"And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth."
—Revelations 12:4
According to Christian theology, of the angels created by God, one-third joined with Lucifer (or Satan, the Devil) while two-thirds remained loyal. Bad things happen on earth because some people listen to the devils; there would be nothing but good if we would all just listen to the good angels.
But what could they possibly have argued about, resulting in the split? The Bible does not say. God made them all, but apparently they were not identical. God presumably made Heaven, but apparently 1/3 of his creation thought it was defective in some way.
If earth is a reflection of heaven, if man is made in God's image, then the trouble probably started on a committee. An unimportant committee, like one set up to decorate for an annual event. "Do we have to do all gold again? I mean, everything is gold here. How about a little platinum? Platinum would really liven things up!"
The next thing you know all sort of reform and improvement movements would crop up among the angels. "I call this piece of gold a saxophone." But no, God and his gang of followers have decreed harps are the only musical instruments allowed. Soon angels are having secret, informal meet ups in platinum rooms to listen to saxophonists and watch performance art.
Or it could have started with some angel, not necessarily the eventual leader, Lucifer, being a smarty-pants. Authorities don't like smarty-pants, as I learned from my parents and Catholic School. Smarty-pants have trouble understanding that most angels like the way things are, and prefer stupidity to change. Smarty pants and heresy amount to pretty much the same thing.
"Hey, here's an idea, since this breathing life into clay figurines hasn't worked out very well. Let's start out with building something simple, I call it a protozoa. The protozoa will be able to adapt to the environment (a major reason for clay figurine failure) and have sex, and thereby produce improved protozoa each generation. They can evolve over time to have many cells, be bigger, and differentiate into species to form a mutually evolving ecosystem."
Then again it could have been cosmological questions that set angels against each other and against God. Perhaps that started as a philosophical argument about determinism (fate) and free will. The determinism angels favored the clockwork universe. The free will angels favored introducing chance, in the form of quantum probability waves for the small particles which they argued would make a better universe than just paving the streets with gold.
I suspect that God gave the smarty-pants angels earth because he could not get it to work to his liking. It was just a bunch of clay figurines dancing to his instructions on a globe of solid gold. The lazy two-thirds of the angels just went back to God and their harps.
But the entrepreneurial angels mixed things up. Earth ended up with an iron core and a stony crust with water that could support bacteria and then algae and protozoa and higher life forms.
So here we are. Unfortunately, apparently when God saw how well things were going he got jealous and tried to take earth back. Having perhaps learned a bit from the smarty-pants angels, he decided to invent a dozen or so major religions to compete with each other for the hearts and minds of homo sapiens. If you want a stupid religion to believe in, there are plenty of choices.
Showing posts with label heaven. Show all posts
Showing posts with label heaven. Show all posts
Sunday, February 16, 2014
Monday, July 30, 2012
Mitt Romney, Mormon, and Islam
Last night I was at a dinner party where three of the five attendees were former Latter Day Saints, better known as the Mormons. I am a former Catholic. I am not sure about the fifth person's childhood faith. In any case we had a good time talking about the Mormon faith and Mitt Romney.
Two of the Mormons had been mainstream, Utah Mormons. One had been in the much smaller Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (RLDS). That is the one that did not follow Brigham Young to Utah, and instead stayed loyal to the family of the founder, Joseph Smith. And I just leaned something new (from Wikipedia) that the ex-member did not know: this sect changed their name in 2001 to the Community of Christ, and now allows women to be priests.
We had a discussion of where Mitt Romney and the mainstream Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints fits into the theological spectrum. The Mormons, according to their former members, do not believe Jesus is God in the sense that most believing Christians do. They believe Jesus is a sort of planetary god. They believe that if they (the men, anyway) have enough wives and children and are holy enough they will reincarnate on planets of their own, which they will rule over as (small g) gods.
This strange combination of science fiction and primitive Christianity makes a lot of sense if you understand the culture of the United States of America in the 1820s, when Joseph Smith pieced his cult together. Science had discovered that planets were not just mobile stars, but bodies like earth, big enough to live on, perhaps. The large number of stars indicated that there might be large numbers of planets beyond the solar system. The Bible did not mention this (or foresee steamboats and railroads and other development), so either the Bible was not written by a omniscient God or it was only a partial revelation. Times were changing, and religion clearly needed a major update. Joseph Smith was the most successful of the updaters of that era.
Which brings us round to Islam. There can be no doubt that Mohammed, the Prophet, was the Joseph Smith of his day (570 - 632 A.D.). He too was born a nobody. He became a trader and capitalist (just like Mitt) and in the course of business visited much of the Middle East. He came in contact with people of many different religions. Most importantly, in addition to meeting orthodox Christians, he met both gnostic Christians and the original Christians. The original Christians were still Jews and thought Jesus was a prophet, not a god. Their historical records told them that Jesus had died on the Cross, but had not been resurrected.
Eventually Mohammed founded a new religion. He did not pretend to be a god, and his followers have been very strict about that issue. His religion must have met a lot of people's needs because it became wildly popular far faster than any prior religion. It is still popular today.
Just like the Latter Day Saints, early on Islam split into two sects. One, the main Sunni branch, was started by the powerful elders, mostly military leaders, who had known Mohammed. The other, Shia, was formed by the direct bloodline descendants of Mohammed. They have been fighting ever since.
Mitt Romney does not want potential voters to know what Mormons really believe. He does not want them to know that despite its name, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints could be categorized as Islamic. Joseph Smith certainly knew some of what was then modern science. He also clearly was influenced by ancient Egyptian precepts and Islam. Many passages of Smith's writtings are paraphrased from the Koran. The polygamy thing is obvious: Mohammed practiced polygamy. The concept of Heaven in the Mormon Church is right out of the Koran, with some 19th century science updates.
Of course Joseph Smith gave no credit to the Koran, which would have been impolitic. He was a new Prophet and according to his theology, was headed to being a god on his own planet when he died on this earth.
Like most small starter religions, Smith's new Church advocated religious tolerance. "We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our conscience, and allow all men the same privilege." [Pearl of Great Price] Thus they advocated for a non-Christian America where their version of Islam could be part of the cultural mix.
Why then, since he belongs to a branch of Islam, is Mitt Romney currently siding with Israel so strongly?
Mitt Romney has always been skilled at the art of deception and willing to do whatever lying it takes to get what he wants. He went to Harvard Law School to brush up on that skill. What else would you expect from a man who grew up in France, who speaks French better than English, and yet want to be the first Latter Day Saint President of the United States of America?
Romney needs to win in Florida to be President and establish Joseph Smith's vision of a Mormon Kingdom on the American continent. "We believe in being subject to kings," [Pearl of Great Price].
Mitt Romney needs a few hundred thousand Jewish votes in Florida to become President. Those of you who support the human rights of Palestinians don't need to worry about Romney's pro-Israel, zionist rhetoric. Mormons know the True Zion is on the American continent. Their leadership is very pro-Islam, and has already made deals with the Saudis to gain total economic control of the globe and its women. The Jews and Christians just need to be fooled for a few more months.
Two of the Mormons had been mainstream, Utah Mormons. One had been in the much smaller Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (RLDS). That is the one that did not follow Brigham Young to Utah, and instead stayed loyal to the family of the founder, Joseph Smith. And I just leaned something new (from Wikipedia) that the ex-member did not know: this sect changed their name in 2001 to the Community of Christ, and now allows women to be priests.
We had a discussion of where Mitt Romney and the mainstream Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints fits into the theological spectrum. The Mormons, according to their former members, do not believe Jesus is God in the sense that most believing Christians do. They believe Jesus is a sort of planetary god. They believe that if they (the men, anyway) have enough wives and children and are holy enough they will reincarnate on planets of their own, which they will rule over as (small g) gods.
This strange combination of science fiction and primitive Christianity makes a lot of sense if you understand the culture of the United States of America in the 1820s, when Joseph Smith pieced his cult together. Science had discovered that planets were not just mobile stars, but bodies like earth, big enough to live on, perhaps. The large number of stars indicated that there might be large numbers of planets beyond the solar system. The Bible did not mention this (or foresee steamboats and railroads and other development), so either the Bible was not written by a omniscient God or it was only a partial revelation. Times were changing, and religion clearly needed a major update. Joseph Smith was the most successful of the updaters of that era.
Which brings us round to Islam. There can be no doubt that Mohammed, the Prophet, was the Joseph Smith of his day (570 - 632 A.D.). He too was born a nobody. He became a trader and capitalist (just like Mitt) and in the course of business visited much of the Middle East. He came in contact with people of many different religions. Most importantly, in addition to meeting orthodox Christians, he met both gnostic Christians and the original Christians. The original Christians were still Jews and thought Jesus was a prophet, not a god. Their historical records told them that Jesus had died on the Cross, but had not been resurrected.
Eventually Mohammed founded a new religion. He did not pretend to be a god, and his followers have been very strict about that issue. His religion must have met a lot of people's needs because it became wildly popular far faster than any prior religion. It is still popular today.
Just like the Latter Day Saints, early on Islam split into two sects. One, the main Sunni branch, was started by the powerful elders, mostly military leaders, who had known Mohammed. The other, Shia, was formed by the direct bloodline descendants of Mohammed. They have been fighting ever since.
Mitt Romney does not want potential voters to know what Mormons really believe. He does not want them to know that despite its name, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints could be categorized as Islamic. Joseph Smith certainly knew some of what was then modern science. He also clearly was influenced by ancient Egyptian precepts and Islam. Many passages of Smith's writtings are paraphrased from the Koran. The polygamy thing is obvious: Mohammed practiced polygamy. The concept of Heaven in the Mormon Church is right out of the Koran, with some 19th century science updates.
Of course Joseph Smith gave no credit to the Koran, which would have been impolitic. He was a new Prophet and according to his theology, was headed to being a god on his own planet when he died on this earth.
Like most small starter religions, Smith's new Church advocated religious tolerance. "We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our conscience, and allow all men the same privilege." [Pearl of Great Price] Thus they advocated for a non-Christian America where their version of Islam could be part of the cultural mix.
Why then, since he belongs to a branch of Islam, is Mitt Romney currently siding with Israel so strongly?
Mitt Romney has always been skilled at the art of deception and willing to do whatever lying it takes to get what he wants. He went to Harvard Law School to brush up on that skill. What else would you expect from a man who grew up in France, who speaks French better than English, and yet want to be the first Latter Day Saint President of the United States of America?
Romney needs to win in Florida to be President and establish Joseph Smith's vision of a Mormon Kingdom on the American continent. "We believe in being subject to kings," [Pearl of Great Price].
Mitt Romney needs a few hundred thousand Jewish votes in Florida to become President. Those of you who support the human rights of Palestinians don't need to worry about Romney's pro-Israel, zionist rhetoric. Mormons know the True Zion is on the American continent. Their leadership is very pro-Islam, and has already made deals with the Saudis to gain total economic control of the globe and its women. The Jews and Christians just need to be fooled for a few more months.
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
On Death
Child: During our talk about God, you said we could talk about death later.
Meyers: Certainly. And I agree that now is that conversation's later.
Child: I don't want to die.
Meyers: Of course not. You are like me, you like life.
Child: But everybody dies. Only they don't really. They go to heaven, so they don't really die, at least if they are saved.
Meyers: Another belief system that denies the reality of death postulates reincarnation instead of heaven and hell. In reincarnation the soul, at death, moves into the body of a creature being born. Reincarnation is associated most closely with Hinduism and Buddhism. But let's focus on the death of the human body, and worry about heaven and reincarnation later. Okay?
Child: Okay.
Meyers: How old are you?
Child: Twelve.
Meyers: Then thirteen, or certainly fourteen, year ago you were not alive. Any problem with that?
Child: No, I guess not.
Meyers: And you would agree the past is real. Yesterday was as real as today, and the day you were born was a real day, and before you were born real things happened, like the births and deaths of your ancestors in say the 19th century?
Child: Of course.
Meyers: I only make the point because some religions and philosophies, like Buddhism and extreme forms of skepticism, insist that the present is an illusion, and the past must be an illusion too. We'll talk about the idea that the world is an illusion at some other point, or else we'll lose track of this death question.
Child: So what does the past being real have to do with death?
Meyers: Let's suppose you live for a really long time. Just say 80 years. Now imagine we are both dead, let's say a hundred years from now. Go ahead, try to imagine being someone else, a hundred years from now, who maybe has heard about you or me, and is thinking about the year 2010.
Child: I guess anyone could do that. Anyone alive then. Just like I can imagine my great grandfathers during World War II. Two of them fought, one was too old, one was too young.
Meyers: So it is pretty simple. People are born, live some length of time, and then die. After they die their life is in the past. Can we see the City of London right now?
Child: No, but I could get web cams to come up if you wanted to see.
Meyers: Surely you could. And there are still archives about your soldier ancestors, we could see them if we wanted to. But we can't be in two geographic locations at once, and we can't be in two times at once. Our present is your ancestors' future and your descendents' past. It is all real.
When someone dies their life is simply in the past, to the people whose life goes on. But their life is still real. The common phrase "he passed away" really should be "he's in the past now."
Child: But what about heaven? Your body could be in the past, and your soul could go to heaven.
Meyers: People are sad when their relatives and friends die. They wish they were still alive, in the present. So a long, long time ago people invented the idea of ghosts. They would dream they saw their dead friends, so they thought they were still alive in some form. Then the professional religious racket got a hold of the idea. They encouraged people to think that ghosts are real, and they invented a home for them. At first it didn't sell well, because the home was pretty gloomy. Then some priests realized that inventing a happy ghost home, heaven, made living people happy. They wanted their dead to be alive in a happy home, and they wanted to go to a happy home themselves when they died. But it is just a story. The truth is dead people are in the past.
Child: I don't know. Seems you could have both.
Meyers: Sure. Some time when you have some time to put to use, you could read some about the Greek and Egyptian religions that were around before Christianity. You get an idea of the trajectory, of how religious and philosophic ideas developed. Sorting out what is true from what is false is no easy task. A lot of people want you to believe what they believe. And a lot of people choose that, to go along, to pretend to believe, just to get along with their friends and family.
Child: I want to know the truth.
Meyers: I think that's good. But the truth is not always beautiful, at least not in detail. Ugly things happen in this world. Hopefully you'll avoid the worst of them.
Meyers: Certainly. And I agree that now is that conversation's later.
Child: I don't want to die.
Meyers: Of course not. You are like me, you like life.
Child: But everybody dies. Only they don't really. They go to heaven, so they don't really die, at least if they are saved.
Meyers: Another belief system that denies the reality of death postulates reincarnation instead of heaven and hell. In reincarnation the soul, at death, moves into the body of a creature being born. Reincarnation is associated most closely with Hinduism and Buddhism. But let's focus on the death of the human body, and worry about heaven and reincarnation later. Okay?
Child: Okay.
Meyers: How old are you?
Child: Twelve.
Meyers: Then thirteen, or certainly fourteen, year ago you were not alive. Any problem with that?
Child: No, I guess not.
Meyers: And you would agree the past is real. Yesterday was as real as today, and the day you were born was a real day, and before you were born real things happened, like the births and deaths of your ancestors in say the 19th century?
Child: Of course.
Meyers: I only make the point because some religions and philosophies, like Buddhism and extreme forms of skepticism, insist that the present is an illusion, and the past must be an illusion too. We'll talk about the idea that the world is an illusion at some other point, or else we'll lose track of this death question.
Child: So what does the past being real have to do with death?
Meyers: Let's suppose you live for a really long time. Just say 80 years. Now imagine we are both dead, let's say a hundred years from now. Go ahead, try to imagine being someone else, a hundred years from now, who maybe has heard about you or me, and is thinking about the year 2010.
Child: I guess anyone could do that. Anyone alive then. Just like I can imagine my great grandfathers during World War II. Two of them fought, one was too old, one was too young.
Meyers: So it is pretty simple. People are born, live some length of time, and then die. After they die their life is in the past. Can we see the City of London right now?
Child: No, but I could get web cams to come up if you wanted to see.
Meyers: Surely you could. And there are still archives about your soldier ancestors, we could see them if we wanted to. But we can't be in two geographic locations at once, and we can't be in two times at once. Our present is your ancestors' future and your descendents' past. It is all real.
When someone dies their life is simply in the past, to the people whose life goes on. But their life is still real. The common phrase "he passed away" really should be "he's in the past now."
Child: But what about heaven? Your body could be in the past, and your soul could go to heaven.
Meyers: People are sad when their relatives and friends die. They wish they were still alive, in the present. So a long, long time ago people invented the idea of ghosts. They would dream they saw their dead friends, so they thought they were still alive in some form. Then the professional religious racket got a hold of the idea. They encouraged people to think that ghosts are real, and they invented a home for them. At first it didn't sell well, because the home was pretty gloomy. Then some priests realized that inventing a happy ghost home, heaven, made living people happy. They wanted their dead to be alive in a happy home, and they wanted to go to a happy home themselves when they died. But it is just a story. The truth is dead people are in the past.
Child: I don't know. Seems you could have both.
Meyers: Sure. Some time when you have some time to put to use, you could read some about the Greek and Egyptian religions that were around before Christianity. You get an idea of the trajectory, of how religious and philosophic ideas developed. Sorting out what is true from what is false is no easy task. A lot of people want you to believe what they believe. And a lot of people choose that, to go along, to pretend to believe, just to get along with their friends and family.
Child: I want to know the truth.
Meyers: I think that's good. But the truth is not always beautiful, at least not in detail. Ugly things happen in this world. Hopefully you'll avoid the worst of them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
