The Perils of religion [W:1129]

[Tigerace117]

Re: The Perils of religion

Atheism is a minor aspect. Socialism is a failed social experiment, a dead ideology which largely appeals only to that segment of the population with a highly developed sense of self entitlement. You post reflects the religious attitude that without an imaginary god, there can be no moral life. First, people had morals, compassion, charity etc long before xinaity was stolen from earlier pagan beliefs, which also had those qualities, which is where the xians stole them. So, nothing new in xianity. Second, if one were to examine the xian theory that god=morality etc, then one would be quite capable of proving their god does not exist simply by relating the immoral, hate filled, mysogynistic, racist, murderous, rape-promoting history of the xian faiths.

Atheism was a pretty big part bud. It was present in every East Bloc state at one point or another. Trying to minimize that makes you no better then Christian "apologists" you despise do much.

Of course people had morals; but you can't deny that Christianity's moral system, at least when truly practiced and not perverted for one end or another, was highly sufficient.

The existence of human evil doesn't rule out the existence of God. It would rule out the existence of a God like the Greek and Roman ones, which actively tried to control their worshippers; but there's something called free will.

 

[Realitywins]

Re: The Perils of religion

Atheism was a pretty big part bud. It was present in every East Bloc state at one point or another. Trying to minimize that makes you no better then Christian "apologists" you despise do much.

Of course people had morals; but you can't deny that Christianity's moral system, at least when truly practiced and not perverted for one end or another, was highly sufficient.

The existence of human evil doesn't rule out the existence of God. It would rule out the existence of a God like the Greek and Roman ones, which actively tried to control their worshippers; but there's something called free will.

Have it your way. Socialist/Communism is an economic ideology dedicated to ensuring everyone starves to death at the same rate. As I pointed out xianity's moral system was well established and practiced long before xianity was invented. So the presence or absence of the xian myth is simply not a factor. What is a factor is that it is a code honoured more in the breech than the observance by xians themselves. The catholic church being a prime and horrid example out of many. If your god existed and there is absolutely no proof of that whatsoever and it was serious about you guys observing that code, there'd be a lot of dead xians. I know why the faithful are so hung up on "free will". Up until the 80's or so, maybe a bit sooner, xians swore everything was god's doing or gods will. Then as people started question xian doctrine and asking why their god was letting all those people in Africa starve and other embarrassing questions, the xian apologists came up with the concept of "free will", thinking this would let their absent god and just incidentally but more importantly themselves, off the theological hook. AS with all religious plans and schemes, insubstantial and didn't work. We all have free will because there is nothing to prevent us from having it.

 

[Tigerace117]

Re: The Perils of religion

Have it your way. Socialist/Communism is an economic ideology dedicated to ensuring everyone starves to death at the same rate. As I pointed out xianity's moral system was well established and practiced long before xianity was invented. So the presence or absence of the xian myth is simply not a factor. What is a factor is that it is a code honoured more in the breech than the observance by xians themselves. The catholic church being a prime and horrid example out of many. If your god existed and there is absolutely no proof of that whatsoever and it was serious about you guys observing that code, there'd be a lot of dead xians. I know why the faithful are so hung up on "free will". Up until the 80's or so, maybe a bit sooner, xians swore everything was god's doing or gods will. Then as people started question xian doctrine and asking why their god was letting all those people in Africa starve and other embarrassing questions, the xian apologists came up with the concept of "free will", thinking this would let their absent god and just incidentally but more importantly themselves, off the theological hook. AS with all religious plans and schemes, insubstantial and didn't work. We all have free will because there is nothing to prevent us from having it.

No, the concept of free will has been around for longer then the 1980s, because the question has been around for longer then that.

Glad to see that you've acknowledged the big role atheism plays in communism.

How exactly does one go about "proving" an omnipotent being? Is it even possible? Could one tell that they were looking at a god even if human science could identify one?

 

[Visbek]

Re: The Perils of religion

Aside for the obvious falsehoods, outright lies, plagiarizations and determined denials wielded by the faithful over the centuries, slowly many people are seeing through the smoke and smashing the mirrors....

meh

I don't see any indication that Christians are any more or less ethical, or hypocritical, than any other religious group.

Most of the claims above seem pejorative without any real evidence, let alone understanding of human nature. They certainly don't assume they are good; they assume they are sinners who need to be forgiven.

Some are obnoxious and pushy; others are generous and compassionate.

Some skate by on little effort; others work hard to help others.

The real issue is not about the religion. The issue is tribalism.

"Sony people don't think with logic." - Eric Cartman.

 

[Realitywins]

Re: The Perils of religion

meh

I don't see any indication that Christians are any more or less ethical, or hypocritical, than any other religious group.

Most of the claims above seem pejorative without any real evidence, let alone understanding of human nature. They certainly don't assume they are good; they assume they are sinners who need to be forgiven.

Some are obnoxious and pushy; others are generous and compassionate.

Some skate by on little effort; others work hard to help others.

The real issue is not about the religion. The issue is tribalism.

"Sony people don't think with logic." - Eric Cartman.

There are none so blind...Plenty of fact and evidence has been provided on many threads on this Forum. If you choose to overlook the obvious, well...

 

[Realitywins]

Re: The Perils of religion

No, the concept of free will has been around for longer then the 1980s, because the question has been around for longer then that.

Glad to see that you've acknowledged the big role atheism plays in communism.

How exactly does one go about "proving" an omnipotent being? Is it even possible? Could one tell that they were looking at a god even if human science could identify one?

Such an acknowledgement was not made save in your ever-hopeful mind. I always find it amusing when the faithful change what was said to what they wish was said. Socialists are economic idealogues first and foremost, religion plays a very small role in their day to day life. They spend less time worrying about your mythological buddy than do the faithful worrying about whether or not xianity is dying and it is.

Of course it is not possible to prove the existence of an omnipotent being, because one need not prove that which patently does not exist, does not exist. Science only concerns itself with reality. Still, if your imaginary pal existed, one would think it would make itself known, what? Then we could ask it why it lets all those people starve to death, kids to be raped, Tsunami's to happen, etc, etc.

 

[RAMOSS]

Re: The Perils of religion

And what's a key feature of that failed ideology?

Atheism.

Rejection of religion.

Whatever you want to call it, it's there.

Actually, it was not the rejection of religion, but the promotion of the cult of personality, using 'The State' as the cult instead of a religion.

 

[Tigerace117]

Re: The Perils of religion

Such an acknowledgement was not made save in your ever-hopeful mind. I always find it amusing when the faithful change what was said to what they wish was said. Socialists are economic idealogues first and foremost, religion plays a very small role in their day to day life. They spend less time worrying about your mythological buddy than do the faithful worrying about whether or not xianity is dying and it is.

Of course it is not possible to prove the existence of an omnipotent being, because one need not prove that which patently does not exist, does not exist. Science only concerns itself with reality. Still, if your imaginary pal existed, one would think it would make itself known, what? Then we could ask it why it lets all those people starve to death, kids to be raped, Tsunami's to happen, etc, etc.

Ah, my "small" mind, is it? Case in point. Why is it that almost every atheist I've run into has a superiority complex?

So in other words, "if science can't prove it, right now, it doesn't exist." Brilliant. I suppose you think we've discovered everything in the universe as well.

Why should an omnipotent even feel the need to come back down? It did it once, at least. Who knows how time passes for a being like that. To us it was more than two thousad years; to it, it just might be the day before yesterday.

 

[Visbek]

Re: The Perils of religion

There are none so blind...Plenty of fact and evidence has been provided on many threads on this Forum. If you choose to overlook the obvious, well...

I assure you, I'm not the one overlooking the obvious.

The existence of a few obnoxious Christians proves nothing except that a few Christians are obnoxious.

P.S. What's up with the bolding? You do know we can read normal text, right?

 

[Tigerace117]

Re: The Perils of religion

Actually, it was not the rejection of religion, but the promotion of the cult of personality, using 'The State' as the cult instead of a religion.

Technically, it was the rejection of religion. You could make the case that a cult of personality is a sort of religion, but that seems kinda shaky IMO. The crackdowns on Christianity and other religions seems to hold that out.

 

[RAMOSS]

Re: The Perils of religion

Technically, it was the rejection of religion. You could make the case that a cult of personality is a sort of religion, but that seems kinda shaky IMO. The crackdowns on Christianity and other religions seems to hold that out.

It is a rejection of religion only in as another concentration of power that might oppose the state.

 

[Tigerace117]

Re: The Perils of religion

It is a rejection of religion only in as another concentration of power that might oppose the state.

And, you know, as the opiate of the masses---it was to have no place in the communist states. They cracked down very hard on religion because they wanted it gone, period, end of story.

 

[RAMOSS]

Re: The Perils of religion

And, you know, as the opiate of the masses---it was to have no place in the communist states. They cracked down very hard on religion because they wanted it gone, period, end of story.

That quote is one that is highly taken out of context, from a cultural stand point. This is the paragraph in full.

The foundation of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man. Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man – state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopaedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d’honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.

Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.[2]

 

[bluesmoke]

Re: The Perils of religion

Atheism was a pretty big part bud. It was present in every East Bloc state at one point or another. Trying to minimize that makes you no better then Christian "apologists" you despise do much.

Of course people had morals; but you can't deny that Christianity's moral system, at least when truly practiced and not perverted for one end or another, was highly sufficient.

The existence of human evil doesn't rule out the existence of God. It would rule out the existence of a God like the Greek and Roman ones, which actively tried to control their worshippers; but there's something called free will.

I can't deny Christianity's moral system any more than I can deny the moralism of atheists, situation ethics, or anyone else, with few exceptions. I've attended many churches, known their people, known people of many faiths, atheist and all gradients, kinds, races, leanings, and all inclusive of people and where morals are concerned, I can't tell the difference. What are your exclusions, if any?

 

[bluesmoke]

Re: The Perils of religion

Technically, it was the rejection of religion. You could make the case that a cult of personality is a sort of religion, but that seems kinda shaky IMO. The crackdowns on Christianity and other religions seems to hold that out.

A cult can either be a religion or a social group. In either case it is abnormal (deviant) or "novel".

 

[tosca1]

Re: The Perils of religion

I think very few people are capable of being genuinely religious. Christ would not recognize many of his so-called followers.

That's been prophesied by Christ Himself:


Matthew 7
21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’
23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’


Matthew 7
13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it.
14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.




But who knows and can judge who gets to heaven? Only God.

 

[Realitywins]

Re: The Perils of religion

That's been prophesied by Christ Himself:


Matthew 7
21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’
23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’


Matthew 7
13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it.
14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.




But who knows and can judge who gets to heaven? Only God.


Non-followers of Christ ought to not worry about Christians.....but instead, concentrate on their own lives.

It is not xians one worries about, it is the negative effects their foolish beliefs have on human society.

 

[tosca1]

Re: The Perils of religion

Aside for the obvious falsehoods, outright lies, plagiarizations and determined denials wielded by the faithful over the centuries, slowly many people are seeing through the smoke and smashing the mirrors.

"As I explored this, I realised why there is so much hypocrisy amongst the so-called body of Christ. Christians have little to no motivation to try to be good because they already believe they are good in spite of what they may do simply because of what they believe. This explains why Christians (including the many that barge on into this site) are so pompous, insensitive and full of themselves. Their beliefs give them a false sense of entitlement and superiority where they believe they have a right to say what they want to whomever they want as long as the gospel is being preached. Some will even go as far as to actually tell lies to get their point across. With regard to the issue of faith over works, it is patently obvious why so many Christians fall on the side of faith; it offers the path of least resistance and allows them to indulge their worst traits, safe in the knowledge that unlike the rest of us “sinners”, they are not perfect, but forgiven."


From: 14 Problems with Christianity

I agree with faithful Servant in his assessment. Your so-called "exploration" had scratched a false surface,
by the looks of it. :lol:

Explore some more. Start by actually reading the Scriptures, and studying it. You need guidance.



Anyway.....

Non-followers of Christ ought to not worry about Christians.....but instead, concentrate on their own lives.

That a non-believer seem to have a "fixation" on the subject of Christianity and its followers, could be a sign that one is spiritually in distress.....it could be a sign that there's a battle going on in you.

One thing for certain, according to the Scriptures, the only way to life is through Christ.....and there's only one sure destination for those who reject Him.

 

[tosca1]

Re: The Perils of religion

It is not xians one worries about, it is the negative effects their foolish beliefs have on human society.

If you're talking about "their beliefs having negative effects on society," then you're not thinking with a full deck!

That's why Faithful Servant had described your rant - yes it's a rant - to be bigoted!

Why do you single out Christianity? Why this obsession with Christianity?
That's a good and legitimate question, no?

 

[ashurbanipal]

Re: The Perils of religion

That's been prophesied by Christ Himself:


Matthew 7
21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’
23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’


Matthew 7
13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it.
14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

Yes, correct.

But who knows and can judge who gets to heaven? Only God.

This is why I don't believe in sectarianism. It is God's prerogative to make whatever covenant with whomever He wishes. Who can really say he doesn't have one covenant with those born in Christian lands, and another with those born in Buddhist lands? John 14:6 may have been said with foreknowledge of exactly who would be called to account under its terms, and who would be called under entirely other terms.

It is for us only to strive to be the best helpers possible.

 

[tosca1]

Re: The Perils of religion

This is why I don't believe in sectarianism. It is God's prerogative to make whatever covenant with whomever He wishes. Who can really say he doesn't have one covenant with those born in Christian lands, and another with those born in Buddhist lands?

The Scriptures says it explicitly: the only way is through Christ.

Besides, we read what angered God in the OT. Those in other lands who worship other gods - like the Baal lands.

John 14:6 may have been said with foreknowledge of exactly who would be called to account under its terms, and who would be called under entirely other terms.

God will not contradict His own Scriptures.
It is for us only to strive to be the best helpers possible.

 

[tosca1]

Re: The Perils of religion

Aside for the obvious falsehoods, outright lies, plagiarizations and determined denials wielded by the faithful over the centuries, slowly many people are seeing through the smoke and smashing the mirrors.

"As I explored this, I realised why there is so much hypocrisy amongst the so-called body of Christ. Christians have little to no motivation to try to be good because they already believe they are good in spite of what they may do simply because of what they believe. This explains why Christians (including the many that barge on into this site) are so pompous, insensitive and full of themselves. Their beliefs give them a false sense of entitlement and superiority where they believe they have a right to say what they want to whomever they want as long as the gospel is being preached. Some will even go as far as to actually tell lies to get their point across. With regard to the issue of faith over works, it is patently obvious why so many Christians fall on the side of faith; it offers the path of least resistance and allows them to indulge their worst traits, safe in the knowledge that unlike the rest of us “sinners”, they are not perfect, but forgiven."


From: 14 Problems with Christianity

If there's anything that has a disastrous and evil affect on society - it could be the one who believes in this:

‘There’s probably no god. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.’




What's your enjoyment?

Pol Pot had his own enjoyment, and so did Hitler.


Believing to make the most out of this one life you've got, can provide all the incentives for you to do whatever you want....especially when you don't believe in facing judgement in the hereafter.
The only thing that deters you is the law of the land....but we know some are not deterred even by that.
That's why we have monsters.

 

[Verthaine]

Re: The Perils of religion

If there's anything that has a disastrous and evil affect on society - it could be the one who believes in this:

‘There’s probably no god. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.’




What's your enjoyment?

Pol Pot had his own enjoyment, and so did Hitler.

So enjoying one's life without the Deity YOU believe is equivalent to being Pol Pot or Hitler?

 

[ashurbanipal]

Re: The Perils of religion

God will not contradict His own Scriptures.

Two points:

1. How do you know? It sure sounds like you're trying to limit what God can and cannot do/ will or will not do. Strikes me as somewhat arrogant.

2. Wouldn't be a contradiction anyway. If I say to my daughter "you may not have a glass of wine," I do not thereby also deny myself the right to have a glass of wine. Similarly, if I say to a stranger "please don't touch me," I don't thereby mean to tell my wife she can't give me a kiss or a hug. So, God may well speak through scripture...to exactly those people He means to reach with that particular message. He may have other messages for other folks. Who are you--who is anyone--to tell God what He may or may not/ will or will not do?

 

[tosca1]

Re: The Perils of religion

So enjoying one's life without the Deity YOU believe is equivalent to being Pol Pot or Hitler?

EH???

Follow the poster's way of thinking in his OP. That's the parallel.