[extropy-chat] embedded in open hearts

Olga Bourlin fauxever at sprynet.com
Sun Apr 10 20:08:33 UTC 2005

From: "David Lubkin" <extropy at unreasonable.com>
> You appear to conflate distinct concepts.
> 1. There is an after-life.

> 2. It is better than this one.

> 3. Only people who (a) believe our dogma and (b) behave themselves get to 
> go.

> 4. Everyone else (a) stays here, (b) gets a chance to redeem themselves, 
> or > (c) goes somewhere else for punishment.

I may conflate them, but I personally don't believe in any of the above.

> Different religions and denominations preach different combinations of 
> these concepts. Catholicism may rely on all of them, but it doesn't 
> necessarily have to.

What I was questioning (and wondering about was ...) are religions like 
Christianity and Judaism mutually exclusive or not?  When I was growing up 
they "were."  Then this neologism came into use:  "Judeo-Christian."  WTF?

> Judaism, for example, does not have either the concept of hell or 
> admission > criteria for heaven, and has millions of followers who attempt 
> to live > moral lives; the only explicit carrot or stick is pleasing or 
> disappointing > their deity. Variants of Buddhism don't even have that to 
> motivate > adherents; ethical behavior is its own reward.

Yes, I know.  Not disappointing the tri-deity (and praising him/them) seems 
to be the obligation of Christians, as well.  If I were a Christian or a 
Jew, my concern would be ... why is my deity so insecure that he needs the 
validation of his prominence from his flock of 
oh-so-mundane-and-humble-and-merely human subjects?

I am not a theist of any kind (mono- poly- or pan-).  However, I, too, 
believe in virtue being its own reward (but am not keen on, you know, 
"rituals" accompanying some even somewhat nontheistic so-called religions).


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list