Show thread history
Bill Cypher
11h ago
Heresy and semantic stop signs pretty much sum up the ways Anti-Theists feel than religion is a source of harm in society.
Personally I also think about house cats.
They are genetically wild, no difference unlike dogs which have genetic changes from wolves. They are in a state of stunted emotional development. They shift their dependence from their parents to their owner.
This is why a pet dog let loose dies but a pet cat let loose will be fine, the cats finally grow up.
As an atheist and an anarchist I realize that both of those are moving on from and gaining independence from additional layers of parental figures. It adopting those beliefs feels a lot like a late additional stage of growing up. You also start to often see statists and religious people appealing to those figures a lot like siblings yelling "But Mom! Make them stop I don't like it! "
Personally I also think about house cats.
They are genetically wild, no difference unlike dogs which have genetic changes from wolves. They are in a state of stunted emotional development. They shift their dependence from their parents to their owner.
This is why a pet dog let loose dies but a pet cat let loose will be fine, the cats finally grow up.
As an atheist and an anarchist I realize that both of those are moving on from and gaining independence from additional layers of parental figures. It adopting those beliefs feels a lot like a late additional stage of growing up. You also start to often see statists and religious people appealing to those figures a lot like siblings yelling "But Mom! Make them stop I don't like it! "
See translation
0
0
0
0
0
Replies
npub12h6h8
@npub12h6h8
11h ago
I've come full circle in my spirituality. Well, not quite full circle, but close enough.
I started with the assumption that Christians are nice people and there's no reason to go beyond that. Then I had some spiritual experiences, and I assumed that meant Christianity was correct - that one, narrow and truncated form of spirituality, quite an assumption. But there were inconsistencies, so I decided to make an honest effort at understanding the Bible - that included church, exploring various denominations, attending regular live online sermons (those were Eastern Orthodox), and the latest was a bible study with fellow nostriches. Every - **_every_** - attempt has ended when I pointed out what the Bible actually says, and got very angry responses. I don't claim to have a perfect understanding, but I can point to specific verses and their context and say, "this definitely can't mean (xyz)." But
I started with the assumption that Christians are nice people and there's no reason to go beyond that. Then I had some spiritual experiences, and I assumed that meant Christianity was correct - that one, narrow and truncated form of spirituality, quite an assumption. But there were inconsistencies, so I decided to make an honest effort at understanding the Bible - that included church, exploring various denominations, attending regular live online sermons (those were Eastern Orthodox), and the latest was a bible study with fellow nostriches. Every - **_every_** - attempt has ended when I pointed out what the Bible actually says, and got very angry responses. I don't claim to have a perfect understanding, but I can point to specific verses and their context and say, "this definitely can't mean (xyz)." But
... See more
See translation
0
0
0
0
0
Bill Cypher
@Bill Cypher
10h ago
Two books popular in the atheist community are "God is disappointed in you" and "apocrypha now"
They both use the same shtick. The religious texts but the stories are told by an atheist in modern language instead of ancient language or modern language selected by a figure in the religion who is incentivized to keep you believing.
The first is the Bible, the second is the Apocrypha. I bring them up because the Apocrypha is books that at some point claimed to be a part of the bible but were axed by various human committees at various times.
You seem like you may be interested in "Apocrypha Now" and or the original texts.
I went through a lot of what you went through on my path to atheism. Happy to talk to a fellow traveler who is curious and genuinely searching instead of just searching for confirmations of what they already believe.
They both use the same shtick. The religious texts but the stories are told by an atheist in modern language instead of ancient language or modern language selected by a figure in the religion who is incentivized to keep you believing.
The first is the Bible, the second is the Apocrypha. I bring them up because the Apocrypha is books that at some point claimed to be a part of the bible but were axed by various human committees at various times.
You seem like you may be interested in "Apocrypha Now" and or the original texts.
I went through a lot of what you went through on my path to atheism. Happy to talk to a fellow traveler who is curious and genuinely searching instead of just searching for confirmations of what they already believe.
See translation
0
0
0
0
0