Greetings YUyutsu,
You write: "Only if one's allegiance is given to the intellect." To disregard one's intellect, to ignore it, to disrespect it is to abuse oneself, to trample one's humanity, to declare a serious deficiency in self-esteem. It is to live one's life as if in thrall to a superior authority, where one strives to be good for fear of disfavour. A totalitarian regime.

"Religion is the process of coming closer to God."
Religion is the attempted legitimisation of intolerance, suspicion and exclusion and turns them into virtues for the seeker with low self-esteem. It provides him with a throng that he can feel superior to. It caters to his pet prejudices and if he's lucky he gets to feel smug about it.

"What makes such scripture "Christian"? Just because the authors claim to follow Christ? I don't think that Jesus would approve!"

And those faithful who venture to advise that they speak for their god and know his moods have convinced themselves [an advanced and inoperable affliction] that not only is smugness a virtue it is an essential acquisition for a "chosen" spokesperson. But then, if I, with only my intellect and experience to guide me, received a call and was elevated to some celestial peerage, I suppose I'd feel pretty damned smug about it myself!

I'm only an imperfect human after all. I have a spine better suited to an animal that walks on four legs, eyes with blind spots, extra teeth that our smaller mouths accommodate with great difficulty reflecting our simian origins and a few other things that speak of an indifferent if not malevolent "designer"

Dear Pogi,

We could discuss ad nauseum the atrocities of those who claim to be religious and the folly of their statements. Rather, I was commenting about religion - not about the impostors (or the deluded) who only claim to be religious.

Regarding intellect, it's a great servant and a poor master. It does us good so long as we keep it in its subordinate position, but as Jesus said: "If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away": I say the same for the intellect.

My self-esteem does not depend on my intellect because the intellect and indeed the whole human body and brain, are merely some property that I have for a short while - nor "my self". My humanity too belongs to that body and will be gone with it. Yes, our humans are imperfect, that's why we only wear them for a while and once they are no longer useful for us, we discard them.

An atheist is not someone who doesn't believe in some God out there, but as Swami Vivekananda states: "He is an atheist who does not believe in himself."

Secularism is a death cult Runner?

Which religion eagerly looks forward to the apocalyptic end of all life on earth, celebrates the violent death by torture of it's representative and thus believes that redemption is only possible by human sacrifice?

Even it's iconic symbol is an execution device and has a history of extreme violence, conquest and bloodshed.

It's always been obsessed with death and martyrdom and it's initial recognition by Constantine was historically based on the need to stop violent infighting between its own competing rival sects plus the ceaseless persecution of Jews.

Death cult indeed!

Hi Rache,

Death cult indeed, yes. And compared to Islam ? As an atheist, my limited understanding is that, for Christians, the death of Christ means that, if one believes, then bodily death is not the end, that one can have everlasting life, forever, 24/7, surrounding by bloody harp-playing cherubs and singing angels praising god.

For Islamists, the alternatives seem to be a bit more drastic: believe, or be exterminated, here and now - a sort of evil, psychotic twin to Christ's dying for others. In Islamism, it seems that one dies for oneself, straight off to Paradise and 72 voluptuous virgins, no matter how many other poor bastards one destroys to get there.

Perspective, Rache - after all, a belief from two thousand years ago of someone dying for others, compared to a current notion of somebody dying only for his own lust and selfishness, no matter what the cost to others might be, sounds immeasurably superior to me. Islamism is obviously a dreadfully backward step compared to the mythical teachings - and example - of Christ hundreds of years earlier.

If I were ever turn to religion - and it's getting a bit late for that - it would probably be Christianity, maybe Quakerism, rather than the crazed and ghastly psychosis of Islamism. One promises building and caring, the other destroying (e.g. Yazidis) and exterminating (e.g. Palmyra).

Joe

Greetings Yuyutsu,
You write: "We could discuss ad nauseum the atrocities of those who claim to be religious and the folly of their statements. Rather, I was commenting about religion - not about the impostors (or the deluded) who only claim to be religious."

And you are erudite in the matter of imposters? Of course you are! How else can you tippytoe your way through a discussion and emerge triumphant? And those faithful who advise that they speak for their god and know his moods have convinced themselves [an advanced and inoperable affliction] that not only is smugness a virtue it is an essential acquisition for a "chosen" spokesperson. Your claim to special privilege is dismissed. Such specious declamation is more likely the device of an imposter than otherwise. You don't get to stack the stage only with players that you approve of. You know nought of the minds of Arnaud Amalric, the papal legate to the Cathar crusade, of the bishop of Bezieres, Renaud de Montpeyroux, of pope Innocent lll and of all other participants. Whatever and whenever the event, your claim to "special" insight is dismissed.

Kindly refrain from filtering your opinion through the, "What would Jesus approve of" gauze. This one among hundreds of messiahs that the Jews hoped would free them of the Roman yoke was a last gasp seizing of a fast dwindling opportunity. Of the hundreds that sought historic immortality it's not surprising that out of desperation the Jews finally chose one. Previous imposters had clearly demonstrated that the messiah job had limited prospects for advancement. Elevation to an eternal aristocracy when it supports a crumbling argument is still practised today with the fast-tracked beatification of that grotesque devotee of suffering Agnes Bojaxhiu by Wojtyla, pope JP2.

Eye witnesses are notoriously unreliable and especially those who have an obvious bias, a not-so-hidden agendum, who would swear to anything to find favour among their peers. Nor were scribes uninfluenced by the fervour of the events taking place, they too, strove mightily to impress and leave their mark on history. Cont.....

Dear Pogi,

I do not understand where you are trying to get: are you trying to refute the principle of Ahimsa (or its Western version, the Golden Rule; or the biblical commandment "Love thine fellow as thyself") by claiming that one could be both violent AND religious at the same time?

There is no need to be erudite in matters of Christian or Jewish history to notice the obvious:

If you see someone claiming that they are a mathematician and that 2+2=5, then you have seen an impostor.
If you see someone claiming that they are a scientist and that the earth is flat, then you have seen an impostor.
If you see someone claiming that they are religious yet preach violence, then you have seen an impostor - and I don't even care if their name is Jesus or how many millions consider them a "Messiah".