Karma

[Wootah]

ref:To believe in Jesus

Jesus was teaching the principle of karma.

That was his message as far as I'm concerned.

I believe in karma, therefore I believe in the teachings of Jesus because Jesus was teaching karma. Thus I believe in the message of Jesus. And so I believe in Jesus in that sense.

Who would like to explain Karma to me and be willing to examine whether Karma is a cogent philosophical concept?

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 9 by Philomath]

What about the disabled? It seems like a harsh punishment Buddha/(god?) would do to a newborn child. Why should people be punish for things they cant remember?
You really cant work you way out to get news eyes or out of a cast system.

Should we decide that the infant deserved to be disabled? Stuff like that causes inequality and social problems in India.

Karma does not work in Christianity.
You should see Christianity as a juridical trial where you will be punished on judgement day for your deeds.

In Christianity you have even bigger problems.

You said, "What about the disabled? It seems like a harsh punishment Buddha/(god?) would do to a newborn child. Why should people be punish for things they cant remember?"

But what about the Christian God? The Christian God would be creating these same disabled babies, yet the Christian babies are totally innocent because there are newly formed souls created at concept or birth by the Christian God himself.

So why would the Christian God be so cruel to new born babies that hadn't even had a chance at life at all yet?

At least with the idea of Karma it can be imagined that new born baby is actually a reincarnated soul that was in some way responsible for it's current situation.

However, I agree that these types of issues are quite difficult to even justify in a karmic view of reality.

The pure secular atheists view truly does have the best possible answer. Like is just a freak accident and things aren't anywhere near perfect.

In fact, if the atheists have a problem at all, they would have a problem with why things seem to go well far more often that they go sour.

I always say that theists have a problem with "Evil" because there is no sound reason why any God would allow the horrible things to happen that clear do happen.

On the other hand the atheists have a problem with "Good" because there is no sound reason why an accident should work out to be so good more than 50% of the time. Of course the atheists are armed with evolution which does indeed explain why things do indeed work out good far better than 50% of the time. So actually atheists have an answer to the "Problem of Good".

Whereas, theists do not have an answer to the "Problem of Evil". The Abrahamic religions try to pin the "Problem of Evil" onto humans through an accusation of a "Fall from Grace", but that doesn't wash. Humans weren't always around but yet the problem of "Evil" had plagued the early earth and life long before that.

Moreover, trying to pin the problem of "Evil" on the creation instead of the creator taking full responsibility for it is absurd anyway.

Karmic religions try to do away with the "Problem of Evil" altogether by proclaiming that there is no such thing as "Evil", everything is precisely as it should be and what we see as "Evil" is actually just Karma playing out which is totally justifiable because Karma only returns to people what they themselves had created.

So we have these three philosophies.

1. Secular Atheism - Life is just an accident that has "evolved over time"
2. Abrahamic Theism - Humans are to be blamed for all the evils of the world.
3. Karmic Mysticism - Souls are eternally reincarnated, and what you do comes back to you.

If I were to rate these in terms of which are more plausible I would rate them as follows:

1. Secular Atheism - Life is just an accident that has "evolved over time"
2. Karmic Mysticism - Souls are eternally reincarnated, and what you do comes back to you.
3. Abrahamic Theism - Humans are to be blamed for all the evils of the world.

So based on this issue alone I actually favor Secular Atheism. It seems like the best explanation overall.

Karmic Mysticism is a spiritual "faith" (a hope and dream that it might actually be real)

For me personally, Abrahamic Theism is a nightmare. I can't imagine why I would ever want to have "faith" that Abrahamic theism is true. That would mean that we are all evil 100%.

Moreover, as I've stated above the God of this Abrahamic Theism would also be totally unfair to newborn babies. Not only because of birth defects, but also by what they are being born into (i.e. abusive parents, war zones, overpopulation and starvation, dying young, etc,)

I just don't see where there could be any justice of fairness in the Abrahamic theology. It is the least likely scenario for reality.

Both atheism and Karmic Mysticism are far superior to the Abrahamic myths.

The Abrahamic myths are the most undesirable of all. As well as being the most unfair and unjust.

[Finn the human]

[Replying to post 9 by Philomath]

[/uote]
But what about the Christian God? The Christian God would be creating these same disabled babies, yet the Christian babies are totally innocent because there are newly formed souls created at concept or birth by the Christian God himself.

So why would the Christian God be so cruel to new born babies that hadn't even had a chance at life at all yet?

No idea, not following any religion yet

At least with the idea of Karma it can be imagined that new born baby is actually a reincarnated soul that was in some way responsible for it's current situation.

However, I agree that these types of issues are quite difficult to even justify in a karmic view of reality.

So it cant be justified but does it mean were okay to dislike the disabled simply because they might have been a bad person?

I always say that theists have a problem with "Evil" because there is no sound reason why any God would allow the horrible things to happen that clear do happen.

Have you seen the Simpsons Halloween episode with Lisa and the tooth?

Whereas, theists do not have an answer to the "Problem of Evil". The Abrahamic religions try to pin the "Problem of Evil" onto humans through an accusation of a "Fall from Grace", but that doesn't wash. Humans weren't always around but yet the problem of "Evil" had plagued the early earth and life long before that.

I think Evil started with Satan?

Moreover, trying to pin the problem of "Evil" on the creation instead of the creator taking full responsibility for it is absurd anyway.

I think that's free will. God gave free will so we do what we like. Were not robots to follow without choice.

Karmic religions try to do away with the "Problem of Evil" altogether by proclaiming that there is no such thing as "Evil", everything is precisely as it should be and what we see as "Evil" is actually just Karma playing out which is totally justifiable because Karma only returns to people what they themselves had created.

So a family murdered is not Evil it just what they deserve. Hmm that seems worse than the Semite religion. At least with their God stuff happens to them because of chance and free will but with Karmic bad stuff happens to you because you deserved it. Then truly they should revere criminal as they carrying out Karmic justice?

So we have these three philosophies.

1. Secular Atheism - Life is just an accident that has "evolved over time"
2. Abrahamic Theism - Humans are to be blamed for all the evils of the world.
3. Karmic Mysticism - Souls are eternally reincarnated, and what you do comes back to you.

it should be.....

1. Secular Atheism - Life is just an accident that has "evolved over time"
2. Abrahamic Theism - Satan and free will.
3. Karmic Mysticism - Souls are eternally reincarnated, and what you do comes back to you = so you started it off by punching some dude (or etc.,)1000 years ago.


So based on this issue alone I actually favor Secular Atheism. It seems like the best explanation overall.


For me personally, Abrahamic Theism is a nightmare. I can't imagine why I would ever want to have "faith" that Abrahamic theism is true. That would mean that we are all evil 100%.

Moreover, as I've stated above the God of this Abrahamic Theism would also be totally unfair to newborn babies. Not only because of birth defects, but also by what they are being born into (i.e. abusive parents, war zones, overpopulation and starvation, dying young, etc,)

So it just as bad as Karma?

Both atheism and Karmic Mysticism are far superior to the Abrahamic myths.

I see Karmic being worse. Its like the Semite God just left us alone to destroy the planet but with Karmic anything that bad happens is human are dicks so we fu*ked ourselves by starting the punishment cycle.

Stuff like this causes problems in India today. That messed up caste system is so Evil i don't understand why people are following it.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 11 by Divine Insight]

However, I agree that these types of issues are quite difficult to even justify in a karmic view of reality.

Agreed. Karma is worse than hard to justify as we'll see but I doubt you will be making any New Years resolutions to stop defending it.

The problems with the born disabled within karma is actually not that it is a punishment for a previous life. It is that if karma is justice and a person born disabled is justice then we have no moral right to help that person.

Let me explain by example. If a person is justly and correctly in jail for a crime and I free them then I am perverting justice.

Karma and we see this effect in karmic societies, destroys the ability to have relationships with others. The rich and better off feel justified in ignoring the poor and worse off. To help someone is to pervert karmic justice.

If someone is drowning in a river is that not karma judging them to deserve to drown?

In Christianity you have even bigger problems.

I think the problem of evil and the emotional difficulty we have with it is mans biggest problem in reconciling with God. Christianity does answer these problems logically but it is still no easier emotionally.

The key difference is how God asks his followers to respond.

The pure secular atheists view truly does have the best possible answer. Like is just a freak accident and things aren't anywhere near perfect.

Actually I think your views are better than theirs. Within atheistic evolution you actually cannot be sure if a disabled person is an advancement in evolution or not.

Naturally I disagree with your rating system, mine is Christianity, Theism, Atheism and it is a logical rating.

[Goat]

[Replying to post 9 by Philomath]

[/uote]
But what about the Christian God? The Christian God would be creating these same disabled babies, yet the Christian babies are totally innocent because there are newly formed souls created at concept or birth by the Christian God himself.

So why would the Christian God be so cruel to new born babies that hadn't even had a chance at life at all yet?

No idea, not following any religion yet

At least with the idea of Karma it can be imagined that new born baby is actually a reincarnated soul that was in some way responsible for it's current situation.

However, I agree that these types of issues are quite difficult to even justify in a karmic view of reality.

So it cant be justified but does it mean were okay to dislike the disabled simply because they might have been a bad person?

I always say that theists have a problem with "Evil" because there is no sound reason why any God would allow the horrible things to happen that clear do happen.

Have you seen the Simpsons Halloween episode with Lisa and the tooth?

Whereas, theists do not have an answer to the "Problem of Evil". The Abrahamic religions try to pin the "Problem of Evil" onto humans through an accusation of a "Fall from Grace", but that doesn't wash. Humans weren't always around but yet the problem of "Evil" had plagued the early earth and life long before that.

I think Evil started with Satan?

Moreover, trying to pin the problem of "Evil" on the creation instead of the creator taking full responsibility for it is absurd anyway.

I think that's free will. God gave free will so we do what we like. Were not robots to follow without choice.

Karmic religions try to do away with the "Problem of Evil" altogether by proclaiming that there is no such thing as "Evil", everything is precisely as it should be and what we see as "Evil" is actually just Karma playing out which is totally justifiable because Karma only returns to people what they themselves had created.

So a family murdered is not Evil it just what they deserve. Hmm that seems worse than the Semite religion. At least with their God stuff happens to them because of chance and free will but with Karmic bad stuff happens to you because you deserved it. Then truly they should revere criminal as they carrying out Karmic justice?

So we have these three philosophies.

1. Secular Atheism - Life is just an accident that has "evolved over time"
2. Abrahamic Theism - Humans are to be blamed for all the evils of the world.
3. Karmic Mysticism - Souls are eternally reincarnated, and what you do comes back to you.

it should be.....

1. Secular Atheism - Life is just an accident that has "evolved over time"
2. Abrahamic Theism - Satan and free will.
3. Karmic Mysticism - Souls are eternally reincarnated, and what you do comes back to you = so you started it off by punching some dude (or etc.,)1000 years ago.


So based on this issue alone I actually favor Secular Atheism. It seems like the best explanation overall.


For me personally, Abrahamic Theism is a nightmare. I can't imagine why I would ever want to have "faith" that Abrahamic theism is true. That would mean that we are all evil 100%.

Moreover, as I've stated above the God of this Abrahamic Theism would also be totally unfair to newborn babies. Not only because of birth defects, but also by what they are being born into (i.e. abusive parents, war zones, overpopulation and starvation, dying young, etc,)

So it just as bad as Karma?

Both atheism and Karmic Mysticism are far superior to the Abrahamic myths.

I see Karmic being worse. Its like the Semite God just left us alone to destroy the planet but with Karmic anything that bad happens is human are dicks so we fu*ked ourselves by starting the punishment cycle.

Stuff like this causes problems in India today. That messed up caste system is so Evil i don't understand why people are following it.

Just pointing out, the whole 'original sin' and 'Man is evil' is not a religious piece of Dogma that is subscribed to by the Jewish faith. "Original sin" does not exist as it is described by Christians. A child is born a blank slate.

[Divine Insight]

So it cant be justified but does it mean were okay to dislike the disabled simply because they might have been a bad person?

That's not in harmony with the rest of what these religions teach.

You're not supposed to be passing judgements on other people.

So you're taking this religious concept out of its contextual basis.

But I will agree with you that this is a view that is commonly held, and I also agree that it's problematic.

Therefore chalk one up for Secular Atheism again. If we're going to keep score.

Because all religious ideologies necessarily have to have their God condoning what's happening to anyone at any given time. Therefore anyone who is in a bad situation can only be in it because it's cool with God. No religion is exempt to that.

Only Secular Atheism is exempt to that. Secular Atheism wins on this point hands down.

Have you seen the Simpsons Halloween episode with Lisa and the tooth?

No, I haven't.

I think Evil started with Satan?

And where did Satan get his start?

Moreover, trying to pin the problem of "Evil" on the creation instead of the creator taking full responsibility for it is absurd anyway.

I think that's free will. God gave free will so we do what we like. Were not robots to follow without choice.

No. Free will doesn't make a person evil. A person who has free will can chose to do whatever they want, which means that they can choose to be as righteous as they please.

So having free will does not make a person evil.

This free will excuse is a Christian excuse, but it doesn't fly. There is no reason why people who have free will need to be evil. So evil cannot be the result of free will.

Moreover, does God have Free Will?

If he does, then by this apologetic nonsense then God too would be evil.

And if he doesn't, then he's a robot.

So it's a lose/lose apology.

So a family murdered is not Evil it just what they deserve. Hmm that seems worse than the Semite religion. At least with their God stuff happens to them because of chance and free will but with Karmic bad stuff happens to you because you deserved it. Then truly they should revere criminal as they carrying out Karmic justice?

I agree, there are problems with karma.

Chalk one up again for secular atheism.

Because don't forget, all of these problems apply to Christianity as well.

Why didn't God protect this family from the murderers? Obviously God must have felt that the family deserved to be killed.

Moreover, if you attempt to justify this by claiming that the family is not in heaven, then that justification can also be made for karma. The dead family was simply reincarnated into a better life.

In other words, any problem you find with karma is automatically going to be a similar problem in Christianity.

So we have these three philosophies.

1. Secular Atheism - Life is just an accident that has "evolved over time"
2. Abrahamic Theism - Humans are to be blamed for all the evils of the world.
3. Karmic Mysticism - Souls are eternally reincarnated, and what you do comes back to you.

it should be.....

1. Secular Atheism - Life is just an accident that has "evolved over time"
2. Abrahamic Theism - Satan and free will.
3. Karmic Mysticism - Souls are eternally reincarnated, and what you do comes back to you = so you started it off by punching some dude (or etc.,)1000 years ago.

Satan and free will are a lame excuse that doesn't fly. Where did this Satan come from? In order to properly construct that kind of religion you'd have to promote Satan to being a full-fledged God. Not a mere fallen angel that a God is permitting to wreck havoc with his creation.

So this would require that the Abrahamic theism is actually polytheism with at least two God, a supposedly good God who is at war with a supposedly evil God.

That could be reality, but it's certainly not the Abrahamic Picture.

The Abrahamic picture wants to have the cake and eat it too proclaiming that there is only one God, and that Satan is just a nasty fallen Angel that God is allowing to run loose and have the freedom to bring evil into the world.

Not only that but this God would have had to have been the source from whence this evil monster named Satan had come.

And remember, free will does not create evil in and of itself. That's nonsense. Especially if you demand that God has free will. And if you don't allow for that, then God becomes the robot.

Moreover, as I've stated above the God of this Abrahamic Theism would also be totally unfair to newborn babies. Not only because of birth defects, but also by what they are being born into (i.e. abusive parents, war zones, overpopulation and starvation, dying young, etc,)

So it just as bad as Karma?

It would be far worse. In karma at least the baby had supposedly done this to itself from its own behavior in a past life. In Christianity God would just be entirely cruel to brand new innocent souls.

So karma is the better picture here.

But I agree Secular Atheism is still winning hands down on this issue.

Both atheism and Karmic Mysticism are far superior to the Abrahamic myths.

I see Karmic being worse. Its like the Semite God just left us alone to destroy the planet but with Karmic anything that bad happens is human are dicks so we BLEEP ourselves by starting the punishment cycle.

Stuff like this causes problems in India today. That messed up caste system is so Evil i don't understand why people are following it.

I agree that Karma can be a difficult concept to accept and understand. It's certainly not "worse" than the Christian picture. You are imagining karma to be unjust. But that's a false picture. If you're going to believe in karma you must necessarily believe that it's as perfect as any system can be. If you don't believe that, then you aren't truly believing in karma. Instead you're just being a skeptic trying to find ways to belittle it.

It's a faith-based belief. If you're going to believe it on faith, then have faith that it works. That's how its done with the egotistical God of Christianity. It's really no different on that count.

On the other hand, if you want to argue that Secular Atheism has better answers on this issue I'll be the first to agree. In fact, I believe I had already made that clear in my original post.

[Divine Insight]

Agreed. Karma is worse than hard to justify as we'll see but I doubt you will be making any New Years resolutions to stop defending it.

I will always defend Karma over Christianity. But I've already conceded that Secular Atheism has all spiritual concepts beat.

The problems with the born disabled within karma is actually not that it is a punishment for a previous life. It is that if karma is justice and a person born disabled is justice then we have no moral right to help that person.

That's because you don't understand karma. Karma is NOT about Punishment, it's not a judgement of any kind.

It's simply about you creating your own situations. This doesn't mean that you "deserve" them in the sense of "punishment".

Punishment is a human fabrication and judgement.

Let me explain by example. If a person is justly and correctly in jail for a crime and I free them then I am perverting justice.

Karma is not about justice. That's not what karma is about. You are trying to push the Christian idea of a judgmental God onto Karma. They are not the same thing.

Karma and we see this effect in karmic societies, destroys the ability to have relationships with others. The rich and better off feel justified in ignoring the poor and worse off. To help someone is to pervert karmic justice.

That too is a perversion of Karma. Moreover, that attitude prevails in Christianity as well. There are many Christians who feel that if people aren't doing well in this life it can only be because they have rejected God, and thus it is there own fault.

So this kind of perversion of these spiritual concept is prevalent everywhere.

If someone is drowning in a river is that not karma judging them to deserve to drown?

Again, you're talking about "deserving" things. Karma is not about judgement, punishment, or what you "Deserve". Those are Christian ideas of judgements based on morality.

Karma has more to do with cause and effect. If you rock the boat you'll capsize the boat in drown. Did you "deserve" to drown? That's not even a meaningful question. You downed because you rocked the boat. Period.

Karma has nothing to do with making moral judgements.

It works out to favor righteousness and love naturally. But there is no moral judgement required.

Karma is NOT a judgment it's a consequence of actions.

In Christianity you have even bigger problems.

I think the problem of evil and the emotional difficulty we have with it is mans biggest problem in reconciling with God. Christianity does answer these problems logically but it is still no easier emotionally.

The key difference is how God asks his followers to respond.

I disagree that Christianity answers these problems logically. All Christianity tries to do is pin the blame for all evilness onto humans.

And we know that this is a false charge because the world was filled with disease, death, and animals eating other animals long before humans ever showed up.

So Christianity does not address the problem of evil. All it does is try to unfairly pin the blame onto humans.

And that's baloney. It's not logical at all.

The pure secular atheists view truly does have the best possible answer. Like is just a freak accident and things aren't anywhere near perfect.

Actually I think your views are better than theirs. Within atheistic evolution you actually cannot be sure if a disabled person is an advancement in evolution or not.

Naturally I disagree with your rating system, mine is Christianity, Theism, Atheism and it is a logical rating.

Atheism is definitely at the top of the list on the topic of evil. There can be no doubt about that.

In atheism there is no such things as a "Problem of Evil". It's simply not a problem at all. On the contrary, if anything atheism would have a "Problem of Good". How can things accidentally be as good as they actually are?

There is far more goodness in the world than there is evil.

But of course, atheists actually have an explanation for this, and that explanation if evolution. Evolution explains why things worked out to overwhelmingly better than not.

So Atheism wins hands down. Atheism has this issue covered entirely and completely.

Christianity tries to pin the blame for evil onto humans because they can't afford to have the creator being responsible for evil. But that can't work.

If there exists a creator, then that creator is 100% responsible for everything he creates. If this creator created evil humans, then it can only be the creator's fault. You can't pin the blame for evil onto the created. That's nonsense.

So Christianity falls flat on its face in the mud once again.

Thus far Atheism wins in this category hands down. No problem at all.

Karma (when understood properly as not being about punishment or judgement) is the best spiritual guess.

Christianity can't be true verbatim no matter how hard it tries because Christianity has shot itself in its own head by trying to pin the blame for evil onto humans.

That cannot fly.

Perhaps you could make a New Years resolution to give up beating that dead horse?

[Finn the human]

[Replying to post 16 by Divine Insight]


Okay please help me understand about Karma if evil is just an illusion.

Here is the scenario:
The first ever person/thing (named Thing-X) in the world decided to kill the second thing (named Thing-Y) in the world.
Because of this Thing-X will have some bad stuff happen to him in this life or the next.

If evil is not the result of free will then why did Thing-x kill Thing-Y? Something must of started the Karma cycle going?

If the bad is just an illusion why do people commit new evils? Or if these evils are old Karmic stuff then should we (the collective) not have been cleansed by now We have been living for a long while.



Free will explains a lot more.
I don't understand why you have a problem with free will. People chose to do good actions and bad actions. There is nothing forcing them to do the one or the other.

God made Satan gave him free will and he chose to f*ck us.

Im only stressing this because Karma seems as worse (or more) as Christianity .

[Divine Insight]

Okay please help me understand about Karma if evil is just an illusion.

Evil is not an "illusion". It's a judgement made by as humans.

A good example is that if we kill an animal we don't see that as being "Evil" at all.

But if an animal kills a human, suddenly there is "Evil" present in the world.

So evil is in the subjective minds of humans. It's entirely their own fabrication.

Here is the scenario:
The first ever person/thing (named Thing-X) in the world decided to kill the second thing (named Thing-Y) in the world.
Because of this Thing-X will have some bad stuff happen to him in this life or the next.

Again, you are judging "Good verses Bad"

Karma is not about "Good verses Bad". Karma is about cause and effect.

Think of it like a swimmer swimming through the water. The swimmer makes waves. When it comes time to turn around, the swimmer needs to swim back through the same waves that he or she made.

We are the ones who label those waves to be "Good waves" or "Evil waves".

But the waves are just waves.

In a similar way think of karma as swimming through an ocean of emotion. You make emotional waves as you swim. Eventually these waves will come back to you and you will experience these emotional waves yourself.

Therefore if you create what we have judged to be "Bad Emotional Waves" then what you will experience in your future will be "Bad Emotional Waves". The judgement of "Bad" is entirely our judgement. You simply reap what you sow.

In fact, didn't Jesus even teach that we reap what we sow? That's karma.

If evil is not the result of free will then why did Thing-x kill Thing-Y? Something must of started the Karma cycle going?

There is no "good or evil" in karma. Good and evil are subjective human judgements.

If the bad is just an illusion why do people commit new evils? Or if these evils are old Karmic stuff then should we (the collective) not have been cleansed by now We have been living for a long while.

There is no such thing as "good" or "evil" all that exists are human subjective judgments.

Free will explains a lot more.
I don't understand why you have a problem with free will. People chose to do good actions and bad actions. There is nothing forcing them to do the one or the other.

If there's nothing forcing them to do anything, then Free Will cannot be the source of Evil since it's not forcing anyone to do an evil thing.

Free will cannot be the source of "evil".

God made Satan gave him free will and he chose to BLEEP us.

You need a polytheistic religion to have an evil God versus a good God.

By they way, just as a friendly comment, your shorthand notation for unacceptable words is not permitted on this forum. I have BLEEPED them out in your quotes. I'm only telling you this for your own benefit. If a mod reads your shorthand notation for the word you are using they will comment on it or possibly even give you a warning.

Im only stressing this because Karma seems as worse (or more) as Christianity .

Well, I'll grant you that Karma isn't a perfect solution. IMHO, it's far better than Christianity, but it's still lacking as an explanation in general and fails to surpass atheism's answer to this issue.

In Christianity you sill have the totally insurmountable problem of new born babies being born with birth defect, disease, etc.

So Christianity only introduces even more unanswered problems.

At least Karma offers an explanation of how this could make some sense.

And of course in Atheism it's not even remotely a problem to begin with. It's just the way things are. Period.

[Finn the human]

[Replying to post 18 by Divine Insight]


OKay i think i now understand it. And sorry i did not know the *** were not allowed.


So please tell me if I am wrong.

The events that happen to fall on us is down to our past actions. The wave story really helped

So evil and good are not real. It is our own human interpenetration that deems it one or the other but in essence neither exist.


So if i decided to rape you (hypothetical) it not because i did anything evil (evil is not real) but because of your past actions coming back at you to compensate the first event.

Is what I said wrong?

[Divine Insight]

So if i decided to rape you (hypothetical) it not because i did anything evil (evil is not real) but because of your past actions coming back at you to compensate the first event.

Is what I said wrong?

No, it's not wrong. But it can easily be misunderstood.

And also, I will be the first to agree that this is an area in which I personally have great problems with karma. So I confess that the more I look at karma and compare it with the Atheistic world view, the Atheistic world view actually make far more sense.

I mean let's face it. A believe in any spiritual essence to life is a "Faith-based" belief. It's a desire and hope that there is something more to life than pure secular materialism. So this is the motivation for spiritual beliefs to begin with. We have no actual evidence of any kind that a spiritual nature of reality should or must actually be true.

But now, getting back to the problems with karma. Yes, there are problems as you point out. But the important thing to realize is that every problem you point out is just as big of a problem with a religion like Christianity, if not even more so.

Now let's take a look at your scenario:

You say, "So if i decided to rape you (hypothetical) it not because i did anything evil (evil is not real) but because of your past actions coming back at you to compensate the first event."

This is of course a deep topic of concern even among those who do wish to believe in karma. And this is not a question that has gone unaddressed. I have pondered this question (or very similar ones) many time. And there are several answers available. None of which are satisfying to an atheist, I might add.

One possible way to look at this is, yes, you could rape someone, but unbeknownst to you, you can only rape people who's karma will permit it. If you tried to rape someone who's karma did not permit it you would simply fail.

So there would be people who are "protected" from this action by their karma.

A second problem with this has to do with your view of this. If you are thinking, "Hey they must deserve to be raped if karma permits it". Therefore by raping them I am not doing anything "bad" because I'm just helping them fulfill their karma which is what they deserve.

The very first thing I'd like to point out here is that karma is not about what a person deserves. It's not a judgment of any kind, its not in place to be a punishment of any kind. It's more akin to a law of what is "permitted" in terms of pain and discomfort.

So in other words, if you successfully rape someone, all this means is that their karma "permitted" them to experience that degree of pain and agony. It does not mean that they deserved to be raped. Not does it mean that you had "helped karma along" in any way. You didn't do any such thing. On the contrary, all you've managed to do is add to your own pain and agony in your own karma bank.

The pain and agony (including emotional distress) would then be added to your karma and you may become a "rape victim" at some time in the future. Although it most certainly wouldn't need to be carried out through rape, it simply means that you would then suffer the same emotional and physical pain that you had unleashed on someone else.

Therefore there is absolutely nothing in it for you to go around raping people just because you feel that "It must be ok" since their karma is permitting it.

Karma isn't about what people deserve. Karma is not a system of "morality". And to view it as such is the wrong idea.

This is why people who are used to the Western religion that have been taught that everything comes down to "punishment or reward" think that Karma somehow gives them the "right" to do bad things to other people because those people must deserve this since karma permits it to happen.

But that is a total misunderstanding of karma to begin with.

Attempting to use karma to "justify" anything is a misguided notion because karma isn't about "justice".

Think of karma like the following:

You go to an amusement park. At the gate when you buy your ticket you agree to how much pain and agony you are willing to suffer in the amusement park. That becomes your "karma bank".

Inside the amusement park you can then suffer up to, the amount of pain and agony that you have agreed to suffer. Precisely how you will suffer this is undetermined. It just means that you are open to experiencing that degree of suffering. And that's all it means. It has nothing to do with what you deserve or what you are due, or right or wrong, or anything like that.

It's just an accounting system that assures that you won't suffer anymore than you had agreed to suffer.

Now you might ask, "Why if that's the case then why doesn't everyone just buy a ticket that has "No Suffering" stamped on it?

Well, for some people that would be an extremely boring experience. The more you are willing to risk suffering, the more exciting you journey will be. And so this is the reason why you might want to buy a ticket that allows for the potential for suffering.

In fact, in a previous post you has asked the following question:

Here is the scenario:
The first ever person/thing (named Thing-X) in the world decided to kill the second thing (named Thing-Y) in the world.
Because of this Thing-X will have some bad stuff happen to him in this life or the next.

This may not be the scenario for life on Earth.

Life on Earth may only be a very small part of reality. In fact, if you believe in a spiritual essence to reality, then life on Earth is definitely only a small part of reality.

Life on Earth may be an "amusement park". And just as I had described above, when you came into this amusement park you had already agreed to how much pain and suffering you are willing to experience. And therefore your original karma did not arise from some imagined "first cause", but rather it was actually agreed on by you before you stepped into the amusement park called "Life on Earth".

One thing I've learned is that once we begin to consider the possibility of a spiritual essence to reality the "Earth-centric" and "Human-centric" aspects of life instantly vanish and become totally irrelevant.

Now Earth is merely one place where spiritual beings can have a physically incarnated experience. Earth becomes nothing more than a "Amusement park for the Gods". And of course, we are the Gods who are playing in this amusement park. And the animals are Gods too that have decided to see what it's like to be an animal. Every living conscious entity is a participant in this amusement park called "Life on Earth".

But Earth is only one possible amusement park. There are also billions upon billions of other planets even within our universe that are also actively running as amusement parks as well.

And now, if scientists are right, there may even be totally different kinds of universes existing beyond this universe that contain amusement parks that we can't even begin to comprehend.

So looking at planet earth and thinking in terms of a "First Cause" is really a very narrow-minded view of reality. If reality truly is spiritual then it may also be timeless, the very idea of a "First Cause" may not even make any sense to a spiritual being because a spiritual being is a timeless being that isn't constrained by things such as past and future.

~~~~~~

Now all of this may seem like it's way too far out. But how is this any more absurd than the idea of single egotistical ruling God having created human pets that he will either cast into a state of eternal damnation or keep for his own amusement to serve and worship in an eternal heaven?

How is that scenario any less absurd? IMHO, it's even more absurd. In the case of a single egotistical Godhead, we have this one entity who is totally obsessed with himself and wanting to be worshiped by mere humans for all of eternity.

And as a human, what kind of a fate is that to really look forward to anyway?

~~~~~~

I know that I've gone off on what seems to be a tangent ramble, but when it comes to the idea of Karma it may require the consideration of a whole different view of reality.

If you come looking at karma from the restricted perspective of a judgmental God and "ultimate justice", and trying to get karma to just replace the God as the ultimate "judgement" mechanics, it's not going to make a lot of sense. Because that's not the scenario from which it arose.

Karma arises from a much larger picture of a spiritual world where many different things are assumed as premises.

1. Your spiritual self has always existed and always will exist.
2. You will become reincarnated again into yet another physical life.
3. Life is not restricted to either Earth, or the Human form.
4. Karma is not about judgement or what a person deserves.
5. Your karma is dynamic and changes based upon your own actions.
6. What karma keeps track of is the waves of emotion that you set into motion.

So it's a totally different idea from a "final judgement day" of Christianity.

And like I say, the whole spiritual paradigm is indeed pretty outrageous in any case. It's a hope and dream of many humans that there may be something more to life than meets the secularist's eye.

And so we imagine these wild and crazy spiritual philosophies in the hopes that we can come up with one that might actually be possible.

And that's the foundation of religious and spiritual dreams.

All religions amount to is a dream that Peter Pan can come true and we will all fly off to Never Never Land after we die just like Jesus and Muhammad supposedly did. And all the other Gods created by the imagination of men.

And secularism is the recognition that Peter Pan is nothing but a dream being imagined by temporary biological robots that are doomed to die when they quit functioning physically.

And who knows what reality truly is?

Only the Shadow knows.