|
christians (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Fledz |
| quote: | Originally posted by Taranis
I think it's probably worth pointing out that a) that's probably an exaguration, and b) most of those deaths would have occured anyway, even if they couldn't take place under the pretence of religious warfare. Religion is a conveniant excuse for war, but I think you'll find that it has a lot more to do with politics than religion most of the time. What better way to convince your peasants to go die for you than to tell them they're going to go to an eternity of bliss or hang out with 72 virgins or what have you when they do?
Never the less, I think some of the more dogmatic, militant forms of religion in society do need to be curbed, but I don't think taking a complete anti-religious stance is the answer either.
I think you'll find that the vast majority of what people use to argue against the christian church aren't really central to the teachings of christ anyway. A lot of it is prone to mistranslation or misinterpretation, intentional or otherwise. The Church itself, I think, is pretty much obsolete in it's current form. People need to be less concerned with paying attention to figurehead leaders and spend more time paying attention to what 'they' believe, and what they think, and feel. Religion has become too caught up in the organization that they've lost all sense of spirituality.
Religion is something that's occupied a lot of my thought over most of my life, and I've kind of ended up coming to the conclusion that it is entirely possible, perhaps even as likely as not, that God (or some form of divine or spiritual consciousness or force) exists. I've also come to the conclusion that it's probably not all that worth worrying about anyway, I don't doubt that humanities notion of the divine is highly skewed, and I'm sure it (God, or whoever fills that role) concerns itself with far more important things than going to church once a week and telling a balding priest all the naughty things I did over the last couple days.
I figure when all's said and done, I'm a fairly decent person, and if that's not enough for god, then I probably wouldn't want to spend an eternity in heaven with him anyway. |
Very well said :gsmile: |
|
|
| inconspicuous |
| quote: | Originally posted by Taranis
I think it's probably worth pointing out that a) that's probably an exaguration, and b) most of those deaths would have occured anyway, even if they couldn't take place under the pretence of religious warfare. Religion is a conveniant excuse for war, but I think you'll find that it has a lot more to do with politics than religion most of the time. What better way to convince your peasants to go die for you than to tell them they're going to go to an eternity of bliss or hang out with 72 virgins or what have you when they do. |
ugh. I really dislike this paragraph.
First, you can't exaggerate a true/false statement. Granted, when people make that claim, they often do it while ignoring myriad factors to cut right to something catchy, and it's incredibly difficult to even attempt to prove such a thing, but nevertheless, you still can't exaggerate it.
Second, the fact that deaths "would have occurred anyway" is meaningless. If it was not, murder would never be punished. Everyone is going to die anyway.
Third, the jab at Islamic extremists comes off very poorly, particularly in the context of a discussion of offensive remarks about religion. |
|
|
| inconspicuous |
| quote: | Originally posted by Taranis
Never the less, I think some of the more dogmatic, militant forms of religion in society do need to be curbed, but I don't think taking a complete anti-religious stance is the answer either.
I think you'll find that the vast majority of what people use to argue against the christian church aren't really central to the teachings of christ anyway. A lot of it is prone to mistranslation or misinterpretation, intentional or otherwise. The Church itself, I think, is pretty much obsolete in it's current form. People need to be less concerned with paying attention to figurehead leaders and spend more time paying attention to what 'they' believe, and what they think, and feel. Religion has become too caught up in the organization that they've lost all sense of spirituality.
Religion is something that's occupied a lot of my thought over most of my life, and I've kind of ended up coming to the conclusion that it is entirely possible, perhaps even as likely as not, that God (or some form of divine or spiritual consciousness or force) exists. I've also come to the conclusion that it's probably not all that worth worrying about anyway, I don't doubt that humanities notion of the divine is highly skewed, and I'm sure it (God, or whoever fills that role) concerns itself with far more important things than going to church once a week and telling a balding priest all the naughty things I did over the last couple days.
I figure when all's said and done, I'm a fairly decent person, and if that's not enough for god, then I probably wouldn't want to spend an eternity in heaven with him anyway. |
Moving on to the rest, a lot of what you mentioned at first is dependent upon the specific institution. All of your points are most related to the Catholic church. Catholicism, while having a huge following, does not encompass the whole of religion. |
|
|
| eckmek |
| quote: | Originally posted by inconspicuous
ugh. I really dislike this paragraph.
First, you can't exaggerate a true/false statement. Granted, when people make that claim, they often do it while ignoring myriad factors to cut right to something catchy, and it's incredibly difficult to even attempt to prove such a thing, but nevertheless, you still can't exaggerate it.
Second, the fact that deaths "would have occurred anyway" is meaningless. If it was not, murder would never be punished. Everyone is going to die anyway.
Third, the jab at Islamic extremists comes off very poorly, particularly in the context of a discussion of offensive remarks about religion. |
Surely you can exaggarate a number which is hard to verify? Who really knows the exact number of people killed "in the name of god"? There's a lot of not very precise factors going into that description, and thus, it could easily be exaggarated imo.
And really, i don't think it's a "jab" i think he was just coming up with some well known examples...but i dunno... |
|
|
| inconspicuous |
| quote: | Originally posted by eRRaTiK
I agree with Gandhi, and apply it across all religions. |
Yes, it very much does.
Most religions are based on admirable traits and noble intentions. Yet another problem, though, is that people judge a religion by the behavior of those who claim to follow it. This is a flaw only exacerbated by the fact that those outside of any given following base their knowledge of such behavior on that which is made available. As this is largely through hearsay and media, it consists mainly of the extreme, the disturbing, and the shocking. News stations will never cover the story of a couple who followed the teachings of a given religion, were very good people, raised two happy and successful children, and cared for their friends and family, then died of natural causes, yet a story about a suicide bomber claiming the support of Allah, or of a man stating that Jesus told him to kill someone will be on the air within seconds, and relayed by word of mouth shortly thereafter. This becomes the religion with which people are familiar. |
|
|
| inconspicuous |
| quote: | Originally posted by eckmek
Surely you can exaggarate a number which is hard to verify? Who really knows the exact number of people killed "in the name of god"? There's a lot of not very precise factors going into that description, and thus, it could easily be exaggarated imo.
And really, i don't think it's a "jab" i think he was just coming up with some well known examples...but i dunno... |
Here was the quote:
| quote: | Originally posted by eRRaTiK
There have been more deaths "in the name of god" then anything else in this world. |
That cannot be an exaggeration. It's either true or false. Either there are more such deaths or there are not.
To the second point, it reads poorly. Perhaps you're right, though. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
I'd say that plague and famine have killed more people than religious wars, but I guess I don't really have the exact numbers to back that up...
UNLESS you consider that plagues and famines were merely blessings from our god to rid the world of all those nasty infidels and heathens, in which case it would still be considered under religious termination jurisdiction. :O
Xtianity doesn't bother me - xtians usually do. And it's not because of all the unanswered questions or those little subtleties that people try to cram down each other's throats with an awesomely faux-athiest agenda, as though they're sooo smart because they've found faults in the system that cannot be resolved with their limited pleb logic. Xtians bother me because they are so content with what they believe to be the one truth - the only truth - and the authority for this truth is not from a present authority, but from the fact that they, themselves, have made a decision to stop seeking. And it's not as though they all bug me - mostly just the right-wing idiot heads who think that Jesus hates fags - it's usually just the vocal minority who it up for everyone else, but that's humans for ya, I guess. |
|
|
| lex400sc |
| you should hear the christian explanation for birth defects and mental retardation :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: |
|
|
| lex400sc |
| quote: | Originally posted by clubamerica
Everybody will be judged. |
one day kids will read about your kind in history books and laugh |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | Originally posted by inconspicuous
Most religions are based on admirable traits and noble intentions. |
This is an extremely common viewpoint, but I think it's important to consider how convenient it is that our concepts for 'admirable traits and nobility' stem, primarily, from religious teachings. Is it possible that our very concepts of what is right and what is wrong come directly from major religious doctrines? Even people who do not consider themselves religious in the least, or even anti-religious, may find themselves adhering to these precepts of accord and noble propriety. How far does the Xtian hegemony go?
Seems to me that any step to try and disconnect and disseminate the cause and source of such precepts is a step in the right direction. Not necessarily total opposition to, but really what makes all these Xtian ideas so essential to human prosperity and are the ideas you have about Xtianity really true or are they merely offset shadows of a darker doctrine of intolerant contradiction???.
Tonight, on Nightline. |
|
|
| Taranis |
| quote: | Originally posted by inconspicuous
ugh. I really dislike this paragraph.
First, you can't exaggerate a true/false statement. Granted, when people make that claim, they often do it while ignoring myriad factors to cut right to something catchy, and it's incredibly difficult to even attempt to prove such a thing, but nevertheless, you still can't exaggerate it. |
He's exagurating the number of people who have died due to religion, stating that it is higher than any other cause, which I think is false.
| quote: | | Second, the fact that deaths "would have occurred anyway" is meaningless. If it was not, murder would never be punished. Everyone is going to die anyway. |
My point wasn't that they would eventually die anyway, of course they will. My point was that they would have died exactly the same way, at the same time, even if religion didn't exist, they'd simply be fighting for purely political reasons instead of under a religious pretence.
| quote: | | Third, the jab at Islamic extremists comes off very poorly, particularly in the context of a discussion of offensive remarks about religion. |
How the hell do you interpret that as a 'jab' at Islam? It was an example provided to make my point, nothing more. |
|
|
| Taranis |
| quote: | Originally posted by inconspicuous
ugh. I really dislike this paragraph.
First, you can't exaggerate a true/false statement. Granted, when people make that claim, they often do it while ignoring myriad factors to cut right to something catchy, and it's incredibly difficult to even attempt to prove such a thing, but nevertheless, you still can't exaggerate it. |
He's exagurating the number of people who have died due to religion, stating that it is higher than any other cause, which I think is false.
| quote: | | Second, the fact that deaths "would have occurred anyway" is meaningless. If it was not, murder would never be punished. Everyone is going to die anyway. |
My point wasn't that they would eventually die anyway, of course they will. My point was that they would have died exactly the same way, at the same time, even if religion didn't exist, they'd simply be fighting for purely political reasons instead of under a religious pretence.
| quote: | | Third, the jab at Islamic extremists comes off very poorly, particularly in the context of a discussion of offensive remarks about religion. |
How the hell do you interpret that as a 'jab' at Islam? It was an example provided to make my point, nothing more. |
|
|
|
|
