I class myself as an agnostic forward thinking Christian as that’s the culture I was raised in, but I also like some aspects of Buddhism and Zen philosophy. Just think all faiths need to find a way to coexist peacefully without demonizing each other.
Problem is that most religions at least try to become the dominant religion on the planet. Which leads to conflict especially when there are cultural differences between the religions.
Every religion can become militant, enough Hindus and Buddhists beating muslims is a testament to that.
Even promoting non conflict will doom your religion by being succumbed to religions that will engage in conflict.
Noble but foolish. Pacifism is never a good survival strategy. Pacifism also allows for genocide and other forms of human suffering.
If you are not able to be dangerous than you cannot be peaceful, rather you are harmless. Peaceful people have the ability to cause great harm and choose not to, thus it shows strength of will.
Ultimately, there is only one correct religion. Since there is only one correct religion, any attempts to allow for the existence of multiple religions is to attempt to allow for the existence of false religions. False religions cannot be true, so they are detrimental to the true religion. To cause detriment to the true religion is to reduce the amount of truth in the world. To reduce the amount of truth in the world is a bad thing.
Since reduction of the amount of truth in the world is a bad thing, causing detriment to the true religion reduces the amount of truth in the world, false religions cause detriment to the true religion, religions that aren't the true religion must be false, and there is only one true religion, it is entirely nonsensical and counterintuitive to allow for the continued existence of multiple religions.
I wouldn't say I'm okay with any religions; I'm just saying that some of them make you dig a little deeper to find the messed up stuff (excluding the stifling of science which is on the surface of them all).
For example, if someone were tasked with finding something messed up in Hinduism it might take them a while but one can just go flipping through the Bible and quickly find things like, "Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished."
Here we have God punishing with infanticide and rape. Lovely.
If I had to pick a religion that I'm most okay with, I'd probably say Pastafarianism.
Well for someone who claims to hate all religion you did at least cast your net further than Christianity that time. You probably should distribute the contempt a bit more evenly lest people think you have an agenda.
Did I though? Presuming that by "cast your net" you're referring to recruitment of some sort... yeah I really didn't.
My pitch: "Christianity says some horrible stuff."
Christianity's pitch:
Clearing throat to say some horrible stuff, "Join us or burn in Hell."
I distribute my contempt in a fashion that keeps an eye out for depravity and applies the contempt accordingly. I can't help that the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), which all actually worship the same god by the way, are so much worse than a lot of the others.
It's not like I'm going after it out of nowhere, pulling this out of my ass. The texts say what they say. If me merely quoting it seems an absurd attack on it, perhaps consider what that says about the texts. Nothing good seems like it's being attacked by someone for quoting it.
For example, imagine I approached a woman on the streets who is quoting the Bible, preaching. I stand beside her in solidarity and also start shouting quotes at people. I read one about how women should never teach or preach at people and should shut the fuck up and be silent.
What's she going to do? She's going to look at me like, "Wow. Rude as fuck." It's as if I'm supposed to be like, "Oh yeah! My bad. I forgot we cherry-pick this and say only what we like. My apologies."
But if she's standing there teaching about global warming or something, I can stand beside her quoting the science behind it until the sun goes down and she's never going to think anything besides, "Man, this dude's really backing me up here."
At a certain point you have to stop running, stop avoiding it, and own what your texts _SAY_ if you really support them. I especially don't understand people who actively reject like 80% (if not more) but desperately insist on clinging to some good ol' parts as devine. This is a morality book. Imagine facing this issue with literally any other subject. You're studying for an English exam. You notice like 80% of your textbook is fucked up and makes no sense. Do you really keep rolling with that one? Or do you say, "How much fucking crack were they smoking when they published this? Were they even a native speaker? I'm going to get my money back and find a competent book to teach me."
At the point that you're desperately cherry-picking a book for good parts, it's not making your life easier and enlightening you. It's not your teacher. You've taken the authoritative role and are now going out of your way to act like an attorney noticing their client is drunk in court and trying to control what they say and don't say. You're doing the work.
If someone like me can simply pick up your texts and begin flipping the pages and that illicits a feeling like, "Fuck. I hope he doesn't say _that_ part," that's not a good book to base your entire life on because you can feel in your own heart that much of it is wrong.
If I seem like I have an agenda it's because I do. I never once claimed to be one of those "I don't believe personally but to each their own" types. For me, given the texts, that's like saying, "I don't believe in stoning women to death personally but to each their own."
No. I say fuck that. This isn't a debate over favorite colors. And I implore anyone to paint _ME_ as the bad guy for having a problem with such evils.
They do not worship the same god, and to claim that they do is a rejection of the truths of each of the religions. Judaism rejects Jesus and the Holy Spirit. How can the Jews believe in the same god as the Christians, when they only believe in one-third of the Christian God? Same with Islam; it also rejects the Trinity including Jesus and the Holy Spirit, so how can it be the same god? It cannot. Islam believes that their god sent a prophet called Mohammad to prophesy to people; Judaism does not. The same god could not have possibly have both sent and not sent a prophet by the name of Mohammad to prophesy in his name. They must be treated as three different gods, because they are not the same god.
I also cannot understand how anyone can read something like what you were talking about with what Paul said to Timothy or something like James 2, and then completely reject it, making up crap like "faith alone".
You are the bad guy in this argument, because you reject the truth. Rejection of the truth is rejection of God, and rejection of God is rejection of good. Rejection of good leaves only evil, and only the bad guy is only evil.
‘I can't help that the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), which all actually worship the same god by the way, are so much worse than a lot of the others.’
Yes that’s a bit more fair.
My point was that despite you claiming to hate all religion; I’ve only seen you criticizing the bible and Christianity so far.
Then again I am new here, but it’s not politically correct to call out the other two is it.
why are you atheist? why are you theist?
← View full post
I class myself as an agnostic forward thinking Christian as that’s the culture I was raised in, but I also like some aspects of Buddhism and Zen philosophy. Just think all faiths need to find a way to coexist peacefully without demonizing each other.
--
LloydAsher
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
-
S0UNDS_WEIRD
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
Problem is that most religions at least try to become the dominant religion on the planet. Which leads to conflict especially when there are cultural differences between the religions.
Every religion can become militant, enough Hindus and Buddhists beating muslims is a testament to that.
Even promoting non conflict will doom your religion by being succumbed to religions that will engage in conflict.
--
[Old Memory]
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Then I will go to my grave a non-expansionist pacifist and let the chips fall as they may for the aggressors.
--
LloydAsher
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
-
Clunk42
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Noble but foolish. Pacifism is never a good survival strategy. Pacifism also allows for genocide and other forms of human suffering.
If you are not able to be dangerous than you cannot be peaceful, rather you are harmless. Peaceful people have the ability to cause great harm and choose not to, thus it shows strength of will.
--
[Old Memory]
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
Nice b8 m8
--
LloydAsher
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
At least I dont need to use numbers to spell
--
[Old Memory]
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
Whoosh
If you are a non-expansionist who accepts all other religions, then you do not know the truth.
--
[Old Memory]
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
What’s the truth then?
--
Clunk42
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Ultimately, there is only one correct religion. Since there is only one correct religion, any attempts to allow for the existence of multiple religions is to attempt to allow for the existence of false religions. False religions cannot be true, so they are detrimental to the true religion. To cause detriment to the true religion is to reduce the amount of truth in the world. To reduce the amount of truth in the world is a bad thing.
Since reduction of the amount of truth in the world is a bad thing, causing detriment to the true religion reduces the amount of truth in the world, false religions cause detriment to the true religion, religions that aren't the true religion must be false, and there is only one true religion, it is entirely nonsensical and counterintuitive to allow for the continued existence of multiple religions.
--
[Old Memory]
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
And the true religion is???
Most of them don't really need any external demonizing; you can simply read the texts.
--
[Old Memory]
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
‘Most of them...’
This implies you are ok with some religions.
Which ones?
--
S0UNDS_WEIRD
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I wouldn't say I'm okay with any religions; I'm just saying that some of them make you dig a little deeper to find the messed up stuff (excluding the stifling of science which is on the surface of them all).
For example, if someone were tasked with finding something messed up in Hinduism it might take them a while but one can just go flipping through the Bible and quickly find things like, "Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished."
Here we have God punishing with infanticide and rape. Lovely.
If I had to pick a religion that I'm most okay with, I'd probably say Pastafarianism.
--
[Old Memory]
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Well for someone who claims to hate all religion you did at least cast your net further than Christianity that time. You probably should distribute the contempt a bit more evenly lest people think you have an agenda.
--
S0UNDS_WEIRD
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Did I though? Presuming that by "cast your net" you're referring to recruitment of some sort... yeah I really didn't.
My pitch: "Christianity says some horrible stuff."
Christianity's pitch:
Clearing throat to say some horrible stuff, "Join us or burn in Hell."
I distribute my contempt in a fashion that keeps an eye out for depravity and applies the contempt accordingly. I can't help that the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), which all actually worship the same god by the way, are so much worse than a lot of the others.
It's not like I'm going after it out of nowhere, pulling this out of my ass. The texts say what they say. If me merely quoting it seems an absurd attack on it, perhaps consider what that says about the texts. Nothing good seems like it's being attacked by someone for quoting it.
For example, imagine I approached a woman on the streets who is quoting the Bible, preaching. I stand beside her in solidarity and also start shouting quotes at people. I read one about how women should never teach or preach at people and should shut the fuck up and be silent.
What's she going to do? She's going to look at me like, "Wow. Rude as fuck." It's as if I'm supposed to be like, "Oh yeah! My bad. I forgot we cherry-pick this and say only what we like. My apologies."
But if she's standing there teaching about global warming or something, I can stand beside her quoting the science behind it until the sun goes down and she's never going to think anything besides, "Man, this dude's really backing me up here."
At a certain point you have to stop running, stop avoiding it, and own what your texts _SAY_ if you really support them. I especially don't understand people who actively reject like 80% (if not more) but desperately insist on clinging to some good ol' parts as devine. This is a morality book. Imagine facing this issue with literally any other subject. You're studying for an English exam. You notice like 80% of your textbook is fucked up and makes no sense. Do you really keep rolling with that one? Or do you say, "How much fucking crack were they smoking when they published this? Were they even a native speaker? I'm going to get my money back and find a competent book to teach me."
At the point that you're desperately cherry-picking a book for good parts, it's not making your life easier and enlightening you. It's not your teacher. You've taken the authoritative role and are now going out of your way to act like an attorney noticing their client is drunk in court and trying to control what they say and don't say. You're doing the work.
If someone like me can simply pick up your texts and begin flipping the pages and that illicits a feeling like, "Fuck. I hope he doesn't say _that_ part," that's not a good book to base your entire life on because you can feel in your own heart that much of it is wrong.
If I seem like I have an agenda it's because I do. I never once claimed to be one of those "I don't believe personally but to each their own" types. For me, given the texts, that's like saying, "I don't believe in stoning women to death personally but to each their own."
No. I say fuck that. This isn't a debate over favorite colors. And I implore anyone to paint _ME_ as the bad guy for having a problem with such evils.
--
Clunk42
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
-
[Old Memory]
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
They do not worship the same god, and to claim that they do is a rejection of the truths of each of the religions. Judaism rejects Jesus and the Holy Spirit. How can the Jews believe in the same god as the Christians, when they only believe in one-third of the Christian God? Same with Islam; it also rejects the Trinity including Jesus and the Holy Spirit, so how can it be the same god? It cannot. Islam believes that their god sent a prophet called Mohammad to prophesy to people; Judaism does not. The same god could not have possibly have both sent and not sent a prophet by the name of Mohammad to prophesy in his name. They must be treated as three different gods, because they are not the same god.
I also cannot understand how anyone can read something like what you were talking about with what Paul said to Timothy or something like James 2, and then completely reject it, making up crap like "faith alone".
You are the bad guy in this argument, because you reject the truth. Rejection of the truth is rejection of God, and rejection of God is rejection of good. Rejection of good leaves only evil, and only the bad guy is only evil.
‘I can't help that the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), which all actually worship the same god by the way, are so much worse than a lot of the others.’
Yes that’s a bit more fair.
My point was that despite you claiming to hate all religion; I’ve only seen you criticizing the bible and Christianity so far.
Then again I am new here, but it’s not politically correct to call out the other two is it.