|
|
|
|
|
| why is this topic called religion
Posted: 1/3/2008 11:21:53 AM | deerdog1,I do hear your concerns and I feel like you are indeed in search for understanding on this topic at hand. And although I can only give you possible reasons why,still I have no answers for any solution to what you may seek to find.
But as I mentioned,I could mount many possible reasons why. Imo,there are those that step into these forums as a means to evangelize,possibly even to the point where this one even may use what many refer to as the word of G-d just to break others down while this one builds himself or herself up. Also,imo,there are those that are here to vent religious prejudices and differences with drive-by cafeteria style trollings that are completely off topic from what was asked in a premise of an original post along with those that are possibly here that have been hurt by others in their past,possibly even by loved one's in their past that may have 'condemned this one to hell with a dose of bigotry on the side' so to speak and this one may use this as a means of therapy and/or striking/bashing out. Again,I'm only giving my opinion on the many possibilities.
And I also believe that there are those that are here because they want to share and gain understanding about those things one is passionate about.And notwithstanding should one share the point of view and/or same beliefs as what is given in a premise,there are also those that are here that can add to that discussion in such a way that it makes one pause and think,...add to that discussion in such away that it motivates and not humiliates others and it is the integrity of these posts that I embrace the most.
In conclusion,I have found that these forums add diversity and even what many would consider adversity and I also believe that this is when and where we find our balance and 'grow' the most. | |
|
| why is this topic called religion
Posted: 1/3/2008 11:29:22 AM | As I stated in the Forums before
"Although someone may say there is Philosophy, Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, One's Own Truth etc......when that person has penetrated the essential nature of things, he will regard all religions, philosophies, and Personal Aspirations as the same, meaning that Reality is only One".
And notice this, please: as soon as you put a label on yourself, there is somebody out there ready to point the finger at you.....You said this....you believe that....and you are what???? It is quite an interesting phenomenon.
This is why I describe myself as an eclectic thinker......Can you crucify an 'eclectic thinker', 'A free mind'? ( I guess they can: they crucified Galileo Galilei for having said that the earth is not the centre of the universe!)
Bow at your own potential! | |
|
| why is this topic called religion
Posted: 1/3/2008 11:29:59 AM | The thing is, I always believed that this was a place to come and share what makes us "tick" individually.
And unless someone blatantly sends another one to hell, or one yells to another YOU'RE WRONG AND I'M RIGHT...isn't that the purpose of these forums?
I have noticed a lot of intolerance in these forums in the last while...in fact, it's made me stay away. I thought I left the school yard mentality a long time ago and I have no wish to go back.
But yet it seems to me that there are just too many people who get too easily offended by other people's posts.
If I was to report and/or complain EACH time that someone has sent ME or someone like me to hell, I'd be a permanent poster
on the report thread. 
I have at times felt the need to point out in one of my post an obvious exclusivity of truth made by another poster, but it has
been rare, and it was mostly done with humour or sarcasm on my part. Most of the time though, I just let it pass!
And I can't say that I've ever felt crushed or deeply hurt by people claiming I'm nothing but dirt in their eyes for being a "non-believer", although I admit to loathing that expression. It has irked me to no end though...but hey, atheists are human too:)
And all of the above is just my opinion...sheesh...wouldn't want to forget to mention THAT a hundred times per post now, would we? 
JMHO
\/ Edit at below: \/
LOL! More like nothing that anyone could pin me to the wall for ;) | |
|
| |
| why is this topic called religion
Posted: 1/3/2008 11:42:20 AM |
the OP only wanted posters to tell of miracles
what the op wants is irrelevant, posters read the op's words not his/her mind. Even if they were aware of the op's intent, people discuss as they see fit.
I think your definition of "staying on topic" is a more narrow definition than many others have. If someone starts a thread on miracles (or any other subject) and everyone talks about miracles, even if its in a negative way, they're still on topic.
POF is a smelting pot of all cultures and beliefs. If you post a thread here, expect to get some derogatory posts because people who live and think and believe differently than you do can read and post. What pof lacks in mutual admiration it makes up with contrasting opinions and viewpoints.
This community is an unsympathetic public that is empowered by anonymity. The gloves are off here. Start a thread about love and someone will probably beat the crap out of you with it.
 POF | |
|
| why is this topic called religion
Posted: 1/3/2008 11:45:28 AM | OK OK ...my hidden agenda in this thread didnt work ... yea im going to admit it ...i had a hidden agenda .... and i didnt really expect it to work i guess .... the things that bother me and i guess i ask for it by getting in these topics .... is the animosity toward other opinions ... like i said i tend to be agnostic .....I too hate the things that have been done in the name of religion .... but i also hate to see people of ANY religion being attacked or belittled or discriminated against just because of his beliefs or lack of beliefs .... yes i love the debate.but
would like to keep the debate friendly ... I have atheist friends ,Muslim friends ,Christian friends , pagan friends, and agnostic friends ...i just keep feeling that if we can tone down the debate we will all benefit...and have a better chance of seeing all points ... the only belief i despise is a closed mind ... the only thing i preach is tolerance... the only sin in this argument is that of a hypocrite or a bigot ... sometimes my thinking becomes so deep that i dont express my meaning very well ...I know and accept this ...and ask your forgivness and will always try to clear my meaning in a civil manor | |
|
| why is this topic called religion
Posted: 1/3/2008 11:51:13 AM | Casheyes:
I have found that these forums add diversity and even what many would consider adversity and I also believe that this is when and where we find our balance and 'grow' the most. I couldn't agree more! As frustrating as this place gets.. I keep coming back for more for that very reason..
People have suggested that I go to a like-minded-only forum.. but I know for a fact I would be bored to tears...
I enjoy learning from all of the differences... and debate can be done with respect ;)
Rock:
Start a thread about love and someone will probably beat the crap out of you with it. Yup.. I've got proof of that! And after the first one got deleted too, lol....
I think that this forum is a microscosm of the world spiritually in flux... I believe that we are evolving as a species.. rather quickly too... and those of us in here slogging it out through our key boards imo have our fingers on the pulse of the future...
I thoroughly enjoy my participation in this online pluralistic church.. regardless of any minor skirmishes :) | |
|
| why is this topic called religion
Posted: 1/3/2008 11:51:40 AM |
But I have a great many bones to pick with religions of all sects for all of the dastardly deeds committed in the name of some god throughout history. I also choose to challenge what I see as an elitist attitude of such religious faithful that profess that I shall believe precisely as they do or suffer an afterlife burning in hell for eternity. I will attack such positions just as I will attack such institutions as the KKK which are responsible for far fewer atrocities against humanity than any of the major religions. You are entitled to do that in a private forum. But to quote your own post:
If someone chooses to post their opinion, belief or what they may think is the truth or fact on a public forum, they are presenting their position for the scrutiny and critique of the public. Your "bones to pick" are entitled to be scrutinised, critiqued, and found wanting, equally well as the opinion you are scrutinising.
I will proceed to look for a forum entitled "religion" and go over there to exercise my right to discuss, and attack if I so choose, the positions of posters whom I may think are in error or as in many cases here on the forums, delusional. You aren't allowed to bash other posters. So you aren't allowed to attack them.
You are allowed to present an opinion. But your feelings are not an objective opinion. To state an opinion because of your feelings, is not objective. If that means that your opinion is incorrect, because you based it on your personal feelings, and not on objective facts and logic, then it is not surprising that you find difficulties with people who don't share any opinions that you have that are based primarily on your feelings, because you would be a "true believer" in "blind faith". I have every respect for a person who questions my beliefs or others' beliefs, on logic and objective evidence. If such opinions are in short supply from those who doubt all religions, then you can expect for those religious people who are logical and empirical, to reject such opinions, time and time again, because any atheist who was logical and empirical would do so as well.
If people want to discuss only their beliefs of the aspects of their religion then there are venues such as churches, mosques and other houses of religious worship to do that without outside public scrutiny. I would never violate the sanctity of such private institutions. I am glad that you show that respect to people. I only hope that you realise that a public forum does not give you the right to insult others, or to claim things without logical and empirical proof. | |
|
| |
| why is this topic called religion
Posted: 1/3/2008 11:55:51 AM | You are allowed to present an opinion. But your feelings are not an objective opinion
An objective opinion? Isn't this a contraddiction in terms?
Sometimes only feelings tell you "the truth" of the matter ( I am a woman: I know! just kidding :))))
Logic? Quantum physics has defied that....Reality if modified by the feelings of the observer: Reality is one but humans "see" it under different forms. | |
|
| why is this topic called religion
Posted: 1/3/2008 12:01:56 PM | Not to pick on your post Scorpio, but the words logical and empirical evidence have WHAT to do with religion and faith again??
Isn't using words like logic and faith and empirical evidence in the same sentence sort of an oxymoron??
And why is one side oblige to provide all that and not the other?
One side relies on ONE book and ONE book only...a book that has been PROVEN to be falsified and doctored...and yet I'm expected to be logical at all times AND to have to provide empirical evidence of anything I have to say as MY opinion?
Sheesh...
PS: As far as what the rules are for bashing/ insulting or whatever.... here is what is clearly written in the rules
that applies to ALL of us:
You can slam & bash the Topic or Subject under Discussion all you like, but you cannot insult, bash and slam other Posters.
There is a difference...IMO.
| |
|
| why is this topic called religion
Posted: 1/3/2008 12:13:52 PM | | it is my thought that one only has to provide evidence when trying to change another persons mind /opinion... and then the only test the evidence has to meet is what is that person willing to accept as evidence ... this holds true for theist and a atheist | |
|
| Why Not?
Posted: 1/3/2008 12:38:05 PM | Quotes from Galileo Galilei:
"Infinities and indivisibles transcend our finite understanding, the former on account of their magnitude, the latter because of their smallness; Imagine what they are when combined."
from: To infinity and beyond.
"The difficulties in the study of the infinite arise because we attempt, with our finite minds, to discuss the infinite, assigning to it those properties which we give to the finite and limited; but this ... is wrong....."
From: Two New Sciences
"I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him"
 | |
|
| Why Not?
Posted: 1/3/2008 1:29:37 PM | OP's i think i understand what you mean. I started a forum at one time called oddly enough "miracle space" However not many people wanted to talk about miracles or work towards expressing the miracle from within. A public forum is just that, and no matter what we want to hear we need to give space for every voice to be heard. It isn't the opinion that is of utmost importance it is the difference between opinions and accepting that even the worst reply to a thread can possibly shed light on some aspect of our belief that we have over looked.
Some times the barriers to acceptance are more important then not getting our message across. If we are unable to relate then our message is useless. If we are just posting to spew then we may as well just take a classified ad out it will have just about that effect. Public forums can be creative energy for our own growth and a greater understanding of others comes of a deeper understanding of our own human nature and coping mechanisms that hinder our that expression. If we aren't getting the responses we want then i think we aren't giving ourselves the space to grow. | |
|
| Why Not?
Posted: 1/3/2008 2:35:52 PM | RE msg 34:
An objective opinion? Isn't this a contraddiction in terms? Perhaps an example might suffice to explain:
Objective: Some men only want sex.
Subjective: ALL men only want sex.
Does that clear it up?
Logic? Quantum physics has defied that....Reality if modified by the feelings of the observer: Reality is one but humans "see" it under different forms. Actually, quantum physics has not defied logic, but people's beliefs. I'll give you an example:
Quantum Physics shows that a lot of the laws of physics make a lot more sense when an electron is treated as though it is in many places at the same time. That contradicts the belief that any one object must occupy only one space at one time. But logic doesn't claim that. People's beliefs do. Logic merely postulates what the universe would be like, if any one object occupies only one space at one time. But it doesn't claim it is true.
A subtle difference to be sure, but one that is required for the understanding of logic.
RE msg 36:
Not to pick on your post Scorpio, but the words logical and empirical evidence have WHAT to do with religion and faith again??
Isn't using words like logic and faith and empirical evidence in the same sentence sort of an oxymoron?? It is true that "blind faith" is mutually exclusive with logic and empirical evidence. But not all faith is "blind". I can understand your disbelief. I too felt exactly the same way once. So I went out to prove religion wrong. But I found many people who were respected scientists and philosophers, who I questioned time and again, and they had logic and empirical facts to back their views up. But those people never claimed that religion was an excuse to insult or degrade others. I found that many people claimed that religion supported their beliefs, but were in fact not being completely truthful, and when I questioned them using logic and empirical evidence, found that they did not have anything to back up their beliefs, other than their own desires.
And why is one side oblige to provide all that and not the other? Both sides require this. That way, you can separate the people trying to convince you that Gd wants you to give Him all his money, from the people who say that you should give a reasonable portion of your money to the charity of your choice because society is founded on the concept of mutual co-operation.
One side relies on ONE book and ONE book only... SOME people rely on one book and only one book. Others use the wealth of knowledge that is easily available in our society, and logic to understand and analyse it.
...a book that has been PROVEN to be falsified and doctored... Ever heard of the Dead Sea Scrolls? Funny how they seem to match the Old Testament, word for word.
...and yet I'm expected to be logical at all times AND to have to provide empirical evidence of anything I have to say as MY opinion? Don't be logical. Say you don't believe in the Bible because your last boyfriend lied to you. But don't expect me to take such a statement seriously.
P.S. If you think everything that Science says is always reliable, google "Jan Hendrik Schon". He claimed to have proved many different things, and the scientific community believed him. His papers were only questioned when others tried to use his results to do more work, and could not replicate his results. Turned out he made it all up. Thing is, he's not the only one. Not by a long shot.
PS: As far as what the rules are for bashing/ insulting or whatever.... here is what is clearly written in the rules
that applies to ALL of us: Let's re-read that:
You can slam & bash the Topic or Subject under Discussion all you like, but you cannot insult, bash and slam other Posters. I agree that you can bash the topic. But not the assumptions, because that would be off-topic. Otherwise, I could always attack the assumptions of any post, by using Sartre's point that all knowledge is only a belief, and thus prove that any post quoting any form of knowledge is just a personal belief, and has no representation of truth whatsoever. So I am all for people bashing the Bible, when it is on-topic, such as on threads that are entitled "Is the Bible true?"
RE msg 38:
"The difficulties in the study of the infinite arise because we attempt, with our finite minds, to discuss the infinite, assigning to it those properties which we give to the finite and limited; but this ... is wrong....." It might help if everyone who attempted to discuss the infinite, such as the Laws of Science, and the views of Religion, studied Cantor's Theorem. He proved that for every infinity, there is a bigger infinity. It really opens your eyes, when you realise that this is the case. | |
|
| why is this topic called religion
Posted: 1/3/2008 8:13:21 PM | I too commented on the validity of calling events miracles. My goal was not winning the god argument, but enlightenment of all, me included.
I said "If it did happen, it can happen. If it can happen, it's not a miracle."
This could be seen as an attack, or a buzz-kill for those hoping to read heart-warming dramatic anecdotes, but that would be assumptive. When I debate I am hoping to learn as well as opine.
As far as being on topic: when I hear someone say they believe wonderful events in their lives were miracles I feel they are missing out on the human contribution. As soon as you say there was a supernatural force responsible for some providence in your life you are, IMO, dismissing the real provider, whether it be nature or your family or qualified, considerate health care professionals. It's never the supernatural, IMO, so it's always a lost opportunity to thank your family, or a good samaritan, when you thank untestable, invisible deities.
I'm trying to get people to recognize the great works we do for each other, and the great opportunities only nature provides. Inserting a middle-man costs us connection with nature and each other. My goal is healthy relationships, but to heal one must sometimes cut.
If you don't want this topic to stray from "miracles exist, aren't they great" then post this thread at Teens-4-Christ. You won't be challenged. | |
|
| why is this topic called religion
Posted: 1/3/2008 8:34:51 PM | A more appropriate question would be, "why is this thread still around?" as it is little more than whining.
Come on. There are far more insightful conversations to be had. | |
|
| why is this topic called religion
Posted: 1/3/2008 9:44:11 PM | From a post By: sassyaquarius on 1/3/2008 2 13 PM
"I think that this forum is a microscosm of the world spiritually in flux... I believe that we are evolving as a species.. rather quickly too... and those of us in here slogging it out through our key boards imo have our fingers on the pulse of the future..."
Very observant, Sassy.
A hunger abides in much of humanity for the truth which might justify our complex existence. It is becoming ever more evident we may not be "a fluke of the universe" as was for so long believed. In spite of this the world at large remains secular and hope for any near term popular enlightenment remains elusive. Sadly, until our spiritual eternal existence gains acceptance as being factual and the manner in which we lead our lives on earth is proven as consequential thereto, relief in the disparity that exists on earth seems unlikely. Alas, in spite of this we mustn't abandon hope, things sometimes change quickly. If the dawning of the Age of Aquarius coincides with a change in the world as we know it on the final date on the Mayan calendar reckoned to be December 21, 2012; we haven't long to wait. Deception will end when minds can be read. | |
|
| why is this topic called religion
Posted: 1/4/2008 3:40:27 AM | the only belief i despise is a closed mind
That's just fantastic and I'm very happy for you. But so what? Some of us, many of us, despise closed minds and other beliefs as well. Didn't much care for Hitler's beliefs. Still don't care for what the KKK believes and to be a klansman it is required that you also be a christian. These present day jihadists? Jim Jones? David Koresh? Timothy McVeigh? I could go on and on about people and groups whose beliefs I despise. And do you see a pattern here? All of these dastardly folks are religious. In fact, if I were to name everybody that I dispise, I suspect that other than the likes of Joe Stalin and his cronies, just about every one of them would adhere to a religious belief. I don't recall the exact number but I recently read that an extrodinarily high percentage of our prison population are religiously faithful. Of course that does not mean that more than just a very few christians, muslims, jews, hindus etc., are anything other than fine upstanding members of society. But it does mean that the elitist mentality that I have experienced among a great many of the religious faithful is simply unfounded and offensive. To suggest to me that I must either believe precisely as they do or suffer such consequences as burning in some hell for eternity is absurd, arrogant and offensive. To further suggest the lunacy that if I do accept some "messiah" as the son of some god who died for all of our sins, I will be able to ask him to forgive my past sins and one day enter some kingdom for which there is no evidence to even begin to suspect exists is even more elitist. Especially when you contemplate that if they are right, that means dastardly deed doers such as KKK klansmen, Nazis, the perps of the inquisition, crusades and Salem witch trials and these fanatical jihadists we have to deal with today all have the option of a great big, "Sorry lord, shouldn't have killed all those fine folks, Didn't mean it. You're the man." They then are forgiven and enter this fanciful kingdom. Why in the hell, haha more delusion, would I worship such a god? Who could possibly want to be any place near such monsters for the rest of eternity?
So pal you go forgive, respect and tolerate whatever belief system you want. But leave me to despise whatever belief system I want. I firmly believe that were all religions somehow eliminated from this planet there would be a great deal more peace and tolerence within our society. I believe war would nearly dissapear and that humans would finally begin to reach out accross boarders and work together to better the lives of all humanity and those of our fellow living plants and animals that we share this globe with and must depend upon for our very survival. I will attack these historically evil, elitist cults at every oportunity just as I would attack any other institutions that I feel have done and will continue to do my fell living creatures harm. And I will conduct those attacks at belief systems and not the believers themselves. I will never and have never personally attacked another human verbally or physically unlike a great many of the religious faitful who have personally attacked me simply because I do not accept their seemingly flawed, delusional thought process.
Like you, I too am an agnostic which simply means that as Albert Einstein once said, "Our human mind is not capable of ever understanding whether god exists or not." I believe old Al's quip to be correct. Perhaps there is a god. I just highly doubt it. But if there is, I cannot imagine that he would resemble anything near what these seemingly delusional religious cults have professed over time. So let's wipe the slate clean. Let's remove all semblence of what I consider to be mentally ill reasoning and start over with a logical, scientific approach to determining our creation. Let's simply all become optomistically agnostic and hope that there is some wonderful creator that has a plan for all of us and that that plan culminates for each of us in a better place after we have lived our lives. But let science do the work. Let's stop all this inventing of what is true and putting such "truths" into scripture so it can be used to instill fear into innocent people so they can be indoctrinated into a cultist, elitist, arrogant belief for the purpose of who knows what. My attacks on religious belief systems will end at that very moment. | |
|
| why is this topic called religion
Posted: 1/4/2008 4:49:54 AM | But I have a great many bones to pick with religions of all sects for all of the dastardly deeds committed in the name of some god throughout history. I also choose to challenge what I see as an elitist attitude of such religious faithful that profess that I shall believe precisely as they do or suffer an afterlife burning in hell for eternity. I will attack such positions just as I will attack such institutions as the KKK which are responsible for far fewer atrocities against humanity than any of the major religions.
scorpion
You are entitled to do that in a private forum. But to quote your own post:
If someone chooses to post their opinion, belief or what they may think is the truth or fact on a public forum, they are presenting their position for the scrutiny and critique of the public.
Your "bones to pick" are entitled to be scrutinised, critiqued, and found wanting, equally well as the opinion you are scrutinising.
Of course. I am surprised that after all of my postings on these forums that you have read that you would even begin to think that I would not fully agree with you.
I will proceed to look for a forum entitled "religion" and go over there to exercise my right to discuss, and attack if I so choose, the positions of posters whom I may think are in error or as in many cases here on the forums, delusional.
You aren't allowed to bash other posters. So you aren't allowed to attack them.
Of course I am not allowed to attack other posters. Nor would my morals and ethics allow me to. That is why I said that I will attack, "the positions of posters". Sscorpion, when did you begine to misread my posts so? You have always been fair in responding to the exact wording of posters in this forum for which I respect you greately. Now you are inserting and removing from context wording that I have used that in no way can be interpreted to a mindset of mine such as you are alleging. Please review as many posts of mine as you wish and present even one here where I have attacked anything other than another persons, belief, view, opinion or position. If I did so it was completely out of character for me and I will appologize to that person in public and in private.
You are allowed to present an opinion. But your feelings are not an objective opinion. To state an opinion because of your feelings, is not objective.
Do you hear what you are saying? Are you really saying that to present an opinion here it has to meet your standard of objectivity? And in a religious forum at that? Are you now defending the opinions of the religious faithful as being objective? Since when has being taught unproven and unprovable thought processes such as a religious belief system been anything but highly SUBJECTIVE. Where is the objectivity in such teachings to be found. The bible? The koran? You don't really consider such feelings and opinions to be objective do you? Do you really? And regarding my feelings. I am going to do a search of my previous posts because I cannot recall ever posting my feelings here or on any other forum. Perhaps I am wrong and will indeed find an occasion in which I did. But if I did, it means that I have to be much more diligent in insuring that it never happens again. If you happen to find such a case during your search for my having made a claim or perpetuated a personal attack please let me know.
I have every respect for a person who questions my beliefs or others' beliefs, on logic and objective evidence. If such opinions are in short supply from those who doubt all religions, then you can expect for those religious people who are logical and empirical, to reject such opinions, time and time again, because any atheist who was logical and empirical would do so as well.
And any agnostic such as myself. I agree completely. Now you are talking like the scorpion I've come to know.
If people want to discuss only their beliefs of the aspects of their religion then there are venues such as churches, mosques and other houses of religious worship to do that without outside public scrutiny. I would never violate the sanctity of such private institutions.
I am glad that you show that respect to people. I only hope that you realise that a public forum does not give you the right to insult others, or to claim things without logical and empirical proof.
You only hope that I realise that a public forum does not give me the right to insult others, or claim things without proof? Are you really talking to me scorpion? You only hope I realize? Again, go find us all a post where I have insulted anything other than a person's position, opinion or belief. Then go find us all some posting where I have ever made a claim that requires logical and empirical proof. Am I not one of the strongest advocators of the need for logical and empirical proof for the many, many claims of truth and fact coming from the faithful on these cites. Is it not them that are making these outrageous claims without even the most miniscule evidence much less logical and empirical proof? Jeez. You need to get diggin' into my history of postings here.
Perhaps an example might suffice to explain:
Objective: Some men only want sex.
Subjective: ALL men only want sex.
Does that clear it up?
Great example but the definition of objective already was cleared up for me. Your suggestion here, I believe, is that to say "some men" is objective because indeed some men only want sex. And you go on to say, if I read you correctly, that to use the term "all men" would be to suggest an absolute which is always subjective. How about this example where a christian is explaining his belief about hell.
Some men will go to heaven.
Some men will go to hell.
Neither statement claims an absolute. But are either objective opinions? Or would you consider them to be nothing more than that persons feelings? And if that is the case, why are you so tolerant of the faithful here and suddenly so onesided about objectivity? | |
|
| why is this topic called religion
Posted: 1/4/2008 6:11:26 AM |
the only belief i despise is a closed mind
jrbogie i was speaking in the context of the forums ...sure there have been beliefs in history that i despise ... any belief that thinks it has the right to do harm to others is in that category..... but are the instances you described really beliefs ...i dont know ...did the tyrants in history really believe they were doing right or did they just not care ...sure they used religion but only when it suited their purpose... and the blind followers of theirs... do they not fall in the category of closed minds ..Jim Jones even though he convinced a lot of people to kill themselves he stopped short of drinking the poisen himself did he believe what he was preaching?.... yes it is my opinion that most if not all the crimes done in the name of religion were done either by people exploiting religion or their blind closed mind followers....maybe with a few criminally insane people thrown in... but they would have found justification in their minds for their deeds even without religion ...... there is no way you can really follow the teachings of the bible and do such things to your fellow man .... yea they all said they were religious but saying is not doing .... you can scream ....Thou shalt not kill ...while your murdering your neighbor but if you believed it you could not do it.... religion does not cause people to do harm ...people pervert religion and do the harm
whether the bible ... the book these people claim to believe... is the word of God or not ...(and i have read it from cover to cover something that most Christians have never done )..i can find no where it teaches that these atrocities were right ... . actually i see nothing in it but good .... | |
|
| why is this topic called religion
Posted: 1/4/2008 8:52:11 AM | jrbogie i was speaking in the context of the forums
So was I. As I have said, I use these forums to assault the positions of the elitist religious faithful wherever I can. Not the elitist faithful themselves personally, just their positions that they express here on this open public forum.
did the tyrants in history really believe they were doing right or did they just not care
How would I know what anybody's belief is other than what they state? And a good many of these perps did commit the crimes and did state that they believed they did so in the name of god.
sure they used religion but only when it suited their purpose...
You're making my point nicely. They executed their purpose and used their beliefs to excuse and even justify themselves. Were religion not prevalent in the minds of the inquisitors, the crusaders or the judges and executioners in Salem they would have no purpose for their crimes. But they did have a purpose, their purpose. And their purpose was to somehow cleanse humanity of those who did not believe as they did. Had they not believed as they did, there would have been nobody to cleanse.
there is no way you can really follow the teachings of the bible and do such things to your fellow man
But the proof is in the pudding. They did do such things to their fellow man. And if what you say is true, how many true christians are there really. How many "good christians" as most would consider the vast majority that go to church today never commited adultery? My "good christian" ex wife who attended church every week had no problem sleeping with another man. I don't know of anybody that does not consider her to be a good christian. The faithful will claim eroneously that this country was founded on christian values. Well the constitution that those "good christian" founding fathers laid down that structures how we develope laws has put many people in prison. Almost all of the prison populatiion today claims to have a faith in god. Are they not christians in fact? And does just not breaking society's laws or not getting caught make one a good christian. My ex broke no law. But she did not live up to the religious vows that I agreed to take with her in honor of her beliefs. | |
|
| why is this topic called religion
Posted: 1/4/2008 9:49:01 AM |
And if what you say is true, how many true Christians are there really.
we agree not very damn many ... but wait we are not the first to say this ... its even said in the bible go figure
but claiming to be a good Christian does not make it so ... claiming to be a good doctor ..or lawyer does not make it so ..but im sure there are some good Christians and doctors ...lawyers im not sure about but i wont rule it out....
claiming to be a Christian did not make your ex cheat ...and if she cheated and did not recognize it as a sin ..and still claimed to be serving her religion..... .then the beliefs of her religion makes her not only an adulteress but a hypocrite
i know several Christians who i can find no fault with their beliefs and actions ... they are my friends and have never showed me or anyone believer or not anything but kindness ... they dont preach to or condemn me or none believers ...if asked they state their beliefs ... and except yours ... in knowing these people and the way they live ...and knowing others that claim to be Christians it is my opinion that there are many more hypocrites than true Christians ... but does that minimize the beliefs of any that might be true to their faith ... not to me | |
|
| why is this topic called religion
Posted: 1/4/2008 11:07:13 AM |
i know several Christians who i can find no fault with their beliefs and actions ... they are my friends and have never showed me or anyone believer or not anything but kindness ... they dont preach to or condemn me or none believers ...if asked they state their beliefs ... and except yours ... in knowing these people and the way they live ...and knowing others that claim to be Christians it is my opinion that there are many more hypocrites than true Christians ... but does that minimize the beliefs of any that might be true to their faith ... not to me
Nor to me. But on a percentage basis, if I were to compare the christians, muslims and jews that I know personally, with the buddhists, atheists and agnostics that I know personally, and I know many of both, I can honestly say that to my knowledge one hundred percent of the non believers in god live up to my moral and ethical standards and less than half of the god fearing come close. | |
|
| |
|
|
Home
login 
