Because it’s written in a holy text.

But who put it in the holy text and why? These things didn’t just appear. You can’t just walk into town and tell everyone what the new rules are if they are completely alien to people. You’ll get laughed at, unless you have a big army. Which hasn’t always been the case.

A lot of the Old Testament is just information on how to live. The Jews lost the focal point of their religion when the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed, so they made their customs and rituals the focal point, so they wrote it all down. But the point is that was what they were already doing before the books existed. The religion and their society evolved together.

Religions don’t just pop out of thin air.

Islam holds that on judgement day everyone crosses a bridge over Hell, if you’re destined for there, you’ll find it too narrow and fall.

All that praying, following rules and regulations and it basically boils down to if you’ve got shit balance, unlucky! I knew all that skateboarding would come in handy at some point.

But who put it in the holy text and why?

The divine, God, Allah etc and because they could, so there mortal. If you don’t believe that then it follows you believe that religion is an entirely man made construct and therefore just a massive con/pyramid scheme. Don’t like it? Better hope you’ve got good balance come the end times.

I think a lot of the posts are coming at this from the wrong angle to be honest. Yes religions and religious beliefs can lead to people doing good things and bad. Would the balance of those things alter for the better if religion wasn’t a thing? I honestly don’t think it would. People would just be nice because they’re nice or do shitty things to one another because people. If you need a deity to frighten or cajole you in to being nice then, frankly, you’re a bit of a ****

Religions don’t just pop out of thin air.

I think everyone is well aware of that. However as others have pointed out a problem is a solution which was suitable for a bronze or iron age society isnt necessarily the right one for a modern society. Once you have something in the holy book though as the word of god its generally harder to update to suit the changed circumstances.

Once you have something in the holy book though as the word of god its generally harder to update to suit the changed circumstances.

Oh I don’t know. Western society along with its interpretation of Christianity has evolved dramatically over the last 500 years, hasn’t it? In fact, I would go so far as to say that society has led the change and the Church has had to follow, simply because it’s part of society. In the last 30 or so years it’s faltered but the long term trend is clear.

Once you have something in the holy book though as the word of god its generally harder to update to suit the changed circumstances.

Bit like the American constitution and guns then.

I think science has led the change and the Church has had to update or get left behind. Now it chooses to pick out some bits of the bible and say they’re definitely still true but you just ignore the others that are demonstrably bunkum.

But who put it in the holy text and why? These things didn’t just appear.

It really doesn’t matter. It’s absolutely obvious some bloke wrote it but in the here and now real world if you state the fact it is a horrendous blasphemy, punishable by death in many countries. The reality is holy texts are treated as the word of God and people live and act on that basis.

The divine, God, Allah etc and because they could, so there mortal. If you don’t believe that then it follows you believe that religion is an entirely man made construct and therefore just a massive con/pyramid scheme.

Many books of the bible literally have their authors’ names on them. Most people know that they are written by people and only inspired by God. This really couldn’t be clearer. The most important books in the NT, the gospels are named after the four people who told them and they are all different and they don’t even all agree. How much clearer can it be that they aren’t the divine word of God?! Most Christians understand that, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t valuable and they understand that too.

It’s entirely plausible that people experienced God, then wrote down their experiences *as people*. You can still believe in God and yet treat the Bible as human writings.

The reality is holy texts are treated as the word of God

I think that is a minority view.

Many books of the bible literally have their authors’ names on them. Most people know that they are written by people and only inspired by God. This really couldn’t be clearer.

We’re not just discussing Christianity here or the NT though. Ten Commandments, God. Quran, word of God as just two examples. If they aren’t the word of God why not live life by LotR’s or the lates Jack Reacher novel. You’re making a good case for religion being more batshit than it already is. Basically god has nothing to do with it and it’s just a story some fella wrote as his personal interpretation of what they think God meant. That’s a shabby defence and, when you stop and think, really depressing that people have built their lives around it

Religions don’t just pop out of thin air.

No.

They require a human being who believes that they know better than everyone else, despite all the evidence to the contrary:

L Ron Hubbard, Sun Myung Moon, Joseph Smith, Charles Taze Russell, Li Hongzhi etc……

Man created God.
Religions initially reflect, then ultimately corrupt the moral and social constructs of the day.
How could they not?

I think that is a minority view.

It’s certainly been the majority view, whether sincerely held or used as a tool of repression for most of the time that the Abrahamic religions have existed.

Of course, choosing which bits to enforce and which bits to ignore gives rise to an almost infinite variety of interpretation or methods of control.

It’s entirely plausible that people experienced God, then wrote down their experiences *as people*.

This is where fundamental disagreement comes in. Plausible isn’t a word I would use for it. You’ve just described Scientology there too. Something that it’s okay to mock and say bad things about, yet the same doesn’t apply to other belief systems. It would be highly amusing if it wasn’t so depressing.

I think that is a minority view.

It’s absolutely not. In Catholicism, for example, the Word of God does not just mean the literal spoken word of one part of the holy trinity. It’s the more general good news of the lord blah blah. It has a very particular meaning beyond the literal.

You’re also saying the Bible was just written by the prophets. If you’ve suffered the misfortune like me of chanting the nicene creed every week at mass it includes the clear statements that God spoke through his prophets. You have to chant it week in week out. Followed by an affirmation that it’s the word of the lord. You can’t be a real practicing Christian and believe anything other than the Bible is the word of God.

This has wandered pretty far off topic now.

Anyone want to discuss the Viet Minh, Khmer Rouge, VRS, Third Reich and Bolsheviks and how religion contributed to those conflicts?

I only popped in to make the comment about the subhumans song and was delighted to see that it was the very first comment back to the OP. Well done singletrack x

It’s nothing if not a Word Factory, this place….🙂

You can’t be a real practicing Christian and believe anything other than the Bible is the word of God.

That may come as a surprise to some of the Christians I know.

Are they REAL Christians though or just whatever the hipster version of a Christian is? What is a real Christian? I have a friend called Christian and he’s real or at least I think he is.

it includes the clear statements that God spoke through his prophets

That’s not exactly clear, it doesn’t specify if any of the message was re-interpreted or just dictated verbatim. Plus, not everyone in the bible is a prophet, are they?

You can’t be a real practicing Christian and believe anything other than the Bible is the word of God.

Incorrect. The bible is not the literal word of God, it’s inspired by God but written by humans. And, apparently, they put in a lot of other stuff alongside about seafood and fabrics and the like. Which backs up my point about religion and society being completely intertwined and co-dependent, which backs up my original point about wars that appear to be religious not actually being religious and that whilst the groups involved might’ve been different I doubt there would have been fewer conflicts without religion.

Something that it’s okay to mock and say bad things about, yet the same doesn’t apply to other belief systems.

Just to be clear – you can mock all you want, as long as you don’t break rule 1 (which you probably will). What annoys me is people banging home a point with absolute certainty when they clearly haven’t understood any of it and are completely unwilling to listen, think and discuss the subject. Example: sitting through mass enough times doesn’t make you a theologian or a historian. Now, I’m not claiming to be either, what I want is a good discussion. If there’s one thing in the whole of human experience that is least likely to be a black and white simple issue, it’s religion.

Anyone want to discuss the Viet Minh, Khmer Rouge, VRS, Third Reich and Bolsheviks and how religion contributed to those conflicts?

Yes, that’s what I want to talk about 🙂 (not sarcasm)

Just to be clear – you can mock all you want, as long as you don’t break rule 1

Depends where you happen to live. I wouldn’t fancy my chances of being free to mock in certain parts of the American south or Middle East.

what I want is a good discussion.

You wanted a good discussion so chose STW chat forum and religion? Has your account been hacked or something? All joking aside you appear to be just as incapable of listening as TJ and others who have debated the topic.

The original debate was pretty much settled on page one. People are generally dickheads and tribal. Religion facilitates tribalism, makes it easier and more convenient to ‘other’ people and therefore can be used as a great reason to start trouble, make existing trouble worse or rile people up when other methods (politics, fear, resources etc) fail to get the desired results such as war. If religion doesn’t work perhaps resources will or othering a group of people based on other criteria. Perhaps a combination of some of the aforementioned points.

Basically people are **** and if something can be used as a convenient tool it will be. Religion is low hanging fruit in that regard so has obviously been a factor in a few wars.

The original debate was pretty much settled on page one. People are generally dickheads and tribal.

This ^^^

Put it in another way I haven’t heard of any religious teaching that says annihilate thy neighbours … unless they are being interpreted by certain people.

I was researching the history Chinese dynasties, gave up when I was near to the Last Emperor, and what I noticed was at no point was religion was used an excuse to conquer or to annihilate their opponents. Although there were already many religions (local ones) but most of their excuse is rather simple. e.g. I want your land and resources bow to me or I destroy you. That’s it really. No ifs or buts but just because they can. Even the Mongol, although very superstitious, they conquered because they could as they really had no need to have an excuse to conquer.

Other parts of Asia can be a mixture of using religion as an excuse to conquer from India to Indonesia. Perhaps you can say that they are a bit “civilised” at attempting to use religion as an excuse to conquer unlike China and the Mongol in those days.

I wonder if there are any specific examples of wars being avoided because of religion?

Kennedy was Catholic and that might’ve influenced his actions during the Cuban Missile Crisis, but that’s about all I can come up with.

Mol, your question has been answered.

Religion is a powerful man made constuct that can be used in an infinite variety of ways.

People can be persuaded to wage war for a variety of reasons.
Religion may or may not be one factor amongst many in individual conflicts, but there are many examples where it is.

Faith would appear to be intrinsic human trait, irrespective of religious belief.

And if you actually want a discussion, taking on board the views presented to you is a prerequisite.

I wonder if there are any specific examples of wars being avoided because of religion?

Perhaps Ashoka the Great, the Indian emperor of the Maurya Dynasty, after he converted to Buddhism …