Re: Religion.

violet crayon of delirium · by violet crayon of delirium on Mon 18 May 2009, 1:00 am

Y_Y
I'm not saying the New Testament is invalid... I'm only saying that Christians could benefit from accepting more scriptures that were written about him. And that bible was put together by a certain group of people using religion as a source of power, who were subject to their own beliefs and prejudices anyway. You can interpret it how you want, but the selection of detail does favour theirs.

I never said that what God wants is bad... I'm saying that it's not something for everyone. I mean I wouldn't want to go to heaven, because it would be hell to me. I don't think Hitler's ideals were bad either, I just don't want to live in a totalitarian dictatorship. I'm chaotic, and so is the world. Everyone is different and have different ideals and value different things. Heaven is good for being an exclusive world for people who want to serve. But it's only appropriate for people who want to serve. It's not that you don't have the freedom to go around doing things, it's just that you always have to value God more than anything else and must obey whatever he tells you to do.
And besides... I told you before that your belief was the deciding factor. It doesn't matter what other's believe and value, it's only about what you believe and value.

And I already said that God and Jesus have different approaches but the same agenda. I may dislike God, but I respect Jesus. I just don't wish to serve, I value chaos over order.

People seem to misunderstand my view on the matter. I don't hate the values of Christianity and other God following faiths. They are just unsuitable to me.

kafka wrote:but if you look at Christianity's core and take away it's divine worship factor it offers pretty simple rules to live by: be humble, help others, love others, live in peace, treasure the things around you, etc.

I like when that's what Christian's ideals are, but as I said, it's not my cup of tea(I don't even like tea all that much anyway, I like coffee better :p). I'd be friends with Jesus, but a wouldn't follow him unless I felt like it.

Of course the interpretations of forbidden fruit story can vary. It might be anger at disobedience or fear of them going further and eating immortality fruit. But I think it's a fair enough assumption to assume that God didn't REALLY want humans to have sentience. I mean if "original sin" is supposed to be inherited, it makes more sense to assume that sentience is that sin you're born with. I think God can live with the fact humans have sentience now, but it doesn't change that it complicates things for him.
Obviously if God is the creator then it's his fault. But maybe God made a mistake. Alternatively, maybe God made Lucifer so that he had an antagonist to give himself a challenge (and a scapegoat for his mistakes), Then you could say Lucifer put the trees there.
I guess it doesn't matter though, because the fact is that you still need to use your sentience to serve God/Jesus if you want to get into heaven.

And the thing is... It didn't HAVE to be Christianity that gave the world culture and law. Other religions or beliefs could of filled it's place, it just didn't in this reality. I mean, the other religion wouldn't be any better, but they would be different and would cater to different types of people.

You can say nothing doesn't exist, but nothing IS non-existence. Try to prove anything without using belief in it as an example? You need to accept the laws of nature in some way before you can say that there is a computer in front of you. If someone honestly believed there wasn't a computer in front of them, they wouldn't be able to comprehend one. It's like if I tried to convince you that I had a friend standing next to me. If you didn't believe I had a friend here and believed that I was crazy instead, then you're in a different environment and context, so no ones right or wrong. It's like arguing over whether 1 + 1 = 2 or 10. Both are true, it's just that one side is using binary.
I guess it's more like, Nothing is the rest state of everything. Belief makes nothing into something, but the believer is also just a something, that decides to spawn more something. Its like when people say God is in everything and that everyone is a part of God. Well I substitute the word God, for Nothing. And if you want to become part of the source again, you stop believing in anything, including yourself. Otherwise you use your power of belief to do what ever the hell you want. I mean, usually people start off by playing the game that they woke into existence in, but people don't realise until later that "being a part of God" means you have his power too, and that you can control your environment too. But as everyone is God, you just move away from the environment others are in, while still retaining copies of the people who didn't believe.

But yeah, my belief even allows for you to not believe in them :p. I don't worship nothing, I empower myself as an aspect of her. The great thing about my belief is that people don't need to follow my belief. Of course, at the moment, I'm still playing reality with you all, because I don't want to throw away the interesting experience, but I'm still creative in my spirituality. (Laugh if you want, but instead of praying for God's help, I command servant spirits to help me out with things. :p)

proust. · by proust. on Mon 18 May 2009, 1:57 am

violet crayon of delirium wrote:Y_Y
I'm not saying the New Testament is invalid... I'm only saying that Christians could benefit from accepting more scriptures that were written about him. And that bible was put together by a certain group of people using religion as a source of power, who were subject to their own beliefs and prejudices anyway. You can interpret it how you want, but the selection of detail does favour theirs.

And I'm just saying that other scriptures are invalid. Personally, I think the Bible is a huge block of knowledge and offers enough detail.

And, why do you automatically assume that they were trying to "make religion a source of power"? It's exactly the same thing as saying that the people who wrote the American constitution were trying to make an instrument of power out of democracy. The ecumenical councils are vital for Christianity because they put order in beliefs. A religion shouldn't be a confusing haze of beliefs from which everybody interprets everything however they want.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:I never said that what God wants is bad... I'm saying that it's not something for everyone. I mean I wouldn't want to go to heaven, because it would be hell to me.

That's an oxymoron. whatnow? O_O

violet crayon of delirium wrote:I don't think Hitler's ideals were bad either, I just don't want to live in a totalitarian dictatorship.

Which of Hitler's ideals? Because they all seemed to involve totalitarianism.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:I'm chaotic, and so is the world. Everyone is different and have different ideals and value different things. Heaven is good for being an exclusive world for people who want to serve. But it's only appropriate for people who want to serve. It's not that you don't have the freedom to go around doing things, it's just that you always have to value God more than anything else and must obey whatever he tells you to do.
And besides... I told you before that your belief was the deciding factor. It doesn't matter what other's believe and value, it's only about what you believe and value.

You don't have the freedom to go around doing things in democracy either. You have to obey to the laws of the state you're in and you have to serve your country too.
Again, God doesn't ask you to do absurd things, just to swallow your pride most times.
And the world is pretty orderly actually, the whole universe is ruled by the same laws.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:And I already said that God and Jesus have different approaches but the same agenda. I may dislike God, but I respect Jesus. I just don't wish to serve, I value chaos over order.

I don't understand how that is possible unless you've had a personal conversation with either God or Jesus.
There's the Old Law in the Old Testament and the New Covenant in the New Testament, and the Father and Jesus do have different roles in the creation of the world, but They both want to impose the same values on humanity.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:Of course the interpretations of forbidden fruit story can vary. It might be anger at disobedience or fear of them going further and eating immortality fruit. But I think it's a fair enough assumption to assume that God didn't REALLY want humans to have sentience.

Then why didn't He just stop them from it?

violet crayon of delirium wrote: I mean if "original sin" is supposed to be inherited, it makes more sense to assume that sentience is that sin you're born with. I think God can live with the fact humans have sentience now, but it doesn't change that it complicates things for him.

The original sin is erased through baptism, reason is obviously not.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:Obviously if God is the creator then it's his fault. But maybe God made a mistake.

God cannot make mistakes because God is perfect.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:I guess it doesn't matter though, because the fact is that you still need to use your sentience to serve God/Jesus if you want to get into heaven.

How could sentience be a requirement to get to Heaven if God didn't want people to have it?

violet crayon of delirium wrote:And the thing is... It didn't HAVE to be Christianity that gave the world culture and law. Other religions or beliefs could of filled it's place, it just didn't in this reality. I mean, the other religion wouldn't be any better, but they would be different and would cater to different types of people.

They could've, but they just didn't. During the Middle Ages while Western culture was at a standstill, Arabic and Byzantine culture made impressive advancements. We can read Plato or Sophocles today because their manuscripts were preserved in the East. Yet, (Western?) European culture is the only culture that managed to impose itself as universal.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:You can say nothing doesn't exist, but nothing IS non-existence. Try to prove anything without using belief in it as an example?

I guess it's more like, Nothing is the rest state of everything. Its like when people say God is in everything and that everyone is a part of God. Well I substitute the word God, for Nothing.

Tell all that to Aristotle. :]
Plus, if you say that Nothing exists in everything, then you're already contradicting yourself because if Nothing is non-existence, then it cannot exist in anything.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:But yeah, my belief even allows for you to not believe in them :p. I don't worship nothing, I empower myself as an aspect of her. The great thing about my belief is that people don't need to follow my belief. Of course, at the moment, I'm still playing reality with you all, because I don't want to throw away the interesting experience, but I'm still creative in my spirituality. (Laugh if you want, but instead of praying for God's help, I command servant spirits to help me out with things. :p)

No offense, but you mix together so many different beliefs and things, it's unbelievable and confusing. How can you genuinely believe in something just to change it into something completely different the next day?

And this is indeed a very long post. x_x

violet crayon of delirium · by violet crayon of delirium on Mon 18 May 2009, 4:39 am

Y_Y
You just don't understand what I'm saying... Because you're arguing against conclusions you made about what I said, not against what I said.

kafka wrote:It's exactly the same thing as saying that the people who wrote the American constitution were trying to make an instrument of power out of democracy. The ecumenical councils are vital for Christianity because they put order in beliefs. A religion shouldn't be a confusing haze of beliefs from which everybody interprets everything however they want.

The people who wrote the American constitution WERE trying to get power in introducing democracy. The problem is that you take things to be bad, or unusual when they aren't. Obviously you need people who agree on something if you wish for an ordered decision on something. But just because one group agree on something, doesn't mean the other groups are wrong. Essentially what you're saying in that case is that people who aren't satisfied with what they're given, can go f*** themselves, (Only, they can't because masturbation is immoral :p). But what I mean is, that it's fine to be satisfied, but you have to acknowledge that some people aren't.
The funny thing is even if you say it shouldn't, It still is. Christianity has split into so many forms and everyone has different interpretations of the same thing. Christianity itself was split from Judaism, and Islam is similar anyway. The only way for something to have one truth, is to eliminate the people who don't follow that truth. Heaven takes all people who value the same thing and excludes everyone else.

It's only an oxymoron is you keep everything literal. Hell was a metaphor. If my only purpose was to serve for eternity, I'd rather destroy myself. Or did you mean the previous sentence? I guess it's because I don't have morals that I can say that something isn't bad while I dislike it. God and Heaven is great for people like you, but it's horrible for people like me. The statement about Hitler was the same. Some people would be happy living in totalitarian dictatorship if they idolised their dictator, but if they didn't, they'd hate it (and be killed anyway if they showed resistance).

kafka wrote:You don't have the freedom to go around doing things in democracy either. You have to obey to the laws of the state you're in and you have to serve your country too.

Actually you don't. If I don't want to follow a law, I don't have to. I mean, law enforcers will try to enforce it against me, but that's assuming they can. It's like how you can flee to a different country or state to avoid prosecution. Consequences only come about because you leave yourself open to them. And it's not like some expert criminals don't get away with their crimes. You can argue that God has universal power, but that's just your belief and assumption.

kafka wrote:And the world is pretty orderly actually, the whole universe is ruled by the same laws.

That's only assuming that what you believe is an absolute truth. Order is only brought about from belief and conviction. And the fact is that while there is order, it's lots of different orders. And lots of different orders is still chaos. If you want order, everyone has to believe and value EXACTLY the same thing. And the simplest, most basic form of order, is when everything is in a state of nothing.

kafka wrote:I don't understand how that is possible unless you've had a personal conversation with either God or Jesus ... They both want to impose the same values on humanity.

Why do you need a personal conversation. If you read about what they did and what they said, you can get an idea about the type of person they are and the types of things they're likely to do. Add other related event in history that you've heard about, and it gives you more of an idea. I mean, you can have feelings about fictional characters can't you?
And didn't I say in that quote that they had the same agenda? So why are you repeating it back like it's an argument. I hate God for using fear and threats to inspire loyalty, and I like the loving and accepting approach Jesus uses.

God allowed humans to acquire sentience because he was going along with the rules and set up that he'd already made. It's like, "Well, it happened this way, so maybe I should countermeasure it by doing this to fix it up". I mean he let's f***ed up things happen to people, he just tries to direct it so it works to his advantage in the end.

How do you know that the way you interpret a passage is right? Like I mentioned before, the purpose of godparents is to raise you to be a follower of god. So baptism seems like, a forgiving that you were born with sentience, and starting you on a path where you won't use that sentience in a way that won't stray you away from him.

The only thing that says that he is perfect, is himself, and people that believe him. Even so, it doesn't have to be a mistake, per say. It can just be a negative consequence that he accepts and takes into account for his future calculations. Or a calculated negative circumstance placed so that a positive action can be implemented (Like how governments exploit a disaster to implement new laws or get approval for certain actions).

I never said sentience was a requirement, I said that using your sentience for his advantage is the only way to make up for the fact that you have it.

My only point was that Christianity was not necessary for the future of humans and such. It was essential for things to turn out this way, but it's not like there's anything significant about how thing turned out apart from the fact that it applies to your life at the moment.

As famous as Aristotle was, it really doesn't make a difference whether he believed in it or not. My point was that you can't proof anything unless people believe in your evidence. Nothing is doesn't have to exist to exist as an idea because the idea is that something is able to not exist.

You underestimate the value of zero, when there isn't any other value. That means that the potential is infinite and has no resistance. Everything is worthless ultimately, but you make up or accept imaginary values for it and so does everyone else.

It's not mixed up beliefs, it's just that I don't think anyone is wrong. I believe that everyone is right at the same time. I mean, it starts off being nihilistic, but it's topped off with a positive spin on the result of the idea. I'm staying pretty consistent with what I'm saying, I'm only elaborating, Or are you asking me how it works?

Your belief is controlling your reality. At the moment, you're just going along with the scenario that you were put into. You're assurance in the laws of nature are what's keeping their power over you. Your belief in God is what will likely lead you onto heaven after you die. But if you stopped believing in something and started believing in something else, your environment will change. You can hardly try now though, because you're skeptical. And even if you were dedicated, if you have doubts in your belief, they aren't complete.

Prayer for help and things work through the power of your belief. Magick, in the occult sense works in the same way.

**more adventurous.** · by **more adventurous.** on Mon 18 May 2009, 5:09 am

I'm just going to add something in.

God isn't a person. So saying you "get to know what kind of person they are" doesn't make sense to me.

P R I N C E S S · by P R I N C E S S on Mon 18 May 2009, 5:14 pm

kafka. wrote:
violet crayon of delirium wrote:Y_Y
I'm not saying the New Testament is invalid... I'm only saying that Christians could benefit from accepting more scriptures that were written about him. And that bible was put together by a certain group of people using religion as a source of power, who were subject to their own beliefs and prejudices anyway. You can interpret it how you want, but the selection of detail does favour theirs.
[font=times new roman]And I'm just saying that other scriptures are invalid. Personally, I think the Bible is a huge block of knowledge and offers enough detail.

Um.. I feel mildly like I am switching sides here, but anywho.

The other scriptures are not invalid. Look at the Gospel of Timothy for example. I haven't read the whole thing, but much of it shows a younger Jesus that is not portrayed very frequently in the accepted Christain bible (which has a few stories- such as the one where he teaches the rabbi's in the temple- and then mostly skips ahead to when he is older.) This scripture shows a pre-teen, pre- running away to the desert with Mary etc in one story he is playing a game similar to marbles and a boy cheats, he then tells his father (God) to strike him down, and the boy becomes ill. I think these scriptures are important, despite the fact that they are not included within the bible.

Yes, this was not selected for the bible because this story is not backed up by other gospels, but that does not mean it is less valid to those of the Christian faith. And the church did not try to hide it from it's followers, otherwise how would a 17 year old like me know about it? I think that seeing Jesus like this, as a more normal person is important in aiding his followers to relate to him.

God never used threats to get people to follow him. The church used fear, but that was it's belief at the time, and the belief of the people. They could have chosen not to believe.

I'm confused about the Hitler thing. Which beliefs do you think are okay? The one where Jew's are impure and should be made to walk until they die or reach gas chambers? Or the one where genecide is okay because Jew's aren't really human?

Smile, Lovely · by Smile, Lovely on Tue 19 May 2009, 3:56 pm

I thought that the 'original sin' was indulgence? And using personal gain in order to better yourself over others. Isn't that what Eve did with the apple? And then her sins were made worse when she lied to God, which was why she was banshed?

bittersweet. · by bittersweet. on Tue 19 May 2009, 7:09 pm

Smile, Lovely wrote:I thought that the 'original sin' was indulgence? And using personal gain in order to better yourself over others. Isn't that what Eve did with the apple? And then her sins were made worse when she lied to God, which was why she was banshed?

Original sin is things that we didn't do, but is passed down from father to son and daughter. So yes, original sin would be Eve's and Adam's doing.

proust. · by proust. on Wed 20 May 2009, 3:34 am

violet crayon of delirium wrote:
The funny thing is even if you say it shouldn't, It still is. Christianity has split into so many forms and everyone has different interpretations of the same thing. Christianity itself was split from Judaism, and Islam is similar anyway. The only way for something to have one truth, is to eliminate the people who don't follow that truth. Heaven takes all people who value the same thing and excludes everyone else.

Christianity, Islam and Judaism are just three different religions, while Christianity doesn't deny that there is truth in the teachings of other religions it doesn't claim that they're all one universal religion- actually, I think that everybody accepting one universal religion is one of the signs of the coming of the Apocalypse.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:It's only an oxymoron is you keep everything literal. Hell was a metaphor.

Yes, I know what a metaphor is. But Heaven cannot be unpleasant, to say that you wouldn't feel perfect beatitude in Heaven is an oxymoron.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:Actually you don't. If I don't want to follow a law, I don't have to. I mean, law enforcers will try to enforce it against me, but that's assuming they can. It's like how you can flee to a different country or state to avoid prosecution. Consequences only come about because you leave yourself open to them. And it's not like some expert criminals don't get away with their crimes. You can argue that God has universal power, but that's just your belief and assumption.

No, you can't just flee the country when you do something illegal. International organization will get hold of you -if you manage to cross the border in the first place- and you'll still be trialed. You seem to think that to cheat the law is really easy.

violet crayon of delirium wrote:That's only assuming that what you believe is an absolute truth.

So the law of gravity is just a "belief"?

Replying the whole post would lead to another ridiculously long post. Your opinions on how Christianity views God are just awkward, you claim to know how Christians see/interpret God and bring no arguments in favor of it. whatnow? O_O

P R I N C E S S wrote:Um.. I feel mildly like I am switching sides here, but anywho.

The other scriptures are not invalid. Look at the Gospel of Timothy for example. I haven't read the whole thing, but much of it shows a younger Jesus that is not portrayed very frequently in the accepted Christain bible (which has a few stories- such as the one where he teaches the rabbi's in the temple- and then mostly skips ahead to when he is older.) This scripture shows a pre-teen, pre- running away to the desert with Mary etc in one story he is playing a game similar to marbles and a boy cheats, he then tells his father (God) to strike him down, and the boy becomes ill. I think these scriptures are important, despite the fact that they are not included within the bible.

Yes, this was not selected for the bible because this story is not backed up by other gospels, but that does not mean it is less valid to those of the Christian faith. And the church did not try to hide it from it's followers, otherwise how would a 17 year old like me know about it? I think that seeing Jesus like this, as a more normal person is important in aiding his followers to relate to him.

Up until this point, I've never heard of the Gospel of Timothy, but I don't think Christianity should promote the image of a vengeful, hateful God who strikes down boys who cheat at games. whatnow? O_O

violet crayon of delirium · by violet crayon of delirium on Wed 20 May 2009, 6:37 pm

I'm not saying they're the same religion, I'm saying that religion ISN'T universal. There are heaps of ways of interpreting the bible and faith and well, You can look at anything in multiple different ways.
You're saying that there is only ONE way to interpret the bible, but saying that is immensely conceited. The only one validating your interpretation is you, and anyone else with the same conceited opinion. You're saying that anyone who doesn't see thing exactly the way you do are WRONG.

Heaven IS heaven for those who make it there, but if you put me in heaven, I would despise it. Utopia only caters to one group of people. The difference between utopia and dystopia, is whether you're the side benefitting from it.
I'm saying that you have to want heaven as it is for heaven to be desirable. Heaven is only the perfect place for SOME people, not everyone. I'd be more content in Hell.

I'm not saying that cheating the law is easy. I'm saying that it's possible to get away with crime. Some people are never caught for great crimes, and people get away with little crimes all the time. I mean thousands of people ignore copyright laws all the time and it's not like they're usually prosecuted.
I mean, what about when Christianity was illegal, What if it was made illegal again. Are you going to obey the law when it goes against who you are and what you belief in.

The law of gravity IS just a belief. You were born with the belief that it is the truth, but that doesn't mean that you have to stick with it. Your belief dictates your reality, so of course you'll see other people fall to their death when they believe they can fly. But you didn't believe it, so of course you couldn't see their sucess. They went off into a wavelength of reality where they were able to fly, and you stayed in your skeptical little world where they can't. You believed in opposites, so you're worlds deviated from each other. You'll think they're dead, or in hospital, and they'll be laughing at you for not believing in them.

The people who defy the odds are the ones that believe in themselves. You choose what restirctions you have, Truthfully, you have no restrictions, but life is more interesting when you believe you do. It's like how god-moding roleplayers are no fun to play with, people prefer to impose restrictions on themselves, so they can have forfillment in their journey.

If God isn't a person, the bible loses even more worth. There wouldn't be any talk of anyone communicating with God, they'll just be what appears. God needs personification before he can communicate with any human, Otherwise he's just a subtle influence and feeling. Agnostics tend not to think of God as a person, but rather, an energy. And it's fine to see God as an energy rather than a person. But Christianity does imply that God is a person, just a hopelessly powerful person.

Look up 2 Kings 2:23-25
It's a lovely little story in the bible where some people laugh and mock a prophet for being bald, and the prophet has God summon bears to maul them. So essentially, Christianity is already promoting that sort of message.

And honestly, I don't see what your argument against my credibility is. I'm saying that everyone is different, so essentially it's not like I'm saying everyone believes and does the same thing anyway. If you were to start a discussion of what Christianity is, made up purely of Christians, you'll find plenty of conflict and differing opinions and values.
The arguments and points of view are varied, so when you advocate Christianity, you need to clarify what your Christianity is and understand that there are many different approaches to Christianity. You can say that all others are wrong if you want, but you need to know your religious identity and be able to clarify and analyse your own beliefs. I'm picking at the flaws and contradictions that I can see, and expecting you to look at that subject for yourself and decide your idea on the subject.

If you remember, I'm Catholic to the point of Confirmation. Essentially that makes me a Christian too, just one that deviated elsewhere. I've gone to a Catholic private school and even in primary school I had religious education. I've got a bible and I've read it, it's funny how many Christians haven't read the bible. I still have my own idea of what Christianity is, I just don't worship God because of what I know Christianity to be.

Of course... This is a thread on religion, and I should be allowed to express my ideals and beliefs, and I'm prepared to discuss it. All you're telling me, is that I'm wrong because I don't agree with you.

P R I N C E S S · by P R I N C E S S on Wed 20 May 2009, 9:40 pm

No they shouldn't promote it. And therefore it is not included within the Bible. But I do not think gospels such as Timothy should be hidden either.

And dw if you haven't heard of it. I'm just a little bit nerdy when it comes to my religion and I like to know everything! lol

violet crayon of delirium · by violet crayon of delirium on Thu 21 May 2009, 2:53 pm

But when they have 2 Kings 2:23-25, It's not like they aren't promoting the same kind of thing already...

death till we part · by death till we part on Wed 10 Jun 2009, 11:02 pm

I'm Atheist.
I study Religion at school.
Religion sometimes scares me, especially when people are prejudice against my "lifestyle choice".
I really don't mind what people choose to believe, but if it affects other people in a bad way then I don't like it. There are good people in each religion, and bad.

Heartswell. · by Heartswell. on Thu 11 Jun 2009, 3:32 am

^Religion is perfect, people are not. >_>

death till we part · by death till we part on Thu 11 Jun 2009, 8:21 pm

Yes, YES. So true.

Except nothing is perfect. Smile

**more adventurous.** · by **more adventurous.** on Fri 12 Jun 2009, 6:47 am

^ But God is perfect. I can't speak for other religions because I'm most familiar with Christianity, but I'm sure many other religions believe their god or creator is perfect too.

It's a matter of how you look at things.

death till we part · by death till we part on Fri 12 Jun 2009, 9:05 am

I believe God is a metaphor for everything good in the world, he is used in a symbolic way to promote peace and happiness. But that's just my view.

Heartswell. · by Heartswell. on Mon 15 Jun 2009, 2:20 am

^I don't think God is portrayed as a symbol really; well, that's what I grasp from how religion portrays God.
God is pretty much a fact. >_> The concept of God is a product of how we -humanity- always need a leader. God regulates us, just like society does with our behaviors.
God is a superior being unique and separate from us and everything created.