Understanding Religion's Relationship To Human Social Systems

  10:00 - 10:17 admits the Hebrew conceptualizations of "God" were BS. Creative fictions written to project their own cultural narratives of identity and worth out-and-up into a "God". 10:17 - 10:40 describes the Might Makes Right premise of "morality" that Hebrews wrongly ascribed to. Again, the narrator of this video throws the ancient Jews under the short-bus, as false-religious cultists. I happen to agree. But I can afford to agree, because: I'm not a Christian. Therefore, I'm not a religion that builds upon the premise that the Hebrews got their beliefs about power and morality from the "one true God". Included in that segment of this video: The idea that all cultures across the world, since always, held entirely to that idea, where the conquerors prove their moral character by conquering. Somehow, this CONSERVATIVE Christian fails to recognize that his POLTICAL VALUES are based entirely on the values that h

 I never feel critical of someone for merely having God-beliefs or spiritual beliefs.   There are even some spiritualities that I admire.  But what makes my mind incompatible with Biblical and Quranic (aka "Abrahamic") concepts of "God"  is that I greatly value things which the writers of those books did not.    I value facts and logic; far more than they did. I value compassion; far more than they did. I see VALUE in the sentience and beauty of animal lives; which they did not. I also see VALUE in the sentience and beauty of human lives; which they did not.  Granted, they saw some value in some lives. And yes ... it's very common to hear a Christian or a Muslim saying that their deity  greatly values the life of every human. But they aren't being honest with themselves about what's in their books.  Nor are they being honest about what is taught in their modern religious buildings. They don't have real respect and positive value-ation for the lives o

 Trigger warning: This blog contains references to religious violence against children.  I think it's important to recognize the full weight of the issues being discussed.  This blog only covers approximately the first 5 minutes  of a 25 minute voice message that  a very religious family member recently sent me.   Normally, she avoids listening or speaking about such issues.  But she was in the mood for (her one-sided end of) that discussion.   I was really curious to map out her personal values.  Although, now that I have learned so much more about her personal values, I do lament discovering how horrible those values actually are.  Her views are nearly identical to her parents' (both of them).   Her personality is also eerily similar.  It does make me wonder if maybe psychopathy and narcissism can be inherited.  I suppose I'll need four more blogs to cover it all;  averaging one blog per every 5 minutes of apologetics. Although, that causes these blogs to be too long for

ApPersonaNonGrata    That's a very cool trick; being able to remember something they never witnessed in the first place.   @tategarrett3042 14   Any evidence to back that claim up?   @ApPersonaNonGrata    It is the overwhelming consensus among qualified scholars that the "gospels" were not written by eye witnesses.        tategarrett3042 14        even if that were the case, and I don't agree that it is, them being written second hand does nothing to refute their accuracy.     @ApPersonaNonGrata   The book someone eventually decided to call "Mark" was the first of the later-called "gospels". But that writer evidently FORGOT miracles that the other writers wrote about. The most dramatic and impressing things Jesus reportedly ever did just plum slipped Pseudo-Mark's mind. The same problem persists for the other writers. Every time a new "gospel" was written, the writer remembers some super-miraculous stuff that the prior writers forgot