Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cadovax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!trwrb!trwrba!cadovax!keithd
From: keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Fragin' the Christians!
Message-ID: <335@cadovax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 14-Dec-84 20:15:40 EST
Article-I.D.: cadovax.335
Posted: Fri Dec 14 20:15:40 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 17-Dec-84 02:29:51 EST
References: <211@decwrl.UUCP>
Organization: Contel Cado, Torrance, CA
Lines: 83


>Is this some of what is happening here on net.religion?  Indeed in our country?
I suppose.  It's ok with me.

>Many of those on the net who oppose Christianity seek a secular salvation
>in the form of a rational moral structure or a 'better' society through
>science.  "Better living through Science"

I suggest: Speak for Thyself

>No not everone on the net beleives everything sold in the 'scientific'
>marketplace.  Primal scream, yogurt enemas, Carl 'billions & billions' Sagan,
>etc.  But how are we to build a civilization on chaos in the marketplace?

We don't have to 'build' a civilization on (in?) chaos, it only has to be
maintained.  In such a chaotic environment, 'systems' tend to 'co-agulate'
out of the fray.  'Gremlins' of some sort are required to interfere with
the normal operation of these systems so that they do not become large and
dominating.  At the same time, these gremlins must not become a system of
their own.  Many of our present market system(s) have grown out of this 
chaos because existing gremlins were unable to curb systems growth. 
We now have several large systems that are inclined to further growth
at no consideration for anyone or anything outside of their own 
particular system.  'Gremlins' that are able to pit these large systems
against each other, are now required in order to regain the 'chaos'
required for more complete freedom of thought and action.  At present
the religious community seems to be progressing fairly well in this area,
as there are many diverse lower-order systems that are keeping things
at least 'reasonably' chaotic.  However, in the political and commercial
communities, this opposite is true.  There are several higer-order systems
who's interests have major effects on surrounding lower-order systems.
Clearly gremlins that pit political systems against each other exist, but
this is undesirable, as they tend to have violent effects on the earth as
a whole.  Perhaps the recent trend of conflicts between commercial systems
and political systems is an effective solution.  Either way, these systems
don't last forever, and tend toward chaos eventually.  Personally, I think
this is healthy.  Perfect systems are for dreamers.

>Daniel Bell says:
>  "The real problem of MODERNITY is the problem of belief."  He sees a 
>breakdown of society along these lines.

I don't understand why so many people think we all have to believe the
same things.  That's something I certainly don't believe.

>Blake, with great insight I believe, said: "Man must and will have religion"

Perhaps, but if true, I'd say A religion not THE religion.

>"Even the endless chit-chat of our time is finally incapable of hiding the
>fact that there is a hole at the heart of the scientific world view and of
>any argument or character primarily determined by it.

That 'hole' is there because it is beyond the realm of science.  Science
has no heart, as it is a brain.  Religion is a heart (I suppose) and is
not dictated to by science. (or at least should not be)

>Into that hole some idea, emotion, or object will be elevated, to stave off
>the chaos of a centerless, incoherent existence.

For some that idea is called Christianity, others call it by other names.

>I get sick and tired of, "I think" and "Well, I think" and no one refers
>to any of the large body of thinking done and recorded down through the
>ages and going on in our time.  It's the mark of NON-THINKERS!!!!

Perhaps it's the mark of thinkers who think for themselves, rather than
adopt the arbitrary thoughts of those who chose to express their thoughts
in words.

>Some of you terds on net.religion actually think you have a right to an
>opinion just because you can type.

>And I'M raving???!

Rave on, rave on...

>Ken Arndt
 
Keith Doyle
{ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!keithd
"You'll PAY to know what you REALLY think!"