Religion is Stupid Powerlessness

Worship and idolisation are sought by powerless people

H+ Magazine published an article, 25 March 2014, titled Religion+ for Humanity+, by Rev. Chris Benek. Here are my thoughts.

Let's consider the hashtag #PrayForMH370.

It's not that God doesn't listen to prayers, it is merely that God does not exist. All religions are based upon a delusion.

Praying cannot change reality. Action is the only solution. Magic or Gods are appealing when a person has no power. Instead of facing the horror of being powerless, in a terrible situation, it can be comforting for people if they delude themselves about God existing to answer their prayers.

Technology will empower us therefore the delusion of God will become obsolete. Furthermore, the deception of the delusion is not compatible with intelligence, thus if our intelligence is genuinely increasing then belief in God must become obsolete.

Yes I do recognise the “engraftedness” of religion onto our mindless culture, it is a cancer we can cure.

Rev. Chris Benek wrote:

“To begin with I would contend that both practically and philosophically no person is unaffiliated with religion altogether, even if one doesn’t claim to be an adherent to an organized religion. The evidence of the engraftedness of religion throughout human culture is an indisputable fact. This doesn’t mean that a person has to be personally satisfied with the current options of organized religions before them, but to deny religion’s impact on culture is not a very scientific proposition.”

CANCER OF THE MIND

Atheism can exist. We can be atheists. We can be without God despite the taint of culture. The delusion of God does not actually mean we are with God. The delusion does not actually mean God exists. We merely live in the midst of a cultural God delusion. Atheists resemble doctors on a cancer ward. Amidst this cancer epidemic not everyone is sick, not everyone embraces the disease.

Winston Smith, in Nineteen Eighty-Four, had a small amount of freedom despite extreme authoritarianism: “Nothing was your own except the few cubic centimetres inside your skull.” Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn managed to write Cancer Ward despite Soviet authoritarianism. Ideas and states of being can exist contrary to normal standards.

Worshipping something, in any shape or form, is not intelligent irrespective of the degree of worship (excessive or minuscule). Rev. Chris Benek declares “worship” is “passion” and vice versa. Benek then states passion is God, which is typical religious nonsense indeed. It is amusing that Rev. Chris Benek wants to redefine “passion” as “God.” Benek seems very confused.

Passion is different to God, which I suppose is the reason for there being two different words. Passion is not idolisation or worship. Passionate people, with a passion for a hobby or person, are not idolaters. Passion can be linked to idolisation but it is not idolisation. Passion is not religion.

I think Istvan is merely trying to enhance intelligence via rejecting God. It’s wrong to dismiss this as a “power play” or an attempt at converting people. Self empowerment does not entail becoming an idol.

If your power depends upon people worshipping you then your power is rather limited, delusional. Consider all the people worshipping God, yet God didn't have the power to bring the people from MH370 home safely.

God is totally powerless because God does not exist. Worship and idolisation are delusional substitutes for power. Worship is integral to a lack of intelligence thus being worshipped by people is a very dismal state of affairs, a very mediocre situation of stupid powerlessness. Intelligence is power. God is a non-existent moron, completely powerless, thus God equals worship.

Worship is stupid thus intelligent people don’t not seek it. Istvan seeks true power thus he wants to empower people, he wants to enhance his intelligence and the intelligence of others, which means he wants people to reject the nonsense of religion. That's the way I see it.

“Are We Heading for a Jesus Singularity?”

On 21st March 2014 Zoltan Istvan published an article via Huffington Post questioning the possible influence of religion on the Singularity. He feared the taint of religious people could skew the development of AI.

Religion+ for Humanity+ by Rev. Chris Benek is perhaps an example of such skewing.

Zoltan fears the lack of atheists in Congress could skew AI policy. Zoltan wrote: “The question of whether civilization is heading for a Jesus Singularity should begin with a head count of the admitted atheists in the U.S. Congress. The count doesn't take long. Currently, the number is an astonishing zero.”

Thankfully despite Zoltan’s understandable fears, the fear is invalid. We only need to look at WikiLeaks or Snowden to see how freedom and ideas can develop contrary to governmental policy. Consider how Snowden, a person deeply embedded in the propaganda of the NSA (US intelligence and security department), rejected the policies of his security chiefs. Snowden shows us how true intelligence cannot be stopped. WikiLeaks is similarly notable for surviving despite immense pressure from world leaders.

Children growing-up under the psychological cudgel of religious parents can break free from narrow-minded tradition, perhaps most notable via Breaking Amish.

Note how former LulzSec joker Cake Davis (Lulz) stated: “You cannot arrest an idea.”

Facebook Comments

Luke Parrish agreed passion is not God, but he was somewhat dismissive of me: “I don't take Singularity Utopia too seriously. ” He also wrote:

The funny thing is, the person writing this rebuttal is kind of fanatical on certain topics like intelligence. For example, they believe that immoral behavior is inherently stupid, therefore no truly intelligent being could pose a risk to humanity. Also the idea of building an AI with constraints to e.g. not wipe out humanity would be "slavery".

Kristi Jones wrote:

The author doesn't even use proper terminology making many of his statements appearing double minded. It has nothing to do with "to each their own" his wording proves the severity of his ignorance. I'd respond with a video response if and when I get the time.

James Ledford wrote: