|
|
|
|
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/22/2008 6:35:16 PM | jmars said:
But the fact is that such examples are few and far between with other religions, and are generally as incidental in nature as those atrocities folk claim spring from atheism. Non-monotheist, not beleiving that they have the one and only, and existing within a completely different paradigm of beleif than the monotheists, have historically been tolerant of other religions and not inclined to wage war for such reasons. In contrast, virtually the entire history "the monotheisms" is a history of religiously motivated violent atrocity.
If you could provide examples from other beliefs, well, there is an open floor...
Buddhism is usually espoused as a religion of peace and tolerance. I agree that it generally is, but Christians living in Japan between the 17th and 19th centuries would not have thought so. I would invite you to read about the Kakure Kirishitans, the hidden Catholic Christian communities of Tokugawa-era Japan. In order to root out Christians, certain Buddhist officials would have "step-on pictures" called fumie outside the entrances to cities. The people would be required to step over images of Christ or the Virgin Mary on the way in or out of a town. Those who refused were tortured, crucified, thrown into volcanoes, etc. | |
|
Nergal
|
Joined: 4/29/2007
Msg: 77 | |
| |
Nergal
|
Joined: 4/29/2007
Msg: 78 | |
| |
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/22/2008 7:20:48 PM | A fair example Jacobus101. Unfortunately I think that it falls short, involving as it does one of the three that agrressively promote themselves before all others.
The Saxons of the 8th century could also be cited for launching raids into Catholic France aimed specifically at Catholic churches. Of course, muchlike the vikings of the following century, and undoubtedly your Buddhists, such acts were born in reaction to the aggressive spread of Christianity.
A closer look at the situation of the Saxons and their fellow Continental Germanic tribes reveals that the initial missionaries were consistently received by various Germanic Kings with open arms and much curiousity. It was not until the missionaires began acting to undermine the ancestral beliefs, and then additionally brought in the Carolingian warlords to back them up, eg. Charlemagne, that they began to *reap what they'd sown*.
Better examples would exclude situations involving the big three; as the intolerance of these faiths towards what they can't help but perceive as competitors ends up setting the context of their interaction.... in the same way that a person who is bound and determined to start a fight sets the context of all actions that follow. And given that isolated examples of anything can be found virtually anywhere -- such as a normally peaceful and easy-going person giving a habitual violent offender his due -- a demonstration of the type of consistency we see amongst the big three would be even more poignant. | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/22/2008 7:26:10 PM |
I think that if you are going condemn religion itself, a reasonable person would be obliged to provide examples stemming from religions other than three monotheisms... especially considering those three all spring from a common source and culture of belief.
Well the world isn't in danger of messianic Mayans obtaining nuclear weapons, now is it?
I'd rather you just point out a religion that has never committed an immoral action of some kind.
The Mayans practiced human sacrifices, the Inca sacrificed children. Are those too old or too obvious? Want more? | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/22/2008 7:34:06 PM | Well, actually, yes, I would like more.
"Religion" afterall covers a very broad spectrum of different belief systems. So far everyone has been providing examples of Abrahamic beliefs, and you have added Aztecs/Mayans, and excluded a *multititude* of others that you are nevertheless quite willing to paint with the same brush.
So, yeah, so long as we're talking about religion in general I would ask for ALOT more. | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/22/2008 7:43:20 PM |
I'd rather you just point out a religion that has never committed an immoral action of some kind.
What civilization has there been without a religion? Communism?
What civilization has never committed an immoral action? | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/22/2008 8:04:34 PM | "What civilization has there been without a religion? Communism?
What civilization has never committed an immoral action?"
There's a difference between a civilization and a religion. I'm challenging everybody to name one religion that has never directly caused or sanctioned immoral events.
The larger point is that religion just makes things worse. The Catholic church says AIDS in Africa is bad but condoms are worse. Without religion would anybody ever come to that conclusion? Of course not.
In Iran if a woman is convicted of a capital offense (such as showing her hair or leaving the house without her husband) she can't be sentenced to death if she's a virgin. However, while she's in prison she can be raped by the revolutionary guards and then put to death. What atheist would ever subscribe to such twisted ways of thinking?
Well, actually, yes, I would like more.
"Religion" afterall covers a very broad spectrum of different belief systems. So far everyone has been providing examples of Abrahamic beliefs, and you have added Aztecs/Mayans, and excluded a *multititude* of others that you are nevertheless quite willing to paint with the same brush.
So, yeah, so long as we're talking about religion in general I would ask for ALOT more.
I'll make a deal with you. For every ONE religion you can provide that has never directly caused one terrible event or another I'll give you TEN that have.
I have no interest in going out of my way to supply a religion from every corner of the globe and every time period within the past 40,000 years just to satisfy you. But if you do a little research and come up with something, I'll trump it ten times. | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/22/2008 8:11:14 PM |
I guess you missed the part where I explained that being an atheist is no declaration of immorality. Human beings are innately selfish creatures and religion feeds into that by telling us that the universe was created with us in mind, and that it's possible to know what god wants us to do. The selfishness is already there, religion makes it worse.
Theists have a belief they will ultimately have to answer for their actions to a God, whereas an atheist only believes he needs to answer to himself. It's fantasy thinking to believe that an innately selfish creature will not go as far as he can to obtain what he wants. From that perspective an atheist will go to greater lengths then a theist as is proven by atheistic regimes.
No there aren't.. Of course science can't explain everything yet. But the universe looks and works as it would if there were no god. An atheist sees fossils and understands what they are and why they're there. The theist has to come up with an explanation that fits with their already established beliefs.
As` a theist the Universe to me has too many laws to be the result of chance and chaos. A theist has the ability to make just as many assumptions about fossils and why they are there as the atheist. Your assertion proves nothing and is based on another assumption that all theists must believe in what you believe the stereotypical creationist to believe. Nothing could be further from reality.
The theist has to wrap their minds around the question as to why a just and moral god allows babies to be born with heroin addictions.
The theist has to explain why the human body has to many imperfections if we're modeled after god.
A theist already knows that this physical life is but dust in the wind in comparison to the totality of eternity. A theist also knows that the physical plane of this existence is not how a loving God would have it but that He allows His creation to try and live their lives under their own steam, which is what the whole Adam and the apple thing was about.
Simply incorrect. That's like saying my not believing in flying unicorns led me to kill a man.
Maybe you should do a google search for why Communist regimes have an anti-religion policy.
And atheism is not a religion.
Thanks for your opinion but the US courts do not agree with you and are in this case a higher authority then you.
LAW OF THE LAND
Court rules atheism a religion
Decides 1st Amendment protects prison inmate's right to start study group.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45874
Another absolute falsehood. Go and re-read what I said about our morality not coming from religion.
"Our"? You speak for all atheists in where your morality comes from? Rather presumpteous. Are you saying your morality is the same as that of other atheists?
Of course in reality the real reason is that those regimes were simply power hungry dictators.
Exactly. And because they didn't believe themselves answerable to anyone but themselves, they were capable of atrocities comparable to the theists who used religion as their excuse. Therefore the resulting conclusion is that the wars, genocides and democides are a result of human selfishness rather then a particular religion. | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/22/2008 8:18:23 PM | No. You're interested in condemning the many based on the actions of the few, and then demanding the nay-sayers to prove you wrong when the onus is clearly on you.
Nevertheless, I'm game... so hows about the indigenous religions of the Germanic or Celtic peoples? I've done at least a little research on those two, though I'm sure it in no way compares to your pervasive and all-encompassing research, but you'll humour this benighted wretch nevertheless, no? | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/22/2008 8:35:21 PM | Theists have a belief they will ultimately have to answer for their actions to a God
Has that stopped religious institutions from murdering in the past? Let's face it, when religion held sway it had no problem whatsoever wiping out whatever people it found inconvenient.
whereas an atheist only believes he needs to answer to himself.
False logic, it isn't one or the other, god or no god.
If I were making generalizations I would contend that the theist has less personal responsibility than the atheist as he believes his sins can be wiped clean by letting Jesus in whereas the atheist answers to his friends and community.
It's fantasy thinking to believe that an innately selfish creature will not go as far as he can to obtain what he wants. From that perspective an atheist will go to greater lengths then a theist as is proven by atheistic regimes.
But that perspective is simply illogical. Has there ever been a convincing statistic linking atheism to crime? Of course not.
As` a theist the Universe to me has too many laws to be the result of chance and chaos.
That alone doesn't give religion a pass. OK, you believe there must be a creator based on the splendor of nature. That makes you a deist. What gall do you have to go even further? It's not enough that you know the unknowable - the existence of a supreme power - but you also know his mind. In fact, you talk to him all the time. And you know what he wants you to do.
A theist has the ability to make just as many assumptions about fossils and why they are there as the atheist. Your assertion proves nothing and is based on another assumption that all theists must believe in what you believe the stereotypical creationist to believe. Nothing could be further from reality.
It's all a matter of LOGIC. Without religion who would ever look at evolution and suggest the presence of a higher power guiding it all?
As a theist reality has to fit around your beliefs, because your beliefs are from god almighty and cannot be incorrect ever.
Atheists aren't bound by any dogma, we have no reason to look at fossils and create stories out of the blue like that.
A theist already knows that this physical life is but dust in the wind in comparison to the totality of eternity.
No, a theist believes that. If you cannot back your statements up with hard evidence then I won't let you get away with using words like 'know'.
A theist also knows that the physical plane of this existence is not how a loving God would have it but that He allows His creation to try and live their lives under their own steam, which is what the whole Adam and the apple thing was about.
Then why even pray to him? He's a god that doesn't intervene, apparently.
Maybe you should do a google search for why Communist regimes have an anti-religion policy.
For the same reason all totalitarian states try and control thought: to consolidate power. Communists saw religion as a threat to its power. Being a tyrant is hardly something exclusive to atheists.
Thanks for your opinion but the US courts do not agree with you and are in this case a higher authority then you.
A higher legal authority, not a higher moral authority. Atheism might be considered a religion for statistic/legal purposes but in practice it is anything but.
"Our"? You speak for all atheists in where your morality comes from? Rather presumpteous. Are you saying your morality is the same as that of other atheists?
I speak for every normal human being who ever lived when I say that, because there are certain values innate in human beings. Individual/cultural ethics aside, human beings are born with the instinct that going around killing everyone isn't OK, they know lying is bad, they know raping is bad.
When somebody is born without the ability to understand those things we call them psychopaths or sociopaths.
Religion is not required for morality. Again, without faith would anybody ever suggest that condoms are bad for Africa?
Exactly. And because they didn't believe themselves answerable to anyone but themselves, they were capable of atrocities comparable to the theists who used religion as their excuse.
What? Do you even understand the point?
Nobody is defending the atheist regimes. They murdered millions of people, they were monsters. But their thirst for power and control came from their own twisted minds, it wasn't spurred on by lack of belief in god.
Whereas religion has the power to take an otherwise good person and sanction him for the most terrible things.
Therefore the resulting conclusion is that the wars, genocides and democides are a result of human selfishness rather then a particular religion.
Yes and no. Faith is certainly is not the only cause of war, genocide, poverty, etc. But it has the ability to make existing situations immeasurably worse in ways no atheist ever could.
No. You're interested in condemning the many based on the actions of the few, and then demanding the nay-sayers to prove you wrong when the onus is clearly on you.
You too have missed the point. I am not, nor have I ever, suggested that religious people as individuals are immoral. I am saying that the institution of religion always makes things worse, it poisons the world in ways only it can.
Nevertheless, I'm game... so hows about the indigenous religions of the Germanic or Celtic peoples? I've done at least a little research on those two, though I'm sure it in no way compares to your pervasive and all-encompassing research, but you'll humour this benighted wretch nevertheless, no?
I'm sorry, when did I provoke that smartass comment?
And you have to give me religions that have never directly caused an immoral act, not a people. | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/22/2008 9:01:59 PM | | I think your challenge is unfair. You cannot name a society religious or not that has not committed immoral acts. You want to separate out communist atrocities and deny atheism is a religion. I think you are implying that an atheist society would be morally superior with no proof. Morality is defined by society and/or religion, so you are judging peoples from thousands of years ago by your standards. I think that men have used religion as a scapegoat to justify their atrocities. Very few are truly integrated into the religion. | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/22/2008 9:10:11 PM |
You cannot name a society religious or not that has not committed immoral acts.
But I can name immoral events that could only have taken place due to faith. You can't name an atrocity that only an atheist could perform. | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/22/2008 9:41:14 PM | | If you are saying that an atheist cannot kill in the name of a god, I think that is obvious. Communist atheist atrocities are proof that it is not purely religion. I would agree that organized religion is a easy path to corruption, especially Fundamentalism. | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/22/2008 11:27:56 PM |
But I can name immoral events that could only have taken place due to faith
No. You can name immoral events that took place because of human misconception about what faith requires and because of human deliberate misdeeds. You make the mistake so many do of thinking those who claim to believe in something actually act according to the true principles of that which they claim to believe. It's an easy mistake, but none of your 'proofs' would pass a high-school test in terms of providing proof to back up a theory because of it.
You can as easily say that everything on earth is evil, including love, because there are examples of people doing wrong in its name. And you'd be as wrong. | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/23/2008 2:03:15 AM |
message 74 It's not the gun that kills; it's the person that pulls the trigger. Don't blame religion for all the evils of the world. No, it's not the true evil by any means. You're stereotyping, generalizing and judging those you don't know.
guns were invented for the very act of killing, religion was invented to do away with free thinking and unite everyone into a belief system for the sole purpose of control. Nothing has changed and no one is generalizing. Sure there may be some moral people within religious organizations but that doesn't change what religion is, and its devastating effects on society.
message 74 A true Christian to me is spreading the word of God through their love for mankind. They don't judge nor would they tell others how they should be living their lives. They have wise words and give good advice, but they tend to their own business and stay out of others.
I have known many Christians and even been one who spread the word of god *cough* (apologises for my bad) It was not for the love of mankind nor was it what we were taught about Christianity. We were taught that it was our duty and because we were so sinful doomed there was a compulsion to 'do the right thing' (what we were told). There was a lot of fear tactics used to increase the numbers of the church. This was not just one religion but many different denominations of the same faith.
message 76 wow is it that hard for anyone to accept the fact that everyone has a right to there view on this issue??? i mean ya we're not all gonna agree on this but damn some could write book about there feelings on this...i think if the topic is that big of a deal it should be left alone for the sanity sake..
theres topics i avoid too cause i be ranting and get super defensive if i had to answer questions on my views...
calm down people its just the forums
the forums are very much like life and if your idea of dealing with differences is to ignor them and sweep them under the rug as a way of keeping your sanity perhaps your sanity is already in question. openly talking about beliefs can help people of all faiths come to a deeper understanding of what they believe or don't believe. It helps everyone question what they do believe and see if it still fits for them today, there is nothing wrong with that.
I don't think any one has changed there belief because of something someone has said on a forum and i doubt it would ever happen. Some people are passionate about how they see the world but I don't think we can jump to the conclusion that that passion is written in anger or disdain for another person.
message 85
"Our"? You speak for all atheists in where your morality comes from? Rather presumpteous. Are you saying your morality is the same as that of other atheists?
what's wrong with such a generalization? no different then the assumption that god created us. Or that there is a god at all! I think we can speak for all people in such things because even though religion has moral codes we find people without religion having even stricter moral codes. Some even abstaining from foods that harm other species. I don't see Christian's becoming vegans as a part of their compassion for the world. Of course everyone has different moral codes, it is religion that tries to impose a level of such that is immoral in itself. | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/23/2008 7:59:51 AM |
Has that stopped religious institutions from murdering in the past? Let's face it, when religion held sway it had no problem whatsoever wiping out whatever people it found inconvenient.
I agree with you. However when such an institution commits acts which are specifically against what their texts state that their particular deity's will is, then they have gone beyond the letter and are operating from human selfishness. It is then not a religious issue but a human one.
The theme I see running through your posts and a few others is that when an atheist commits what is considered morally reprehensible acts, he is labeled a sociopath or a psychopath even though his political affiliations or ideologies seemingly require him to stamp out any beliefs in a god. When a person who labels themselves as religious does the same thing, it is the religion that is blamed for the acts committed even though that person has clearly gone beyond it's dictates.
A double standard at work. | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/23/2008 8:07:07 AM |
Theists have a belief they will ultimately have to answer for their actions to a God, whereas an atheist only believes he needs to answer to himself. It's fantasy thinking to believe that an innately selfish creature will not go as far as he can to obtain what he wants. From that perspective an atheist will go to greater lengths then a theist as is proven by atheistic regimes
There is no evidence that atheist societies have gone to greater lengths in what are considered immoral acts than any theistic society. The USSR was no more cruel than (and probably far less so) than Inquisitional Spain..and do I even need to mention Guatanamo Bay? Hitler's Germany was NOT an atheistic society... The UK has had conditions in workhouses that would make a modern person pale in disgust (their only crime was being poor). As an Historian I see no evidence that the three big judeo-based religions and the societies based on them are any better than any other system. In actuality...for sheer numbers and time span, the Catholic Church probably has committed more atrocities than any other belief system (now catholics, don't get in a knot.. this is history)
The above quote is therefore unsusbstantiated and based on a false premise.
The most peaceful societies are, according to anthropologists:
Amish, agriculturists, christian
Batek, -hunter/gatherers, gender equality, animists...conflict handled by committeee/consensus
Birhor, hunter/gatherers, animists, gender equality,animists with hindu influence...conflict handled by committeee/consensus
Buid, agriculture, animists, gender equality...conflict handled by committeee/consensus
Chewong, hunter/gatherers, animists, gender equality, no competition in society or myth...no conflict/withdrawal
Fipa, agriculture, animists, counsels of men and counsels of women for governing...animists
G/wi, agriculture-hunter/gatherers, monotheists, gender equality, tribe consensus and mild ostrazation for conflict settlement
Hutterites, christian - agriculture, governance by committee
Ifaluk. hunter/gatherers - agriculture, animists, anger and violence unacceptable, strict gender roles but women control food and households...conflict handled by social ostrazation and help from elders
Inuit, hunter/gatherers, animists... social language endorses warmth and kindness as a norm.
Ju/'hoansi, hunter/gatherers, animists, gender equality..social ostrazation for aggression
Ladakhi, hunter/gatherers, agriculture, Buddhist, polyandrous...conflict handled by committeee/consensus
Lepchas, agriculture, husbandry, Buddhist, sexual freedom (with discretion), aggression controlled by group acceptance
Malapandaram, hunter/gatherers, animists, gender equality, cooperation highly prized, relationships based on affection not economics...conflict handled by social pressure
Nubians, Muslim, agriculture...conflict handled by community
Paliyans, hunter/gatherers, gender equality, anarchistic...conflict handled by avoidance
Piaroa, animistc/pantheistic, gender equality, personal autonomy very important..conflict handled by community
Rural Thai, Buddhist, gender equality, aversion to face to face conflict... social cooperativenss
These are also notoriously non-violent peoples
Tahitians (only 2 murders were reported on the isle of Tahiti during the first half of the 20th century)
Tristan Islanders
Yanadi
Zapotec of La Paz
It is important to note that all of these societies prefer governance by consensus, most people in authority act in a group (committee, consensus, elder groups, community at large) They have languages that promote humility, cooperation, non- competitivemess, kindness, and humour, They are almost all very indulgent and non-violent with their children.. they are almost all societies where men and women are valued equally. They all consider non-violence to be a vital condition to being considered "human". Strangely..in most, divorce is common.. or at least not looked down upon. In most their conception of peace and morality is directly related to their conception of the good of the community... and not to please the "gods". They highly value individualism, and put the responsibility for correct conduct on each person.
Most are shamanistic, or animists. Most are hunter/gatherers (cooperation is vital to their survival)
None of them belong to large organized religions, even the christian and muslims.. their faith is more of a community thing. | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/23/2008 9:41:47 AM |
No. You can name immoral events that took place because of human misconception about what faith requires and because of human deliberate misdeeds.
Absolutely wrong on every level.
First of all, violence done in the name of religion is not a misconception. It's what the texts say. I'll provide yet another example.
Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:15 NAB)
That isn't a metaphor, it means what it says. If you ever see somebody on the news arrested for killing their children and babbling about how god said it's OK, well....we might be able to agree that they're crazy, but they are not misinterpreting the bible.
But you're still missing the point of my challenge so I'll repeat it.
Name me one moral action performed by a believer that could not be performed by an unbeliever.
Then name me one immoral action performed by a believer that could only happen due to religion.
Do you understand that? September 11th, for example, would not have EVER happened without religion. Call it a manipulation of faith or whatever you want but the simple fact is that unless those men were under the impression that they'd receive a holy reward in the afterlife those airplanes would not have been flown into buildings.
You make the mistake so many do of thinking those who claim to believe in something actually act according to the true principles of that which they claim to believe.
I would suggest that you are mistaken by vouching for the morality of the holy texts. They're inherently immoral.
It's an easy mistake, but none of your 'proofs' would pass a high-school test in terms of providing proof to back up a theory because of it.
Talk big when you can rebut my challenge.
You can as easily say that everything on earth is evil, including love, because there are examples of people doing wrong in its name.
The whole point is that religion isn't necessary. Without it we would still have all of our morality without any wars over holy land, without children terrified that they'll go to hell if they think bad thoughts, without the genitals of little boys being mutilated, without daily car bombings in the middle east, without families split over a homosexual son or daughter.
A true Christian to me
First mistake. A 'true Christian' isn't open to interpretation. It's all right there in those books. You might like to think that Christianity is all about doing good deeds but it isn't.
They don't judge nor would they tell others how they should be living their lives. They have wise words and give good advice, but they tend to their own business and stay out of others.
As I said, I'm obviously not going to judge individuals. But the Christian bible preaches the most terrible acts. If somebody wants to call themselves Christian but ignore the bad parts then they aren't really Christians, are they?
However when such an institution commits acts which are specifically against what their texts state that their particular deity's will is, then they have gone beyond the letter and are operating from human selfishness.
My whole point is that violence and immorality are in the original texts. It ISN'T going against the bible for a man to go out and kill a homosexual, for example.
The theme I see running through your posts and a few others is that when an atheist commits what is considered morally reprehensible acts, he is labeled a sociopath or a psychopath even though his political affiliations or ideologies seemingly require him to stamp out any beliefs in a god. When a person who labels themselves as religious does the same thing, it is the religion that is blamed for the acts committed even though that person has clearly gone beyond it's dictates.
A double standard at work.
*sigh* I tire of repeating myself.
Murder, lying, stealing, rape, all of these things are going to happen regardless of whether religion exists or not. We're lower primates and it shows.
HOWEVER, religion makes these things immeasurably worse while offering only suffering in return.
Without religion there would still be charity and goodwill. It would still be against the law to murder, rape, lie under oath, etc. Art would continue to flourish, charity organizations would still operate.
WITH and ONLY WITH religion would we saw off the genitals of our children, issue fatwahs calling for the murder of authors, allow disease to run rampant in Africa, seek nuclear weapons in order to bring about the apocalypse, tell children that they'll swim in a lake of fire for eternity if they don't swallow the lies we're feeding them, claim that natural disasters are punishment for homosexuality....should I keep going? | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/23/2008 9:56:50 AM |
Talk big when you can rebut my challenge.
I did. I pointed out the illogic of your premise. That you continue to insist on believing that your premise is correct is your problem. 'Religion' is a concept. It is neutral. It causes nothing. It is how people (mis)interpret it that is the problem. And people misinterpret everything and commit immoral acts in the name of everything, including love. How man men have murdered their wives in the name of love? According to you, it would be love that would be blame. it is not. It is a problem of the individual, not of the institution. If you can't understand that, I can't help you. | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/23/2008 10:10:31 AM |
As I said, I'm obviously not going to judge individuals. But the Christian bible preaches the most terrible acts. If somebody wants to call themselves Christian but ignore the bad parts then they aren't really Christians, are they?
Graduating the pimple phase in life does not teach us all the wisdom and mystery of life.
Nor does studying the bible make a person a christian. Nor is it even necessary to study the bible to become a christian or remain a christian.
Christianity is an experience in life...It is a connection made with God through Jesus Christ...it is not a religion in its true sense of the word, and it is impossible for someone who is not a christian to even grasp what christianity is. You can observe various religious doctrine that claims it is a christian faith, you can disect their doctrine according to what you understand, but you cannot know faith, unless you first experience the reality of faith. | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/23/2008 10:20:24 AM |
And you have to give me religions that have never directly caused an immoral act, not a people.
I gave you both... a people AND a religion. Even as Judaism is BOTH a people and a religion, so to are Germanic and Celtic and Baltic and Sioux, not to mention Mayan and Aztec, amongst a multitude of others. They are ethnic religions, indigenous belief systems of a given people that are part and parcel with their culture and language and which evolve in correspondence with their historial experience. | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/23/2008 10:50:26 AM |
I did.
No, you haven't.
You have not named one moral action performed by a believer that couldn't be performed by an unbeliever.
I pointed out the illogic of your premise.
No, you haven't.
'Religion' is a concept. It is neutral. It causes nothing.
Religion is a concept and in every one of its incarnations it asks for people to give up their reasoning on one level or another.
And it causes nothing? Oh do tell, then, what caused 7/7? Or the Inquisition?
It is how people (mis)interpret it that is the problem.
As I have pointed out, the texts themselves are violent. It isn't a matter of interpretation.
How man men have murdered their wives in the name of love? According to you, it would be love that would be blame.
No, because love is a very real emotion not an institution to control people. This world would be quite the cold place without affection, wouldn't you agree?
It is a problem of the individual, not of the institution.
So you wouldn't classify it as a problem that because of religion we circumsize our children? You wouldn't classify it as a problem that because of religion some of us ostracize our own family for being homosexual?
People will do bad things without religion, this much is plain to see. But religion has caused, and continues to cause, terrible things to happen that nobody would ever fathom without it.
Graduating the pimple phase in life does not teach us all the wisdom and mystery of life.
See how Christians love their fellow men?
Nor does studying the bible make a person a christian.
Obviously. You've got to believe it to be Christian.
Nor is it even necessary to study the bible to become a christian or remain a christian. Christianity is an experience in life...It is a connection made with God through Jesus Christ...it is not a religion in its true sense of the word, and it is impossible for someone who is not a christian to even grasp what christianity is.
Complete white noise.
You can observe various religious doctrine that claims it is a christian faith, you can disect their doctrine according to what you understand, but you cannot know faith, unless you first experience the reality of faith.
I don't claim to know what faith is like or understand how thinking person could buy into it, but I can absolutely observe the effects of religion on the world.
Even as Judaism is BOTH a people and a religion, so to are Germanic and Celtic and Baltic and Sioux, not to mention Mayan and Aztec, amongst a multitude of others.
Have it your way.
The book Germania by Gaius Cornelius Tacitus dates back to the first century and describes early Germanic animal and human sacrifice.
Under polytheism the Celts practiced human sacrifice as well, according to the book 'The Religion of the Ancient Celts'.
I've got to go to work soon, but if you'd like I can research the other religions later. | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/23/2008 11:13:29 AM | Jmars... I really enjoy your participation in this forum and find your posts incredibly balanced and knowledgable.... so I say this with total respect and as one who has occasionally done the same...
Don't feed the trolls ;)
crazylilting:
I don't think any one has changed there belief because of something someone has said on a forum and i doubt it would ever happen. I have... and know it will happen again... its a part of why I like it so much in here :) | |
|
| Religion is the True EVIL in the world
Posted: 2/23/2008 11:29:20 AM |
Have it your way.
The book Germania by Gaius Cornelius Tacitus dates back to the first century and describes early Germanic animal and human sacrifice.
Under polytheism the Celts practiced human sacrifice as well, according to the book 'The Religion of the Ancient Celts'.
And what is necessarily immoral about either human or animal sacrifice? Are you aware of the contexts these acts took place in? That they were not some Hollywood stereotype in which some innocent is dragged kicking andf screaming onto some slab of rock in some dark fetid place and brutally murdered?
For the most part Germanic and Celtic human sacrifice fell into two classifications... sacralized capital punishment and sacralized euthanasia. The former is given mention in Tacitus' work and the latter is best represented in the writings of a Muslim merchant whose name escapes me at the moment. They stand amongst the types of human sacrifces received by the deity Woden (corresponding to Mercury in the earliest Latin writings), who was also known poetical as the *Lord of the Gallows*... the gallows being the tree on which capitial offenders were hung, ie. Woden "received" human "sacrifice".
The early Germanic tribes also had a custom of opening a battle with a volley of javelins, which were not hurled AT the enemy, but over them... thereby dedicating all of the fallen to Woden. Some sources even mention a man "marking himself for Odhinn", as an acknoweldgement of imminent death and similar to the Crusader custom of being given the last rites before entering battle.
Finally, the was the "sacrifice" of captured p.o.w.s, a fate the according to native Celto-Germanic values was by far preferable to being sold into slavery amongst a foreign folk whose customs you did not understand and whose language you cannot speak. Of course, such pows were regarded as part of the spoils of war, and so in accordence with the Iron Age in which ALL of the spoils of war were to be disposed of, and as opposed to profitted from, the pows were no exception.
But what is also clear from a number of sources given the fate of pows was that their fate was not a foregone conclusion. There is throughtout the warrior culture of the Germanic peoples, a people who joyfully killed each other in inter-tribal raids, a keen awareness of the value of human life embedded in their law codes and sacral customs, such that a human life, that is, human dignity, could not be denigrated and debased without serious deliberation and ultimately the consent of the deity Tiw/TyR (corresponding to Mars in the earliest Latin writings) . As Tactitus writes, even in times of war not even the Warlord could have a man flogged, imprisoned or executed without the express permission of the High Priest, who was himself required to render judgement in accordance with the will of the God of Glory. Other sources indicate that this was determined via the casting of lots.
And you really have to understand that left to the will of the community, pows and (the considerably more ill-regarded) missionaries, would be worm food. So this was a "stay of execution" so to speak, delivered from on high as the last chance for survival and freedom.
As for animal sacrifice as the Heimskringla and numerous early Law Codes make clear, these animal sacrifces were tantamount to sacralized pig roasts, in which the animal was humanely killed by he hand of a specialized priest (called a *blotere* in Anglo-Saxon) and then cooked and eaten by the participants... with its head and hide being that portion of the animal given to the deities.
What goes on in a modern day slaughter house, in which there is NO sacral element, is EXCEEDINGLY more immoral than the practice of animal sacrifice.
In the end, simply citing human and animal sacrifice without ever really defining it in context, and maybe hoping for the typcial Hollywood inspired kneejerk response, is hardly proof of immorality.
Yes, the Celto-Germanic practiced human and animal sacrifce. So what? | |
|
|
| Page 4 of 31
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 |
|
Home
login 
