Spyke
sh.itjust.works

This is the time to start invoking all of the gods for a more dynamic and adaptive office environment.

"Listen, Ryan, I'm gonna need you to ask yourself what Enki would do in this situation, ok? You're giving Enlil when I need an Enki. Dammit, get your head in the game. Have you not been keeping up on this stuff? Seriously, if you've been experimenting with that Jesus stuff again I'm gonna come unglued, I swear. Get off the fuckin cross already, jeez."

97
lemmy.dbzer0.com

Oh no, anyone trying to promote non-christian ideologies will 100% get instacanned under this order I'm sure

51
Philotereply
lemmy.ml

Really throw them off by talking about Yahweh and Elohim and how are these Gods relevant today?

21

You're gonna confuse the evangelicals by naming the two entities which voltroned into their own object of worship

14

Or discuss the singular El versus the plural Elohim and the related implications for that over the pantheon alluded to in the books of Moses.

But... I was trying to spread the love across the old religions and just leading off with a fun pairing. This Yahweh guy gets a lot of attention. Ra is displeased and unpleasant droughts will undoubtedly be visited upon us all now. Fuck.

10

Sure, but still no reason not to put it on display in clear and hamfisted terms if you ask me

4

"Fascists enable Christian Nationalist Karens to abuse coworkers on the government's funds."

52

This shit only flies as long as it isn't a Muslim doing it.

Reminds me of Valarie Hodges in Lousiana like a dozen years ago. Where she stopped supporting religious vouchers for school cause an Islamic school wanted to use them and she didn't realize that could happen.

46

That's pretty much the entire operating model of the Satanic Temple. Either you're getting a Baphomet statue to go with it, or you're losing that Jesus one.

44
lemmy.world

Time to start turning my coworkers into atheists.

All jokes aside, this ends when we ban orginized religion.

Nobody should be publicly religious. Do it in your own home.

44
samus12345reply
sh.itjust.works

Banning religion has been tried, It doesn't work. Banning the awful things that religion makes people do is a better option.

-3

Authoritarianism comes in many forms. Didn't any of you read 1984? I mean, don't waste your time - there's way better materials to learn from, but Thought Police, anyone? Also, no idea why you're getting downvoted. You atheists are dogmatic as fuck. I'm an atheist. Hey, let's ban Islam. That's how you sound.

4
lemmy.world

There are multiple countries who have already banned orginized religion.

It is the next step of human society.

2

China doesn't ban organised religion. It even has a state church. China is paranoid in general, and an effect of that is they just like to keep religious followers where they can see them. In a way, literally, churches there are kind of like a compound (not a security compound) where they hold meetings and worship and house missionaries and stuff.

It doesn't ban evangelisation or missionaries per say, but mainly foreigners. Part of this is a concern with foreign interference (which to be fair, the USAID was recently exposed for sending money to Christian organisations abroad so the American megachurches can gain influence there.)

It's not ideal for Christians, but it's nowhere near what @[email protected] was suggesting as "banning organised religion".

If anything, China can be seen as preferring organised religion to unorganised religion

2

If you can't learn to copy/paste into a sewrch engine then you are going to keep failing to know things for a long time.

I don't fucking care enough to spoon feed you, you're an adult act like it.

1

Asking people to be sane and use some critical thinking in the face of proselytizing woo woo nonsense and rubbish is a reasonable thing to do.

5
boonhetreply
sopuli.xyz

Personally I wish we could all be publicly nothig. Not religious, not atheist. Let's not talk about it all, at all.

3
Aulireply
lemmy.ca

Atheism is funny what else has a name for not believing in something.

2

Republican = not believing in science and/or data

Jokes aside, what a weirdly leading question that doesn't actually lead anywhere— the only reason it is given a name is because the social dominance of theism necessitated the distinction.

There are also plenty of phrases regarding the rejection of something. Put "anti" at the front of plenty of philosophies or systems and boom, there you go.

3
lemmy.world

I don't think we should hire any Catholics because they believe eat humans and drinking their blood is legitimately okay. The people who believe God decides anything in day to day life should all be fired for not being able to accept scientific theory, which is the same scientific theory that drives the economy in which this company runs. I mean come on they are clearly braindead drones who believe anything they are told and have proven they can't innovate anything new that could help us. Also all Muslims are terrorists, they've been proving it on the news every night for decades, we shouldn't hire them either.

In most companies they would just get rid of you for talking about the news / politics. If you fire someone for preaching their religion the company can be sued for illegally terminating an employee do to their religious beliefs. It's not a good idea.

1

Either you're a troll or a religious zealot.

I don't think companies should get rid of people for talking about news and politics in a respectful manner

1
lemmy.world

I find you calling me a religious zealot to be hindering my right to tell you why you're going to hell for the next 8 hours as is my given right now. In fact I think HR may find it pertinent to know you were calling people religious zealots for practicing their legal rights at work.

....it isn't trolling, it was the discussion as to why this is a bad idea.

0
lemmy.world

No I called Catholics cannibals, which they believe they are. The Eucharist being the actual transformation into the body and blood of Christ is one of the main differences between Catholics and some protestant denominations that split off. Methodists for instance, do not. Lutheran's believe it is a physical transformation and not just a spiritual ceramony one either.

Thereby, they intentionally eat a person's flesh and blood every Sunday, or rather they try to.

Also I never called Muslims Zealots, I called them terrorists, because that's what I learned from the news. Which was obvious satire... Zealots are obsessive, not necessarily terrorists. A good example of zealots would be the Jesuits.

(Though one could argue Jesuits were church sanctioned terrorists... But that's besides the point)

1

Uh... I'm pretty sure the catholics believe strongly in the principle of transubstantiation. It's still taught at the teenage level before confirmation. That is the exact opposite of what you're claiming the lutherans believe, which, seeing as I remember my 'lessons' in one of the synods' influence, lutherans don't even really claim the transubstantiation is a real thing.

2
lemmy.world

As an atheist, faith should be warmly invited, and traditions should be celebrated. You don't have to have anything to do with it. You can assert yourself without assuming you know what people think and classifying their worship. And, on another note: these are human tales. You think books that took generations to compile don't have a few nuggets of hard earned wisdom? Do you read Frankenstein and dismiss it because it's ludicrous?

-10
lemmy.world

You're simply wrong. That is not all that religion does. You and I have both seen, in person, the power of faith. This hard-line science approach is toxic. As somebody who has been entrenched in theoretical physics for 15 years and is currently running my own relativistic model, I can tell you with confidence that these physicists love selling half-truths and relying on rote memorization. Let alone interference from intelligence agencies. The scientists they shove in your face are not the ones from the Manhatten Project. They are incrementalists trained to mind their calculations and suppress dissent. This is a simple, obvious fact of a post-mutual destruction age.

-9
HugeNerdreply
lemmy.ca

Manhatten Project

Are you from the Fringe parallel universe?

5
lemmy.world

My pointing to the project was a demonstration of what we can do when we're not in the middle of active suppression.

-2
HugeNerdreply
lemmy.ca

I was pointing to the spelling. Dude. Seriously.

1
Aulireply
lemmy.ca

Sure you are. Religion is is just a way to control the masses and always has been.

4

I'm going to add, you're confusing atheism with nihilism. You're a disrespectful bubble boy who needs to develop your social skills. Other people are important to your brain development, and your empathy and ego are profoundly undeveloped. Want some science dogma? Philosophies of mind, like Buddhism are really just pointing toward smooth operation between body and mind. 3 parts to your brain: conscious, subconscious, and other people. We are social primates with mirror neurons and facial recognition. That input is important for brain development. That's where you get ego and empathy. Work on it. Meditation is easy. Going outside and talking to people is easy.

2

I don't give a shit. It's important to the people I care about. You're fucking bankrupt. Sucks for you

-4

Thank you. I identified the parts of the machine, from the military-industrial-intelligence complex to the Epstein honeypot operation. This confirms my final hypothesis: The motivation is theological. An elite death/apocalypse cult. I suspected it because of the nature of the honeypot operation. Could have been gambling or personal blackmail. No. The desecration of innocence was a ritual, and the island, a temple. Revealing the final inner circle. The high priests of a cult. You can find their rituals being portrayed as frat-like behavior.

-1
sopuli.xyz

THANK YOU TRUMP for allowing me to FINALLY share the Teachings of ALLAH with other Government Workers!

42
Kairosreply
lemmy.today

I know it's intentional here, but I cringe whenever someone says 'Allah' in an English sentence because it's just the Arabic word for God.

4
lemmy.zip

But doesn't muslims also consider arabic to be the holy language and therefore the correct way and only way to refer to allah?

12

Ah yes, the age old source of disagreement. The nuance of what God/Allah/Elohim/Bagavan/Deva/Dingir/Wakan Tanka/Kami/Hunab Ku/Baiame/Netjer……… is and isn’t. The biggest source of discord used by the greedy to aim humans against each other. When in reality it should be the binder of humanity. It’s like fighting over the description of what a perfect apple tastes like. Every time we fall in that trap, we widen the gap.

3
lemmy.world

I'm sure when atheists and satanists start proselytising there will be outrage - "we really meant Christians should allowed to bother their co-workers not you guys"

35

I bet you a coke this is to fuck with the FFRF and MRFF, two great orgs trying to keep religion out of our gov.

3
IIIreply
lemmy.world

My I introduce the reverse loophole.

Blaspheme against the holy spirit, that piece of shit.

Doing so is the only unforgivable sin. Do not pass go, do not collect 200 dollars. Straight to hell with you and there is nothing anyone can do about it. Not even their god. By blaspheming against the holy spirit, that fake garbage, you are putting up the shield against christians. They can't save you, you have no reason to convert, it is a waste of their time...please leave me alone.

Now, if anyone can give me reverse loopholes for other religions, that would be great.

9
Phoenixzreply
lemmy.ca

Fuck your gods, all hail Satan!

That might work for most

6
IIIreply
lemmy.world

Technically that doesn't even work with christianity. You have to very specifically blaspheme against the holy spirit, who is most definitely a child rapist on the Epstein list. You can call their god whatever name you want, deny Jesus, worship any form of metallic idol you want - you still can get through the door to heaven. It takes a special kind of statement - like saying the holy spirit isn't even real and only exists because whatever man made it all up was accused of copying off of some other religion and just made up even more bullshit so their "nuh uh" had more weight.

0
IIIreply
lemmy.world

Oh, it isn't? What's your definition if not Merriam-Webster's? Or do we look to the holy spirit for the definition? Because in my understanding that thing can't even spell much less string together a coherent definition of what it means to blaspheme.

1

Traditionally, blaspheming the holy spirit is taken as denying the existence thereof. As soon as you believe in it and convert to christianity, the sin no longer exists and is 'forgiven.' The reason it is "unforgiveable" is because you literally cannot ask for forgiveness and to "receive christ in your heart" without believing in it.

1

I agree with you. On surface, it is a good thing. But again, this is Trump speaking.

I think maybe someone should convert Trump to Christianity.

2

That's not promoting slavery. It's addressing slavery that's already happening.

Also worth mentioning this isn't like chattel slavery

0

i’m waiting for this to backfire on him as muslims openly pray in their workplace at the designated times

32

Let's start spreading the unspeakable ancient knowledge of the first one. The one that has no name but an idea of an existence. Now hum the deep tone of the empty.

Edit: Fuck CBS

25
lemmy.world

I don't think people really understand what's comming. Everyone's like "so now everyone can talk about their respective religion, haha". But where I see this going is only the one right religion being acceptable in near future and everyone who's making clever remarks being outlawed and prosecuted. The fact we're not there yet makes the obvious progression to that none the less scary.

24
lemmy.world

I don't think you realize that christians aren't as popular as they were before. There are a LOT of others and non religious. I don't think christians are going to enjoy the process as much as they think.

6

Frankly, I'd never hire or do business with a fundie. It's hard to put my finger on it, but there's something about their desire to enslave or kill nonbelievers that makes me uncomfortable.

2
Frezikreply
lemmy.blahaj.zone

They will once the rule is unevenly applied in their favor. Which it will be.

2
lemmy.world

You misunderstand, when they inevitably try that, and try to continue the "Christian nation" shit, there will be a backlash, and the violence will likely get out of control. I would not be at all surprised to see a concentrated effort to murder Christians by mobs. Christians have gone so long without facing ANY BACKLASH whatsoever for their continued depravity. It will happen and they will cry about how much of victims they are.

1

I'm pressing X. The christo part of christofascism is well embedded. Just like with this epstein thing, if the 'deep state' under trump tried to rid themselves of the christian part by not enforcing the law in christians' favor, they would rattle a significant part of their base. Also, we are LITERALLY seeing an entire segment of our nation (something like 40+ million strong) be targeted by this administration, and the most we can do is filming the masked guys doing it and having some city walk-arounds to show our irritation.

1

I do genuinely feel bad for the people who actually attempt to live by the words of Christ. They will be hit in the backlash much the same as other Christians, undeservedly.

1

For anyone else who also doesn't recognize this, it's a greeting phrase from the TV show A Handmaid's Tale.

6

So this is where the new new atheist movement will start.

Also, remember epstein? whatever happened to that guy?

24
lemmy.ca

Time to found Epsteinology, a religion based around the release and realization of the Great Nefarious Files to bring about the Grand Awakening and destruction of the Orange Menace for the good of all Humanity.

18

Ha! Yeah that one produces anaphylaxis in most Magats... I'm not necessarily opposed to that either.

1

And fully expect this to only become worse as time goes on. The Christo-taleban has full steam now and won't stop

10

I'm sure a lot of people are re-thinking their religious beliefs after the fucking devil was elected.

10
lemmy.world

Surely that goes both ways, and one side has a lot more evidence...

8

Ugh. Looking at the comment sections in posts about religious authoritarians, is about as insufferable as the comment sections in posts asking people to reduce their animal consumption.

4

To date there is zero evidence for interaction between material nature and the spirit. And not for want of looking, as scientists and clergymen alike have been searching for centuries now, anomalous exceptions are extremely rare. Even the standard model of particle physics is transparent to any spiritual factor.

So why should we look at it? Because the human mind, to perceive and process sensory stimulus into situation awareness, to remember, to read and speak and understand facial expression, to compute, and to engage in reason — for all these capacities — it requires power.

While LLM generative systems power demand is calling for the re-commissioning of nuclear power plants, the human brain eats up (according to anatomists) about 20% of our caloric intake, when we are awake, at rest. Less when we're at full run, more when we're computing the integral of the acceleration of rocket thrust as fuel is spent, or landing an airliner by yoke.

But it means, if we have a soul, and that soul remembers its sins, can reason why such behaviors were sinful; if that soul can feel the fires of Hell, this processing takes energy, and an energy source. That means interaction between the physical and spirit, which means there should be something to detect. There should even be side channels.

No evidence of energy exchange, no side channel heat or sound, it strongly (not absolutely) implies there's no spirit to detect. Or if there is, it might be so delicate that interference from natural phenomena (lightning strikes and CME emps come to mind) would shatter it.

The exception is the simulated-universe hypothesis: If the universe is a simulation in a computer program (or Azathoth's dream; Ia! 🦑🌊🌌) then all our recorded observations are of simulated events, and souls can simply be simulated. But some of us object to the notion we're an object in a program or a figment in a dream.

If there's no detectable energy powering our souls, then they could be in the core of the sun and not feel a thing, nor have an eff to give. No regrets, no memories, no pain, no misery.

Most likely, by far, we are thinking meat.

Heck I who am awake today can be a different iteration than me, who was awake yesterday. The separation of time when cerebral cortex activity is shut down for maintenance (non REM sleep) may indicate separate beings, like an AGI powered down and rebooted, with its past memories front-loaded. We're the same for day-to-day quotidian purposes, but our breaks in continuity raise philosophical questions.

And all this is before we get into the incomprehensible vastness of our galaxy, in which earth is barely a mote, or the universe featuring immense strings of galaxies, in which our Milky Way is a dot.

And all this is before we discuss the multiple great filters that are imminent before us, and as a species we are ill prepared to navigate. When we go extinct in the next century or too, it will be part of the Holicene dying, and none of our gods, myths and cultures will survive. All of our operas and symphonies, all of our paintings and sculpture, all of our cinematic thrillers and cozy mysteries and Ghibli animations and fine cuisine will evaporate into geographical layers, and the universe won't even notice.

All this is to say, I've thought about this and confronted my personal insignificance. I've come to terms with mortality and the end of society and species. I get why people cling to notions that we are something special, even though all indications from nature imply we are not.

I say, bring it.

2
lime!reply
feddit.nu

lukewarm take at best, and i'm superficially on the same side here.

the notion that a potential soul takes energy from a person is completely unqualified, and used as a basis for the rest of the argument. there are so many external energy sources in the universe even before we start talking about a "spiritual plane".

weak.

2

I didn't say the soul pulls energy from the person, but there has to be interaction between material and spirit (I don't need spirit to be its own manifold in this model so I didn't presume it)

If the soul doesn't interact with the material then there's no connection between the two and theyre not associated.

So we should be able to detect that interaction. It should have enough of a footprint that were able to notice something even if only side channel effects (which is how we discovered radiation and the heating properties of microwaves).

And we haven't.

As I said, it doesn't rule out spirit, but like many apologetic arguments, it takes a lot of weird presumptions to assert that spirit does exist, does interact with material, yet cannot be detected with the scientific means we have in the twenty first century. It can happen but then it requires stark changes in the models of mechanics we have (such as possibly the simulated-universe hypothesis). In this case our scopes are good enough to see the proverbial teapot. 🫖

But I appreciate that it's difficult to comprehend what the issues are, and why this is a failing not merely of Christianity but any narrative that involves spirit or afterlife. It rules out most models of ghost and fairy phenomena as well.

And don't worry. If you don't get it today, we'll have many (hypothetical, thankfully) days together in the break room so that I can assure you do.

2
lime!reply
feddit.nu

why does there have to be interaction?

1
lime!reply
feddit.nu

but that argument would never persuade anyone, it's just intellectual autofellatio for people who are already on that side of the debate.

if your belief system incorporates souls or spirits, then the fact that they can't be measured surely is even more proof for them existing outside the "real world". just like how someone who believes in reincarnation wouldn't believe that your good and bad deeds are somehow tallied chemically within your body, but kept track of in some incorporeal way, to be used after you've left the mortal coil.

all of these systems are based on coincidence and things that are inherently unknowable, like prayer or what happens to your conscience when you die. trying to logic someone out of a belief system isn't worth the effort or even an interesting endeavour.

0

i've never seen someone write like that just for sharing.

0

That argument wouldn't persuade someone who is willing to rely on faith, because they have given up reason for loyalty, much the way MAGAs assert the 2020 election was stolen from Trump; it's a statement of fidis (faith, or fidelity; loyalty) rather than an assertion of truth.

But for those of us trying to understand what is, the silent void is evidence of a silent void in a world where events are not only detectable but also have effects that can be detected through side channel attacks. It's how the science we depend on to fight plagues and land airplanes and determine evolutionary links is not based merely on a handful of observations but an abundance of data that consistently points towards our mathematical models.

But again, the reason I posted it here (as opposed to athiest communities or philosophical communities) is I know its an oversized pill. Even those who live their lives as naturalists don't want to acknowledge the gravity of what that means. And I've thought about it more than all the proselytizing evangelists I've encountered have thought about their belief, combined. I doubt Ned Flanders is going to have much luck with me (or those like me who love thinking about these things) at the water cooler.

And to be fair, my exploration and coming to terms with insignificance was a rough climb down into the abyss and back out again and maybe about a third up the other side. The common problem in Miskatonic University of professors going mad from revelations of forbidden truths is one I've experience myself. (Studying the German Reich and the Holocaust in the aughts when the US started feeling fashy did not help matters). We humans want to be special. We want to be God's chosen. We want to be more than social hominids polluting ourselves to death with industrial exhaust. We want to, at least, be colonizing space and one of the elite species that escaped their terrestrial prison. And we're not.

Camus' absurdism is about coming to terms with the reality of death, of a meaningless chaotic world that (considering his time and experience in the Résistance) might not actually be worth experiencing, as a lot of it sucks and is suffering.

Religion, as Camus called it philosophical suicide but others call it a leap of faith is the most common response to the realization that we live our lives to no divine purpose. Most choose to veer away and pretend that reality is different. And that is the nature of faith.

Put simply, there are no embarrassments to materialism, and this is even the consensus of religious scholars.

1

Let's see what happens if I start promoting atheism and mocking belief in Bronze Age alpha males in the sky.

2

I don't really see the problem? I'd assume this includes any belief system, including atheism?

The headline is a bit sensationalist. The article is just "colleagues should be allowed to debate religion"

-2
60dreply
lemmy.ca

Any religion that includes crosses or mezuzah, sure.

Atheism isn't big on crosses.

3
lemmy.world

sure we are. we want them burning...no wait...that's still Christian. we want them upside down and in the....still Christians.

maybe we aren't big on crosses...

2
Aulireply
lemmy.ca

Atheism isn't a belief system. Or what do we call not believing in Santa Clause, the Easter bunny and tooth fairy.

1