Skip to main content

God, Science, & discussion

This book of psalms has an £18m price tag, which could make it the world's most expensive book when it's auctioned on Tuesday in New York.

Pretty good, considering it is riddled with punctuation and spelling mistakes.


(following discussion from BBC Facebook)

Lord-Jon Trumpington : It's also riddled with lies and superstition of course.

Dave Hunter: Is this the most expensive work of fiction ever?

Steve Pugsley: Will it be sold in the fairy story book, part of the sale.

David Jones: "To my darling Candy. All characters portrayed within this book are fictitious and any resemblance to persons living or dead is purely coincidental."

Ed:  Ahhh....i see the heathens are out in force - in condemning religion. They'd rather hang on to the epistles of celebs, royalty, oprah, tycoons, and sportstars.

Pay them no mind. They have to discount such beauty and truths as contained within scriptures of all religions so that they can feel justified cheering for Beckham, their greedy royalty and elite, flags, and Apple's latest.

They are nothing but extensions of the capitalist system and hence have to pour scorn on everything of meaning so that they can pursue naked self-interest, consumerism, and celeb-worship with introspective impunity.

Time to look elsewhere, away from the west. Perspectival degenerates most. No wonder they value antiquity more than truth that is much older.

David Jones: Beauty and truths of religion, Edwin? Like rape, slavery, homophobia, death penalties, war, murder, xenophobia, misogyny et al?

Just because someone's an atheist, it doesn't mean they idolise celebrities. Although at least they exist.

Ed:  What you mentioned is anathema to religion David. Don't confuse the sins of man and an elitist system for the sins of religion. How does the 13th Commandment, 'Love your neighbour as you love yourself' necessarily lead to all the evils you mentioned. Your western 'culture' of nationalism, capitalism, celeb-worship, gross self-interest, and ethnocentrism does that.

As for 'homophobia', you people in the west like to add the suffix 'phobia' to refer to people who think wrong that which you think right just because many are ok with it - and excusing yourself from considering if it is or isn't. I am all for respecting homosexuals, but i'm not about to lose my objectivity and think it natural because you people add the word 'phobia' or 'phobic' to describe those who think it wrong. Or maybe i should say that you are suffering from homophobicphobia?

Anyway, what do you people know anyway. Post-colonialism, you became culturally inbred and didn't pay attention to perspectives originating from the rest of the world. The only thing you imported was the wealth you stole in your days of plunder and pillage. Thereafter, you relished in global worship and cultural hegemony, and viewed yourself as China does, the Central Kingdom. Hence, you failed to appreciate other ways of appreciating things. And from that diminutive vantage, you want to speak of right, wrong and freedom. Please.

If you really think further about it, you'll find that religion turned into a bloody sword in the hands of the west. Blame yourself, or is the condemnation of religion an effort to exonerate yourself for your own historical mistakes.

An atheist will necessary lose the perspectives to question that which is considered hallowed in any time and space. Right and wrong will just refer to that which is promoted by your hallowed celebs and media, and lauded by the masses as all reference points of good and evil are done away with. Strangely enough, the 'atheist' Marx mentioned this in The Communist Manifesto.

The numbers will increase as the young are inducted into such a system, as it already has. The west is leading the the proverbial piper of Hamlin.

David Jones: The beauty about being an atheist is I don't have to believe what other atheists believe. I think for myself. So you can't call me a Marxist, a socialist, a capitalist, a westerner, as I am my own person and don't mindlessly attach myself to groups. The hypocrisy of religion is that you can't just pick and chose what teachings you believe in and ignore the abhorrent rest. Read your holy texts and actually ask yourself if it is right to believe in what they preach.

The availability of information and the expansion of science is making religion redundant. People turn to fact for answers - not fiction.

Ed: I DO 'pick and choose' what i want to believe when it comes to religion. And in appreciating Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Christianity, i can appreciate how they all come together to form a whole picture.

There are many Hindu philosophers who have appreciated that point, as have quite a few Catholic missionaries (of Charity) whom i have spoken to. As some of the latter said to me a couple of decades ago when i lived with them for a short while to see what they were about, 'The Spirit unites, it doesn't divide' in an attempt to bring together people of seemingly differing faiths.

A true scientist does not discount fiction purely on the basis of the facts they can comprehend via the means they have discovered.

A true scientist will appreciate that the means of discovery will have to come from a greater appreciation of the different aspects of the human experience and imagination. That is the inductive method.  To do otherwise is deductive and narrows the development of humanity in line with what they know rather than what can be known.  It is this that frees science from its own arrogance.

David Buchanan: Edwin has made a lot of valid points, most of which will be completely ignored because in this modern Western system it is not critical thought but rather demagogy that rules the day. That and everybody believing they deserve to belong to some or other special interest minority group so they can enjoy special protection from the neutered corporate and state media and ultimately enjoy being more equal than those they strove to be equal with.



Popular posts from this blog

Is singapore a tyranny, or are people to dumbed down to feel it?

The following is a consideration of the perspective posted at the site, 'article14'. The site, in discussing the so-called 'Black Sunday movement' whose members wear black and congregate at Starbucks - perhaps they have an unstated desire to boost Starbucks sales of overpriced beverages, or perhaps Starbucks is paying for their black garments...silly people - to express their support for the freedom of expression - brought up certain points that seem to be commonly held by the 'singaporeans' of today.

Manifesto Against Same-Sex Marriages and Homo-Promotion

My stand against homosexuality is based on the following.  It is a logical, rather than a personal, decision.

Under the slogan, 'the freedom to love', it in principle justifies incestuous, group, etc, marriages.  All it requires is 'consenting adults', without an inquiry into what it means to be an 'adult' in intelligent, moral, and introspective terms.

This in turn encourages a ‘go with your feel’ tendency, which in itself gives rise a myriad of tendencies that go unquestioned.  Right and wrong ceases to matter, and even if something is illegal, one can still view it as society just having its own bias against it, just as it once had a ‘bias’ against homosexuality.

‘Nothing is natural.  Everything is just a matter of preference.’  That is the basic thrust of this unfortunate situation.  In fact, having a preference is in itself seen as evidence of one’s intelligence.  No attention needs to be paid to intellectuals, thinkers, philosophers, sages, religious te…