| (Pages: 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 ... 29) | |
Muckraker  Posts: 226 Joined: 29 Apr 2008     | |
Muckraker Posts: 226 Joined: 29 Apr 2008 | repeat |
BANNED  Posts: 740 Joined: 19 Jun 2008    |
Why is it now?
How so? It was just a question, and in no way reflects my personal opinion. The statement involved with the question was stated by another individual, I merely asked if he believed the statement to be true. User was banned for: I'm Finished. (Permanent) |
Muckraker  Posts: 231 Joined: 11 Oct 2008   |
I understand the point you're making, I do, I just don't agree... Granted, I won't even attempt to pretend I'm an expert on Christianity or theology in general, but with all the contradictions within the Bible, not all of it can be taken as fact. There was a big division within the Baptist church over whether or not everything is 100% right or not, but I think it can be safely surmised that not everything in there is right. As for the treatment of homosexuals or contraception or what have you, well, I also don't think a chair I sat on when I was on the rag is unclean and that a man who touches it has to wash and can't attend temple because he's unclean, so I think it depends on where you draw the line...
I think I said something about the Crusades already but just to reiterate- yeah, it was brought about by Pope Urban II being a twat and exaggerating the threat to the religion in the Middle East. I would say that the level of piety back then was on par with extremism but I have shit to back that up, so I'm not sure what to say. It happened. It shouldn't have.
It's not. It goes all the way back to Ancient Greece. Even Confucius had his own spin on it. It isn't a solely Christian ideal by any stretch of the imagination, but it just so happens to be the one Christ picked as his favorite (sarcasm), and since Christianity is (supposed to) follow him, by proxy it's the most important teaching of his. Even if it wasn't original, that doesn't mean it's suddenly shit and should be tossed out the window. |
PROBATION  Posts: 3934 Joined: 24 Apr 2008     |
Sorry, wrong way around, No, but it once was. User was put on probation for: Kid loses Xbox, runs away, dies in a field.. (7 days) |
BANNED Posts: 740 Joined: 19 Jun 2008 |
Why isn't it now? All this delay has caused me to lose the will. User was banned for: I'm Finished. (Permanent) |
Muckraker Posts: 226 Joined: 29 Apr 2008 | the definition of homosexual is fairly distorted in translation of Hebrew to English and can better be defined as a sexual pervert, and more specifically as a child molester. Because in the culture of the time a common practice for a child was begin the study of a trade under the supervision of a master. The masters in this situation often had little time for families of their own and in some cases lacked them completely, and because of the lack of permanent prostitution in the society, many of the masters would use their students for sexual pleasures. This theme was common throughout many cultures including the Greeks who as well discriminated against the practice. So this new definition spreads a little light on the situation and any person who approves of the homosexuals of the biblical times is obviously mentally disfigured because child molestation goes against many anthropological attributes and necessities. The second point I would care to take is the recently new information put forward regarding the genetic deficiency where certain hormones are not produced, and creates an imbalance in sexual preference. This new abnormality can open the doors for bisexuality not homosexuality. While if a man chooses to be with another man I can respect his choice, but if he claims he has no choice in this matter then he is simply lying because it is biologically impossible. |
Paperboy  Posts: 29 Joined: 11 Oct 2008  | I don't know if anyone has mentioned this already, but lots of my atheist friends complain about religious people being too preachy. However, if someone tells any of my friends "Hi, I'm a Christian", all of a sudden they start listing reasons why all religions are wrong, try to start an argument and attempt to prove that religious beliefs are stupid. Hypocrisy pisses me off >_> Btw, I'm an atheist. I just think we should let people believe what they want to believe, even if we disagree with it. |
Paperboy  Posts: 41 Joined: 9 Oct 2008   | Christianity is a big religion in the west and thus a big target. |
Muckraker Posts: 231 Joined: 11 Oct 2008 |
Yay for someone getting it! Voltaire, anyone? |
Muckraker Posts: 226 Joined: 29 Apr 2008 |
I would agree with your philosophy, but your friends are obviously mislead. If their biggest complaint is that Christianity is to preachy, i would tell them kindly to elaborate, but if they were able to sufficiently support it with specific instances, then I would kindly remind them that for the one misguided individual who stands on the sidewalk and proclaims his revelation for god in a group of 100 people, then there are over 81 people who are keeping silent. As well as to further drive my point any popular organization is going to be "preachy" look at the democrats and republicans. They both have valid ideas and are a driving force behind our economy but they are "preachy" so should they be ignored?? The same argument could also be made against atheists, just look at this thread, think about it |
Copy Clerk  Posts: 104 Joined: 29 Aug 2008 |
Like other people have said, it's just religion in general, but we usually don't criticize anything in the Middle East cause they scare us. I mean look what happens to a few poor cartoonists that decide to take an extremely satirical poke at Islam. We do think ALL religion is bad, but it isn't like Christians are going to track you down and murder you if you say something they don't like (well, not anymore at least). And no one criticizes the Buddha because Buddhism isn't like the other religions. In fact, Zen Buddhism isn't even a religion at all, it's more of a following since they're following the teachings of A MAN, not a god. I mean sure they people believe in some supernatural stuff and they do have some weird god-like figures, but they don't hate people for being different or believing in something different. They're (for the most part) kind and accepting of everyone and they don't force people to join their religion BY FORCE (if you don't get that reference, don't ask)!!!! I hope that's an adequate response :) |
Copy Clerk Posts: 66 Joined: 27 Aug 2008 | I'm just gunna add my own 2 cents in here. I think that religion is probably one of the worst things thats ever happened to the world. How long has society been held back by false gods? How many people have died because their god was different that someone elses? And this stuff still comes into play today, i mean in the middle east, they literally think their fighting a holy war. But my personal qualm with christianity and religion in general....wheres the proof? And do NOT say the bible, that is just a collection of myth's. The bible was made by men, and people base their religion on this? Source material that we have no way to verify? no way to proove? Where is the sense in that? |
Muckraker Posts: 226 Joined: 29 Apr 2008 |
If these are your true beliefs then personally I'm startled you even have an opinion because you have apparently never even looked at the bible let alone read and analyzed it. and your idea that somehow religion stifles progress is completely unfounded. name a time when the church has directly and completely halted the study or progress of human kind. (the examples you use must support the validity of your statement) Edit: if you use the example of the world is flat , and the heliocentric model, i will laugh at you because the concept was rejected not because it was against the religion but because there were other scientists opposing his ideas who had just as valid an argument at the time, and if you use stem cells i will laugh at you even more because you obviously know nothing of what your talking about. |
Infamous Scribbler  Posts: 626 Joined: 15 Jun 2008     | I just realized, Pope Urban II is just like George W. Bush. He played up the threat of the middle east and started a war that got a whole bunch of people killed. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 2935 Joined: 13 Aug 2008   | I hate chirstians because they are non-beleiving heretics. Revert foul mysanthropes! Well I'm kind of late to the party here but I'd just like to say something. |
Infamous Scribbler Posts: 626 Joined: 15 Jun 2008 |
And I suggest you get your nose out of the Bible and read something else, anything else for that matter. THE BIBLE IS NOT A LEGITIMATE BASIS FOR YOUR ARGUMENT. It uses circular logic as it's own proof and has no outside verification. This is what pisses people off when we try to talk to religious people. When they use a holy book as proof. The Bible was written by Bronze age savages, it is not the inerrent word of god. |
Copy Clerk Posts: 66 Joined: 27 Aug 2008 |
Alright stifling human progress...this isn't what you'd call scientific progress but definetly cultural progress. The crusades. Was there a point to those? Maybe its just a coincidence that the region those took place in is today one of the most unstable in the world, i doubt it though. Many of the cultures in that region had alot to offer the world but instead of embracing this, peacfully coexisiting, it was decided that they were a blight on the world, and had to be removed from the holy lands. And the Popes backed this maddness, out of greed. How surprising that the one person thats supposed to be the ideal is just as corrupt as alot of other people. And I like how you ever so subtly side stepped the question of proof there. |
BANNED  Posts: 453 Joined: 12 Sep 2008 | I'd venture to say most of Europe's wars and conflicts weren't caused by religion, and in the cases where it was given as a "cause" i'd say it was more of an excuse. Not saying religion is free from responsibility, but I'm pretty sure a lot more is blamed on it than it was actually responsible for. User was banned for: Proposition 8, sparks anger, and threats.. (14 days) |
Copy Clerk Posts: 66 Joined: 27 Aug 2008 |
This is probably true, but still, the fact that something we're supposed to base our moral compass on being twisted for personal gain is a little warped in my opinion |
BANNED Posts: 453 Joined: 12 Sep 2008 |
I don't disagree, and its one of the reasons why I don't actively defend it. After the most recent scandals involving pedophilia and huge settlements (collection money mind you), there is no way I can defend it. I defend my theism, but religion no. User was banned for: Proposition 8, sparks anger, and threats.. (14 days) |
Copy Clerk Posts: 66 Joined: 27 Aug 2008 |
And i respect that |
Paperboy  Posts: 17 Joined: 11 Oct 2008 | That's an impressive statement, to say the least. Religion over a broad aspect is just a reform to life and impressionability: where the morals and the belief system meet in ones attentive mind. Theism is a sub genre and, therefore, more relationship based on personal levels. Where a Christian has direct communication with God. In the same context a vegan still chooses morals and lifestyle benefits but does not expect the salad to actualy engage in any form of communication with him/her. |
Copy Clerk Posts: 104 Joined: 29 Aug 2008 |
Yea they do... Didn't you know that Vegans worship the Great Salad God from Vega? VEGRATHRON THE ALMIGHTY!! He's my lord and savior and this ranch dressing on my salad is his way of telling me SALADS PWN!! And don't say I'm wrong cause I have this 2 and a half thousand year old cookbook that was written by a bunch his disciples to prove that being a Vegan is the better than anything else :) |
Muckraker Posts: 226 Joined: 29 Apr 2008 | To definitively say every nation in the world has benefited from every religion would not be completely correct. A religion is essential in any society where there is not a strict set of rules established by the community, an example of this would be many indigenous tribes in Africa and many native American tribes, or in a society where the government clearly dictates social and personal interaction , example of this is communist Russia , and feudal China. The reason for this is no matter how often we say "that because we are individuals we can make our own choices" the fact of the matter is that saying this just subjects you to your own set of morals rather than a communal set. Unfortunately the theory that a society can function with absolute moral freedom is a laughable concept at best, because while all humans have a degree of innate morals, many people will neglect these for personal advantage (as the theory of objectism states). This creates while maybe not governmental anarchy it does create societal anarchy, which as Rome would attest is very destructive in and of itself. The advantage that a religion brings, is that if its widespread enough it regulates society giving the society stability that no other governing structure can give. If we look at the evidence of history its rather odd that the most dominant and technologically advanced are societies are ones with a strong central religion. And societies that don't adhere to a specific religion are usually quick to fall apart. and you are not going to argue that a structured society is less productive then an unstructured. |
Paperboy Posts: 17 Joined: 11 Oct 2008 | That is the most impressive imagination I've ever come into contact with, Eipok. hippo. I traveled there for only a month but still took in a great deal with what little Zulu I actually know. Nih Kwen Khos. |
Paperboy Posts: 17 Joined: 11 Oct 2008 | You are correct in saying that a structured society is more productive with materials. But when we allow production to include percentage and overall value or change the variable of production to include family, inclusion, overall satisfaction. Production is measured and defined by those measuring. For that matter religion will then be defined by those defining it. Let's hope my brother does a good job there. |
Muckraker Posts: 226 Joined: 29 Apr 2008 |
While I understand the point you are making, it is apparent your historical views are quite...misplaced. The crusades were not a holy wars as they were proclaimed to be. Although the common man was told that and it may have been part of the situation it was more of a result of greed and pride (to things i think the bible directly prohibits). The first act that was initiated was the Muslim blockage of access to trade routes and passage. This was a severe blow to the European economy. Europe was dependent on trade with Asia to get many of their commodities, and the pilgrimages to Jerusalem that many Lords and kings made in order to seek forgiveness or attempt to find inner peace through god, were abruptly halted. The sudden blockage of these two acts was a proverbial slap to the Europeans. The European countries were not happy about the majority of their supply lines being cut, so the many traders and investors (kings) demanded an intervention. Because the average peasant or commoner at the time cared little for trade (which only benefited the wealthy and middle class) they needed an alternate motive if they hoped to amass an army. In order to do this many of the kings pressured the pope to issue a decree lessing their punishment for sins to any man who joined the crusades (this act is contradicted by many passages in the bible). The way in which the pope was convinced is not decided on because of the many accounts of it but, it's speculated the kings were able to convince enough Cardinals that it would pose a threat to the pope himself. Regardless the example of the crusades is a poor example it better illustrates the consequences of tradition without scripture. Which was a prevalent theme throughout the catholic ch |
I suggest you reread the new testament.