[Closed] Anyone for another religion thread?

i agree its odd how many are able to just ignore the book and still believe it from what it says on creation to gay people to contraception to abortion to even what Jesus said about the OT. At least Mogg was true to what the Bible actually says. Revelation is very clear on what happens to "modernising" churches that look focus on the true word of god

In essence we have folk believing a myth and not even following the myth and we have to respect their right to do this whilst making sure we also have to have it rammed down our throat how important it is to everyone and that we need to respect the right to do this - all whilst they say I will spend an eternity in hell for not doing as they say and then lecturing me on tolerance

No i wont tolerate this and I dont know why others do

Yours
the militant

At least Mogg was true to what the Bible actually says.

Mogg also selectively follows the Bible.

Do you think Christ would vote Tory? He was quite specific on rich people and the kingdom of heaven.

I struggle to resolve how 'liberal' religious people can ignore some of the literal bits of these religious 'word of god/gods prophets' texts, saying that they don't apply nowadays.

Mostly because we're not mental.

Take the Bible as an example.... Is it the literal, unfiltered Word of God? No, of course it isn't. If such a thing existed it'd be carved forty feet high in eternal flaming letters on a mountain somewhere.

It's a translation of a translation of a translation of an interpretation of someone elses interpretaion of a highly edited collection of handed down tales which have been told and retold and altered and skewed for a thousand different purposes over a millenia.

At best, it's a loose set of guidelines contained in a series of simple parables designed to make moral points to the uneducated masses of the middle ages.

Doesn't mean that there aren't good stories and valuable lessons contained therein.

It's like looking at a Haynes Workshop manual for an Austin 7.
Almost all of the information in it will be utterly obsolete, but, at it's core, it still contains enough guidance that you could figure out the principles of how an internal combustion engine is supposed to work.

The book isn't the religion any more than the Church is.
Anybody who believes it is, in my opinion, is entirely missing the point regardless of whether they believe or not.

This thread with a bunch of athiests / agnostics quoting scripture at each other is a perfect illustration of this.

Obviously, my personal opinion only. I'm not, like, the Pope or anything.

Where's that then? IIRC, there's one reference in an epistle and it's specifically about same-sex prostitution.

Leviticus 18:22) (Leviticus 20:13)
Also Romans, Timothy and some others I dont recall

L 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

The Biblical view of homosexuality is not really debatable - well it is but only by ignoring scriptures

EDIT: re wealth The bible says harder not impossible to get into heaven 😉

FWIW i do agree Christ clearly rails against the inequities of capitalism and rich folk in general and those who make money form money specifically whilst saying give it all away to the poor
Yes he is also selective

Do you think Christ would vote Tory? He was quite specific on rich people and the kingdom of heaven.

I, an atheist Green Party member, have far more in common with my friend Martin, a Quaker Green Party member, than he does with Jacob Rees-Mogg, a 'Christian' Tory Party member.

It's a translation of a translation of a translation of an interpretation of someone elses interpretaion

yes, it is all a bit 'Life Of Brian', or even a lot.

Where's that then? IIRC, there's one reference in an epistle and it's specifically about same-sex prostitution.

Just google it multiple references in multiple books
Leviticus 18:22) (Leviticus 20:13)
Also Romans, Timothy and some others I dont recall

L 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

The Biblical view of homosexuality is not really debatable - well it is but only by ignoring scriptures

Leviticus also has rules on not rounding beards or cutting the hair on your temples, no tattoos and no eating shellfish. God hates shrimp.

Jesus said nothing about Teh Gays. WWJD?

My friend with a theology doctorate from Oxford is cool with teh gays, so I reckon Jesus would be too.

In Leviticus it says that if a man lays with another man, he should be stoned.

I think that means that homosexuality is OK, as long as you are smoking weed...

One thing I find interesting in this whole debate is religious and christian have been used as synonyms. Plenty of other religions out there. Some with the same roots and some from totally different directions. I had a very interesting discussion with some local Sikhs. Its a relatively recent religion and appears to be very tolerant of others as in one of their basic tenets is that all are equal before god. No discrimination is allowed. Being a "good person" is essential to them but trying to convert others is not allowed. Interesting bunch and I particularly like that they do not try to make others adhere to their creed.

I, an atheist Green Party member, have far more in common with my friend Martin, a Quaker Green Party member, than he does with Jacob Rees-Mogg, a 'Christian' Tory Party member.

A very good point.

I was using the words in their literal sense but I accept once again that it was poor communication from me and that the effect taken was not what what I intended and for that I both accept the blame and apologise.

Thanks TJ - good post.

Jesus said nothing about Teh Gays

Loving your interpretation of that bit of Leviticus, Turner Guy.

@Mrwopsit. You are still trying to over complicate the simplicity of faith.

You cannot see the evidence because you choose not to, the faith comes first then your mind will be open.
It doesn't matter how intelligent you are or how well you can translate ancient text, without the faith you will never see the clear evidence.

The words themselves have no meaning, think of them like a magic spell if you like... with the key of faith in your heart the scriptures become a passageway to a new place.

I don't see why we can't just tear up all these books and just replace the lot with:

"Be excellent to each other."

("And party on, dude!" optional).

without the faith you will never see the clear evidence.

Evidence does not require faith (and faith does not require evidence).
If you're asserting that it does then you're fundamentally misunderstanding the meaning of at least one of those words.

the faith comes first then your mind will be open.

Said someone on Dagobah in a galaxy far, far away...

Apologies. Not mocking (too much) just tickled me as it was very [i]"That is why you fail..."[/i]

Edit : ...and what AdamW wrote, too. Being nice is A Good Thing. When was the last time you were nice to someone outside of your usual circle.

Faith is what gets people past the lack of or awkward evidence (yep the dinosaurs)

You cannot see the evidence because you choose not to

Just like the religious people on geology trips. You start by showing them molluscs up thousand meter peaks and that was the biblical flood apparently. Then you point out that the flood lasted longer than Noah lived but that can't be possible. You can even show them species evolving from the bottom of a cliff of sediments to the top, but God decided to do that for some reason apparently.

And then those who have faith accuse the geologist of not being able to see the evidence.

Show me!

Evidence of faith most certainly requires faith, you will never see any evidence of faith unless you have faith kapishe? I think we are saying the same thing tbh

These discussions are always way more complicated than they need to be. Without faith you cannot interpret the scriptures so no point trying
With faith it all makes sense
Arguing about who said/wrote what and why is silly because the words are not important, it's the combination of words and faith that make the magic happen

Just like [s]the[/s] [i]a small proportion of[/i] religious people on geology trips.

Fixed that for you. Very few religious people are young Earth creationists.

....awkward evidence (yep the dinosaurs)

Just like the religious people on geology trips. You start by showing them molluscs... blah blah.

Isn't this sort of crap exactly what the article in the OP was actually about.

Fixed that for you. [b]Very few religious people are young Earth creationists.[/b]

The problem is , unlike American Beauty, they dont think its fiction.

Most of them do think it's allegorical though. This has been explained over and over again, by the people themselves. You don't seem to be listening though.

The religious never get called militant [ or intolerant] despite them all believing the only way to save my soul and avoid an eternity in hell is to follow the word of the book that even they dont believe all of

I know lots of religious people, most of whom know I'm an atheist, and none of them have EVER offered to save my soul, not once. A couple of people I met on the street have, but that's it.

You are cherry picking.

Isn't this sort of crap exactly what the article in the OP was actually about.

The TL;DR was that he compartmentalised it, filed it in a box marked "other" where regular physical laws didn't apply. The same thing that he did with subatomic physics. Hard to argue with that if I'm honest.

Non-overlapping magisteria, as Stephen Jay Gould called it

A YouGov poll, commissioned by Newman University in Birmingham, has found that 72% of atheists polled believe that someone who is religious would not accept evolutionary science.

That exact same incorrect assumption, repeated (as always) as quoted above in my last post. .

Now the eye of the needle bit. There are more signs of ostentatious wealth and greed in the church car park on Sunday morning than anywhere else in town.

Or 'a different epistemic category' as SaxonRider put it.

In my view there's nothing to exclude the existence of a god. There's plenty to doubt in the Bible, but that doesn't preclude there being a god. But in Christianity you are allowed to interpret the Bible. You may not think that is sensible, but Christians do. You can interpret it as allegory or literal fact if you want.

There are more signs of ostentatious wealth and greed in the church car park on Sunday morning than anywhere else in town.

I live in a church, there's no signs of ostentatious wealth on my drive.
(To be fair, it's not an "actual" church anymore, but the big colourful windows are very nice)

There are more signs of ostentatious wealth and greed in the church car park on Sunday morning than anywhere else in town.

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11979235/Muslims-and-Christians-less-generous-than-atheists-study-finds.html ]another study may well have the answer[/url] for that, start 'em young

Evidence of faith most certainly requires faith, you will never see any evidence of faith unless you have faith kapishe? I think we are saying the same thing tbh

These discussions are always way more complicated than they need to be. Without faith you cannot interpret the scriptures so no point trying
With faith it all makes sense
Arguing about who said/wrote what and why is silly because the words are not important, it's the combination of words and faith that make the magic happen

Well someone on this thread has been on the weed...

This is the most disturbing bit :

I think we are saying the same thing tbh

And you wonder why aetheists get angry...

So if religious people now believe:

The earth is at least 4.5 billion years old

Evolution from bacteria is where man originated

Rich people can go to heaven

Homosexualtity is fine

Abortion is fine

The pill is fine

Wars are fine and good even if religious leaders say so

Blessing tanks is fine

You can pick and choose your message from the Bible

The Bible isn't God's word except when it is

What's left?

What's left?

At least they can always rely on athiests thinking they know more about religion than they do ?

So if [b]SOME[/b] religious people now believe:

So if religious people now believe:

The earth is at least 4.5 billion years old

Evolution from bacteria is where man originated

Rich people can go to heaven

Homosexualtity is fine

Abortion is fine

The pill is fine

Wars are fine and good even if religious leaders say so

Blessing tanks is fine

You can pick and choose your message from the Bible

The Bible isn't God's word except when it is

What's left?

You're assuming that all religious people have the same beliefs, again.

You're assuming that all religious people have the same beliefs, again.

Well it'd be helpful if those religious folks would actually define what they do believe and then we'd all have space for a rational discussion. Strangely though they do seem to be rather reluctant to do so. I can't for the life of me think why that would be the case …

Well it'd be helpful if those religious folks would actually define what they do believe and then we'd all have space for a rational discussion. Strangely though they do seem to be rather reluctant to do so. I can't for the life of me think why that would be the case …

Each religion sets out their beliefs pretty clearly. Try looking on their website?

What's left?

That God created the universe
That God loves you
That God sent his son to die for your sins
That God want you to be nice to each other

Etc etc. Maybe read the bible again and try and figure some more stuff out? Tell us what you think it means.

Each religion sets out their beliefs pretty clearly. Try looking on their website?

At least they can always rely on athiests thinking they know more about religion than they do ?

we know enough to dismiss its importance. If someone could show us some concrete evidence of something interesting, then maybe we would investigate.

Now the eye of the needle bit. There are more signs of ostentatious wealth and greed in the church car park on Sunday morning than anywhere else in town.

Hadn't realized Honda Jazzes were so aspirational.

we know enough to dismiss its importance.

So you are saying religion isn't important ?

Yup, so they can pick and chose as it suits them:

Call people to war ingnoring the bit about not killing people

See various churches and child-sex crimes

See various religions and colonialisation attrocities

See the Church and political despots

That God want you to be nice to each other

Read the Bible from end to end and get back to me on that one, Molgrips.

All I can see is people using religious ideas to build postions of power they then abuse, ruthlessly oppressing any form of contestation. This takes place at every level from the parish to the Vatican, from Luton to Saudi Arabia, from Wall Street to Palestine.

There may well be something that started this all, as in big bang in their petri dish, but there surely isn't some god that looks over us and controls our lives, and demands worship and can respond to prayers.

And if there is, then he/she is a sick psychopath that doesn't deserve worship - take that eye worm example in the video - what was the point of creating that - the child is an 'innocent' so why punish him like that, and if you are 'testing' him then why not just make him blind by some other means, instead of send a little worm to eat his eyeball out from the inside - it's like some torture scene from Star Trek...

All I can see is people using religious ideas to build postions of power

If that's really all you can see, I feel very sorry for you and your blinkered view.

Each religion sets out their beliefs pretty clearly. Try looking on their website?

Even a simple question like which parts of the bible are allegorical and which aren't would elicit a different reply from christians, even within their own sect. So no, they really don't set out their beliefs clearly at all.

ginefishin former alter boy and reformed catholic.

we know enough to dismiss its importance.

So you are saying religion isn't important ?

it shouldn't be but unfortunately it is because of lot of deluded people who can't accept there is nothing else for them when they die do cr8p that influences my life.

If they just stayed at home and did their worship in private I would have no issue.

I feel very sorry for you

Don't, I don't need your pity. The idea you think that religion make you better than me and you should feel sorry for me I find offensive.

All I can see is people using religious ideas to build postions of power they then abuse, ruthlessly oppressing any form of contestation. This takes place at every level from the parish to the Vatican, from Luton to Saudi Arabia, from Wall Street to Palestine.

Not all religions but the abrahamic ones tend to be bad at this and Hindu can and often is used in this way. Don't think the Buddhists / Quakers, sikhs do this

Have a look at the history of India, TJ.

If that's really all you can see, I feel very sorry for you and your blinkered view.

It's not all, because these persuasive and charismatic people that see the opportunity to exercise power need more gullible people to persuade.

Other people use religion for the social aspect and the sense of belonging to something. And some do charitable work in the name of religion, but it doesn't require religion to cause people to act like this.

The funny thing about this thread is I am in agreement with Junkyard and Edukator !

Edukator - Reformed Troll

Have a look at the history of India, TJ.

Educate me? I thought the sikhs were basically defensive, it was the muslims and hindus that were the aggressors. I'll have a look tho

Evidence of faith most certainly requires faith, you will never see any evidence of faith unless you have faith kapishe? I think we are saying the same thing tbh

Not so, that's just circular logic. I, without faith, can see that your posts are forms of evidence that you do have faith.

These discussions are always way more complicated than they need to be. Without faith you cannot interpret the scriptures so no point trying

You don't need faith to read words. You could readily be a leading theologian and without believing a word of it. You might as well argue that you can't understand The Lord of the Rings because you aren't a hobbit.

Non-overlapping magisteria

I hadn't come across that before, thanks for that.

Not all religions but the abrahamic ones tend to be bad at this and Hindu can and often is used in this way. Don't think the Buddhists / Quakers, sikhs do this

How sodding ignorant can someone be

You don't need faith to read words. You could readily be a leading theologian and without believing a word of it. You might as well argue that you can't understand The Lord of the Rings because you aren't a hobbit.

Anyhow look around you and answer some simple questions:

"Is religion a force for good or for evil as witnesed by what you see and associate it with?"

"Through history has religion caused suffering or has it prevented it?"

"Has religion contributed to progess or done its best to prevent it?"

"If we follow religious doctrine now where will it lead us? And if we don't?"

Well, back from the ride. First exploration and it turned out to be downhill/no way through/back uphill.

Good though. Proves that I'm (like the tea on the Heart of Gold) almost but not quite, completely unlike someone who's not too old for this malarkey...

Anyway. Looked eagerly through the thread for theocb's claimed evidence that a god exists and found:

theocb - Member
@Mrwopsit. You are still trying to over complicate the simplicity of faith.

You cannot see the evidence because you choose not to, the faith comes first then your mind will be open.
It doesn't matter how intelligent you are or how well you can translate ancient text, without the faith you will never see the clear evidence.

The words themselves have no meaning, think of them like a magic spell if you like... with the key of faith in your heart the scriptures become a passageway to a new place.

Which is what I thought might be on offer after all. That is to say - a load of dimwitted gibberish.

Feel free to be offended, I really don't [s]care[/s] mind. 8)

mefty - Member

Not all religions but the abrahamic ones tend to be bad at this and Hindu can and often is used in this way. Don't think the Buddhists / Quakers, sikhs do this

How sodding ignorant can someone be

By the tone and content of your posts very 🙂 Abrahamic religions tend to accumulate wealth and power greatly. I accept sikhism is not as benign as that could be read as. Quakers and buddists don't seem to do this.

Look at stuff like the hoarding of wealth by the christian churches in Europe. The perrsecution of the palestinians in the middle east. The actions of many Islamic sects worldwide.

Lots and lots of examples of religions accumulating wealth and power and using this wealth and power to act in very unpleasant ways. From the crusades to Blairs "god told me to do it" To RC fobbidding the use of contraception

Edit - oh flip - what am I doping still commenting on this thread. It won't end well

what am I doping

...has, I think, always been the question on folks lips.

😉

You don't need a knowledge of history to understand your ignorance - are you not aware of what is going on in Myanmar?

Don't, I don't need your pity. The idea you think that religion make you better than me and you should feel sorry for me I find offensive.

You can find whatever you like offensive. I'm not too bothered either way.

Your incorrect assumption that I'm religious is probably your main issue here though.
And your incorrect assumption that I believe religion makes anyone better/worse than anybody else may also be causing you some confusion.

As I said, I feel sorry for you and your blinkered views.

You don't need faith to read words.

You have to appreciate that having faith would lead to a different interpretation - surely? This thread is ample evidence.

Anyhow look around you and answer some simple questions:

All very open questions in my opinion - as an atheist.

You have to appreciate that having faith would lead to a different interpretation - surely? This thread is ample evidence.

.. in your opinion.

religion - man's first attempt at explaining when we didn't know anything. like a baby covering its eye's thinking it can't be seen.

I actually don't think that's what it is. I think it's a nice story created about something that man didn't understand. I don't think the ancients were as stupid as you think they were.

Quakers and buddists don't seem to do this.

There is plenty blood on Buddhist hands in the far east. Quakers stuck at what they are good at, porridge.

The indisputable fact is that the adherents of each religion believe that their way is [b][u]THE[/u][/b] way. Inevitably that will lead to the view that other beliefs are wrong, which can easily lead to conflict. Religion is an effective way for men to control other men. And yes, in 99% of cases it is men. Women tend to get a bit of a raw deal in religion. Even a good chunk of Christianity believes that women aren't good enough to rise to the highest level, ergo that are not equal.

TL:DR - Athiests argue with each other over whose version of not believing in anything is the right one.

Really, it's a simple premise.
Can't you all not believe in the same thing?

LOL at perchy! the rare voice of sanity on this thread

Ancient people found ways to control people and remain in power. Religion was that tool, before Christianity came Romans, Greeks and the Norse gods Odin, Thor, Zeus etc. they had their place at the time and the death of those civilisations ended them.
[img] [/img]

LOL at perchy! the rare voice of sanity on this thread and the only single person on the thread who has openly and explicity identified himself as a practicing Christian.

FTFY TJ!

How does this reconcile with your statement that all us religious types are irrational? 😉

I feel sorry for you and your blinkered views.

Don't, and if you think your views on religion make you better than me and you should fell sorry me I find that ofensive.

How does this reconcile with your statement that all religious types are irrational?

INRAT but even a broken clock is right twice a day.

molgrips - Member

I actually don't think that's what it is. I think it's a nice story created about something that man didn't understand. I don't think the ancients were as stupid as you think they were.

how the planet and the universe was created - the story is basically the same no matter what religion you look at. The ancients were not stupid, they were ignorant of what we currently know. Up until 1952 we didn't know DNA was responsible for the transfer of hereditary information. we were not stupid before then.

I don't really care what you find offensive. I thought I'd made that perfectly clear last time you claimed you were offended.

I was simply saying that if "all you can see" from all the religions of the world, is people building positions of power to abuse, then it must be a bit shit to be you.

Personally, I see loads of good being done, and along with it, loads of bad too.

But I'm not blinkered, so I don't ignore the good to focus on the bad.

If you read the NT, you will find that Jesus spent a lot of time having a go at religious leaders for their behaviour. As I've said before on another religion bashing thread, it's human nature that leads to war, intolerance etc. All He asks is for us to love our God and love our neighbour. All other morals/rules to live by hang off of that. If we tried to live our lives this way, there would be no issues. People will cherry pick what they want to suit their own opinions/prejudices. Whether you believe in God or not, treating others as you would want to be treated is a pretty good way to live your life. Pretty simple really. 🙂