Philo wrote, "you are a servant to your own beliefs, master of your passions and drives. This is the identity of the god you worship".

Master replies: You don't seem able to grasp the meaning of the word "worship". Here's a link to the definition for your edification:
http://www.answers.com/topic/worship

Worship basically means "the reverent love and devotion accorded a deity, an idol or a sacred object".

Living one's life in the normal way is not "worshiping", nor is it the worshiping of an "identity of a god" as you seem to "believe". Living life is just that, "living life" - - - it's NOT worship.

Philo wrote, "God is manifest in Truth and wisdom and is eternal and not the property of one".

Master replies: Good on you, if you "believe" that then that's wonderful.

Just remember that others have EQUAL right to "their" religious beliefs, whether or not they agree with your beliefs. And others have EQUAL right to have no religious beliefs. I'm sure you're gracious enough to accept these people "AS THEY ARE", without feeling the need to change or convert them - - - or are you?

Philo,
I agree that the term “primitive“ can have many meanings (as you suggested), however “primitive in the extreme” can have only a disparaging meaning.

I appreciated and learned a lot from the various interpretations of the Book of Job presented here since my world-view is not that much based on scripture (especially OT) but rather on (philosophy of) science and metaphysics.

Thus my reaction, which was not to defend this or that opinion, belief or world-view but the level of language, style on this OLO, even when expressing disagreement with other world-views.

However, I agree, I should not have referred to “intellectual sophistication” in retaliation for the term “primitive in the extreme“ (a Christian should not retaliate, although it does not have to be always “turn the other cheek”).

Nevertheless, I still maintain that people who are arrogant, who belittle, denigrate other people‘s world-views make a statement not about those world-views but about themselves. This has been pointed out on this OLO many times when religious zealots wrote disrespectfully about atheists. I think it works also the other way around.

Master,
ditto.

George, it's all about a little thing called "freedom of speech". Under a "free" society I am allowed to say that it's my opinion that other peoples' opinions on certain things seem "primitive" or "primitive in the extreme" - - - and in the same free society they are absolutely allowed to reply in the manner that they choose.

The fact that I said the views are "primitive" does not display disrespect. It displays my opinion that the views are indeed "primitive". If I think their views are primitive and DON'T SAY THAT, then my "silence" shows a disrespect. They have a right to be aware of what others think; and they have the right of reply: And that reply can be expressed in the manner in which "THEY" choose.

Master,
I am not sure I know, or would understand, what you do or do not believe, what is your world-view, but you can be sure I would never call it “primitive to the extreme” in a sweeping statement, because that is not a language I would use on this OLO, freedom of speech or not.

As a matter of fact, neither would I THINK of it in that way if I knew that this world-view was more or less shared by a number of respectable people - philosophers, scientists, etc.

Well, this is where we apparently differ.

>> Nevertheless, I still maintain that people who are arrogant, who belittle, denigrate other people‘s world-views make a statement not about those world-views but about themselves. <<

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T69TOuqaqXI&feature=channel_page

The most primitive views on OLO are from the earth worshipers who deny the obvious (a Creator) and mumble on with pseudo science such as evolution. It is not surprising to see them acting like animals in the name of 'saving the planet'.