Atheism is a faith.

I looked up salvia and wiki came up with sage! But that's a herb for cooking - am I missing something, or should I have been looking in the kitchen all along for the meaning of life (other than food and alcohol)?

I remember someone supposedly discussed the gospels in terms of mushrooms (magic or not I can't remember).

Salvia Divinorum (it's still legal in the US, you can buy it all over). You can either chew it or smoke it in a water pipe (with a torch lighter). Most people smoke it. Took me 15 minutes to un-merge myself with the edge of my friend's waterbed the first time I tried it.

Don't do it too often.
 
Thanks, Wheezebucket! Excellent; it is on wiki and it's got some links and it is legal. Fantastic. I've only smoked cannabis resin before and although some of the effects were great I can't say it was spiritual. I'd better check if there any any side effects, though.
 
Well I don't know if I'd describe it as 'spiritual'. I mean, you hallucinate, but there's nothing magical about it. At the end of the day it's just a chemical effect. As far as hal's go though, it's legal, cheap (enough), and potent (if you smoke it).
 
Have you experienced any side effects? How long did the effects last?
I only used cannabis a bit because I found after having some in coffee on a friday night that the rest of the weekend I felt seriously down and thought it sensible (but disappointing) to not use it.
 
It depends on if you're chewing it or smoking it. If you chew it, it'll last longer but it won't hit you so hard. If you're smoking it, after you hit it it'll kick in really fast - 10 to 15 seconds. At least, usually it does. Everyone is effected differently in the end. The first 15 minutes or so are pretty intense, then you get a nice half hour, 45 minute period (again, depending on who you are) of relaxed and mellow. You'll sweat a bit and some people get tired, but other than that, no side effects.
 
Cool. Thanks man, I hope I never harsh on your mellow :relieved:. I certainly wasn't expecting to get this out of the thread. Cheers.
 
Cool. Thanks man, I hope I never harsh on your mellow :relieved:. I certainly wasn't expecting to get this out of the thread. Cheers.
Preferably, try and do this with someone who's had it before as you can feel pretty odd and a bit of reassurance might save you panicking. Like dope, a lot of people do it pretty hard the first time, so be cautious as to amount ingested. Remember, if you chew it, it's absorbed through the lining of the mouth, not the stomach, so swallowing it won't get you going.
 
Have you experienced any side effects? How long did the effects last?
I only used cannabis a bit because I found after having some in coffee on a friday night that the rest of the weekend I felt seriously down and thought it sensible (but disappointing) to not use it.

As a word of warning -- salvia is one if the most potent hallucinogens out there -- be very careful and only trip with a sitter (preferably one with salvia or DMT experience). It is not unheard of to totally lose contact with reality and have do stuff with no awareness of having done so. Salvia seems to be fairly safe from a body load/chemistry perspective tho.
 
As a word of warning -- salvia is one if the most potent hallucinogens out there -- be very careful and only trip with a sitter (preferably one with salvia or DMT experience). It is not unheard of to totally lose contact with reality and have do stuff with no awareness of having done so. Salvia seems to be fairly safe from a body load/chemistry perspective tho.

Oh yeah, that's a good call. Have someone there with you, at least the first few times you try it. You can't really control yourself and you might get hurt if you're not careful in those first 15 minutes or so. But it's also pretty hard to move, so it's the flailing you gotta worry about. A nice waterbed helps to contain the action.
 
Are you telling me I have missed my generation and my calling? I could be having sex with my followers out in the Californian desert, man. Damn. I watched Easy Rider for the first time a few weeks ago too.
Could be. You sound a lot like the flower children that used to flourish in that magical decade.

But Easy Rider is crap. I could tell that even stoned.

True, but I don't know that the Orthodox are a sect, if that's what you mean - they're knid of, well, orthodox. And actually that idea has no levels at all, no heaven or hell, just everyone being in the presence of God.
Yeah, but some closer and some farther. It may not be a "quantum" thing, but definately stratified.
And I agree, "sect" is not the right word. Would "bent" be better? But then, who wants bent sects?;)

You've hung out with the wrong Xtians, then! When I was growing up I remember people saying that your bed was made in this life but that hasn't struck me as fair for a long time and I know quite a lot of Xtians who say the same as me.
I have lived all my life in the Bible Belt of the US, and though I know a lot of people from other parts of the world, most of the Christians I know are from my homeland. The Christians here would call you bad names and say you were trying to make God in your image. They'd much rather have God like he is supposed to be, in their image.

I don't see 'repenting after death' as a discovering that one has got a fact wrong (God exists etc) but being caught up as one comes face to face with pure wonderful love; perhaps it is not so much that God judges us but our reaction to the full presence of the most wonderful thing possible that determines how we are.
It seems to me that the situation you describe is just another way of "discovering they were wrong", in this case, about the nature of God. But it still doesn't make any sense to me that such a nature would be revealed after death, when it could be just as easily revealed before. But then, the whole notion of life-after-death doesn't really make sense to me either, so obviously I am not the person to try to characterize what it should be like.

There are Xtian notions that someone might still reject God but who knows how after a time everyone's heart might be softened and warmed.
After a time? That's another concept that doesn't make any sense to me. Time in eternity. Like in the movie "Groundhog Day", if I knew I couldn't die, I'd probably try everything just to have some new experiences. Elsewise, I'd go outta my tree with boredom.

Xtians can go on about becoming a Xtian is the Golden Ticket to get you into heaven but I think that that is not what God is about. What one's character is like and how one treat's one's fellow man (one's neighbour), tending the sick, aiding the poor, fighting injustice is what it is about (remember the OT prophets had a real downer on people who mouthed words, carried out sacrifices, but who were hypocrits - God really isn't fond of hypocrisy).
I agree with almost everything you've said, except that it doesn't have anything to do with Christianity. Anybody can do that. Like you, I think any God worthy of my respect would care more about goodness than He would about making sure you say the right words in mass, but where does Christ come into the picture? You are describing a humanist more than a Christian. (Not that that's bad...:D )

I have not done masses of thinking about what the afterlife is like because I find it difficult to get my mind round it. Good qs. I think the idea of purgatory addresses something of this but I don't know. And, sure, it is no reason to believe that there is an afterlife if you don't think there is one in the first place, but it makes the idea that God is loving and just a bit more plausible!
You are a very difficult person to argue with, because I keep agreeing with you. But I'll keep working at it. Okay, how about this.

Why would you need something to make the idea of a loving God more plausible? It's almost like advertising, slick and sexy, but not real. Why is it necessary for Christians to "sell" Christ? The product should speak for itself.

He he. I have studied Philosophy and Theology and English and I find that the more time I spend here the more my mind works in an academic way and I like using and playing with words, and if they happen to be more accurate words pertinent to the discussion then I will pop them in, especially if people ridicule simplified Xtian ideas and then think they have just dismissed Xtianity I will chuck in these more complex notions and terms. Hey, I'm human.
You are indeed a sneaky bastard, playing on my logophilia. :mad:

But your ideas, while not at all simple, just don't sound Christian to me. It is almost like you have built a great philosophy and at the last minute you just slapped on a Jesus logo because you figured it gave you respectability. I gotta ask, "why?"

Unfortunately it is an all too common failing in us, to accept that we might be wrong.
I think you meant to say that the failing was "to refuse to accept that we might be wrong."

But I might be wrong.
 
But your ideas, while not at all simple, just don't sound Christian to me. It is almost like you have built a great philosophy and at the last minute you just slapped on a Jesus logo because you figured it gave you respectability. I gotta ask, "why?"
I reckon you've got him here, Tricky!

Cling, I've noticed that your version of christianity is a little different from the likes of Huntster and Kurious_Kathy. You don't adhere to scripture and your feelings are quite different from any doctrine I know of.

I agree with Tricky that you've subverted the christian god to suit your own idea of what he should be. There's nothing wrong with that as there are no rules for god/s, but I don't know that christian clergy would agree with your liberal interpretation. I think you maybe need those Unitarian Universalist guys. You seem to be talking too much tolerance for the mainstream guys. Fr Gregory would have some scornful words for you, I think!
 
I reckon you've got him here, Tricky!

Cling, I've noticed that your version of christianity is a little different from the likes of Huntster and Kurious_Kathy. You don't adhere to scripture and your feelings are quite different from any doctrine I know of.
I'm surprised (I seem to use that word a lot at times) you both think this as I am quite a normal liberal Anglican in my beliefs. I don't mention Bible verses here much as there isn't much point. I agree that I have had and continue to have problems with the Bible (and probably will do) but I do think that it does contain much of value (and I must try getting into the habit of studying it a bit more again). Would you say how I don't adhere to scripture? I think that literal reading of certain parts of the Bible is to misunderstand them (Augustine was against a literal reading of the Genesis creation stories, so its not a (post)modern idea and to misunderstand the nature of revelation (metaphors etc at the best of times apart from Jesus). I will expand on this if you like (if you haven't heard it all before).

I agree with Tricky that you've subverted the christian god to suit your own idea of what he should be. There's nothing wrong with that as there are no rules for god/s, but I don't know that christian clergy would agree with your liberal interpretation. I think you maybe need those Unitarian Universalist guys. You seem to be talking too much tolerance for the mainstream guys. Fr Gregory would have some scornful words for you, I think!
I had a conversion experience (so can hold my head up high with fundamentalists because I can say to within about 5 minutes when it occured :D) and started off in a fundamentalist approach, but as I think and as I didn't want to believe something just because someone told me I wanted to work thing out for myself. Perhaps I am lucky in not being Bible Belt because over the years I have had access (especially now with the internet) to the richness and diversity of the different Xtian approaches. Unfortunately many here on JREF only know Bible Belt Xtianity and think that that is all that Xtianity is but that is so far from the truth. I believe in a trinitarian God and that God might interact with us (in some way) so Anglican I am (apart from the fact that Anglicanism is so incredibly broad itself - I'm sure there are a few atheists willingly to be found in a congregation!).

My Xtian life has been a(n impossible) struggle to fit it all together. The idea of fairness, or justice, perhaps, is paramount to me, yes, and I admit that I have molded my God to be what I think he should be, but then I have found the same ideas outside of fundamentalism, but still mainstream (Prots, Catholics and Orthodox, roughly, apologies for omitting others that belong!). A decent God may be found in Xtianity.

BTW I am a quarter Scottish, so am I no true Scotsman?:D
 
I'm surprised (I seem to use that word a lot at times) you both think this as I am quite a normal liberal Anglican in my beliefs. I don't mention Bible verses here much as there isn't much point. I agree that I have had and continue to have problems with the Bible (and probably will do) but I do think that it does contain much of value (and I must try getting into the habit of studying it a bit more again). Would you say how I don't adhere to scripture? I think that literal reading of certain parts of the Bible is to misunderstand them (Augustine was against a literal reading of the Genesis creation stories, so its not a (post)modern idea and to misunderstand the nature of revelation (metaphors etc at the best of times apart from Jesus). I will expand on this if you like (if you haven't heard it all before).
No, not the scrubby Genesis BS. Only fundies believe that literally, don't they? Although it appears that some orthodox types take it pretty literally.

By adherence to scriptural prescriptions, I;m talking more about your vision of god as a benign entity. Nowhere in the bible is that made clear. Even the Big J is very adamant that worshipping his dad is paramount. I know that Anglicans have got very liberal in recent years, but Rowan's Benedictine piece seems to indicate that his liberality has limits. Maybe he's just trying to appease the RCC. Pity if he is.
I had a conversion experience (so can hold my head up high with fundamentalists because I can say to within about 5 minutes when it occured :D) and started off in a fundamentalist approach, but as I think and as I didn't want to believe something just because someone told me I wanted to work thing out for myself. Perhaps I am lucky in not being Bible Belt because over the years I have had access (especially now with the internet) to the richness and diversity of the different Xtian approaches. Unfortunately many here on JREF only know Bible Belt Xtianity and think that that is all that Xtianity is but that is so far from the truth. I believe in a trinitarian God and that God might interact with us (in some way) so Anglican I am (apart from the fact that Anglicanism is so incredibly broad itself - I'm sure there are a few atheists willingly to be found in a congregation!).

My Xtian life has been a(n impossible) struggle to fit it all together. The idea of fairness, or justice, perhaps, is paramount to me, yes, and I admit that I have molded my God to be what I think he should be, but then I have found the same ideas outside of fundamentalism, but still mainstream (Prots, Catholics and Orthodox, roughly, apologies for omitting others that belong!). A decent God may be found in Xtianity.

BTW I am a quarter Scottish, so am I no true Scotsman?:D
Don;t you think the constant downgrading of god's wrath and jealousy by the likes of CoE and yourself are gradually chipping away at the foundations of christianity by shifting the goalposts? Either the scripture's correct and you're going to hell with me for worshipping a false idol, or you're going to end up with a god who's so inept and wishy-washy that he'll be irrelevant anyway.

Gawd, I should have known - 3/4 Sassenach 1/4 mad b'stard? Baaaad mix!
 
Could be. You sound a lot like the flower children that used to flourish in that magical decade.

But Easy Rider is crap. I could tell that even stoned.
Part of my nature is drawn to the far out, let's take a trip man, but I differ greatly in that I don't think that sleeping around is a great idea and that monotony (er, monogamy) is best. I'm glad I watched Easy Rider once; it is also interesting as a social document.

Yeah, but some closer and some farther. It may not be a "quantum" thing, but definately stratified.
And I agree, "sect" is not the right word. Would "bent" be better? But then, who wants bent sects?;)
Hey, perhaps one should take it whenever you can get it (oops that's the cult leader in me again).

I have lived all my life in the Bible Belt of the US, and though I know a lot of people from other parts of the world, most of the Christians I know are from my homeland. The Christians here would call you bad names and say you were trying to make God in your image. They'd much rather have God like he is supposed to be, in their image.
I have encountered many Xtians like me because I have sought them out.

It seems to me that the situation you describe is just another way of "discovering they were wrong", in this case, about the nature of God. But it still doesn't make any sense to me that such a nature would be revealed after death, when it could be just as easily revealed before. But then, the whole notion of life-after-death doesn't really make sense to me either, so obviously I am not the person to try to characterize what it should be like.

After a time? That's another concept that doesn't make any sense to me. Time in eternity. Like in the movie "Groundhog Day", if I knew I couldn't die, I'd probably try everything just to have some new experiences. Elsewise, I'd go outta my tree with boredom.
People do seem to have a nuts idea of heaven - I don't know what it will be like, but of course it won't be dull - alright you might tire of 66 virgins eventually. Anyway, let's say you like walking in mountains with your friends; in heaven there are billions of people you could walk with in many beautiful places and have unlimited fascinating and moving conversations. Of course I have no idea what it will be like but for me the above encapsulates just a little of how great it could be.


I agree with almost everything you've said, except that it doesn't have anything to do with Christianity. Anybody can do that. Like you, I think any God worthy of my respect would care more about goodness than He would about making sure you say the right words in mass, but where does Christ come into the picture? You are describing a humanist more than a Christian. (Not that that's bad...:D )
Good q and I will answer it later as suddenly I am getting keyboard fatigue.

You are a very difficult person to argue with, because I keep agreeing with you. But I'll keep working at it. Okay, how about this.
Careful, soon I'll get you saying 'I wuv you Jeebus' and wanting the Queen to rule over you. I also got your Shakespeare joke (was it original as it was very good?).

Why would you need something to make the idea of a loving God more plausible? It's almost like advertising, slick and sexy, but not real. Why is it necessary for Christians to "sell" Christ? The product should speak for itself.
Plausible in the sense of not being totally incoherent and sounding like an insane evil bastard, that sort of thing.

You are indeed a sneaky bastard, playing on my logophilia. :mad:
I have found a weakness. Mwhah ha ha. I love playing with words too.

But your ideas, while not at all simple, just don't sound Christian to me. It is almost like you have built a great philosophy and at the last minute you just slapped on a Jesus logo because you figured it gave you respectability. I gotta ask, "why?"
I have said some things about this to The Atheist in my previous post.

I think you meant to say that the failing was "to refuse to accept that we might be wrong."

But I might be wrong.
No no. I love paradoxes because they make my brain hurt.
 
By adherence to scriptural prescriptions, I;m talking more about your vision of god as a benign entity. Nowhere in the bible is that made clear. Even the Big J is very adamant that worshipping his dad is paramount. I know that Anglicans have got very liberal in recent years, but Rowan's Benedictine piece seems to indicate that his liberality has limits. Maybe he's just trying to appease the RCC. Pity if he is.

Don;t you think the constant downgrading of god's wrath and jealousy by the likes of CoE and yourself are gradually chipping away at the foundations of christianity by shifting the goalposts? Either the scripture's correct and you're going to hell with me for worshipping a false idol, or you're going to end up with a god who's so inept and wishy-washy that he'll be irrelevant anyway.

Gawd, I should have known - 3/4 Sassenach 1/4 mad b'stard? Baaaad mix!
Yes, so far in my time here I have not said much about the wrath of God issue because most people, it seems, have been bashed over the head thoroughly with it.

I don't believe God is a laissez-faire, anything goes entity. With God I see, as I touched on earlier in the thread, that you have love and justice. Obviously justice is to do with doing what is right and as doing wrong, sin, hurts people God 'doesn't like it' (metaphor, of course, as he isn't a person like us). I still believe that loving others as loving oneself is good (arguments about sado-masochists aside).

Sorry, why am I going to hell? How are the goalposts being shifted? (My brain might be suffering a bit as I stayed up fpr the start of the cricket). If you wan to start getting Biblical, I won't mind!

Also, I can claim to be a quarter Welsh too!
 
I think that near universalism is compatible with the Bible. As for saying the sinner's prayer getting you into heaven remember there are also a lot of verses about merely mouthing the words and not doing anything about the sick, the poor etc. Jesus saying whoever cares for the sick is caring for me.

One can also say that Jesus does not say that no-one comes to the Father except by believing in him, but, except by him, which can mean by his incarnation etc, rather than being a Xtian. Also, it is not up to us to judge someone as we have no idea what goes on deep in a person.
 

Back
Top Bottom