Discussion about religion bashing

[RedStarWarrior]

What's funny is that Islam is more tolerant of other religions than Christianity or Judaism as long as they have scriptures.

[Lady Vulpix]

I don't know about Christianity, or Islam for that matter, but how is Judaism intolerant of other religions?

[MeLoVeGhOsTs]

They're killing palistinians.

[Blademaster]

^En masse.

[Lady Vulpix]

Inform yourselves first. Palestinians have been killing the Jewish for years, performing acts of terrorism and using their own people as shields. They indoctrinate their children to hate all Jewish and want to kill us all. The Israelis (not even all Jewish people) are fighting back and trying to avoid killing civilians, but the Palestinians make it hard, as they hide their bases under schools, hospitals and other sensitive areas. Israel has even allowed people from other countries to enter the Israeli territory to send food and medicine for the Palestinians (except that one ship which was full of weapons). I think most countries have done far worse. And the fight is only against Gaza, where the radical groups are. Not Cisjordania (or whatever the English spelling is), which is also a Palestinian settlement and Israel has never attacked them. Of course they've made mistakes, and of course there are some Jewish people who are filled with hate, but you can't generalize because of that.

And even if you disagree with their policies, your argument is against Israel, not the Jewish community.

[RedStarWarrior]

I don't know about Christianity, or Islam for that matter, but how is Judaism intolerant of other religions?
I didn't say that it was. I'm just speaking from what is actually in the scriptures.

[kazr]

Inform yourselves first. Palestinians have been killing the Jewish for years, performing acts of terrorism and using their own people as shields. They indoctrinate their children to hate all Jewish and want to kill us all. The Israelis (not even all Jewish people) are fighting back and trying to avoid killing civilians, but the Palestinians make it hard, as they hide their bases under schools, hospitals and other sensitive areas. Israel has even allowed people from other countries to enter the Israeli territory to send food and medicine for the Palestinians (except that one ship which was full of weapons). I think most countries have done far worse. And the fight is only against Gaza, where the radical groups are. Not Cisjordania (or whatever the English spelling is), which is also a Palestinian settlement and Israel has never attacked them. Of course they've made mistakes, and of course there are some Jewish people who are filled with hate, but you can't generalize because of that.

And even if you disagree with their policies, your argument is against Israel, not the Jewish community.

If people were given my home my ancestors have lived on for centuries and given all the best land, the governing body, and billions of dollars each year in aid I would be pretty furious too. When you're pushed into a corner with nothing left the only real option is violence. As seen by the operation in Gaza in 2008 Israel isn't concerned about civilian casualties.

Neither side is 'right', both Israelis and Palestinians deserve to live a peaceful, happy life free from terror, and it's an incredibly messy situation but Israeli holds all the cards, they have all the power to really set the peace process in motion but literally nothing has progressed. At all. Israel is going to keep building settlements and annexing '"Palestinian land" and nobodies going to give a fuck. I hope a century from now we look back at the atrocities both sides have committed and shake our heads in disgust, but history is doomed to repeat itself because our pitiful lifespan isn't long enough to learn anything worthwhile as a collective.

[MeLoVeGhOsTs]

Neither side is 'right', both Israelis and Palestinians deserve to live a peaceful, happy life free from terror, and it's an incredibly messy situation but Israeli holds all the cards, they have all the power to really set the peace process in motion but literally nothing has progressed.

This.

[Lady Vulpix]

I agree that both sides deserve to live a peaceful, happy life free from terror. But from what I've heard, Israel has attempted peace talks and Gaza has not accepted anything but the destruction of the whole state of Israel and giving all of its territory to the Palestinians. That's not peace negotiation.

As for who the land belongs to, that's a tough issue, because Israel was there 2000 years earlier, then the Israelis left and then the Palestinians arrived, they settled there and built their lives and then the land was given back to the Jewish by the UN without their consent, so yes, both sides have reasons to claim the land (and I believe some of the UN members stirred up the conflict on purpose because it served their economical interests). I wish it could be shared peacefully, but, like you, I don't see that happening any time soon. Perhaps in a century or two. Who knows.


I didn't say that it was. I'm just speaking from what is actually in the scriptures.Where in our scriptures does it say anything against people who profess other religions?

[Blademaster]

I dunno, but five minutes of Googling got me this. (http://www.revisionisthistory.org/talmudtruth.html)


Rosh Hashanah 17a. Christians (minnim) and others who reject the Talmud will go to hell and be punished there for all generations.

Sanhedrin 90a. Those who read the New Testament ("uncanonical books") will have no portion in the world to come.

Shabbath 116a. Jews must destroy the books of the Christians, i.e. the New Testament.

[Lady Vulpix]

I don't know who wrote that, Blade, but that's not a real Jewish scripture. Hell doesn't even exist in the Jewish religion.

I've never heard of those books before either, if they are books. Those quotes look forged to me.

Edit: now that I've had the time to think about it, I don't think the person who wrote those things knows much about the Jewish religion at all. The very orthodox men who dedicate their whole lives to religion spend hours discussing the Talmud and arguing about what parts of it they agree or disagree with. It's not something you have to accept as if it were God's word (we have the Torah for that, and even there there's room for many different interpretations). By the way, the Talmud says that wise is a person who learns from everyone, and that includes Christians and everyone else.

Also, Christianism did not exist when the Torah was written, and as a consequence nor did the New Testament. Also, reading books and analyzing them carefully is always encouraged.

An orthodox man I met in Jerusalem (who strictly follows all the 600+ precepts) said that every culture has its own virtues and blessings. He wouldn't have said that if the Torah said otherwise.

Besides, the religious people who sell bread, flour or other products containing yeast symbolically sell all their products to a non-Jewish person for Pesach and buy them back the next week, so people from other religions are necessary.

And finally, the names of those alleged books are ridiculous.

[Blademaster]

Whatever. I'm not a Jew, but let's not bullshit: Judaism is an age-old religion, so it's got just as much bullshit in it as Christianity and Islam.

[MeLoVeGhOsTs]

Now that's what I like to hear, Blade.

[Lady Vulpix]

So it's bad because it's old? I fail to see the logic in Blade's argument, if there is any. Yes, there are some things I personally don't agree with nor follow, like the prohibition of touching a member of the other sex unless s/he's your spouse. But there's nothing against people who profess other religions.

Then again, I think we're going off-topic. Unless the topic is religion bashing in general and not just Koran burning. If anyone is interested in discussing Judaism, the Middle East conflicts, etc. we can make a separate topic for that purpose.

[Blademaster]

So it's bad because it's old? I fail to see the logic in Blade's argument, if there is any.

So you're saying EVERY SINGLE WORD of your beloved Talmud/Torah/whatever the book is is positive? There's not a SINGLE passage within it that is fucked up, preaches some idiotic extremism, orders the murder or mistreatment of certain people who aren't Jews, men, white-skinned, etc.?

Unless your response to this question is "No.," I'm going to start worrying.

[Lady Vulpix]

I'm not saying everything is strictly positive, but yes, I do say that the Torah doesn't promote idiotic extremism, nor order the murder or mistreatment of certain people who aren't Jews, men, white-skinned, etc.

[Telume]

Honestly, what good is religion aside from preventing people from going crazy? People need faith to live, let them believe what they want. It's that simple and, yes, they will have crazy views you don't agree with, unfortunately, it's human nature. We tend to, unfortunately, be a very violent creature. It's what we do to 'survive'.

[Lady Vulpix]

We do have some violent instincts. We have conciliatory and cooperative instincts too. If we're conscious enough, we can choose which ones to follow. If there is such a thing as human nature, then the ability to decide our own actions is also a part of it.

As for the benefits of religion, I believe they vary from one person to another. Everyone has reasons for what they believe in (some of those reasons are conscious, some others aren't). I don't think it matters much what anyone else's reasons are, as long as they don't try to force their views on other people, nor attack others for their beliefs.

[Asilynne]

We do have some violent instincts. We have conciliatory and cooperative instincts too. If we're conscious enough, we can choose which ones to follow. If there is such a thing as human nature, then the ability to decide our own actions is also a part of it.

As for the benefits of religion, I believe they vary from one person to another. Everyone has reasons for what they believe in (some of those reasons are conscious, some others aren't). I don't think it matters much what anyone else's reasons are, as long as they don't try to force their views on other people, nor attack others for their beliefs.

I agree with this wholeheartedly, couldnt have said it better myself.

[Bear]

Daoism for the win, y'all.

I don't think any religion can claim to be tolerant of other religions. It sounds nice to say, but it's hypocritical in execution. What religion doesn't profess itself to be the correct one? It wouldn't be a religion at all if it acknowledged other paths than its own.

So, in essence, no religion is tolerant of other religions. Some are more violent and aggressive than others, but they are all, by definition, intolerant.

[Blademaster]

Bear hit the nail on the head.

[Bear]

Bear hit the nail on the head.

http://www.100megsfree4.com/abcsofdbz/gallery/nail.jpg

[kurai]

Hello, friends.

When dealing with the world's major religions there is actually something of a divide in the external sensibility of religious acceptance depending on the cultural sphere that you are examining (that is, whether you are looking at the traditions of ethical monotheism or universalist eastern modes).

In the already established context (aside from the mention of daoism) the notion of religion is being defined through discursively christian means - religio being a latin word for piety incumbent on members of a given christian sect, through creedal allegiance and affirmation. Of course, examining the eastern traditions reveals situations in which this is either inappropriate or impossible (Shinto, for example). It is not the case that religion has to be exclusive within either a society or an individual! Characterizing this sort of divide as a lack of tolerance is sort of inaccurate, because the different religions cover entirely separate aspects of life.

As far as contrast between religions of the EM path exists, it is true that each believes their message to be the valid way (thus explaining their missionary objectives), but there are examples where the original doctrine, and intervening history doesn't really antagonize the other groups without a secondary, non-religious purpose in mind.

So, let's consider some history!

Examining Judaism, an obvious principle is one that assures all righteous people, regardless of ethnicity or religious identity, a place in God's kingdom (see Daniel 12:2). While this isn't an express outline for an afterlife, this sort of thinking is what allowed for smaller segments of jewish populations to exist within larger cultures that might otherwise be wary of them. Following from this, much of jewish law develops in order to retain the communal bond between this cultural group across geography and time while inside other cultures. Tolerance was basically a necessity for there to be a modern jewish people.

So in Judaism we come across a period of apocalyptic messianic sects - then Christianity. Roll out some Pauline doctrine from Galatians 3:28: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." Well, that's pretty straightforward, but note that historically, christian dominated areas have allowed enclaves of people from other faiths without forced conversion provided that they did not threaten the status quo through political or other means. Of course, salvation from this principle is extended to people of all sorts (that is, no one is excluded), they just have to be willing to convert. Kinda tolerant as far as race/culture goes.

As far as Islam goes, it is slightly different from the above but at the same time a combination of both approaches. Consider Surah 2: "There is no compulsion in religion; truly the right way has become clearly distinct from error; therefore, whoever disbelieves in the Shaitan and believes in Allah he indeed has laid hold on the firmest handle, which shall not break off, and Allah is Hearing, Knowing." The submission to Allah required is just not possible to be forced. Historically, when the Umayyid empire spread through regional conquest, they did not eliminate the pre-existing elites and culture, but instead offered conversion incentives (tax exemption, primarily), and provided a secondary administration post in the region (obviously to ensure continued imperial dominance). In this scenario, jews and christians were explicitly outlined as dhimmi - allowed to practice their own religion despite sharia being in effect, with legal protection higher than non-monotheists. So, that's pretty tolerant.

But back to what I was originally saying! Unless you consider anything non-monotheistic to not be a religion, probably half of the world's population follows a religion that allows for simultaneous participation along other paths, where different religious groups have existed alongside one another for centuries with only minor incidents directly relating to doctrine. some kind of cultural centrism going on in here

As far as the value of religion goes, there are a bunch of different reasons to follow a given religion:
- maybe you strongly desire a philosophical interpretation for the ultimate questions of existence
- there is a strong community bond and support structure based on long lines of history and connections between families and friends (this might be kind of difficult to envision for the secular individual, but as an outside observer I personally think it is the most important part)
- culturally prevalent rituals and values allow for it to be the path of least resistance
- spiritually fulfilling mystic practices are always there

[Bear]

hello friends

when dealing with the world's major religions there is actually something of a divide in the external sensibility of religious acceptance depending on the cultural sphere that you are examining (that is, whether you are looking at the traditions of ethical monotheism or universalist eastern modes).

in the already established context (aside from the mention of daoism) the notion of religion is being defined through discursively christian means - religio being a latin word for piety incumbent on members of a given christian sect, through creedal allegiance and affirmation. of course, examining the eastern traditions reveals situations in which this is either inappropriate or impossible (shinto, for example). it is not the case that religion has to be exclusive within either a society or an individual! characterizing this sort of divide as a lack of tolerance is sort of inaccurate, because the different religions cover entirely separate aspects of life.

as far as contrast between religions of the EM path exists, it is true that each believes their message to be the valid way (thus explaining their missionary objectives), but there are examples where the original doctrine, and intervening history doesn't really antagonize the other groups without a secondary, non-religious purpose in mind.

so let's consider some history!

examining judaism, an obvious principle is one that assures all righteous people, regardless of ethnicity or religious identity, a place in God's kingdom (see daniel 12:2). while this isn't an express outline for an afterlife, this sort of thinking is what allowed for smaller segments of jewish populations to exist within larger cultures that might otherwise be wary of them. following from this, much of jewish law develops in order to retain the communal bond between this cultural group across geography and time -while inside other cultures-. tolerance was basically a necessity for there to be a modern jewish people.

so in judaism we come across a period of apocalyptic messianic sects. then christianity. roll out some pauline doctrine from galatians 3:28: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." well. that's pretty straightforward, but note that historically, christian dominated areas have allowed enclaves of people from other faiths without forced conversion provided that they did not threaten the status quo through political or other means. of course, salvation from this principle is extended to people of all sorts (that is, no one is excluded), they just have to be willing to convert. kinda tolerant as far as race/culture goes.

as far as islam goes, it is slightly different from the above but at the same time a combination of both approaches. consider surah 2: "There is no compulsion in religion; truly the right way has become clearly distinct from error; therefore, whoever disbelieves in the Shaitan and believes in Allah he indeed has laid hold on the firmest handle, which shall not break off, and Allah is Hearing, Knowing." the submission to allah required is just not possible to be forced. historically, when the umayyid empire spread through regional conquest, they did not eliminate the pre-existing elites and culture, but instead offered conversion incentives (tax exemption primarily), and provided a secondary administration post in the region (obviously to ensure continued imperial dominance). in this scenario, jews and christians were explicitly outlined as dhimmi - allowed to practice their own religion despite sharia being in effect, with legal protection higher than non-monotheists. so that's pretty tolerant.

but back to what i was originally saying! unless you consider anything non-monotheistic to not be a religion, probably half of the world's population follows a religion that allows for simultaneous participation along other paths, where different religious groups have existed alongside one another for centuries with only minor incidents directly relating to doctrine. some kind of cultural centrism going on in here

as far as the value of religion goes, there are a bunch of different reasons to follow a given religion:
- maybe you strongly desire a philosophical interpretation for the ultimate questions of existence
- there is a strong community bond and support structure based on long lines of history and connections between families and friends (this might be kind of difficult to envision for the secular individual, but as an outside observer I personally think it is the most important part)
- culturally prevalent rituals and values allow for it to be the path of least resistance
- spiritually fulfilling mystic practices are always there

well cya

Well said, but I find one major flaw in your post:

You Don't Capitalize The First Letters Of Your Sentences!!!

DO IT!!!!

[Telume]

Well said, but I find one major flaw in your post:

You Don't Capitalize The First Letters Of Your Sentences!!!

DO IT!!!!

Forget Daoism, lets follow Bearism.

[Lady Vulpix]

Not all religions are missionary, you know. Not everyone has the need to attract others into their fold. And disagreement is not the same as intolerance. It's OK for people to have different beliefs and traditions. I don't think it's right to reject others just because they have different ideas of how the universe came to be, whether there is a God, many or none, whether a messiah has come/will come or not, etc.

[Blademaster]

Posting in agreement with Bear. Uncapitalized letters make my angry start flowing.

inb4alllowercasereply

[Link]

i think all religions are good, but then again, i'm Christian

[Telume]

i think all religions are good, but then again, i'm Christian

At least you're not Jehova's Witness, no matter what they will ALWAYS annoy me with their stupid knocking on doors and trying to talk about the "word of god"

and on that note:



HOLY SHIT I DON'T CARE IT'S 8:00 IN THE FUCKING MORNING ON A SUNDAY AND I WANT SOME FUCKING SLEEP! I WISH I HAD SOME HOUNDS LIKE MR. BURNS I COULD SIC ON YOU SO YOU WOULD THINK TWICE.

:mad2: :mad2: :mad2:

*ahem*

Yeah I needed to get that off my chest, I KNOW not all Jehova's Witnesses are bad (I know a couple that are actually good people and not fanatical about pushing their views on you) but DAMN.

[Shadow Wolf]

I KNOW not all Jehova's Witnesses are bad (I know a couple that are actually good people and not fanatical about pushing their views on you) but DAMN.

Well, it all depends on the person. I'm a Jehovah Witness's myself, but I have to admit that some people can be... how can I say it... a little hard to deal with.

You see, being of a certain religion does not automatically means that we are more reasonable than others. I might consider myself to be a little more flexible than others (BTW, if you have questions about us, let me know; I'll be glad to answer but of course, I'm not here to debate or to win religious topic but for reasoning and a nice conversations). As I heard in a movie: "Religion has flaws because men have flaws."


At least you're not Jehova's Witness, no matter what they will ALWAYS annoy me with their stupid knocking on doors and trying to talk about the "word of god"

I don't know whether to laugh because I imagine you feeling angry (I'm not being sarcastic though) and stuff or to feel bad about this. I'll make a single question, but of course, this question is not for raising angry comments or anything, just to think about it.

"If you've knew about a doctor who can cure death, and you're getting the treatment to be healed from death, wouldn't you try to tell others as soon as possible about this doctor?" Well, something like this is what we do (Apo. 21:1-4; Mat. 24:14)

About 8am... well, you can tell them to visit on another time to talk about it, since that is the time you use for sleeping. I'm pretty sure that they will understand that.

[Lady Vulpix]

That's complicated, Louis. If I had seen it happen, I probably would. But if I'd just heard the rumor I wouldn't say anything until I could see it for myself. There are too many people around saying that what they believe is right and what others believe is wrong. I don't see the point in that, and I wouldn't put up with someone who tells me I'll be going to hell or that my soul will die unless I convert to his/her religion. First of all, that makes no sense to me, and second, s/he has no proof to back up those words.

[Blademaster]

As I heard in a movie: "Religion has flaws because men have flaws."

What movie is this from? I need to know so I can throw it in preachy people's faces whenever they try their "God wrote the Bible." bullshit on me to win arguments.

[Heald]

What movie is this from? I need to know so I can throw it in preachy people's faces whenever they try their "God wrote the Bible." bullshit on me to win arguments.
As someone who has spent 2 years studying Theology, I am often incredibly bemused by people who claim religious scriptures such as the Bible are in no way tainted or tampered with by man, either through lack of recollection of events, misinterpretation, purposefully forging accounts for some other goal or otherwise misrepresenting how events occurred, even though much of the Bible remained largely uncodified through oral tradition and in differing forms for great lengths of time, sometimes not even written down until hundreds of years after the events described actually happened. To say that the original accounts were passed down through the years entirely unmolested, and that the original source is completely untainted in the first place, is simply baffling. Furthermore, there is no Canonical claim that the Bible was in anyway authored by God, and anyone who says otherwise you can safely call an ignorant twit. I hold little stock in the accuracy of the Bible but I probably know far more about it than 99% of Christians out there.

Don't get me wrong, it's a great book, but attempting to follow it literally, word-for-word, is silly, just like thinking books like Harry Potter or Twilight encourage children to practice the dark arts and sorcery is silly.

[Asilynne]

Heald is absolutely correct. Even if it had been said that God delegated a human to write His words into the Bible, time, translations, and the fact that humans are imperfect would inevitably have seeped imperfections into it and caused some passages to have been totally removed and some extra ones added that were not part of the original. As the Bible is translated into different languages some things may change as well, since translating involves a great deal of interpreting meanings of phrases and words.

The Bible we know today is a collection of ancient documents that may be incomplete themselves. Through time different groups of people removed or added books to the Bible, and since a lot of the originals no longer exist or were destroyed there is no way for us to know today the whole story. But the belief in a single higher power predates the christian Bible.

Yes, if you follow any holy script to the letter and completely literally you are making a mistake because time and people change everything. But being Christian, being Jewish, being Islamic, doesnt mean you are right or wrong. Thats the problem with organised religion, the idea that if you are right someone else has to be wrong, and to make those others agree with you no matter what.
These three when it comes down to the bare essence are largely the same despite the fact there are a few differences in the details. All three tell of a surpeme being, whether you name Him God or Allah, all three say we were all created by Him, and speak of a reward for living a good life. Aside from all the flawed fanatical interpretations, all speak of faith and love, and I believe that all three of these religions have the same God, they are just different interpretations of the same thing.
Its like with accents, British, American and Australian accents have the same roots, but with time and distance they changed and grew seperately into what they are today. This happens with cultures, families, colonies, and languages, so why should religions be any different?

[Lady Vulpix]

I agree, but the thing is, people don't usually tell you that you're going to Hell for having a different accent, while many do tell you that you'll be condemned for having a different religion. I don't know if that's written in any official scriptures or not, but I hear it a lot. Just like I also hear the fanatical atheistic speech about religion as a whole being retarded and all religious people being stupid and ignorant. I'm tired of fanatism in all its forms.

[Link]

I remember the religion topics from this site back then when BBP and hitmonlee were here. All I have to say is that I trust in Jesus and his resurrection, and people being against the claims of the bible have been around since the Biblical times, and also, there is nothing more logical to Christians than the fall of mankind, each starting with their own views hopefully, and working from there. The sad part is that atheists like Dawkins and Hitchens, and harris are correct; Religion can lead to some bad stuff if you let it get that way.

[classy_cat18]

As a Christian, I believe in God. As a rational college graduate, I oppose my church's view on fundamentalism, a.k.a. taking the Bible literally. As people have noted, humans wrote the Bible so they have changed or removed scriptures or entire books. Slaveowners used to twist the Bible's words to use against their slaves. I think I remember hearing somewhere that priests removed the Song of Solomon at one point, or kept people from reading it until they hit a certain age. Although I can see why from the content. *blushes*

Also, the version that most of the members read, the King James version, was written by someone that probably wasn't even Christian. Interpret that however you want.

Christians are taught to love everyone equally. But they're also taught that their religion is the only true one, so that tends to screw with their views and behavior. To be honest, the drive behind some hate crimes being religion scares me.

[MeLoVeGhOsTs]

Well I'm glad that you guys are critical, and try to see it both ways. I'd love more of those christians around.

Swap with some of the rednecks.

[Blademaster]

I'm tired of fanatism in all its forms.

I think you mean fanaticism.

[Shadow Wolf]

*Takes a deep breath and relaxes*

Gabi: I believe this is where faith comes in (Heb. 11:1). I've noticed that, even though I can provide a thousand verses of the Bible to prove my point, if someone doesn't believe in the Bible, I cannot force him/her to believe in it. If someone doesn't want to change its point of view, then we have to respect free will. I can show someone the nine resurrections that happened in the Bible and prove to you with the Bible that this is going to happen at a greater scale in the future (John 5:28,29; Apo. 21-1-4), but it's up to the person to believe that the Bible is inspired by God (2 Pet. 1:21). I feel the need and the responsibility to show you this, but I cannot force you to believe it. Apart from everything, God teaches us to love, and inside love lies respect. And well, the center of Christianity should be the "Word of God", AKA The Bible.

If we add the fact that many religions teach established principles (some of them established by man and not the Bible, but I won't speak about that, since it would be skating on thin ice) and make people believe them without questioning (if you question something, you commit a sin), well, people will present resistance when hearing points of view from other religions because they were trained to do so. We are not encouraged to look for the truth ourselves but to believe what "leaders" preach (BTW, ask yourself: How can a God of Love torment people eternally in a burning hell and take kids away from parents because he "needed" and angel in the heavens? That's cruel! (Job 34:10)).

If we believe all of this, then the correct choice would be to look for the truth ourselves and establish the common factor in the religions as the key to finding the truth (in this case, The Bible itself). But we have to be able to listen and be reasonable, because we won't get anywhere if we stick with what someone else told us because he or she has authority as a preacher.

Blade: I am not motivating you to pick up a fight with Christians OK (love and peace first :yes:). I believe the movie is Angels and Demons, by Tom Hanks.

Heald: You know? I laughed when you talked about literal meanings of the Bible (oh wait, in the future a big seven-headed beast will rise and rule all the world.) I have to agree with you also in the translation of the Bible. We don't know who changed words, or if a translation is better than the other (I can believe that the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures is by far one of the most accurate ones and that all the Bibles deliver the same message, but again, that is what I believe.). We have to take the concept of faith again and believe that God will punish whoever translated the Bible to benefit his ideals and his religion (copyrights) (Apo. 22:18,19). But of course, Jehovah is Love too, so he understands that we are imperfect and we tend to make mistakes, even in Translations (James 3:2).

________

Anyway, there are a lot of religions (Christianity, Buddhism, Taoism, Jewish, Atheism, and many, many others), and "anyone who is serious about his religion should think that it is the right one. Otherwise, why would he or she be involved in it? Christians are admonished: "Make sure of all things; hold fast to what is fine." (1 Thessalonians 5:21) A person should make sure that his beliefs can be supported by the Scriptures, for there is only one true faith. Ephesians 4:5 confirms this, mentioning "one Lord, one faith, one baptism." Jesus did not agree with the modern, relaxed view that there are many roads, many religions, all leading to salvation. Instead, he said: "Narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are the ones finding it." Jehovah's Witnesses believe that they have found it. Otherwise, they would look for another religion.—Matthew 7:14." (credits to Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society).

[Blademaster]

Louis, your argument is as flawed as every other argument I've read. Your stance is that the Bible must be true because it's in the Bible, which is the "Word of God."

That isn't how logic WORKS. That's how CIRCULAR logic works. There's a difference between believing in a god and believing in a book that was assembled from earlier pagan beliefs and has been HISTORICALLY PROVEN to be full of falsities right down to its most basic teachings. A little bit of research will tell you that not only could the Bible not even get Jesus's BIRTHDAY right (Jesus's birthday was "decided" to be December 25th three centuries after his DEATH.), but it'll also tell you that Jesus himself was more than a bit of a prick, who preached that it was OK to treat your wife subserviently and that slavery was fine in God's eyes.

I'm all for preaching love and peace. It's a great philosophy. But there should be a solid and honest foundation underlying those teachings. The Bible, in all of its interpretations, simply does not have that. There's some good messages in it, but it is mostly so full of inaccuracies and hypocrisies that any sensible human in this day and age should look at it for nothing more than what it is: Poorly-written 2,000 year-old fanfiction.

[Heald]

There's some good messages in it, but it is mostly so full of inaccuracies and hypocrisies that any sensible human in this day and age should look at it for nothing more than what it is: Poorly-written 2,000 year-old fanfiction.
Yeah, no. Say what you want about the spirituality or the supernatural that occurs in the Bible, but historically speaking it is one of the more historically accurate documents of the era, and much of what occurs in the Bible is historically verifiable. I would also object to calling it poorly written; there is a reason why thousands of scholars across the globe dedicate their lives to this day studying Biblical scripture. Simply dismissing it as 'Poorly-written 2,000 year-old fanfiction' just because you don't happen to follow the faith shows how astoundingly ignorant you are of its content and background, possibly even more so than the fundies who take it literally as God's word.

Also, despite your brilliant point, the Bible says nothing of Christ being born on December 25th.

[crown34]

Religion is pretty much massive cults filled with all types of people. Although I really shouldn't talk because I'm a Buddhist.



Swap with some of the rednecks.

Please all rednecks are intolerant and ignorant as hell.

[Blademaster]

Yeah, no. Say what you want about the spirituality or the supernatural that occurs in the Bible, but historically speaking it is one of the more historically accurate documents of the era, and much of what occurs in the Bible is historically verifiable. I would also object to calling it poorly written; there is a reason why thousands of scholars across the globe dedicate their lives to this day studying Biblical scripture. Simply dismissing it as 'Poorly-written 2,000 year-old fanfiction' just because you don't happen to follow the faith shows how astoundingly ignorant you are of its content and background, possibly even more so than the fundies who take it literally as God's word.

I never said it was historically inaccurate. I said it was poorly-written. Mostly because of how many of its scriptures contradict one another and because of how many of Christianity's rules and regulations today are completely absent from it or were not included in it until years or centuries after the events it supposedly documented occurred.


Also, despite your brilliant point, the Bible says nothing of Christ being born on December 25th.

Perhaps... So then, why do we celebrate Christmas on that date and why do so many people celebrate it and label it as the birth of Christ?

You'll have to forgive my ignorance of much of what that book holds; I went to a Catholic grade school. Where the Bible was never discussed or even shown to us.

[Heald]

I never said it was historically inaccurate. I said it was poorly-written. Mostly because of how many of its scriptures contradict one another and because of how many of Christianity's rules and regulations today are completely absent from it or were not included in it until years or centuries after the events it supposedly documented occurred.
I wouldn't call that poorly written. You also have to take into account that the Bible is a collection of books, accounts and scriptures written by dozens of authors, and so it is bound to have several disparities, especially between books that were written centuries or even a millennium apart. As you hint to in your reference to your poor education of the Bible at school, you clearly have a complete lack of knowledge of the theological and historical significance of the structure and style of the Bible. I can understand why though; Catholicism teaches less from the Bible and from its own traditions and doctrines (much of Catholic tradition has little to no grounding in any Biblical scripture). How much did you learn about purgatory and penance, Catholic doctrines with absolutely no grounding in the Bible? And how much did you learn about important theological concepts within the Bible such as eschatology, Christology or Logos?

Perhaps... So then, why do we celebrate Christmas on that date and why do so many people celebrate it and label it as the birth of Christ?
It is believed the date of Christmas was decided at the time the Church was still trying to integrate Romans and their beliefs into them. They replaced existing festivals and celebrations with Christian ones and it is thought the Romans celebrated the Winter solstice on December 25th and they just changed it to Jesus' birthday. It worked so well that not only do all Christians recognise and celebrate Christmas, so do members of other religions or those of no fixed religion.

[Jeff]

Christmas was created by the Catholic Church in Europe as the Christian version of Saturnalia, the Roman holiday where people brought branches of trees into their houses in honor of the god Saturn.

I don't think it was ever intended as being the anniversary of Jesus's birth, but just a way of honoring it and making it easier to convert the Romans.

[Blademaster]

How much did you learn about purgatory and penance,

We learned that Penance (capitalized) was something done after Confession (also capitalized) in order to make God forgive us for our confessed sins.

Also, we weren't taught about Purgatory. We were taught that the good went to Heaven and the bad were sent to Hell. No second chances or rules being bent: The choice was as black and white as could be.


And how much did you learn about important theological concepts within the Bible such as eschatology,

Never heard of it.


Christology

Never heard of it.


or Logos?

Never heard of it.

Got any more?

No, seriously. PLEASE give me more. I'd love to learn more things I was lied to about or purposely not informed of simply because they weren't as important as "Jesus loves you but He'll throw you into the pits of fire and damnation if you don't do what He says.".

I know that Christmas was originally a pagan festival where the solstice was recognized and trees were brought inside (like Christmas trees). The question was rhetorical. There are millions and millions of Christians in the world, and I'm willing to bet that a large chunk of them don't know Christmas as anything more than the Nativity Scene. Hell, I didn't even know it until a few years ago.

[Heald]

No, seriously. PLEASE give me more. I'd love to learn more things I was lied to about or purposely not informed of simply because they weren't as important as "Jesus loves you but He'll throw you into the pits of fire and damnation if you don't do what He says."
This was, and still is many parts of the world, Catholic policy: don't teach people how to read and study the Bible, just preach what you think the messages are and tell them that deviating from or questioning this is heresy. The Bible was originally only approved to be written in Latin so only the elite and learned could read it, and so only the bishops and priests could vouch for what was in it, and the unwashed, uneducated masses had to rely on the Church for salvation. In the first half of the last millennium, the penalty for translating the Bible into a more common language was death. The Catholic Church thought a peasant did not need to worry themselves with the important recurring themes within the Bible or important concepts such as how the Gospels and Acts relate to each other, as long as they preached what they thought the Bible said to the peasants. Most churches today, sadly, basically continue this tradition, although not so blatantly. The best place you'll get any kind of deep understanding of the Bible is in a theology class, not a church or a religious institution. Churches are basically nurseries for believers: do finger-paintings and hang them on the wall. Nobody asks why, they just do it. When you're in your final year of school and you're told to do a finger-painting so it can be hanged on the wall, you're more likely to say 'Why?' or 'That's stupid'. However, some people are happy to just sit there and do finger-paintings all their life as long as they're doing what they're told. Some people just find happiness that way.

[Shadow Wolf]

PLEASE give me more. I'd love to learn more things I was lied to about or purposely not informed of simply because they weren't as important as "Jesus loves you but He'll throw you into the pits of fire and damnation if you don't do what He says.".

Take Biblical lessons with Jehovah's Witnesses about what does the Bible truly teaches (or just ask me via PM, I'll try to help as much as I can)

I believe that the main problem here is that most of the doctrines of Christianity are pagan and were created by men (Trinity, Heaven and Hell, Purgatory, Mary as the mother of God, Christmas, and many others), but since they were considered at that time "messengers of God", you didn't have the authority to question what they said (Sir Isaac Newton discovered that God wasn't a Trinity and he was Catholic, but you could be completely sure that if he would dare open his mouth, he would get killed; plus consider the fact that the only people at that time who had access to the Bible were the high ranking priests and leaders of the Catholic church; now the Bible is accessible to at least 90% of the people, but since most people do not understand everything of the Bible, then they keep believing their church leaders). If we keep believing that the doctrines established in the churches are truth and we do not confirm it in the Bible, then we will believe that the Bible contradicts itself.

[classy_cat18]

I believe that the main problem here is that most of the doctrines of Christianity are pagan and were created by men (Trinity, Heaven and Hell, Purgatory, Mary as the mother of God, Christmas, and many others)

Yeah, about Purgatory. Baptists and other denominations of Christianity don't believe it. There's Heaven, Hell, and that's it.

Another thing that bothers me is how some religions treat some popular things. I have to hear the whole "Halloween is a Satanist holiday" crap every October, and we're encouraged to dress up as Christian-related stuff for our "Fall Festival". We can dress up as more...earthly things. Just no angels, devils, witches, etc. Where's the fun in that? Shoot, I'll just stay home and be a Shinigami! Not to mention the reminders of the evil in Harry Potter and Pokemon. It's annoying for them to take it so seriously. Just entertainment, people!

[Lady Vulpix]

Louis: sorry for the late reply, I've been busy. You've already noticed that you can't use your Bible to prove itself to someone who doesn't believe in it. Well done.

Unlike Jehova Witnesses and, as far as I know, Catholics, Jewish are taught to think, analyze and discuss (that is probably why you'll always find Jewish people arguing with each other). Even the Torah (the 5 books that are said to be mostly God's word and which have very interesting numerical properties in its Hebrew version but that's beside the point), has countless different interpretations and people keep arguing about what exactly was meant and taking different actions in consequence.

So, "obey and don't think because God said so" is not an argument that will work with me in any discussion. Of course, you're free to do so if that's what feels right to you, as long as you don't hurt anyone because of it, which I trust you won't.

Blade: I have much to say about your posts, but alas, I don't have the time right now. I will, however, thank you for showing me the correct English term for 'fanaticism'. I got mixed up with the Spanish word 'fanatismo'. Learning a foreign language is a life-long task.

[Telume]

Louis: sorry for the late reply, I've been busy. You've already noticed that you can't use your Bible to prove itself to someone who doesn't believe in it. Well done.

Unlike Jehova Witnesses and, as far as I know, Catholics, Jewish are taught to think, analyze and discuss (that is probably why you'll always find Jewish people arguing with each other). Even the Torah (the 5 books that are said to be mostly God's word and which have very interesting numerical properties in its Hebrew version but that's beside the point), has countless different interpretations and people keep arguing about what exactly was meant and taking different actions in consequence.

So, "obey and don't think because God said so" is not an argument that will work with me in any discussion. Of course, you're free to do so if that's what feels right to you, as long as you don't hurt anyone because of it, which I trust you won't.

Blade: I have much to say about your posts, but alas, I don't have the time right now. I will, however, thank you for showing me the correct English term for 'fanaticism'. I got mixed up with the Spanish word 'fanatismo'. Learning a foreign language is a life-long task.

^ This.

[Shadow Wolf]

Louis: sorry for the late reply, I've been busy. You've already noticed that you can't use your Bible to prove itself to someone who doesn't believe in it. Well done.

Thanks Gabi!



Unlike Jehova Witnesses and, as far as I know, Catholics, Jewish are taught to think, analyze and discuss (that is probably why you'll always find Jewish people arguing with each other).

So, does that mean that I (being a Jehovah's witness) have to learn to think, analyze and discuss. I thought I was doing this here. :sweat2:


Even the Torah (the 5 books that are said to be mostly God's word and which have very interesting numerical properties in its Hebrew version but that's beside the point), has countless different interpretations and people keep arguing about what exactly was meant and taking different actions in consequence.

This is something that happens in Christianity too. Since there are many different versions of the Bible, some people think that they convey different messages (considering that it has been traduced from its original script (Hebrew-Aramaic-Greek) to different languages).



So, "obey and don't think because God said so" is not an argument that will work with me in any discussion. Of course, you're free to do so if that's what feels right to you, as long as you don't hurt anyone because of it, which I trust you won't.

I don't think I will ever go with that, since God himself doesn't force you to obey Him (hence free will), but if I did this during this discussion, I apologize.

To everyone posting here: Thanks! Is not everyday that we get to talk about this kind of stuff (probably because religion is controversial and threads like this one can lead to flaming, arguing and stuff like that). This has motivated me to keep learning. Plus I haven't seen that anyone wants to push their ideals to another (again, if you felt that I tried to do this, I apologize). This is what helps us grow. Thanks!

[Lady Vulpix]

To everyone posting here: Thanks! Is not everyday that we get to talk about this kind of stuff (probably because religion is controversial and threads like this one can lead to flaming, arguing and stuff like that). This has motivated me to keep learning. Plus I haven't seen that anyone wants to push their ideals to another (again, if you felt that I tried to do this, I apologize). This is what helps us grow. Thanks!
Seconded.

Sorry if I misunderstood your message earlier, and if my post seemed to imply that you don't think or something like that. I was too nervous and in a hurry for personal reasons, so my words didn't come out as I wished they would. It did seem to me for a moment that you were preaching against analyzing the Bible with a critical attitude, but now I see that it was just a misunderstanding, probably also due to the state I was in.

[Magmar]

Learning a foreign language is a life-long task.

Your English is better than many life-long speakers'. :)

I can speak not to Catholics per se but to Pentecostal versions of Christianity, specifically the Assembly of God. When you start getting into the stricter versions of Christianity, you start to find more of a cult mentality than just a faith. Unlike Catholicism which offers rules on social norms merely as a suggestion as well as the opportunity to immediately atone for your sins, the fierce faiths involve condemning others for partaking in deadly sins such as reading Harry Potter.

There are some people that are so strict, they are not allowed to watch TV, go online, socialize with "worldly" folks, read what they want, etc. In short, they seek to squash any open and inquiring minds in the face of blind faith and McCarthy-like accusations and condemnations. The ignorant members of these churches use terms like Pagan to mean that you are not in line directly with their small, twisted version of Christianity, and there is no wiggle room for finding your own route to Heaven. You are either all-in with their narrow-minded faith, or you are going to Hell with all the Catholics, Jehovah's Witnesses, Jews and other Protestants. You are encouraged to go "save" your friends and family members from going to Hell by forcing them to either be in line with your faith, or excommunicating them from your life.

You are taught to only date members of your own specific sect of Christianity, to never listen to music other than gospel/classical, and to openly condemn those who participate in other churches/religions or atheists/agnostics. You are taught that these people all follow in the ways of Satan, who runs the world. You are taught that there is an imminent "Rapture" where Jesus comes down from the sky, takes all the members of your sect into Heaven, then Jesus unleashes seven years of Great Tribulation before finally killing off everyone else who hasn't converted. Then you get a new Earth all to yourselves. So you have this sense of urgency to keep on trying to save as many people and get them into your church before this Rapture happens.

You carry a disgusting sense of guilt every time you let "oh my God" slip from your lips, you believe that those who smoke cigarettes worship the devil, and that Satan himself plays a guitar which is the devil's instrument.

You are taught that it is okay to beat your children if you catch them going online at school or otherwise associating with people outside your church. Beating them mercilessly with paddles or belts is encouraged, and in their schools, parents must sign a waiver that allows the principals and pastors to do this if you are caught engaging in sin. This sin could be arguing, fighting, or merely making a mistake in dress code and forgetting to, say, wear a belt to school.

There are strict rules for hairstyles, and for clothes you can wear (anything with a logo on it is evil, but you can get Christian-themed t-shirts and that is okay).

Children who grow up in these households are subject to one of the most gruesome and disgusting types of child abuse--it is called spiritual abuse, which is abusing your child physically and terrifying them mentally, combined with encouraging antisocial behavior, until the child may become too frightened to function in normal society. All of your actions are strictly monitored and judged. Women are not encouraged to be in leadership positions at all in these households.

I was a victim of spiritual abuse and have resources if you think you were as well. Send me a PM if you think you need to speak to someone about either current conditions in your household where children may be abused, or if you are recovering from spiritual abuse and were not aware of these amazing resources.

Edit: There are universities like this in the United States that don't even allow heterosexual dating relationships to happen. One school, Pensacola Christian College, forces all students to live in the dorms unless they live in the immediately surrounding area--but you cannot get an apartment once you are 21, for you are not allowed to touch alcohol. You cannot go to movies, even on summer vacations. You must be on campus and in bed with lights out before 11 p.m. You cannot be caught listening to music or watching movies, or playing video games in your room. You cannot work on your papers past lights-out. The school gives an academic workload that basically forces you to always be busy during common hours. You can be punished with social probation if you are caught even touching a member of the opposite sex to hug them. If you are found out to be a homosexual, you get a lifelong ban from the campus and are stripped of your degree. All dorms lack any sort of security on individual rooms; there are no locks, so RAs can walk in anytime and make sure you are in bed sleeping by 11 p.m. or you face a write-up.

My mom tried to force my sister to go to school there.

[Blademaster]

What a wonderful world.

[alanmoore]

i think all religions are good, but then again, i'm Christian

God is one!! God has not created any religion, all are created by peoples....

[Lady Vulpix]

Thanks, Magmar.

And alanmoore... What was that all about? Would it be possible for you to make a post that makes sense and has some actual content that contributes to the discussion?

[Blademaster]

Most likely not since he is quite clearly a DBZ spambot.