MaxInDHouse:
The late Nobel Prize-winning biologist Jacques Monod stated: “Man knows at last that he is alone in the unfeeling immensity of the universe from which he emerged by chance. His destiny is nowhere spelled out, nor is his duty.”

A similar thought is expressed by Oxford professor of chemistry Peter William Atkins, who declares: “I regard the existence of this extraordinary universe as having a wonderful, awesome grandeur. It hangs there in all its glory, wholly and completely useless.”


MORALITY comes from a purposeful reasoning so if someone feels his life has no meaning nor purpose how do you think such a person can value morality?

"Life doesn't have an inherent purpose but it is an opportunity to create purpose,"
Roy T. Bennett

You are walking down the road, you saw a snake on your path, there is a stick laying on the ground, you picked it to scare the snake away.
Prior to you using the stick, it has no purpose but you gave it a purpose.

Prior to emergence of human as self conscious beings, life doesn't have a purpose (animals don't give life any purpose) but human can give life a purpose even if it doesn't have an inherent purpose.

So, if someone feels his life has no purpose or meaning, he can create one and such a person has to value morality if he wants to live in human society. If he can manage to leave the earth and live on the moon then he doesn't have to care or value morality.

LordReed:


That is a different question altogether though.

Do you realise that our legal system takes motivation into account if it could be established. For example shooting someone due to self defense or accidental discharge.

LordReed:


The good actions didn't change, the characters took additional bad actions.

But they wouldn't have taken the additional bad actions if the first actions were taken with good intention.

Blitzerz:


Google who championed the abolition of slavery.?



So let me ask you.
Is euthanasia good?
Or bad?
Also is abortion after sex good or evil?

Answer for yourself.

I can't answer whether euthanasia is good or bad, as for abortion, I believe it is bad and should be avoided by avoiding unwanted pregnancies.

LordReed:


How am I supposed to know this before I make a choice? I will read their minds?

Also what I prefer is irrelevant to the question which is does the good being done change because of the doer's motivations?

@bolded
I will reply you by pasting my reply to triplechoice that I asked you to read earlier showing that sometimes the good being done change if the motive is not right.

You see, motive is very important because if a good is used as a means to an end and the end is not realised, people tend to destroy the good. Let me give two examples.

These happened to two of my friends.

1. The laptop charger of a friend got spoilt so it became stressful to charge her laptop because she has to wait for others to finish charging and the light was not stable.
This guy offered (she didn't ask him to) to buy her a charger with the intention that through that she will agree to his advances.
When the guy got rejected again after buying the charger, he angrily collected the charger back and destroyed it to spite her.

2. She was out on the street, it was about to rain. A guy offered to give her a lift but with the intention of getting her number. After driving for some minutes, it starts to rain, one thing lead to another, he asked for her number, she declined, and can you guess what the guy did? He dropped her on the road while it was still raining.

Those guys used the "good" as a means to an end but when the end was not achieved they destroyed the good.

Anjinsan:

Nice one on morality for its own sake. Also I now know about the sand mandala, thanks.

On Marcus Aurelius, we can't factually talk about his level of morality.

All we have is his journal - Mediation - more like a musing to himself, trying to clarify and deepen his ideals.

On Mother Theresa of Calcutta, the depth of dirt that woman went in bringing relief to many, even with heaven as the prize, many won't do it. Motive is best known by the doer.

Also, the Stoics aren't atheist. In mediation, Marcus Aurelius, often makes mention of the divine. Often rendered as gods, God, nature. Also, after reading the Meditation the take away won't be that he doesn't believe in an afterlife. Same in the Discourse of Epictetus, Same with the letters of Seneca.


With Love.

But you agree the god of the stoic is not the same as religious god. Their god is more of an Einstein god and like you rightly mentioned they sometimes refer to it is nature.

And I don't undermine the work done by mother Teresa for humanity.

Blitzerz:


False.
If so, the word wont even be in the dictionary





Who decides?
This part of your submission calls for a need to revisit history.
When the early civilizations were building the foundations of government, they didnt just decide.
They consulted spirituality.
From Rome, to Egypt, Babylon etc

They didnt just decide.
The earliest british laws were gotten from the bible etc.



Here is how I will answer this;

If a man gives you [b]consent to take his life,
Will you go ahead?[/b]

If you cant then you are pretending based on the above

So they consulted the bible before they abolish slavery??

@bolded
Remember in my reply to you, I didn't mention consent but effect.
To answer your question, have you heard of Euthanasia? In case you haven't Euthanasia refers to the practice of intentionally ending the life of a person or animal to relieve suffering, typically in cases of severe illness, pain, or incurable conditions.

LordReed:


How would he know I didn't treat him like a person after I gave him succor?

Why are we even discussing this, it is a no brainer that the intention that prompted a giving is as important as what was given.

Let's assume your business is failing, which of these friends would you accept help from (assuming you know their intentions).

1. Sees it as an opportunity he can later use to boast in your face that he was the one that saved you from bankruptcy.
2. Wanted to help because he valued your friendship and doesn't want to see you bankrupt.

LordReed:


The more pertinent question is would the beggar care about why I gave the money? Of course not.

He would not care but he wound prefer you had treated him as a person.

And it is more than that, see my reply to triplechoice above

triplechoice:

Exactly .

You see, motive is very important because if a good is used as a means to an end and the end is not realised, people tend to destroy the good. Let me give two examples.

These happened to two of my friends.

1. The laptop charger of a friend got spoilt so it became stressful to charge her laptop because she has to wait for others to finish charging and the light was not stable.
This guy offered (she didn't ask him to) to buy her a charger with the intention that through that she will agree to his advances.
When the guy got rejected again after buying the charger, he angrily collected the charger back and destroyed it to spite her.

2. She was out on the street, it was about to rain. A guy offered to give her a lift but with the intention of getting her number. After driving for some minutes, it starts to rain, one thing lead to another, he asked for her number, she declined, and can you guess what the guy did? He dropped her on the road while it was still raining.

Those guys used the "good" as a means to an end but when the end was not achieved they destroyed the good.

LordReed:


This is my position as well. I find I am less bothered by why people do good things than that they do it at all. Your motivations for doing good will not make you superior or inferior to some other person who has a different motivation.

This is not about feeling superior or inferior, it's about making the good an end in itself and not as a means to an end.

Would you rather give money to a hungry beggar on the street because you don't him to go hungry (at least for the moment) or would you rather give because, then you can post it on your page and it will boost your fame and followers?
Of course, either way the beggar will not go hungry but which motive do you think he would prefer it rather be?

triplechoice:

Please be clear about the bolded .

What I mean by that in the context of the example is that the rich man ought to build the hospital or charity organisation simply for the improved health and living condition the people will get, that is making the people the end.
Rather than taking those actions as a stepping stone on the way to his end (political power or fame), that is making the people the means to an end.

Blitzerz:


Who defines what is good?
Thats the question

Lesbianism and homosexuality is now "good" in some countries.
Does that make it good here?

T

Nobody defines good or bad, it is the effect from the action that does (whether it meets our ideal or not).

For example, we've the ideal of building a peaceful and loving society, now, we decide to make theft lawful, will the effect from making theft lawful meets/accomplish our ideal? No, therefore theft is bad.

Lesbianism and homosexuality is now "good" because the countries do not see any effect from it that undermines their ideal.

What effects do you think come from homosexuality that threaten our ideal to build a peaceful and loving society?

correctguy101:


Erm..

It's simply humans being whatever they choose to be.

Atheist or Theist, a crazy human is a crazy human. A murderous madperson will be just that, no matter the label he fancies to call himself.

Humans can do and be anything and everything. Crazy set of creatures that they... smh

Exactly, but most people (especially theists) are hung up with the labels.

triplechoice:
Whatever reason one finds for doing good doesn't matter . What matters is that we are good to those around us because at the end of the day it benefits us more, whether moral mandala or God.



Not many persons will bother to confirm first the motivation behind any act of kindness shown to them before showing gratitude.

It's more important to focus on the good in doing good and receiving it from whoever, than on the motive behind it. Any other thing is for the purist to debate on.

And it's your personal opinion that mother Theresa is what you described her to be . The thousands of people ,who benefited from her act of kindness, rate her differently and that's because they received real life saving help from her and not just the reason behind the help .

A good person is a good person wherever you find him.

@bolded

Of course a rich man could build hospital and charity organisation with the wrong motive (maybe fame or political ambition) and people will still be better off with it than without it.
But it will be much better for the people to be the end rather than a mean to an end.

As a said earlier, I'm not sure about mother Teresa's intention.

Yes, this is another topic on atheism vs morality, but this is looking at it from another angle which I haven't seen here yet (maybe there is).

Most theists view atheists has animals not on leash, some here even call them Satanists, they're seen as people that will do any evil so long it satisfies their selfish desire. most theists will summarize atheists "morality" as:
"I will fu*ck you up if it profits me"

Let me at this juncture list the levels of morality in ascending order.

1. I will F you up because I can, it's fun (psychopathic).
2. I will F you up if it satisfies my desire for wealth, power, fame etc (Selfish).
3. I will F you up only if you F me up first (Revenge).
4. I will not F you up even if you F me up first but I will not be beneficial to you.
5. Not only will I not F you up even if you F me up first, I will be beneficial to you if the opportunity comes my way.
6. Not only will I not F you up even if you F me up first, I will go out of my way to help you if you need help.

Let me give an example to make this clear.

You are happily married to a gorgeous wife you loved dearly with two adorable kids and you have a good friend who you view as your BFF.

Well, it turns out your gorgeous wife and BFF have been having an affair for years and your adorable kids are actually not yours but your BFF's. Now, since the secret is out already, your wife(with the kids of course) moved in with your friend and they lived happily without feeling any remorse for what they've done, leaving you hanging.

As fate will have it, some months later, an opportunity comes your way in which you can choose any of three options (A, B or C).

If you choose A (Level 3)
- It will completely bankrupt your friend, and it will take years (if ever) to recover.
- It takes the very least amount of effort.
- It can not to traced back to you unless you decide to tell them (your friend and ex wife) to spite them.

If you choose B (Level 4)
- Choosing option B is letting the opportunity pass by ie not making use of the opportunity.

If you choose C (Level 5)
- It will make your friend rich.
- You will have to take some actions (nothing tedious) to make this work.
- They will not know you were the one that orchestrated their wealth, they will not even ever believe you if you tell them.

Now, how will an atheist justify not picking option A (revenge)?
How will he justify picking B or C (especially C)?

As a Spiritist, I can justify picking option C, how?
I believe in the law of cause and effect (sowing and reaping). I believe the Universe is set up in such a way that their is no way you will do evil and not have it come back to you sooner or later and likewise good.

So I can reason thus;
-My friend and ex wife had sowed a seed of bad and sooner or later they will reap the harvest.
-If I choose option A, I'm also sowing a bad seed and sooner or later I will also reap the harvest.
-If I choose option B, I am letting pass by a great opportunity to sow a good seed.
-If I choose option C, I will be sowing a good seed and I will reap the harvest sooner or later.

It may very well be that there is no such law as the law of sowing and reaping (I believe there is) but that is not the point here, the point is what kind of society would we have if large number of people believe this and live by it.

Are there reasons atheists can give to justify moving up the morality scale above from level 3 to 4, 5 and 6.

SAND MANDALA
In Tibet Buddhism, the monks produce a form of art called Sand Mandala. They use varying colored sand to produce highly detailed, beautiful and intricate geometric patterns.
They often spend days even weeks to produce this mandala because it takes a lot of skill and patience to produce.

After the Mandala is completed, they admirer it for some minutes, then they dismantle it without showing it off, taking a picture or video(as memorabilia). They do this to remind themselves of the impermanence nature of all things and not to get attached to anything.

MORAL MANDALA
Moral mandala is to be moral not because a God said so or for the fear of hell or the greed for heaven but to be moral for morality sake, to be moral because humans are capable of it and if humanity is to survive for long this is what we should all be doing.

The concept of moral mandala invites us to drop our selfish, business like, Fear -Greed morality for a selfless morality for humanity's sake.

A philosophical school of thought that has been using this concept of moral mandala since ancient Greece is Stoicism.
Stoics like Zeno, Seneca, Marcur Aurelius etc spent more than half of their life developing their morality and ethics even though they do not believe in afterlife or karma.

So what is the point of all the hardwork they put into developing and becoming a better human being if when they're dead it is over, they're deleted forever (the beautiful and highly detailed mandala is dismantled)?

To them, the individual self is the mandala and they thrive the create the individual self as a beautiful mandala as they possible can not for their sake (because the individual life will be over soon) but as an example for humanity, an example of the great moral state humanity can reach if we could just drop our selfishness.

This is why I admire the morality of Marcus Aurelius (a Stoic) more than the morality of mother Theresa (catholic). Marcus Aurelius is moral for humanity's sake while mother Theresa is (not sure) moral for heaven's sake.
And to be moral for humanity's sake is the purest kind of morality because it is devoid of self.

I sometimes wish I do not believe in afterlife or karma to access this selfless kind of morality, to be good because it's good for humanity and not for personal gain. So I tend to focus on the now happiness of the person recieving the good than the reciprocal effect of the good being done.

In conclusion, an atheist can not only be moral but has more access than a theist to a purer form of morality if he/she views his/her life as an opportunity to make a beautiful mandala for humanity's sake.

benodic:
@ justlove91

The fact is that I have really taken for granted the training I have received in Eckankar and reading about your inner experiences brings a lot of memories in my early days in Eckankar back to the fore.
I remember the inner trainings on how to separate mind creations from reality. How to challenge Beings that come into your vision. How to use the fine art of inner discrimination to decipher messages that come from the inner planes.

The most important of all being how to open your consciousness to the Holy Spirit and allowing it to direct the inner experiences that is needed for one's spiritual growth.

I have never had a misleading inner experience., Maybe that is why I have been taken them for granted.
I remain grateful and I am humbled by this fact.
May the blessings be.

I was once a devoted Muslim, I believed with all my heart I was on the right and only path. Then I started asking questions, started questioning my beliefs, in the end I left it all behind. Now, I do not have any religion, because I'm not a fan of belief system anymore, I would rather know for sure than rely on belief or faith.

Eckankar seems enticing since you prioritize experience over belief but my experience with lucid dream also taught me one can't entirely trust experience.

Like you claim, maybe there is a way to separate subjectively generated experiences from objective experiences.

Thanks again for your patience replying my questions.

benodic:
@ Justlove91



The teachings of ECK takes it a bit further. So it doesn't just end at remembering your past live as a child. You have the privilege to soul travel into the causal plane beyond the influences of spirits hovering at the astral plane .

The causal plane stores the records of all your past incarnations in the lower worlds including earth. You get to see for yourself how you have made your journey of Soul through the different planes of God. Your experience still remains your authority and not based on the someone's own believes.

Remember in our previous conversations I was asking you about soul travel, whether you experience vibration while inducing it etc.
The reason I was asking you all those questions then was because I am a lucid dreamer. And one of the most important thing I've learnt is "seeing is not believing".

One time I was in a lucid dream and decide to see an angel, I closed my eyes, focus on that intention, then felt a movement, seconds later the movement stopped, I opened my eyes and there in front of me was an angel, radiant, beatiful wearing a shining robe. I asked for his name, he said Gabriel.

Then I started singing hiphop song and asked him to sing and dance with me. Moments later he was singing and dancing and really rocking the song. So, my suspicion was right, the "angel" was a being of my making afterall, a thought form.

Now imagine I'm a devoted Christian, will I think of testing the angel? Of course, I will wake up and start telling everybody that cares to listen that I saw angel Gabriel.

Years ago, a friend of mine told me he was travelling, I later learnt he died but was unable to know the cause of death then. I decided to get the information in my lucid dream, I found him covered in blood and he told me he had an accident while travelling.
It turns out this information was completely false, that my brain just fabricated the whole thing.

So, the issue is not whether one can visit the casual plane or access the akashic record or see Eck masters but whether what one is experiencing and the information gathered is objectively true or not.

I'm not trying to claim this also applies to your experiences just relating my own.

benodic:
@ justlove91



The key word here is believe. In Eckankar we don't work with believe. We work with knowingness which is far beyond believe.

What you know is reality and what you believe may be an illusion until you experience it and become a knower.

For me the concept of Reincarnation was a reality from childhood as I experienced it and proved it for myself long before becoming an Eckist.

I remembered fully why I had to return and the people I has karmic scores to settle with.

Another thing you need to know is that reincarnation does not only occur between the astral plane and physical plane. It also occurs between the lower heavens e.g one can reincarnate between 4th and 3rd heaven

Also some souls can spend an extremely long length of time in the lower heavens before choosing to reincarnate.
Of course karmic interplay still goes on in the lower heavens as they are still within the worlds of polarity: good and bad

As for the degeneration of moral values in this age, this has to do with the different epochs or ages the lower universe goes through.
You have the golden age, silver age, bronze age and iron age. We are currently in the iron age when the Kal or negative power takes over the universe completely and things gets very tough and bad.

The negativity is just getting started and it's going to get much worse.

The advantage of reincarnation into the physical universe is that it speeds up your spiritual growth. What you can achieve spiritually in 100 years of earth time may take you thousands of years to achieve in the inner worlds because life is simpler and easier there.
So it is a conscious decision that Soul makes to come back here on order to fast forward it's journey back Home to God.

Of course I'm aware people remember part live and there is a book written by Ian Stevenson on accounts of children remembering their part lives.
The problem is how would one know it's ones part lives? One of the ways some people explain past live remembrance is this:

"There are millions of spirits in the astral plane that belief they've to reincarnate to progress, these spirits attach themselves to pregnant women trying to reincarnated that way.
If the child is sensitive to some extent, he/she starts to remember the past live of the spirit that gets attached to it thinking it was it own past live."

The above is why remembering past live doesn't necessarily proof reincarnation is true.

benodic:
You make a conscious effort to align yourself or put yourself in tune with Divine Spirit. And you do that by chanting a spiritual word, such as HU (pronounced like the word hue).

—Harold Klemp

Knowing that you belief in reincarnation, I would like to know your thought on this message said to have been communicated by an ancient spirit that dead more than 5000 years ago.


...... And this I must say, that in all the centuries of my spirit existence, never have I known a spirit or the soul of a spirit to reincarnate, and in this my disappointment has been grievous.

Many spirits of our association have become perfect through renunciation, and yet they have remained spirits and progressed to the highest heavens of our possibilities (the Sixth Sphere).

Yet, strange as it may seem in view of this experience, we still, to a more or less degree, cling to our old beliefs in reincarnation, thinking that there is something else, that we know not of, to be done in order for reincarnation to become the destiny of our souls.

Sometimes I think that my beliefs in this particular must be wrong, for in comparing the condition of mortals, the most advanced in their mind and soul development, I realize that they are not in a small degree the equal of us in development, and then I wonder and, wondering, cannot understand what good could be accomplished or what improvement made in our condition for progressing, should we again enter mortal bodies.

As true theosophy taught, as we conceived it, reincarnation was a supposed process of purification, and necessary in order that the spirit could attain to a state of perfection and freedom from everything that defiles his soul and prevents that soul from arriving at the blissful state of Nirvana, which means only that condition of soul where no longer reincarnation is necessary or possible; and when I know that many of our spirits - one time believers in these doctrines - have arrived at that condition and entered a state of perfect happiness, I hesitate longer to believe, and only hold the faith because I fear that the experience mentioned may be the results of special circumstances.

But if I cease to believe these teachings, what shall I believe? No one can tell me that this reincarnation will not take place, and I fear to surrender the belief. I further believe that in order for the workings of karma, as the doctrines hold, reincarnation is necessary - that only in the mortal body could I do the reaping that my sowing demands, and yet, I see and know that karma has been and is working in this spirit world, to the extent that the reaping has all been accomplished, and the spirit made perfect, and this without any reincarnation; for as I have said, never have I known or heard of the reincarnation of a spirit or of anything that is connected with or represents the spirit.

@bolded

This is one of the reasons why I don't belief in reincarnation. If reincarnation is true, should we not see a steady increase in human moral development. In your estimate, would you say humanity is more materialistic in this age of social media and all or is humanity more spiritual.

For example, which is more advanced?

1. The moral development of Nigeria youths of 200 years ago.
2. The moral development of Nigeria youths of today.

In other words which of the two is more materialistic?

Busybrain2233:
Do unborn babies have souls?

If yes, then;

At what stage do soul enters an unborn child?

Is it at the BLASTOCYST stage?
or
Is it at the EMBRYO stage?
or
Is it at the FETUS stage?

Please oblige me if you know you know.

My belief is that soul doesn't come from somewhere and enter the unborn child but that soul emerges when the condition is right just like fire emerges when you create the right condition for it to emerge.
The combination of a spark and fuel (kerosene, petrol, gas etc) brings about the emergence of fire. So also, the combination of sperm and egg cell through the process we call fertilization brings about the emergence of soul.

Reflect7:
There is no such thing as 'death'.

There is only transition.

MATTER CANNOT BE DESTROYED.

It can only be transformed into another state.

Go and study the accounts of Near Death Experiencers.

On this website there are over 5,000 accounts by NDEs from all over the world, confirming that death does not exist.

And you do NOT need to 'believe' in 'Jesus' or ANYBODY including God Himself, to transit upon passing.

WE ARE POWERFUL, IMMORTAL SOULS having a temporal 'human' experience.

We ALL live forever.

https://www.nderf.org/

Near death experiences only give glimpses of what happen after death, to gain comprehensive knowledge, one has to study the phenomenon of mediumship and read teachings from people that are actually "dead".
A good book to start from is "Life in the world Unseen" channelled through the medium Anthony Borgia.
The Spirit communicator was a priest while on earth, he tells of his experiences after passing over and how he has to radically change most of his religious beliefs.

Download the book for free here
http://www.innerpath.com.au/borgia/0Borgiaindex.htm

benodic:
@ justlove91



You can choose the position that is most comfortable for you. It doesn't matter.
Minimum of at least 20 minutes. You can extend up to 30 minutes as much as your body can carry.

Thanks

benodic:
@ justlove91




Yes you can.


Yes it is.
I sing HU mentally in public so as not to disturb people and sing it out aloud when I am alone. Both are quite effective from my experience.

Can one sing it while lying in bed or does one has to sit meditative style? And for how many minutes?

benodic:
Take questions to the Inner Master. Chant a sacred word, such as the name for God, HU, and ask for answers to come in the best way.

The Inner Master and the ECK, Holy Spirit, are one and the same.

—Harold Klemp
The Awakening Soul

Can one sing HU mentally? And is it as effective as singing it aloud?

benodic:
@ justlove91



eckankarnigeria. org



There are several radio programmes in different parts of the country.

OK

Templee333:
one is on sunday 8:30 pm and the other is Monday 10:30am; 101.1 FM and 90.5 FM respectlvely. though you may not get these stations clear except you are within Akwa Ibom and Cross Rivers. there are other stations that are close to where you live but i don't know them.

Thanks

Templee333:
the first time i took interest in eckankar was when i listen to eck radio programe way back in 2018. since then i've been listening regularly. there are two local radio stations that i listen to the program every week.

Which stations and time? Are they still airing

benodic:
@ justlove91



Eckankar teachings centres primarily on Soul achieving self-realization and God- realization and usually does not concern itself with psychic matters. I have not seen any elemental beings and have no interest in seeing one either.

What is the website for eckankar Nigeria
Does eckankar Nigeria has radio programmes?

benodic:

@ justlove91



Eckankar teachings centres primarily on Soul achieving self-realization and God- realization and usually does not itself with psychic matters. I have not seen any elemental beings and have no interest in seeing one either.

OK

benodic:
@ justlove91



The process of preparing the juju involves incantations that help to intensify and strengthen the negative thought forms. So it uses the second method.

Thought as much.

What is Eckankar teaching on elemental beings and have you seen any?

benodic:
@ justlove91



Definitely you can use the second method for good if you have acquired the discipline and love required which unfortunately majority of people have not.
As it is presently with the level of consciousness of people currently it is even better that man doesn't know the power he possesses or else the world will be in more serious trouble with the strong preying on the weak psychically

What do you think of Juju? Do you think they've any inherent power or does it work because of using the second method indirectly?