Saw this question on r/atheism today.

[WHAMPOM]

And what is that based upon?

I think you seriously underestimate how small the planets are in the scope of their orbits.

Sure, it will capture some of the objects heading our way, but the orbits of both planets are so massive that it can't be very much.

My guess is Jupiter reduces objects impacting the earth by a factor of 10 to the power of a pretty large negative number.

ETA: This is an interesting discussion of the issue. I will concede that the idea isn't as infeasible as I initially thought it was, and thank you for mentioning the phenomenon.

Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune and Uranus sweeping up any errant bits that cross their orbits for four billion years would pretty much take care 99% of any large Earth crossing bits. Need I add that the Sun takes care of alot that does makes it past the outer planets?

 

[FelixDeCat]

For the simple reason it is a totally insane concept derived from the selfishness of weak minded people that cannot or will not accept the fact that just like the cockroach you squished on the kitchen floor, when we die that's it. Souls, supernatural, afterlife, the musing of children or those with child like minds.

What would it take for me to believe? That is when it's official, I will be totally insane.

If you want to play the "proof" such as many other fairy tale followers often throwout, well bring it on, but till then STFU about your fairytale fantasies.

What fairytale? What are you talking about? It seems like you arent interested in conversing you want a confrontation. Im not interested if thats what youre looking for.

You said you were a volunteer firefighter. When you fought fires, did you arrive at a scene where someone had died? I could not imagine being an atheist in that case....knowing that their life is indeed over after a tragic ending. And that if I knew that person I would never see them again.

It would be so depressing. It might even make me a mean, bitter person who sees everyone else as weak minded, calling their beliefs fairytales. Sound like someone you know?

 

[OCNewbie]

You said you were a volunteer firefighter. When you fought fires, did you arrive at a scene where someone had died? I could not imagine being an atheist in that case....knowing that their life is indeed over after a tragic ending. And that if I knew that person I would never see them again.

It would be so depressing. It might even make me a mean, bitter person who sees everyone else as weak minded, calling their beliefs fairytales. Sound like someone you know?

I don't think the two are related. But, reality is reality... there either is an afterlife, or there isn't. If there isn't, believing in one wouldn't change the fact that when people die, that's the end.

 

[LunarRay]

Eternity implies Life... not Death!

 

[Charles Kozierok]

This post is interesting because of the juxtaposition of this:

What fairytale?

With this:

I could not imagine being an atheist in that case....knowing that their life is indeed over after a tragic ending. And that if I knew that person I would never see them again. It would be so depressing.

Maybe it wasn't your intention, but this sounds to me like you're saying people should believe in an afterlife because thinking there isn't one would be "depressing".

Well, you're right. It is depressing. It's hard being an atheist, having to face your own mortality and know that this is all you get.

But still, don't you see where the charges of "fairy tales" come from when you are basically arguing that people should choose to believe in an afterlife because it will make them feel better?

 

[Dr. Zaus]

This post is interesting because of the juxtaposition of this:



With this:



Maybe it wasn't your intention, but this sounds to me like you're saying people should believe in an afterlife because thinking there isn't one would be "depressing".

Well, you're right. It is depressing. It's hard being an atheist, having to face your own mortality and know that this is all you get.

According to Heidegger, facing the inevitability of your limited being is the basis of authentic care for others. Atheist and Christian alike recognize that we are temporally limited; Indeed, Christian and Atheist alike assume that there will be an eternity of non-influence over the human world after death.

From this common ground we can develop a shared ethic of care for others who, too, have limited time upon this stage.

But still, don't you see where the charges of "fairy tales" come from when you are basically arguing that people should choose to believe in an afterlife because it will make them feel better?

Fairy tails don't exist to make you feel better; they exist as known-false stories that teach a moral; Jesus was a real person. The term is inflammatory rhetoric intended to dismiss the faith of others as simple moralistic stories, de-humanizing the faithful as simpletons fooled by a child's-story.

This is done, clearly, inorder to provide an alterity (a stupid duped christian that I AM NOT) for those that struggle to define an empty identity of being "NOT" a believer in God. A respectable atheist doesn't need to argue against God, or rely on sophistry and derogatory propaganda, because he doesn't need another person to define what he believes.

 

[Moonbeam]

This post is interesting because of the juxtaposition of this:



With this:



Maybe it wasn't your intention, but this sounds to me like you're saying people should believe in an afterlife because thinking there isn't one would be "depressing".

Well, you're right. It is depressing. It's hard being an atheist, having to face your own mortality and know that this is all you get.

But still, don't you see where the charges of "fairy tales" come from when you are basically arguing that people should choose to believe in an afterlife because it will make them feel better?

As you should well know and have said above, if you could believe you would. The problem with people like us is that we can't. But the difference, I think, is that I'm not going to tell somebody who believes that what they believe in is fairy tails. Their belief in immortality, regardless of whether there is any truth to it, creates many beneficial mental conditions. One practices virtue as best on can to attain it, which is good for everybody, and one create a mental state in which it is much easier to experience oneness. You are not concerned with your ultimate fate or with existential suffering. I would not argue to convince somebody not to have faith when their mental state is essentially better positioned for realization than mine is. I will try to deal with my people, the atheists and try to persuade them they are callous and disrespectful because they do not know the real purpose of religion, and that there is one. That is just like arguing against faith, I know, but the difference is that if I can remove the non understanding of the atheist he will be left with something better, not something that degrades his mental condition respecting any opportunity he may have to finding a transcendental state.

 

[alzan]

According to Heidegger, facing the inevitability of your limited being is the basis of authentic care for others. Atheist and Christian alike recognize that we are temporally limited; Indeed, Christian and Atheist alike assume that there will be an eternity of non-influence over the human world after death.

From this common ground we can develop a shared ethic of care for others who, too, have limited time upon this stage.

Fairy tails don't exist to make you feel better; they exist as known-false stories that teach a moral; Jesus was a real person. The term is inflammatory rhetoric intended to dismiss the faith of others as simple moralistic stories, de-humanizing the faithful as simpletons fooled by a child's-story.

This is done, clearly, inorder to provide an alterity (a stupid duped christian that I AM NOT) for those that struggle to define an empty identity of being "NOT" a believer in God. A respectable atheist doesn't need to argue against God, or rely on sophistry and derogatory propaganda, because he doesn't need another person to define what he believes.

Jesus was probably a real person, no argument here.

Fairy tales = infalmmatory rhetoric? Hardly, unless one is playing the victim. If your faith or any believers faith can be bought into question or "ridiculed" that easily your faith was not that strong to begin with. De-humanizing the faithful? Victim complex.

I don't struggle to define an "empty" identity as a non-believer; my identity is defined by multiple layers. The fact that I'm agnostic does not identify the total person; it actually doesn't come up too often in daily life.

And if you think about it, a respectable believer doesn't need to argue for G-d. Live as you believe Christ would have you live, and whatever "derogatory propaganda" you think is directed toward you will not matter.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Jesus was probably a real person, no argument here.

Fairy tales = infalmmatory rhetoric?

Actually, I said that calling someone's faith a fairy-tail is inflammatory rhetoric.

If your faith or any believers faith can be bought into question or "ridiculed" that easily your faith was not that strong to begin with.

How I feel, or shouldn't feel according to you, has nothing to do with the fact that calling someone's faith a fairy-tail is about dismissing their belief structure and diminishing the person with faith by lumping them in with gullible children.

You've made an emotive, not logical, argument. I'm talking about rhetorical devices; not how I feel.

De-humanizing the faithful? Victim complex.

Your arm-chair psychological analysis has nothing to do with my argument that a rhetorical device is being used, nor does it change how that device is being used.

I don't struggle to define an "empty" identity as a non-believer; my identity is defined by multiple layers.

Is this your emotional reason for addressing my argument on an emotive level?

My intention was to point up why someone might utilize the rhetorical device in question; It's based on firm philosophical and psychological grounding. There are, admittedly, alternative reasons: maybe someone's just an argumentative ass hat, for example. But the point I was making was not that the only cause of dehumanization of those that disagree with you is a need for personal identification as "NOT TAHT"; but rather to offer up as a common cause of such argumentation a need for personal identification.

That said, you are right that I needed to better contextualize my argument.

The fact that I'm agnostic does not identify the total person; it actually doesn't come up too often in daily life.

I wouldn't say it does; and I appreciate you presenting a boundary condition to my argumentation regarding self identification.

And if you think about it, a respectable believer doesn't need to argue for G-d.

While I didn't argue that it does; I do agree that similar logic may be employed against evangelists of all ilk in regards to my final statement. Unless there's some good reason to behave otherwise; and in this case the bible clearly states that Christians are to be ready to explain the hope that they have whenever questioned about it.

Also, i'm an argumentative asshat.

 

[alzan]

Actually, I said that calling someone's faith a fairy-tail is inflammatory rhetoric.

How I feel, or shouldn't feel according to you, has nothing to do with the fact that calling someone's faith a fairy-tail is about dismissing their belief structure and diminishing the person with faith by lumping them in with gullible children.

My bad, I should've been clearer. I was attempting to tie-in with the children (For the Children!) aspect and the whole don't let words hurt lesson.

You've made an emotive, not logical, argument. I'm talking about rhetorical devices; not how I feel.

<smacks hand>

Your arm-chair psychological analysis has nothing to do with my argument that a rhetorical device is being used, nor does it change how that device is being used.

You are choosing to see it as dehumanizing. You can't change what someone says, only how you react.

Is this your emotional reason for addressing my argument on an emotive level?

Possibly. All I was really doing was defining as a person who doesn't define by the fact of being a non-believer. Except of course within the realm of these types of threads.

My intention was to point up why someone might utilize the rhetorical device in question; It's based on firm philosophical and psychological grounding. There are, admittedly, alternative reasons: maybe someone's just an argumentative ass hat, for example. But the point I was making was not that the only cause of dehumanization of those that disagree with you is a need for personal identification as "NOT TAHT"; but rather to offer up as a common cause of such argumentation a need for personal identification.

That said, you are right that I needed to better contextualize my argument.

I wouldn't say it does; and I appreciate you presenting a boundary condition to my argumentation regarding self identification.

While I didn't argue that it does; I do agree that similar logic may be employed against evangelists of all ilk in regards to my final statement. Unless there's some good reason to behave otherwise; and in this case the bible clearly states that Christians are to be ready to explain the hope that they have whenever questioned about it.

Also, i'm an argumentative asshat.

Ditto +1

 

[Charles Kozierok]

According to Heidegger, facing the inevitability of your limited being is the basis of authentic care for others. Atheist and Christian alike recognize that we are temporally limited; Indeed, Christian and Atheist alike assume that there will be an eternity of non-influence over the human world after death.

I don't see an equivalence here. Religious folks do a whole lot of assessing and even modifying of behavior in the "human world" based on the supposed afterlife. And that's just the reasonable ones. The crazy ones do crazy things for the supposed afterlife.

In contrast, atheists just have what we have.

Fairy tails don't exist to make you feel better; they exist as known-false stories that teach a moral; Jesus was a real person. The term is inflammatory rhetoric intended to dismiss the faith of others as simple moralistic stories, de-humanizing the faithful as simpletons fooled by a child's-story.

Not exactly. The term is meant more to refer to tales that are told to children to make them feel happy or comfortable, especially about the unknown or the future. "Happily ever after", and so forth.

While I try to avoid that term myself, I won't even try to deny that it is what atheists are saying to theists, to a large degree. They are pointing out that religious people are doing the same thing: telling themselves stories that make them feel secure and happy, because they know if they are good, there will be a "happily ever after".

When you boil it down, there's really not a whole lot of difference between how Christian adults portray Santa Claus to their children, and how Christianity portrays Jesus to those same adults. I'm sorry if you find that offensive, but I'm just explaining to you how other people see it.

Christianity (Christmas) is basically about being faithful in Jesus (Santa) and doing good deeds (being "nice") so you get your reward in heaven (toys) and not punishment in hell (being put on the "naughty list").

Now, consider what MeowKat said: "I could not imagine being an atheist in that case....knowing that their life is indeed over after a tragic ending. And that if I knew that person I would never see them again. It would be so depressing."

All I see there is someone saying that it's good to be religious because if you don't believe in something that makes you feel happy, you might feel sad.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

You are choosing to see it as dehumanizing. You can't change what someone says, only how you react

Fair point and funny responses.

I don't see an equivalence here. Religious folks do a whole lot of assessing and even modifying of behavior in the "human world" based on the supposed afterlife. And that's just the reasonable ones. The crazy ones do crazy things for the supposed afterlife.

In contrast, atheists just have what we have.

This is a reasonable contrast; I was trying to draw attention to the fact that faithful or not, we must reckon with the fact that some day we will no longer have influence on Earth. From this similar human condition, we must realize that there are a limited number of moments of being; in each of which we are answerable to care for our fellow human.

Now, consider what MeowKat said: "I could not imagine being an atheist in that case....knowing that their life is indeed over after a tragic ending. And that if I knew that person I would never see them again. It would be so depressing."

All I see there is someone saying that it's good to be religious because if you don't believe in something that makes you feel happy, you might feel sad.

I don't think he was making an argument to convince anyone of anything, or even offering his own intelectual reasons for belief; he was simply relaying how it makes him feel, though I will admit that an appeal to emotions is the most common method of sharing one's faith.

When you boil it down, there's really not a whole lot of difference between how Christian adults portray Santa Claus to their children, and how Christianity portrays Jesus to those same adults. I'm sorry if you find that offensive, but I'm just explaining to you how other people see it.

I don't find that you think that offensive; I find it indicative of someone that is holding overly simplistic mental models, though I feel the origin of those mental models are indicative of a greater institutionalized network of ideas that reinforce the typical atheistic perspective.

I'll explain the distinction: Faith in santa is something that is proven by the appearance of presents and used as a sort of threat to improve the behavior of children. Faith in Christ is the exact opposite. Unlike santa there is no physical manifestation of Christ upon which an instrumentalist/epmericist might hang her or his hat, though there are plenty of pragmatic manifestations; this means that faith in Christ must be based on hope for things unseen. Unlike santa, there is no requirement that we be not be "naughty*" inorder to receive the gift of salvation; indeed the point of the Christian thing is that we've been "naughty" and will continue to, but we are accepting external help and laying down our "naughtiness": failure leads to forgiveness and salvation continues on, unlike santa who will fill your stocking with coal if you fuck up.

I'd like to add that I do see the ways in which santa/christ seem similar; let me offer a different similarity. Most young-earth fundies operate on a highly improper mental-model of Science (which they tend to misspell "lucifer"); but many atheists hold an improper mental-model of Christ (which they misspell "santa").


*see post 1501 for a detailed discussion of naughtiness

 

[Moonbeam]

I don't see an equivalence here. Religious folks do a whole lot of assessing and even modifying of behavior in the "human world" based on the supposed afterlife. And that's just the reasonable ones. The crazy ones do crazy things for the supposed afterlife.

In contrast, atheists just have what we have.



Not exactly. The term is meant more to refer to tales that are told to children to make them feel happy or comfortable, especially about the unknown or the future. "Happily ever after", and so forth.

While I try to avoid that term myself, I won't even try to deny that it is what atheists are saying to theists, to a large degree. They are pointing out that religious people are doing the same thing: telling themselves stories that make them feel secure and happy, because they know if they are good, there will be a "happily ever after".

When you boil it down, there's really not a whole lot of difference between how Christian adults portray Santa Claus to their children, and how Christianity portrays Jesus to those same adults. I'm sorry if you find that offensive, but I'm just explaining to you how other people see it.

Christianity (Christmas) is basically about being faithful in Jesus (Santa) and doing good deeds (being "nice") so you get your reward in heaven (toys) and not punishment in hell (being put on the "naughty list").

Now, consider what MeowKat said: "I could not imagine being an atheist in that case....knowing that their life is indeed over after a tragic ending. And that if I knew that person I would never see them again. It would be so depressing."

All I see there is someone saying that it's good to be religious because if you don't believe in something that makes you feel happy, you might feel sad.

Jesus, Charles, stop telling the kids Santa doesn't exist. He did exist. He was a man of such love that he gave people in need things and the results of his acts were Sainthood, eternal life in a story that has delighted millions and millions of children and adults that pretend to be like him or are. Stop this shit or Santa may decide next Christmas to shove a lump of coal sideways up your ass.

 

[Moonbeam]

For centuries truths about the human mind have been intuited and studies in detail by folk who study the way to realization. They have discovered what are called archetypes, and create myths to address them. For example, to see ones own self hate is profoundly difficult so this is a major obstacle to vision. Analogies are created to warn folk of this. In trying to travel through the underworld for example, or the unconscious, there will creatures like Cerberus or the three headed dog, or other monsters with so many egos or rather heads that to cut them off without turning to stone, you need a special sword and a magic mirror. Self confrontation is alluded to in Hero myths. The hero demonstrates in allegory the inner journey.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

This is a reasonable contrast; I was trying to draw attention to the fact that faithful or not, we must reckon with the fact that some day we will no longer have influence on Earth. From this similar human condition, we must realize that there are a limited number of moments of being; in each of which we are answerable to care for our fellow human.

I understand. I was just saying that people tend to approach life differently when they think they're going to just disappear and when they think they're going to a "better place". Many Christians view their lives as little more than waypoints to their "real destination".

I don't think he was making an argument to convince anyone of anything, or even offering his own intelectual reasons for belief; he was simply relaying how it makes him feel, though I will admit that an appeal to emotions is the most common method of sharing one's faith.

I realize it wasn't a specific attempt to convince. But it was an honest, and IMO noteworthy, illustration of the phenomenon of religious people believing in an eternal happy afterlife primarily because they can't deal with the alternative.

I'll explain the distinction: Faith in santa is something that is proven by the appearance of presents and used as a sort of threat to improve the behavior of children. Faith in Christ is the exact opposite. Unlike santa there is no physical manifestation of Christ upon which an instrumentalist/epmericist might hang her or his hat, though there are plenty of pragmatic manifestations; this means that faith in Christ must be based on hope for things unseen.

All of this applies to a kid enjoying his first "real" Christmas. He doesn't really know if Santa is going to bring him those presents or not. He has to "have faith".

Now, he does get his payoff pretty quickly, but the idea is the same.

I'd like to add that I do see the ways in which santa/christ seem similar; let me offer a different similarity. Most young-earth fundies operate on a highly improper mental-model of Science (which they tend to misspell "lucifer"); but many atheists hold an improper mental-model of Christ (which they misspell "santa").

I understand. I'm not actually saying I consider the two directly analogous in all ways, just that there are parallels in the context of a "fairy tale" discussion.

I mean, how about the "rapture"? Pretty much pure fairy tale -- the good "true believers" get taken to heaven and the bad people are "left behind" in a hell world.

Something like 40% of Americans think the "rapture" is going to happen.
Forty percent! Many of them are spending their lives getting "rapture ready".

I'm sorry, but from the outside, this is just scary.

 

[Moonbeam]

Here is a rant on yhwh.com I stumbled on that Christians may find interesting:

The Briefest Overview of The Bible's "Plot" I Can Give
The Self-Existent God, Named Ahyh Asr Ahyh, I Will Be What I Will Be, aka YHWH, creates out of Himself the entire universe, and everything is perfectly good, including mankind. (The Eternal Ocean evaporates into little raindrops.)

Man eats from the Fruit from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, separating his consciousness from all that is good, and begins to live as a small, self-willed, ego-filled self-made-man. (The little raindrops forget there's an Ocean.)

YHWH does a lot of work, setting up covenants, talking to people about the pain they are causing themselves, giving commandments (raindrop owner's manual), that type of thing.

He comes to the earth in bodily form, to talk to people one-on-one...about how lost they are...about getting their lives together...That they can change, be born to a new life, and discover Christ living inside of them. (We really are, after all, all made-up of the same Ocean water.)

That's the best I can do.

Now, to the point at hand.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Remember what specifically we are talking about:




The whole thing (your life, the Bible, the history of humanity, everything) can be seen as a journey from the

small, limited, ego-filled, hateful, sin-state of human (aka raindrop) consciousness

to the

large, limitless, egoless, loving, bliss-state of God (aka Ocean) consciousness.

(I presented this in #48, States of Consciousness.)

These are the Bible passages that directly address this issue.
All quotations are from The Holy Bible, New International Version.

Opening Prayer
Ephesians 1:18-19

I pray that:

the eyes of your heart may be enlightened,

in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you,

the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints,

and his incomparably great power for us who believe.

This whole religion thing is real. It's not just about believing and arguing and going to the pot-lucks on Wednesday night. It is about enlightenment, knowledge, hope, inheritance, and great power!

And that is my prayer, that through this you, and indeed the entire planet, can begin to comprehend your inheritance and destiny.

Repentance as Transformed Consciousness
Matthew 4:7

From that time on Jesus began to preach, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near.”

So, we start right-off with a problem...Like I said, proper translations and all...The fact is that the word "Repent" nowadays has all of these religious overtones...In Jesus' day, the word that he spoke meant to the people hearing it, "Change your thinking!" It is not just a matter of changing your actions, but all of your being, renewed from the inside-out, starting with your thinking.

That's what we see in the next passage...

Romans 12:2

Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.

Christ And God Are In You
1 Corinthians 2:11-16

For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man’s spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 12We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us. 13This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. 14The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man’s judgment: 16 “For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ.

The mind of Christ, which is equated with the mind of God, lives in you!!!!

Folks, that one verse, that one idea, if true, means quite simply that we are not what we think we are, and we do not live in the world we think we do!!! The Mind Of Christ lives in us!!!

And what is that? Read this...This explains just what this Mind Of Christ is:

Colossians 1:13-19

For he has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves, 14in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. 15He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. 17He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him.

We are talking about the source and origin of the entire universe. The fullness of God Himself is in Christ, That is the Entire Universe, and that mind is INSIDE OF YOU!



1 Corinthians 3:16

Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit lives in you?

2 Corinthians 13:5

Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you—unless, of course, you fail the test?

In the next passage Paul goes so far as to say that his small "I", the limited, ego-self is gone entirely. As raindrop, he recognizes he is nothing more than a channel for the Ocean to pour through...And after all, isn't that the whole point? We praise the radio program, not the radio!

Galatians 2:20

I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

Note the important phrase "crucified with Christ." That's the entire point of Christian theology...It is NOT enough to "believe" that Jesus died or did anything...The Christian message consists in being United with Him, that His life, death & Resurrection become ours, and with it, everything that He Is!

Galatians 3:27

for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.

Here we learn that Christ in you is the mystery of all ages, now revealed!

Colossians 1:25-27

I have become its servant by the commission God gave me to present to you the word of God in its fullness— 26the mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the saints. 27To them God has chosen to make known among the Gentiles the glorious riches of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.

Philippians 1:21

For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain.

Philippians 2:13

For it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose.

God is in you, dear friend. This is not New Age, but the Ancient Proclamation.

Your life is not about being you.

Your Destiny
You will eventually know as much about God as God knows about you...That's what it means to have God Consciousness:

1 Corinthians 13:12

Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

Eventually, this Mind of Christ that lives in embryo will grow to fill us entirely, and Christ is formed fully in us:

Galatians 4:19

My dear children, for whom I am again in the pains of childbirth until Christ is formed in you...

This, frankly, is just about my favorite verse in the entire Bible...It shows that our destiny, our true calling, where we are going, the REAL purpose of our life, is to have that same infinite glory that is in God Himself through Christ:

1 Peter 5:10

And the God of all grace, who called you to his eternal glory in Christ, after you have suffered a little while, will himself restore you and make you strong, firm and steadfast.

How We Get From Here To There
Ephesians 3:14

For this reason I kneel before the Father, 15from whom his whole family in heaven and on earth derives its name. 16I pray that out of his glorious riches he may strengthen you with power through his Spirit in your inner being, 17so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith. And I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, 18may have power, together with all the saints, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ, 19and to know this love that surpasses knowledge—that you may be filled to the measure of all the fullness of God.

The pathway to God Consciousness and the fullness of Christ is clear...Leave the old, small-self behind and, born-again, live as the True, Real, New You:

Ephesians 4:17-24

So I tell you this, and insist on it in the Lord, that you must no longer live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their thinking. 18They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts. 19Having lost all sensitivity, they have given themselves over to sensuality so as to indulge in every kind of impurity, with a continual lust for more. You, however, did not come to know Christ that way. 21Surely you heard of him and were taught in him in accordance with the truth that is in Jesus. 22You were taught, with regard to your former way of life, to put off your old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires; 23to be made new in the attitude of your minds; 24and to put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness.

Ephesians 5:1

Be imitators of God, therefore, as dearly loved children

Colossians 3:9

Do not lie to each other, since you have taken off your old self with its practices 10and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge in the image of its Creator.

Our small, limited local / national views are gone, replaced with a Universal View:

Colossians 3:11

Here there is no Greek or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all.

Hebrews 11:1

Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.

That's the final word, Faith. NOT (Please, DEAR GOD!!!) as needing to believe whatever the silly idea-of-the-month is, but as the living, breathing, tangible pathway from

small to large,

illusion to real,

sinner to saint,

raindrop to Ocean.

 

[FelixDeCat]

As you should well know and have said above, if you could believe you would. The problem with people like us is that we can't. But the difference, I think, is that I'm not going to tell somebody who believes that what they believe in is fairy tails. Their belief in immortality, regardless of whether there is any truth to it, creates many beneficial mental conditions. One practices virtue as best on can to attain it, which is good for everybody, and one create a mental state in which it is much easier to experience oneness. You are not concerned with your ultimate fate or with existential suffering. I would not argue to convince somebody not to have faith when their mental state is essentially better positioned for realization than mine is. I will try to deal with my people, the atheists and try to persuade them they are callous and disrespectful because they do not know the real purpose of religion, and that there is one. That is just like arguing against faith, I know, but the difference is that if I can remove the non understanding of the atheist he will be left with something better, not something that degrades his mental condition respecting any opportunity he may have to finding a transcendental state.

Well put. This is what Ive said about the other major faiths on this planet other than my own Catholicism. Nothing that is done by man is ever perfect, but on balance they have a positive impact on humanity.

Jesus, Charles, stop telling the kids Santa doesn't exist. He did exist. He was a man of such love that he gave people in need things and the results of his acts were Sainthood, eternal life in a story that has delighted millions and millions of children and adults that pretend to be like him or are. Stop this shit or Santa may decide next Christmas to shove a lump of coal sideways up your ass.

Santa did exist. He is based on Saint Nicolis:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Nicholas

Saint Nicholas (Greek: &#7949;&#947;&#953;&#959;&#962; &#925;&#953;&#954;&#972;&#955;&#945;&#959;&#962;, Hagios Nikólaos; Latin: Sanctus Nicolaus) (March 15, 270 &#8211; 6 December 346),[2][3] also called Nikolaos of Myra, was an historic 4th-century saint and Greek[4] Bishop of Myra (Demre, part of modern-day Turkey) in Lycia. Because of the many miracles attributed to his intercession, he is also known as Nikolaos the Wonderworker (&#925;&#953;&#954;&#972;&#955;&#945;&#959;&#962; &#8001; &#920;&#945;&#965;&#956;&#945;&#964;&#959;&#965;&#961;&#947;&#972;&#962;, Nikolaos ho Thaumaturgos). He had a reputation for secret gift-giving, such as putting coins in the shoes of those who left them out for him, and thus became the model for Santa Claus, whose modern name comes from the Dutch Sinterklaas, itself from a series of elisions and corruptions of the transliteration of "Saint Nikolaos". His reputation evolved among the faithful, as was common for early Christian saints.[5] In 1087, part of the relics (about half of the bones) were furtively translated to Bari, in southeastern Italy; for this reason, he is also known as Nikolaos of Bari. The remaining bones were taken to Venice in 1100. His feast day is 6 December [O.S. 19 December].