The Walum Olam (Native American Tribe) origin myth:

On the earth was an extended fog, and there the great Manito (spirit) reigned. The Great Manito was everywhere. He made the land and the sky. He made the sun, moon and stars, and organized their motions. He gave the first mother. He gave all the animals. An evil Manito came upon the earth, who brought sickness and death.

I've not read much Campbell at all. I assume the messaging is similar to Yuval Noah Harai's messaging in Sapiens about the power of myths, etc?

I understand the historical need for an organized religion but think that need is under strain and suspect it is now being questioned by many more people than ever before.

I personally think religion is a net negative for society and individuals just so you know where I am coming from.

He emphasizes that myth carries messages of truth within it while not being literally true. His big thing is the "hero's journey" ... of which each of our lives it is the ultimate honor to be yourself, to find oneself ... kind of the opposite of being born evil and needing supernatural rescue.

Bump, this thread needs more

I came to the realization that my views on religion are similar to my views on porn: I don't mind people practising religion/porn, as long as they keep it private and there are no kids involved.
In all other cases, religious nutjobs should be challenged/exposed/ridiculed without end.

The "beginning template" of human consciousness - the archetypal substrate (Jung) of human mentation - takes us places just as surely as we take it places. We are in a sense "on board" and in a sense the conductor. One of these directions is religiosity, even fundamentalism, which negates all uncertainty, whitewashes the predicament of the self (Walker Percy), provides a ready made identity and path thus elevating foreclosure of identity (James Marcia) to a virtue. The journey of individuation is not fulfilled by fundamentalism, but stymied by it.

Or: a brutally primitive book of magic fables with non-thinking obedience to an invisible, perfect heavenly parent (that kills millions and instructs to do so) ... is the good.

What if we are all we've got ... with no ghosts, no demons, no Yetis, no Bermuda Triangles, no Loch Ness Monsters, no alien abductions, no pixies, no poltergeists, no personal gods worried about who you are sexually attracted to? What if?

I mean isn't that the whole belief system of atheism? Live life here on earth rather than for some supposed future world.

Assuming we are different or more special than any other evolving animal is sort of the perfect anecdote to human hubris

Aristotle says hello.

As discussed, the masses were illiterate, had negligible practice with any scientific method or critical thinking ... and they are the ones the voodoo was sold to. "You're evil because of the serpent story, but we can sell you salvation." They believed out of pure superstition, fear, lack of independent thinking in abstract realms, etc.

That is, unless someone is postulating that they believed it for sound, scientific reasons. I don't think I've heard that yet ... anybody with the gumption to say that.

"I vote for the barbarism. Faith in superstitions is what makes someone good."
-- says the true believer.

"No, I really am this ignorant. DEEPAK RUUUUUUUUUUUULES!!!!"
-- says the true believer

Far be it for me to defend Chopra, but he isn't illiterate, has a lot of degrees ... and has at least one good book that everyone interested in this forum should probably read. If comparing him to illiterate barbarians, one fails quite dramatically.

What kind of example is god setting by just killing people who do wrong? Is this okay for earthly fathers to do, I mean isn't emulating god - being godly - a virtue? If "He" is so loving, why is he so brutal? If "He" surely loves better and deeper than human fathers, why then are human fathers expected to be more kind? Love is not just a word. You can't kill someone for doing wrong because you love them, can you? Is that okay with you? Because it's in a thousands of years old book?

LOVE KEEPS NO RECORD OF WRONGS. EXPLAIN WHY A GOD OF LOVE KILLS FOR DOING WRONG.

From what foundation do you believe that animals killing each other and people/babies dying, etc, etc, is "wrong" ?

We are all just a bunch of atoms that randomly came together, right ? You don't get morals from that starting point.

We can't understand God completely, and I'm only recently started coming to the religious/Christian path... but a reasonable answer could be that whatever 'bad' things happen in this temporary life, are completely insignificant compared to the glory of the afterlife for those that do good in the eyes of their creator.

I think we are all brainwashed in modernity and with the day to day grind of our lives ....to not fully think about just how utterly, completely bizarre and downright ludicrous our existence is compared to nothing existing. When you can come at it from that perspective, belief in God is completely reasonable.

It's easier to blame things on their religion than it is to take responsibility, religious people are like children, I'm surprised you don't see this after your interactions with Aaron and some others in here.

You've pretty much summed it up perfectly with these posts! Anybody who still believes after reading these 2 posts, is just deluding themselves!

I think many religious people are simply too dumb and many indeed need religion otherwise they'd go insane or commit crimes etc.

But some people, the smart ones that still believe, they have gone allin with AA preflop thinking the hand holds 100% of the time once all the cards are out!

They have invested too much, and now they can't be wrong, they'll look too stupid, their ego will get crushed, so for them it's better to live in denial, overlook the facts and simply choose to put on the blinkers!

The stupidity in this thread is amusing! You can clearly see we have evolved as a species, we have clearly become more intelligent, compared to a few thousand years ago.

If they were smart enough back then, I'm sure they would have invented computers, the car, the plane, modern medicine and probably our best invention yet fake double D tits!

But they didnt, did they! Why is that? Has to be because they weren't as smart!

The religion - most religions perhaps - are saved by not holding them as literally true and the "one true god" type stuff (which was just a ploy for market share), and by advancing with its tenants ... being progressive instead of regressive. Open-mindedness is virtuous, not close-minded dogma.

Let's say you were to take a late 1800s pre-born child and somehow magically transport them through time into the present. That was before they had computers, planes had not yet been invented, and cars were very primitive.

Clearly, that child has zero chance of doing anything at all in a modern world because they came from a time before those things existed. What a moron that child would be!

So the invention of "fire" should be discarded then?

LOL, not setting much of an example are you?

I think the bibliography alluded to, and listed partially above, establishes the willingness to learn on the subject. Gnosis > dogma.

… and a gnostic preacher from Lauderdale by the Sea Church told his congregation: “In the translation through Greek, the words kamilon (camel) and kamiilon (rope) were mistranslated, and the saying attributed to Jesus, actually “It would be easier for a rope to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom,” instead alluded oddly to a giant beast. To Jesus' fishermen followers, as the story goes, the rope saying was earthy, of the every day, real, and wise. Even when the mistake was identified, the official church wanted the more sensational “camel” interpretation. It was fascinating to hear that so much of the scriptures and the official religion evolved in this manner.

You wont hear me saying animals eating each other, babies dying, hurricanes and earthquakes killing masses of people is wrong or evil. There is no moral or immoral action taken by the storm or the predatory animals or by disease. You will hear me saying that someone killing people wantonly on purpose is wrong. I recommend a book called Evil: An Investigation, by Lance Morrow.

If you are looking for a standard of morality in philosophy, it isn't in any of the fictional 10,000 gods ... or if it is one better offer some evidence that their god is the "real" one. The standard of morality is LIFE and quality of life, kindness, fairness, the common good, etc.

The lion attacking the antelope is not immoral, it is its very nature. If that nature was designed by a god, it wasn't necessary. If it is Darwinian, we have a much better explanation.

The meek spirit of scripture does "not seek to be honored," yet the god demands constant worship and praise as the primary function of his creation's life.

Imagine an architect/builder who designed and built a great building. Now he wants to be worshipped and praised over it? That is a primitive conception of an egotistical mind that supposes that a god would be the same way.

Only a narcissist or an egomaniac seeks constant praise, but primitive man couldn't comprehend that, and he was the one writing the books of the Bible.

A meek god of love would seek to serve, praise and encourage ... not demand to be lauded and praised. But primitive man didn't grasp that. So he created what he could envision.

Why is there killing and the opposite of modesty from the god of love and meekness? Who wrote it?? Who conceived it??