I did not say that there were rules passed down from a supernatural

entity. . I said that the former view of life was rules-based. . the source

of the rules is another subject. . another thread?

I do not contend that the elite's and the rulers' use of a story-book

character was wise. . I just contend that it existed. . I do not expect

immortality, and the expressions about that are metaphor, IMHO.

you can keep on trying to categorize my view as you wish;;; I will

keep on trying to clarify. . There Is Never An Intention To Insult. -- j

p.s. Thank You for the Freud and Einstein quotes;;; I always love

learning from the insight of intelligent people -- also from you,

for example. . no delusion, no faking. . just truth.

.

I am still puzzled by the downvoting, Zen.

you are attempting to reject my explanations because you seem

to sense that there is some evasion in them, I believe.

I am an engineer by nature. . I take evidence and make life better

with it. . if I fake reality, people die. . this would not be good.

honor is the term which I use to identify the respect which one

must have for another because they are human, individual, with the

same rights as yours. . Locke, et al plus Rand have helped us to see

how carefully we must view this principle. . it is so important that

I call it honor. . this term also confused my shrink. . she thought

that my control over my emotions as expressions of my mind,

not my amygdala, was wrong. . she saw emotions as

primary sources of insight into the person whom I am. . OK, doc,

I will play your silly game. . put me into a situation where

I must respond fast and see if I can think quickly. . I can. . OK?

and objectivism is right. . also, it is wise to forgive people,

to show them that you have confidence (if you DO) that they

might improve in the future. . it does not pay to forget, however.

when you assert that I might have a "reliance that there is more

than just this life," I would remind you of Rand's view -- that the world ends

for us when we die. . that's all I contemplate. -- j

.

individuals could believe that there are all kinds of greater powers,

including Christ and God -- and turn inward solemnly for insight

in making life choices. . they might call this activity prayer.

it seems to me that the identification with the "order within the universe"

is only natural, for a thoughtful human. . from what we know so far,

natural order is magnificent in its complexity and elegance. . seeing

oneself as part of that is what I'm calling natural. . and it is logical

to attempt to find the right answers for oneself, now, in that context,

and to call it wisdom. . I can take the oath and intend to call on

all of the insight and wisdom at my command, however it might be

conjured up for use. . I might smoke dope to open myself up

for wisdom (I don't), or I might use meditation. . we all use our

own ways of living for our own sake and not for others'. -- j

.

well said! . these are reasons why each individual must determine

the approach to life, regardless of inept advice from others of whichever

flavor. . if we use rationality to arrive at our choices in life, and

use the "faith" label to identify the category of things which are put off

for more data, for more understanding, then we might live wisely. . maybe??? -- j

.

the Gosnell comment was an attempt to condemn that murderous

kind of behavior. . was it misunderstood, someone? -- j

.

I have been saying that for a loooooong time, but others keep on

trying to decide for the mom. . her life is her life. -- j

.

I would impute a survival drive for the child, wouldn't you? -- j

.

afraid that I missed that movie. -- j

.

I contend that gentle-natured people -- who do not want to compel

others to change to match them -- can use the "faith" label to

identify empirical results which are not understood, or

questions which are not answered, with no evil intent nor desire

to circumvent rationality. . it's like putting those things off

until later.

IF anyone takes things from this category and uses them to justify evil --

force or compulsion applied to others who are good -- THEN

I would contend that their actions are immoral.

many use religion this way, IMHO. -- j

.

I bet that you can fork-vault over a 3-inch-thick steak!!! -- j

.

we solved it with clarification, Herb. . Thanks!!! -- j

.

the murders are irrelevant to the Christian era -- they were

committed by people attempting to follow a deity before Christ

came along to clarify. . and we are not talking about defining

a supernatural being. . that is a tautological impossibility.

we -- or I -- are/am talking about accepting that some things

are in the "too hard" pile and fall into the "know by faith" or

"accept" explanation zone. . this is tantamount to agnosticism

with different labeling, in my humble opinion. -- j

.

and, as a 66-year-old man, I can cite chapter-and-verse mistakes

which I made in the past. . Salty is attempting to identify that there is

a new era of understanding -- the Christian era. . my "new era"

began most intensely when I decided to settle down with my

current wife -- when I stopped chasing my tail. -- j

.

he's not a "true Christian" because he is being judgmental? -- j

.

I am not complaining, just observing. . unfortunately, all of the

videos failed to come up on my machine because of some sort of

video player version control issue. . I am responding to the titles

which seem to focus on the bad things about Christianity over the years.

metaphor is exceedingly important in religion, since our understanding

and ability to express empirical results is small in comparison with

the size of the universe, for example. -- j

.

I do not see why not, a tenet of Objectivism is that a person may have his or her own opinion and make their own decisions, So long as they do not try to impose said opinions on others.

Which is the exact root of religion, is to install and control the "group think". That is one reason I cannot believe any of it was ever handed down by an omnipotent being. If there was such a being, I am sure by now they would have washed their hands of us, in that rarely is religion stuck to, and almost always it results in someones suffering. Hard to square with. I think that may be what may be thought of when discussing this, too many "gotta have my way Christians". I mean that only in the context of discussing general characteristics, not to mean any specific case, but I have seen enough "Holy on Sunday, Evil the rest of the week" types to have developed a bias.

and I wonder what "everything is accomplished" means --

the life of Jesus??? -- j

.

Why would an Objectivist have any interest in 'converting' anyone? Teach maybe, better demonstrate, or help explain to those that ask.

The woman always has complete rights of determination of what happens to her body and life. That is not an entitlement.

I don't accept that there is any such association. The reality is simply that a woman is making the decision of what to do with her body and her life which by all principles of Objectivism, is her right. There is no requirement that she justify her decision to anyone nor government.

Surely Objectivists can't be worried about a Christian changing their viewpoint on life. Ergo they should be welcomed to the Gultch if they are not moochers.

john; the mere idea that there are 'rules' passed down from a supernatural entity in some impossible to see place that has no physical dimensions and that a story book character written up some 1,800 yrs ago by rulers and the elite of society to get people to accept their misery and essential slavery in life in order to gain immortality with their god, is something that can be integrated with Objectivism is basically nonsense. More, it's an insult to Objectivist and Objectivism.

There are a couple of quotes I think are appropriate:

“Illusions commend themselves to us because they save us pain and allow us to enjoy pleasure instead. We must therefore accept it without complaint when they sometimes collide with a bit of reality against which they are dashed to pieces.” -Sigmund Freud

“A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.” -Albert Einstein

Not at all! It was my mistake...on the internet, we really need to look at a message a couple of times to make sure that there's not another way to read it. We can't count on voice inflections to tell us!