking is a product of our minds.
“Sin” is just part of a evolutionary cultural continuum that started somewhere in the roots of cognition where “actions>consequences” evolved and branched into “sin” and “karma”.
Creatures with evolved complex cognition need their complex social constructs to evolve to survive as well. They become condensed, efficient, easily axiomized artifacts like “the golden rule”, “religion”, philosophy, ethics, morality. All part of a continuum where divergence, convergence and speciation occur.
Religious and atheists are seperate cognitive sub-species who can choose to compete, fall into a predator-prey relationship (e.g. inquisition or communist religious purge) or we can coexist in our respective niches or, like all the best stuff in nature, become symbiotic and make the system better for all.
In short, not Religion vs Evolution. Religion as evolution. 😉👉
Oh my god! 😉
Poor me, making a witty non-serious comment and now having to defend myself in a theological discussion.
And this with a hangover from being punished by god for committing the sin of alcohol.
Anyway, here goes.
“mental disorder”
That isn’t necessarily a bold statement.
mental disorders exist in a wide range.
From fear of public speaking to smearing yourself with feces or chopping your mother to pieces because a voice told you she is the devil.
Somewhere in that spectrum lies religion.
While I came to that conclusion myself, I have learned I am not alone.
Sometimes labeled as a form of delusion which is a psychiatric condition.
When a majority of humans suffers from this condition it is logical it becomes acceptable and the others will conform, regardless of how crazy their beliefs are.
catholic sins were only defined later
You are making an artificial distinction. Catholicism can be, but shouldn’t be viewed as a thing with a start. It’s part of a continuum. Judaism>Christianity>Islam. Catholic sins weren’t defined later. Like all culture, they evolved from earlier sins. Even calling them Abrahamic Religions as we do is making the same error. The tradition didn’t just emerge, it evolved from predecessors and it has descendants.
I did mention other and previous religions.
Religions themselves make it a point to distinguish themselves from the others, they have specific things that are sins.
Regardless if there are some taken over from the religions they stem from they DO NOT EXIST as sins from their own religion as it hasn’t been invented yet.
It doesn’t care about what is “good” it only cares about what is most advantageous
Obviously, however we humans defined any trait that is most advntageous as good.
Humans needed the group to survive.
So it is good not to just kill someone or steal from them. Even if beneficial to the perpetrator.
Religion has appropriated many of these natural rules.
You are a good follower of religion X if you follow these rules, and breaking them is called a sin.
I see nothing that warrants calling these already existing concepts ‘evolution’.
I also would never place religion in between “golden rule”, “religion”, philosophy, ethics, morality”.
Religious and atheists are seperate cognitive sub-species who can choose to compete, fall into a predator-prey relationship (e.g. inquisition or communist religious purge) or we can coexist in our respective niches or, like all the best stuff in nature become symbiotic and male the system better for all.
Now this is a delusional.
History and present show religions are a huge danger and have awful consequences.
They are imperialist and invariably want to impose their world view.
Even if many of the followers don’t necessarily want this, there are religious zealots that infect others.
Even if there wasn’t any competition the religions try to impose their will on their subjects.
I couldn’t care less what people believe, unless they start bothering others and this is what they do.
Allowing religion is like having a little fire that can get out of control at any moment.
If only sane people would be in charge (as I mentioned it is not the case due to the religious epidemic) it would be forbidden.
Just the same as cigarettes and alcohol if they would be if invented now.
The danger and damages are obvious.
It’s like saying “I can do some cocaine and heroine, no problem. I’m a functioning member of society and no burden to society”
This can be the (individual’s) case, but we know the consequences and examples and therefore do not tolerate this behavior in society.
It would be tolerated if a large portion of society were coke and heroine users.
look at this guy taking the bullshitting seriously.
sins are a made up concept, like religion.
they don’t exist.
and since we were talking about the christian cult specifically that started with this guy.
other religious cults could’ve defined their sins like drinking alcohol,killing a snake or having sex with the wrong person.
the catholic sins were only defined later when they wrote their bible fantasy book.
so nobody sinned before that.
And since there is nothing as divine law there is nothing to violate.
Hmmm. Upvote or downvote? You make solid points. You are defending a position in good faith. Yet “mental disorder”?
Your mentality and eagerness to stake a position and defend the bastion hurts as much as helps.
You are making an artificial distinction. Catholicism can be, but shouldn’t be viewed as a thing with a start. It’s part of a continuum. Judaism>Christianity>Islam. Catholic sins weren’t defined later. Like all culture, they evolved from earlier sins. Even calling them Abrahamic Religions as we do is making the same error. The tradition didn’t just emerge, it evolved from predecessors and it has descendants.
Aside from the above linking culture, specifically religion to evolution in a real tangible way, please consider that natural selection over time takes random mutations and selects for reproductive fitness. It doesn’t care about what is “good” it only cares about what is most advantageous until new offspring can extend the continuity. We tend to think of this in terms of physiological of biochemical traits, but that’s a narrow view too. Our minds are a product of evolution. Our thinking is a product of our minds.
“Sin” is just part of a evolutionary cultural continuum that started somewhere in the roots of cognition where “actions>consequences” evolved and branched into “sin” and “karma”.
Creatures with evolved complex cognition need their complex social constructs to evolve to survive as well. They become condensed, efficient, easily axiomized artifacts like “the golden rule”, “religion”, philosophy, ethics, morality. All part of a continuum where divergence, convergence and speciation occur.
Religious and atheists are seperate cognitive sub-species who can choose to compete, fall into a predator-prey relationship (e.g. inquisition or communist religious purge) or we can coexist in our respective niches or, like all the best stuff in nature, become symbiotic and make the system better for all.
In short, not Religion vs Evolution. Religion as evolution. 😉👉
Oh my god! 😉 Poor me, making a witty non-serious comment and now having to defend myself in a theological discussion.
And this with a hangover from being punished by god for committing the sin of alcohol.
Anyway, here goes.
“mental disorder”
That isn’t necessarily a bold statement.
mental disorders exist in a wide range.
From fear of public speaking to smearing yourself with feces or chopping your mother to pieces because a voice told you she is the devil.
Somewhere in that spectrum lies religion.
While I came to that conclusion myself, I have learned I am not alone.
Sometimes labeled as a form of delusion which is a psychiatric condition.
When a majority of humans suffers from this condition it is logical it becomes acceptable and the others will conform, regardless of how crazy their beliefs are.
I did mention other and previous religions.
Religions themselves make it a point to distinguish themselves from the others, they have specific things that are sins.
Regardless if there are some taken over from the religions they stem from they DO NOT EXIST as sins from their own religion as it hasn’t been invented yet.
Obviously, however we humans defined any trait that is most advntageous as good.
Humans needed the group to survive.
So it is good not to just kill someone or steal from them. Even if beneficial to the perpetrator.
Religion has appropriated many of these natural rules.
You are a good follower of religion X if you follow these rules, and breaking them is called a sin.
I see nothing that warrants calling these already existing concepts ‘evolution’.
I also would never place religion in between “golden rule”, “religion”, philosophy, ethics, morality”.
Now this is a delusional.
History and present show religions are a huge danger and have awful consequences.
They are imperialist and invariably want to impose their world view.
Even if many of the followers don’t necessarily want this, there are religious zealots that infect others.
Even if there wasn’t any competition the religions try to impose their will on their subjects.
I couldn’t care less what people believe, unless they start bothering others and this is what they do.
Allowing religion is like having a little fire that can get out of control at any moment.
If only sane people would be in charge (as I mentioned it is not the case due to the religious epidemic) it would be forbidden.
Just the same as cigarettes and alcohol if they would be if invented now.
The danger and damages are obvious.
It’s like saying “I can do some cocaine and heroine, no problem. I’m a functioning member of society and no burden to society”
This can be the (individual’s) case, but we know the consequences and examples and therefore do not tolerate this behavior in society.
It would be tolerated if a large portion of society were coke and heroine users.