On May 19 2011 04:56 MangoTango wrote: Religion: promoting voluntary insanity since, forever, really.
Science flies people to the moon. Religion flies people into buildings.
User was warned for this post
Well said.
"Science" isn't any more innocent than religion in the atrocities that has taken place during the world history. Heck, one of the most well-known trials in the world is the Nuremberg trials - which was regarding doctors who to make scientific progress tortured and killed performed trials on humans.
This whole attempt at seizing a superior position is really fucking tiring - both science and religion plays an important role in society; when morons misuse either, condemn the morons, not the subject being misused...
Did you seriously just say that religion is as important to society as religion? Really? Yeah sure, without science we wouldn't even have the internet for you to say something like that, but at least we would have Jesus.
Why are you so hateful? Science is no more innocent than religion in having run amok countless times and causing terrible pain. Perhaps you worship some other god, like logic or the internet, but make no mistake that we all worship some god. You worship man, you worship yourself; it doesn't matter really. Humanity has needed something to believe in since the dawn of time, and religion is crucial to our emotional and spiritual evolution. You're focusing only on the bad things religion has brought forward: holy wars, despot kings and fanatical terror. Science has done all these terrible things: human testing, atom bombs and other weapons of war. You think hope, happiness, meaning and a code of ethics for millions billions of people is worthless? It isn't. Just like technology is far from worthless.
I don't practice religion, but I find your binary view of it a little disgusting.
You people are acting slightly ignorant. Both "Factions" i should call it as you people are so seperated. They have both committed atrocities from the Crusades and science with the development of the Manhattan Project and numerous trials and advancements that result in the death of millions whether through military technology or even medicine that turns out to be terrible. Both science and Religion go hand and hand. You know the Vatican approves of the idea of the Big Bang Theory, Evolution, and they even have their own telescope. They approve of extraterrestrial life. They basically approve of modern science and the theories that go along with it (ie: Big Bang Theory, Evolution). There's no reason you can't believe in both. And the idea that you don't believe in the Church which I agree with, as they were (possibly are) very corrupt and have committed atrocities. That shouldn't mean you have to lose all your faith all together. I'm not a christian or religious by any standards but that dosen't mean I have to agree with science on everything. The fact is that Man searches for a purpose in life and if they don't find it through religion, they have to continue to find it through atheism. You don't have to believe in a religion, I don't, but naturally, all people search for a purpose in life, and due to the fact that religion is the main purpose for alot of people, no body really knows any other purpose. I'm fine without religion, however. The point is science and religion coincide with eachother and they agree with eachother on certain things. A lot of scientists aren't atheist and a lot of religious people believe in scientific ideas including the Vatican, as previously stated.
On May 19 2011 04:56 MangoTango wrote: Religion: promoting voluntary insanity since, forever, really.
Science flies people to the moon. Religion flies people into buildings.
User was warned for this post
Well said.
"Science" isn't any more innocent than religion in the atrocities that has taken place during the world history. Heck, one of the most well-known trials in the world is the Nuremberg trials - which was regarding doctors who to make scientific progress tortured and killed performed trials on humans.
This whole attempt at seizing a superior position is really fucking tiring - both science and religion plays an important role in society; when morons misuse either, condemn the morons, not the subject being misused...
Did you seriously just say that religion is as important to society as religion? Really? Yeah sure, without science we wouldn't even have the internet for you to say something like that, but at least we would have Jesus.
Why are you so hateful? Science is no more innocent than religion in having run amok countless times and causing terrible pain. Perhaps you worship some other god, like logic or the internet, but make no mistake that we all worship some god. You worship man, you worship yourself; it doesn't matter really. Humanity has needed something to believe in since the dawn of time, and religion is crucial to our emotional and spiritual evolution. You're focusing only on the bad things religion has brought forward: holy wars, despot kings and fanatical terror. You think hope, happiness, meaning and a code of ethics for millions of people is worthless?
No humans don't need to "believe" in something, and we don't need religion for any type of evolution. If people gain hope from religion good for them, but for one you don't need religion to be fulfilled. Frankly it was an absurd notion that religion brought progress like science did, if anything religion is anti progress. How am I hateful? I didn't even insult you or anything.
The man was a devout Christian, and police speculated that his "deep religious faith" may have helped him endure "immense pain."
Ah, is that so. Apparently his faith wasn't even strong enough to let him endure the mild annoyance life can be.
He wasn't Savior and his cross wasn't The Ankh... he wasn't going to revive or his faith in Christianity wasn't strong enough...he didn't even have the donkey either...
On May 20 2011 07:53 Olinim wrote: Who cares what completely insane rationalization they used within Christianity to justify this? And let me assure you that rationalization is indeed completely insane. How does it make sense for a being that is basically God to die on a cross to absolve the sins of humans...how can someone else pay the price of our sins, that is in complete opposition of any sense of justice that has been adopted in the modern world.
Ahh, you just asked him an open question allowing him the opportunity to give you more of his insane Christian rationalisations on the next question you have asked... Let me assure you, Christians have insanely retarded rationalisations in anticipation for any logical questions.
You are such a troll, it actually physically ails me.
Let's get some things straight right now. I am an atheist. I don't and have never believed in organized religion. I don't particularly care about religious people, and I don't particularly care about this story. But the amount of lack of knowledge of religion, not just in this thread, about among the internet in general is just astounding.
I mean according to DemonHunter, Christians are stupid and are unable to answer logical questions. Never mind all of the famous logicians in history that happened to be Christian, like for example Hegel, Francis Bacon, or mathematicians like Leibniz. No, according to the Christian-haters, religion has only brought evil into the world, and that you could certainly not just blame individuals for their stupid actions and stupid ideas.
I hate this line of thought because it is completely illogical, and fallacious. The Westboro Baptist Church is not Christianity, and is not a good representation for the average Christian. For that matter, neither is Hegel or Francis Bacon. With Christianity being the largest religion in the world (according to CIA World Factbook), there is nothing that will describe all Christians, or their thoughts or feelings or relative rationality.
This guy in the original article had certain beliefs and acted upon them. If we assume everything in the article to be true, then he probably acted upon those beliefs under the impression that it would provide him with a better position in the afterlife. The course of his actions led him to self-mutilation which led to his death. While I completely disagree with his beliefs, I actually admire his will and at least self consistency (even if I also think he has probably misread the Bible, but it is a difficult book to read so alternate interpretations are very common).
To most of us, this seems like a very crazy thing to do. For him, his soul was on the line. I find it relatively comparable to Mohamed Bouazizi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Bouazizi) who lit himself on fire after dousing himself in gasoline. His actions started revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt, and the civil war in Libya. For Mohamed, he was worried about his survival in this life, his economic survival. For the man in the article, he was worried about the state of his immortal soul.
Either way, both of them acted in the manner they thought best. I happen to disagree with their thought process, but hating on a religion is an extremely poor way to show your disagreement. It just shows your ignorance, of both history and alternate lifestyles to your own. I would ask you to imagine what it would be like to be worried over an immortal soul, but you seem clearly incapable of empathizing with the religious. It is pretty much the exact same situation any time a fundamentalist is incapable of empathizing with someone of a different religion.
Obviously not every Christian is stupid, though I believe their train of though to come to that conclusion was poor. Yes, there are countless numbers of different types of Christian which is why people mostly talk about the ones that simply follow the Bible literally the most basic form of it, and you know what, the Westboro Baptist Church does.
Also, your arguments in this post are ridiculous, honestly. You say there is nothing in the world that will describe all Christians, does this make them immune to criticism? No. Secondly you say that he acted upon what his beliefs, what he thought was right...so what? EVERYONE DOES THAT. Oh yeah...Hitler may have murdered millions of people, but in his eyes he was purifying Germany. Doesn't excuse the poor logic this man used, and his blatant mental health issues. I can empathize with them, they are frightened they will go to hell, but that fear is completely irrational.
No, that fear is not completely irrational. Do you have knowledge of what happens to you after you die? Because I sure don't. I would really love to hear about the time you spent dead in the afterlife or in utter oblivion.
I also never said that Christianity is not immune to criticism. I was responding to the dirty way in which criticism is often levied at Christianity from people with a poor understanding of history. Saying the Westboro Baptist Church follows the most basic form of the Bible is a very poor understanding of both Christianity, and its history. From Christianity's beginning issues were not clearly defined and taken at face value within just the Bible. To say that is to completely miss the point.
Just as an example, most people when they mention how Christians went on the Crusades to kill Muslims often leave out a pretty important self-justification the Christians had. Namely, that war is possible if a Christian loved their enemy. Do I agree with the Crusades and buy into their justification? No. But I also don't ignore it. The Westboro Baptist Church is one of the most hateful organizations in all of Christian history. It is decidedly on the fringe of Christianity and a very poor representation of what it has meant to be a Christian historically and in the majority.
I should also point out that Hitler killing millions of people and acting upon his beliefs is decidedly different than this man killing himself. In one situation, a man acts upon MILLIONS of other people, and acts as judge and jury, or "casts the first stone" in Bible-speak. In the other situation, a man acts only upon himself, not causing harm to anyone else. So when I say that I don't mind that this Korean man acted upon his beliefs, I mean I really don't care in the slightest because he did what was best for him without harming anyone else in the process.
Thank you for comparing that to Hitler though, showing another poor understanding of Christianity. Clearly self-mutilation is exactly like genocide, and the desire for rapture and saving of an immortal soul is equally as stupid as the hate of entire races of people.
Yes the fear is completely irrational. It's just like not going outside because you are afraid that there is a psycho bunny monster that will bite your head off, CAN YOU PROVE THAT THERE IS NO PSYCHO INVISIBLE BUNNY MONSTER THAT WILL BITE MY HEAD OFF HUH HUH????? There is no sufficient evidence to believe that there is any type of hell, to say there is, is absurd.
And what are you saying with the Crusade? You said you don't agree with the justification but you don't ignore it? If the justification wasn't right then that means the Christians were in the wrong...so I really don't see what you're getting at.
And I didn't compare his actions to Hitler, I compared your justification of his actions, I was simply showing that doing what you think is right is meaningless because that's what everyone does. Sorry if it sounded like I thought he was as bad as Hitler was just using it as an example for your justification, not comparing him with the victim. The foundation of Christianity is the Bible, the Bible promotes genocide, homophobia, and slavery this is a fact, so how is the Westboro Baptist Church a poor representation of Christianity, it doesn't represent the majority, but it represents the Bible.
I don't think you really know what the meaning of the word irrational is. I can believe something and be rational about it if given proof I stop believing in it. Seeing as I have left my house for many years without having my having my head bitten off, there is most likely no invisible psycho bunny monster. Seeing as no one has ever died and come back, there is 0 proof one way or the other on what happens to you after you die. So a belief in hell is not irrational. Comparing it to an invisible psycho bunny monster is ridiculous.
I also want to point out your lack of knowledge by making it clear that it is not 100% decided that Hell exists in Christianity. Heaven exists for most Christians definitely, but Hell has at times, and perhaps still, been thought of as inconsistent with Christianity and God. So not all Christians necessary believe in it (just some food for thought).
What I was getting at with the Crusade is that the justification for going into a holy war was loving your enemy. That ideally love was the basis for many different sets of actions that Christians have, and that their God has primarily love as his big thing (love of your neighbor). So I find it a pretty logical conclusion to assume that the Westboro Baptist Church is a poor representation of Christianity what with their enormous lack of love for their neighbor.
Doing what you think is right may be meaningless, but there are certainly different shades in doing what you think is right. You attacked my justification of his actions, but my justification was based on the idea that he was acting alone and only upon himself. I think suicide is as equally irrational in any circumstance as religion, but that doesn't mean I don't see the justification. And as long as there are no ramifications upon others (the way there is in murder) then I have no problems with it.
The Bible also does not promote genocide, homophobia, and slavery. The bible certainly does not have a good picture of homosexuality, but to say that the Bible promotes the hate of gay people is an extremely ignorant view of the Bible. How many times do I have to stress this? What part of homophobia is consistent with the message of loving your neighbor? The Westboro Baptist Church does not represent the Bible, and the Bible is not strictly Christianity. It is Christianity's main text, but that doesn't mean that there are not other aspects involved in Christianity, and comparing the Westboro Baptist Church with say Catholocism or Orthodoxy is ludicrous.
Yes, and seeing as I have walked around for years without encountering any type of God, or anything relating to hell, it would be equally silly to base my life on the fact that it might exist, by his creation. Also Ican't believe people still stay that the Bible doesn't promote slavery and genocide, are you kidding me? Seriously, tell me you are?
Leviticus 25:44 "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves."
Eph 6:5 "Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ."
Fucking clear as day, irrefutable.
Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
As for the genocide... God's Death Toll Bible 2,391,421 This is the estimated death toll from the Bible.
You constantly say I'm lacking knowledge, I'm ignorant, but I've only pointed out facts. You're trolling me right bro? Obviously you've never so much as touched the Bible. So let's see now, Those 2 verses promote, oh yes slavery that's right. Then oh look though shalt not lie with mankind, it is an abomination, oh yes very tolerant of homosexuality. Calling them abominations. Surely no genocide, for the loving God of the desert right? Oh wait... 2.4 million death toll...
Your first paragraph is nonsensical. One does not "run into God" anymore than one "rocks into Mordor".
As for your quotes, the first one is from Leviticus, which is part of the Old Testament. There are plenty of things in Leviticus which are later contradicted in the New Testament. But let us take your full New Testament example from Ephasians: + Show Spoiler +
5(CT) Slaves,[c] obey your earthly masters[d] with fear and trembling,(CU) with a sincere heart,(CV) as you would Christ, 6not by the way of eye-service, as(CW) people-pleasers, but as servants[e] of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart, 7rendering service with a good will as to the Lord and not to man, 8(CX) knowing that whatever good anyone does, this he will receive back from the Lord,(CY) whether he is a slave or free. 9Masters, do the same to them,(CZ) and stop your threatening, knowing that(DA) he who is both their Master[f] and yours is in heaven, and that(DB) there is no partiality with him.
I'm pretty sure the point of that quote was not to promote slavery, but to address slavery. Slavery was not a choice two thousand years ago. It's not like people were going around having debates about the morality or legality of slavery. It just was. Here Paul addresses the question of slavery by pointing out that God does not discriminate whether you are a slave or Master.
And you cannot point out the death toll in the Bible as an argument for promoting genocide. You could say the Bible describes genocide, but not promotes it. To promote it, it would have to say "Hey guy, go out and kill millions of people". Instead, the Bible says "thou shalt not kill". I think even you should be aware of that.
I also never said the Bible was cool with homosexuality. It isn't. But the Bible also doesn't promote homophobia, since hating gay people isn't very Christian. It really depends on your definition of homophobia. If you mean fear and disgust, then yeah it probably does. But if you mean hate and violence, then no, the Bible, or at least the New Testament, does not promote that type of homophobia.
I didn't say run into God, I mean to say encounter anything that was an effect from him or any reason to believe he exists. Also, you don't need to be violent towards them to be homophobic, being disgusted by them is the very definition of homophobia since its an irrational disgust. Still, it condones slavery, it freaking says "you may buy a slave" I don't care if it was commonplace at the time FREAKING GOD should know better. He said that it's ok, there's nothing more to it, the Bible promotes slavery and its A FACT. Seriously how can you try to defend this?
There actually isn't one specified definition of homophobia, which was why I specified, but at this point the homophobia is a minor point.
I am defending it because you are oversimplifying. Christianity is not black and white, and the idea that Christianity promotes slavery is also ridiculous. Christianity has changed over time, for example, and what it means to be a Christian today is not the same thing as what it mean to be a Christian in 650 A.D.
Also, I think it should be pointed out that slavery is a social institution. That is why I mentioned how the master and the slave are equal in the eyes of God. Jesus Christ famously said "give unto Caesar what is Caesar's". In other words, Christianity should not involve itself with politics, but with matters of the soul. One could argue that for Christians slavery is relatively unimportant since the soul will be saved or damned regardless of your place on the socioeconomic ladder.
Christianity has plenty of problems, as most religions do, and I am always happy to discuss those. As an atheist, there are a number of issues I have with religions in general that turn me off from them, not the least of which is the lack of reason to choose between competing religions. But the arguments that are usually thrown against Christianity, and the arguments you are using, are not strong arguments. They are gut reactions from people that see Fox News and the Westboro Baptist Church as the most prevalent examples of Christians. That just isn't case.
I dislike this because it creates a straw man that is easy to take down. I see other atheists do this all the time, and it bothers me because they aren't promoting anything other than an irrational hate for the religious. For one thing, being religious does not necessitate a lack of logic, and it is not diametrically opposed to science either (although plenty of churches have been so historically). I don't particularly like fundamentalists either, but I find it easy to avoid fundamentalists and the crazy religious probably because I just don't hang around religious people. Otherwise, I would probably be getting all up in their faces over their inconsistencies. As I interact more with atheists, I do this to atheists. I don't do well with irrationality or inconsistency, whether or not someone agrees with me.
I also don't see this is a difficult task. Separating the actions of flawed individuals from the greater philosophy is a fairly simple task. Understanding that most religions are complicated and rarely have black and white answers, despite what some of their believers may think, is also not difficult. My favorite Christian would probably be Kierkegaard because he recognized that even after the leap of faith is made, a believer will always have doubt if he is a true believer. Kierkegaard thought that to lack doubt in one's faith was not to be a believer, but to be credulous. Put another way, Kierkegaard was against fundamentalism and brainwashing, and I think that is pretty cool.
So my question to you is: why can't you just let it go? How can this one guy be a representation for over 30% of the human population?
On May 19 2011 04:56 MangoTango wrote: Religion: promoting voluntary insanity since, forever, really.
Science flies people to the moon. Religion flies people into buildings.
User was warned for this post
Well said.
"Science" isn't any more innocent than religion in the atrocities that has taken place during the world history. Heck, one of the most well-known trials in the world is the Nuremberg trials - which was regarding doctors who to make scientific progress tortured and killed performed trials on humans.
This whole attempt at seizing a superior position is really fucking tiring - both science and religion plays an important role in society; when morons misuse either, condemn the morons, not the subject being misused...
Did you seriously just say that religion is as important to society as science? Really? Yeah sure, without science we wouldn't even have the internet for you to say something like that, but at least we would have Jesus.
Religion =/= Jesus, and yes I said religion was as important to society as science. Religion is the earliest examples of ethics we have. And without ethics you wouldn't have human rights like say freedom of speech... So yeah, REALLY!
Before your next attempt at a witty remark, think it through please...
On May 19 2011 04:56 MangoTango wrote: Religion: promoting voluntary insanity since, forever, really.
Science flies people to the moon. Religion flies people into buildings.
User was warned for this post
Well said.
"Science" isn't any more innocent than religion in the atrocities that has taken place during the world history. Heck, one of the most well-known trials in the world is the Nuremberg trials - which was regarding doctors who to make scientific progress tortured and killed performed trials on humans.
This whole attempt at seizing a superior position is really fucking tiring - both science and religion plays an important role in society; when morons misuse either, condemn the morons, not the subject being misused...
Did you seriously just say that religion is as important to society as religion? Really? Yeah sure, without science we wouldn't even have the internet for you to say something like that, but at least we would have Jesus.
Why are you so hateful? Science is no more innocent than religion in having run amok countless times and causing terrible pain. Perhaps you worship some other god, like logic or the internet, but make no mistake that we all worship some god. You worship man, you worship yourself; it doesn't matter really. Humanity has needed something to believe in since the dawn of time, and religion is crucial to our emotional and spiritual evolution. You're focusing only on the bad things religion has brought forward: holy wars, despot kings and fanatical terror. You think hope, happiness, meaning and a code of ethics for millions of people is worthless?
No humans don't need to "believe" in something, and we don't need religion for any type of evolution. If people gain hope from religion good for them, but for one you don't need religion to be fulfilled. Frankly it was an absurd notion that religion brought progress like science did, if anything religion is anti progress. How am I hateful? I didn't even insult you or anything.
I think he was referring to your attempt at seizing intellectual highground by riddiculing me with your "Really?"...
And frankly, no it wasn't. To deny that religion has played a huge role in forming of modern values, i.e. human rights, is what is absurd.
The man was a devout Christian, and police speculated that his "deep religious faith" may have helped him endure "immense pain."
Ah, is that so. Apparently his faith wasn't even strong enough to let him endure the mild annoyance life can be.
Or perhaps his ritual wasn't suicide due to mild annoyance; maybe it was either annoyance or not suicide to escape, but (in his beliefs) to transcend?
Those who commit suicide don't ascend to heaven (nor do they transcend anything). + Show Spoiler +
Neither does anyone else, but that's beside the point.
1) Corinthians 10:31 reveal that the Holy Spirit dwells in those who are saved. It is our responsibility to treat Him with respect, and suicide is not appropriate. 2) Genesis 1:26,27 (and similar verses) reveal that we are made in the image of God. This is one of the reasons we are not allowed to murder (see Genesis 9:6,7), so again suicide would be a bad thing. 3) The Bible teaches us to trust, depend on, and believe in God throughout its length. (Romans 8:28 is one example.) To take your own life would show no faith in God. Notice that although the prophets, apostles, and Jesus Christ were persecuted, tortured, and put to death; they did not commit suicide for an “easy out.” They “fought the good fight” to the end (see 2 Timothy 4:6-8). 4) Be aware of how suicide affects other people’s opinion of the person who died. It is common for people to wonder if someone who commits suicide went to heaven. That is a poor testimony for a “Christian warrior.”
On May 19 2011 04:56 MangoTango wrote: Religion: promoting voluntary insanity since, forever, really.
Science flies people to the moon. Religion flies people into buildings.
User was warned for this post
Well said.
"Science" isn't any more innocent than religion in the atrocities that has taken place during the world history. Heck, one of the most well-known trials in the world is the Nuremberg trials - which was regarding doctors who to make scientific progress tortured and killed performed trials on humans.
This whole attempt at seizing a superior position is really fucking tiring - both science and religion plays an important role in society; when morons misuse either, condemn the morons, not the subject being misused...
Did you seriously just say that religion is as important to society as religion? Really? Yeah sure, without science we wouldn't even have the internet for you to say something like that, but at least we would have Jesus.
Why are you so hateful? Science is no more innocent than religion in having run amok countless times and causing terrible pain. Perhaps you worship some other god, like logic or the internet, but make no mistake that we all worship some god. You worship man, you worship yourself; it doesn't matter really. Humanity has needed something to believe in since the dawn of time, and religion is crucial to our emotional and spiritual evolution. You're focusing only on the bad things religion has brought forward: holy wars, despot kings and fanatical terror. You think hope, happiness, meaning and a code of ethics for millions of people is worthless?
No humans don't need to "believe" in something, and we don't need religion for any type of evolution. If people gain hope from religion good for them, but for one you don't need religion to be fulfilled. Frankly it was an absurd notion that religion brought progress like science did, if anything religion is anti progress. How am I hateful? I didn't even insult you or anything.
Because you don't need religion doesn't mean that billions of others share your feelings. In fact, in not needing religion you are in a minority on this planet. You're entire argument is based upon examples from your own life: technology, ipod, vibrating dildo= good, september 11th, priest pedophiles, faith over action = bad. These are incredibly isolated instances (on BOTH sides) of the good or bad these forces have had in your life. You have no world view. BILLIONS of people enjoy and love their faith, see it as an integral part of their life. People see their faith as inspiration, as joy, as happiness. These people life better lives because of their faith. Ultimately, isn't the goal of technology to enrich peoples lives? Religion does the exact same thing.
Ok, well this has devolved into a typical religion thread which means I'm going to close it. My religious views are irrelevant in the matter, but I'd just like to point out to the people promenading logic and science in this debate that most of you haven't actually applied logic or science to the police report, which maintains that a single man was capable of nailing his feet to a cross, tying his neck back, stabbing himself and then drilling holes in his hands while remaining lucid enough to place said hands over spikes.
Officials re-enacted some elements of the crucifixion and concluded that an adult male could perform the act on his own, the agency said.
Am I the only one who sees the absurdity in this? Use your fucking investigative minds.
EPT
