A short list of Gods - Kinda how I feel about things

[xveganjoshx]

It still doesn't mean there is a powerful white man in the sky listening to our dreams and answering our requests for new cars or a hotter girlfriend.

No, there is a powerful brown man in Tucson who listens to your dreams and answers your requests for a hotter girlfriend!

[Amy]

The problem I have with many religious people is they are trying to impose their beliefs on others and turn the US into a theocracy. It's not just the Christian Religious Right. There are many Liberal Christian Democrat social conservative theocrats in the US.

 

They want to change public policy deny women reproductive rights, oppose gay marriage, bring prayer back into public schools, censor the arts, music, literature, film, etc...

 

I am a Christian and I do not try to impose my beliefs on others. The majority of Christians do not. If someone asks me about my Christian views, then I will share how I feel about Christianity. I do believe in women's reproductive rights, I am not against gay marriages, I would love for a child to have an option to pray in public schools, art is art and shouldn't be censored (unless of course it physically hurts someone), etc. There are some Christians who protest, change laws, etc. These Christians are fighting for what they believe in. Some people praise them for their actions to stand up for what they believe in and others are hurt or angered by their beliefs. The same could be said of Vegans or anyone else with strong beliefs.

 

There are so many people in this world with many different religious and cultural beliefs. These are things they have been taught. I believe that as a Christian, I should do my best to love everyone and understand that I can not change people. Not all Christians are mean-spirited. Most really do want the best for everyone. I used to be a person who lived in the "bible belt" and rolled her eyes at "Christians". My father was raised Methodist. My mother was raised Baptist. I went to a Nazarene church when I was in grade school and Junior High. It wasn't until 2 1/2 years ago did I truly understand for myself what it meant to be a Christian. I am a much better person today because of the changes I have made in my life. I definitely don't feel that I am perfect. I am a "work in progress".

[bodybag]

Amy, you're putting words in my mouth. I said many not most in the post you responded too. The Religious Right are a large minority with a lot of money influencing public policy. How can art physical harm someone?

 

Creationism is not science and shouldn't be taught alongside evolution. It would be appropriate to teach Intelligent Design/Creationism in a comparative religion class not a science class.

[blabbate]

I'd be hard pressed to find many things more TRUE than comfort and hope-compassion, forgiveness, and love come to mind. All central themes of most religions. How can personifying and symbolizing benevolent beliefs, so that they live in the forefront of our minds, and that enrich our humanity, be untrue?

Also central themes of many religions: genocide, intolerance, misogyny, war, violence, slavery, capital punishment, honor killings, and bigotry. Religions needed to be violent and intolerant to survive, and it taints them. They do also include benevolence, but unless you're cherry-picking what to believe, you can't ignore the terrible parts.

 

And it's not like we need religion to be either good or bad, peaceful or violent. We can do that on our own. Atheists don't have problems being either benevolent or cruel without the influence of religion.

 

A well constructed deity is a symbol, the personification of cherished values and beliefs, a figurative representation of much that is dear or significant in our minds. You might as well say you don't believe in verbs as say you don't believe in figures.

I'm a little concerned that I can replace "deity" with "college mascot" and the sentence would still make sense. Also, I believe in verbs, but adverbs are a fiction.

[Richard]

You saved me some time there B man, thanks

[Fallen_Horse]

Also central themes of many religions: genocide, intolerance, misogyny, war, violence, slavery, capital punishment, honor killings, and bigotry. Religions needed to be violent and intolerant to survive, and it taints them. They do also include benevolence, but unless you're cherry-picking what to believe, you can't ignore the terrible parts.

 

And it's not like we need religion to be either good or bad, peaceful or violent. We can do that on our own. Atheists don't have problems being either benevolent or cruel without the influence of religion.

I am not particularly religious one way or the other, but I can find very little in Buddhism that supports any of the negatives you mentioned above, except perhaps a little misogyny...

[bodybag]

Also central themes of many religions: genocide, intolerance, misogyny, war, violence, slavery, capital punishment, honor killings, and bigotry. Religions needed to be violent and intolerant to survive, and it taints them. They do also include benevolence, but unless you're cherry-picking what to believe, you can't ignore the terrible parts.

 

And it's not like we need religion to be either good or bad, peaceful or violent. We can do that on our own. Atheists don't have problems being either benevolent or cruel without the influence of religion.

I am not particularly religious one way or the other, but I can find very little in Buddhism that supports any of the negatives you mentioned above, except perhaps a little misogyny...

Tibet was a feudal theocracy ruled by a Buddhist hierarchy that owned serfs before the Peoples Republic of China invaded. Tibetan commandos received military training from the CIA, a terrorist organization, to use violence to resist Chinese occupation.

[Fallen_Horse]

I have no interest in what other people do, but only what a religion teaches people to do. There will always be 'false practitioners' in any religion, but that says nothing against the religion in general. For example, the Qu'ran (by itself) is a very nonviolent book, but people (read: fanatics and theocracies) have smudged and twisted the meanings and intentions, so much of what is 'Islam' today is a violent and backwards culture.

 

The religions are rarely the problem, but rather those who claim to be of the religion and yet behave contrary to it's ideals...

[blabbate]

I have no interest in what other people do, but only what a religion teaches people to do. There will always be 'false practitioners' in any religion, but that says nothing against the religion in general. For example, the Qu'ran (by itself) is a very nonviolent book, but people (read: fanatics and theocracies) have smudged and twisted the meanings and intentions, so much of what is 'Islam' today is a violent and backwards culture.

The Qu'ran is an incredibly violent book, as is the Bible. When I say that some religions are violent, I'm talking about within their primary texts. Let's play a game: Bible or Qu'ran?

• "When the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem"

• "Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbor."

• "Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword."

• “Fighting is prescribed upon you, and you dislike it. But it may happen that you dislike a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that you love a thing which is bad for you"

• "Slay or crucify or cut the hands and feet of the unbelievers, that they be expelled from the land with disgrace."

• "Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die."

Answer: Q, B, B, Q, Q, B

 

Edit: I need to note that this doesn't mean I think these religions are exclusively violent, wrong, etc, but just that they both have violent aspects. They both also have peaceful aspects.

[Mik]

I have no interest in what other people do, but only what a religion teaches people to do. There will always be 'false practitioners' in any religion, but that says nothing against the religion in general. For example, the Qu'ran (by itself) is a very nonviolent book, but people (read: fanatics and theocracies) have smudged and twisted the meanings and intentions, so much of what is 'Islam' today is a violent and backwards culture.

 

The religions are rarely the problem, but rather those who claim to be of the religion and yet behave contrary to it's ideals...

I couldnt agree more.

 

Of course, holy books DO have some passages refering to war but its nearly impossible to 'innocently' get a violent interpretation out of them. You used the example of the Qur'an, the nonviolent verses are very explicit

 

"...if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people...(Quran, 5:32)"

 

"It may be that God will grant love (and friendship) between you and those whom ye (now) hold as enemies. (Quran 60:-7)

 

"But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in God: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things). (8:61)"

 

"Tell those who believe, to forgive those who do not look forward to the days of Allah: It is for Him to recompense (for good or ill) each people according to what they have earned." (45:14)

 

There are many more and likewise with the Bible, while the OT has some undeniebly obnoxious verses (less in the NT), I believe a neutral observer (I am not a Christian) would see that the general theme/commandment to humanity is to be peaceful and forgiving.

 

The general theology, logic and reasoning favoured by fundamentalists falls to pieces against that of...well i dont like the word moderate because it implies half heartedness but i'll just say compassionate, educated and freethinking religious individuals interpretations.

 

I'm probably the zillionth person to say it but the quotes above are quoted waaay out of context and with the worst translations/interpretations. In their context the Quranic verses are clearly refering to war and not against 'any old disbelievers,' incidently the Arabic Quran doesnt even use 'disbeliever' the word which we translate into disbeliever has means someone who is ungrateful to God and covers the truth, it certainly does not refer to all non Muslims. I'm not an expert on the Bible and even though its usually illogical to pass off inconvienient verses as metaphorical I think it genuinely does apply in the case of Jesus saying he came to bring a sword; as he didnt well use a sword nor raise an army or anything similar.

[blabbate]

Of course, holy books DO have some passages refering to war but its nearly impossible to 'innocently' get a violent interpretation out of them. You used the example of the Qur'an, the nonviolent verses are very explicit

{snip}

There are many more and likewise with the Bible, while the OT has some undeniebly obnoxious verses (less in the NT), I believe a neutral observer (I am not a Christian) would see that the general theme/commandment to humanity is to be peaceful and forgiving.

There are plenty of non-violent verses in both books, but the exceptions given to those verses are pretty broad. And I think the overall theme of Christianity varies wildly between the OT and the NT. When I read the OT, it's lots of vengeance, lots of war, lots of slavery. The NT is much more peaceful.

 

I'm probably the zillionth person to say it but the quotes above are quoted waaay out of context and with the worst translations/interpretations. In their context the Quranic verses are clearly refering to war and not against 'any old disbelievers,' incidently the Arabic Quran doesnt even use 'disbeliever' the word which we translate into disbeliever has means someone who is ungrateful to God and covers the truth, it certainly does not refer to all non Muslims.

They're definitely out of context, but the translations are fine. And yes, they should only apply in defense. The problem comes when certain folks decide to very loosely interpret when they're being "attacked," because then they can try to justify their actions as defensive. But overall, I'm just saying that there's plenty of violence in there, and it's easy for someone to come away confused, or for the message to be perverted. Same thing for Christianity.

 

I'm not an expert on the Bible and even though its usually illogical to pass off inconvienient verses as metaphorical I think it genuinely does apply in the case of Jesus saying he came to bring a sword; as he didnt well use a sword nor raise an army or anything similar.

It's definitely a metaphor, and I believe it's only a metaphor for general conflict, not physical violence and certainly not committed by Jesus or his followers, but it's definitely one of the more controversial NT verses.

[Fallen_Horse]

The problem comes when certain folks decide to very loosely interpret when they're being "attacked," because then they can try to justify their actions as defensive. But overall, I'm just saying that there's plenty of violence in there, and it's easy for someone to come away confused, or for the message to be perverted. Same thing for Christianity.

Agreed, the problem is PEOPLE, not the texts.

 

 

Also, any translation of the Qu'ran into English will be invariably flawed. This is why the Bible is terribly flawed today (just look at the Council of Nicea)...

[blabbate]

Agreed, the problem is PEOPLE, not the texts.

I just think the texts influence the people in a negative way as often as positive.

 

Also, any translation of the Qu'ran into English will be invariably flawed. This is why the Bible is terribly flawed today (just look at the Council of Nicea)...

Officially, any translation of the Qu'ran into anything other than Arabic is flawed, since it's no longer the literal word of God, right? I just meant that the English translation I used was as good as any.

[Vegan Joe]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdvhfVoL48c