5 massive lies the Bible tells re Jesus

[GlitterRose]

TML-

The battle for Western Civilization is ultimately about restraint, and not specifically about Islamic vs. Judeo/Christian ideology. The natural tendency of humankind is to throw off restraint and live according to whatever one's passions lead to. That sounds good to someone who equates unrestrained passion with freedom, but it inevitably leads to societal corruption. (Unrestrained sexuality, for example, has led us back to slavery: just a few days ago, Congress passed a bill mandating special training for airline Flight Attendants, to help identify victims of sex trafficking on commercial flights. It took centuries for us to abolish Western-style slave labor, and only one generation to establish this new type of slavery. This is happening right now, right here in America.)

Judeo/Christian ideology is bound by the Biblical injunction to "do unto others as you would have others do unto you." That alone should be enough to lead us to a society that demands freedom and justice for all, but the principle must be grounded in a unifying ideology or we begin to "do what is right in our own eyes." Thus far, Judeo/Christian ideology, when held accountable to its own principles, has proven to be the ideology that is most able to unify us and to lead to "freedom and justice for all".

The word "progressive" is a word used mostly in politics, though it should be used to compare the differences in various ideologies throughout the world: which ideology has shown the most progress going forward? Yes, there are differences in doctrine among Jewish and Christian denominations, but we've progressed to the point where we no longer behead one another. The "do unto others" principle has compelled us to live peacefully side-by-side. We no longer engage in violent battles for dominance.

Yes, there are peaceful Muslims. Unfortunately, the battle for dominance in Islam now appears to be progressing toward the unrestrained violence and sexuality of ISIS-type jihadists, and peaceful Muslims are being murdered along with everyone else.

Murderous jihadists won't defeat us with religion; they have merely to join forces with like-minded individuals who enjoy a life without restraint. The jihadists have found the perfect combination to appease the consciences of their followers: murder and rape to your heart's content, and you will be greatly rewarded in Heaven! An internet search for angry young men will supply them with all the recruits necessary to destroy our society. That is what is being played out in Europe.

The internet has given us "social change on steroids". There is no time left to discuss which ideology is best for society. We choose now, or the choice will be made for us. I'm not saying that to scare people into belief in God. I'm just stating the reality of what is happening in the world today.

You think sex slavery is new? Again, I find myself asking if a religious person has read their own bible. Sex slavery is as old as time. It wasn't invented here after we went through the 60s.

Edited March 23, 2016 by ChaosRose

[simplybill]

You think sex slavery is new? Again, I find myself asking if a religious person has read their own bible. Sex slavery is as old as time. It wasn't invented here after we went through the 60s.

Point well taken, ChaosRose. I edited my post to read: "It took centuries for us to abolish Western-style slave labor, and only one generation to enable another type of slavery."

[Stubbly_Dooright]

So is there any point to this thread other than to provide a vehicle for Seeder's hatred of religion? He posts a video entitled "Religion is bullsh*t", and says "please listen... objectively pls". Right, so a video entitled Religion is bullsh*t" is really going to approach the subject from an objective viewpoint isn't it.

I think one can objectively view it and read it, if they try. You probably wouldn't believe I was a believer, by agreeing with it, but if the OP has a hatred of religion or belief, and I mean every bit of it, I should take offense. I don't. ( although, I will admit, I do have my moments. There are two posters on here, who I respect highly, who could agree with that. )

Then again, I have a strong opposition to prosetylizing, so maybe I'm being biased with the OP.

My point though is, if one tries, they can view it objectively.

...

Man, I hate missing stuff!!!

If someone one can't stand up and say this is bullsh*t, then all discussion ends. As a Pagan I am told my religion is bullsh*t on a regular basis, I am amoral and going to hell for my sins by people who have know idea as to what it is about. Fine with me, I'll have lot of friends there. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. If your faith can't stand up to opposing points of view, then maybe it is bullsh*t. It hurts me to no end when Abrahamics say the Earth is a place of evil and Satan's kingdom. You're talking about my mother. We have created the societies we live in, if the Earth is Satan's kingdom it is because we have made it so. By saying the Earth is Satan's kingdom it was given permission to those who way waste to her for their own proposes of greed. You have every right to your opinion, but don't think I don't have a right to mine.

*raises a cup to GmG*

As pagan as Mormonism right?

I was waiting for a response for that post.

Atheism, the new religion.

Atheists are just as bad, if not worse, than those who follow various religions. Why protest so much against something you don't believe even exists?

It's not the religion, it's the followers who protest the Atheists.

Here's the thought I put into that:

Now tell me it's not becoming it's own religion.

Isn't it someone else labeling them having a religion. It seems they Atheists themselves are calling it a assembly. In which can have a secular definition.

TML-

The battle for Western Civilization is ultimately about restraint, and not specifically about Islamic vs. Judeo/Christian ideology. The natural tendency of humankind is to throw off restraint and live according to whatever one's passions lead to. That sounds good to someone who equates unrestrained passion with freedom, but it inevitably leads to societal corruption. (Unrestrained sexuality, for example, has led us back to slavery: just a few days ago, Congress passed a bill mandating special training for airline Flight Attendants, to help identify victims of sex trafficking on commercial flights. It took centuries for us to abolish Western-style slave labor, and only one generation to enable another type of slavery. This is happening right now, right here in America.)

Whoa! Wait a minute! How is it you see unrestrained sexuality being slavery. There is sex trafficking, but you sound like you are talking about all slavery.

Judeo/Christian ideology is bound by the Biblical injunction to "do unto others as you would have others do unto you." That alone should be enough to lead us to a society that demands freedom and justice for all, but the principle must be grounded in a unifying ideology or we begin to "do what is right in our own eyes." Thus far, Judeo/Christian ideology, when held accountable to its own principles, has proven to be the ideology that is most able to unify us and to lead to "freedom and justice for all".

How is it, you seem to think that is only associated with Judeo/Christian ideology? This is the 'Golden Rule'. And I have found this to be abundant in varying belief systems.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/reciproc.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule

http://www.thinkhumanism.com/the-golden-rule.html

The word "progressive" is a word used mostly in politics, though it should be used to compare the differences in various ideologies throughout the world: which ideology has shown the most progress going forward? Yes, there are differences in doctrine among Jewish and Christian denominations, but we've progressed to the point where we no longer behead one another. The "do unto others" principle has compelled us to live peacefully side-by-side. We no longer engage in violent battles for dominance.

Yes, there are peaceful Muslims. Unfortunately, the battle for dominance in Islam now appears to be progressing toward the unrestrained violence and sexuality of ISIS-type jihadists, and peaceful Muslims are being murdered along with everyone else.

Murderous jihadists won't defeat us with religion; they have merely to join forces with like-minded individuals who enjoy a life without restraint. The jihadists have found the perfect combination to appease the consciences of their followers: murder and rape to your heart's content, and you will be greatly rewarded in Heaven! An internet search for angry young men will supply them with all the recruits necessary to destroy our society. That is what is being played out in Europe.

The internet has given us "social change on steroids". There is no time left to discuss which ideology is best for society. We choose now, or the choice will be made for us. I'm not saying that to scare people into belief in God. I'm just stating the reality of what is happening in the world today.

Ok, if I'm going to come to a conclusion of my question, you are saying the OP are lies. Is that correct, that you are saying that?

To me, it's not that they are coming across as lies, but questions that make some very good points. Given the situations, I have found that A should have equaled B, and since it didn't, that seems glaringly wrong. So, I still feel the five points that was made, as good points.

Now, you seem to be intent in saying that without a particular religion will go into chaos. Here's the thing, how does this connect to the points in the article in the OP? Do these questions and points in the article even talk about the world going to hell in a hand basket if it doesn't have that religion?

[GlitterRose]

Point well taken, ChaosRose. I edited my post to read: "It took centuries for us to abolish Western-style slave labor, and only one generation to enable another type of slavery."

If you look throughout history, there was never restraint. There was merely the illusion of restraint.

[Space Commander Travis]

Atheism, the new religion.

Atheists are just as bad, if not worse, than those who follow various religions. Why protest so much against something you don't believe even exists?

I've never understood that. The militant atheist brigade spend so much time pointing out what a genocidal despotic tyrant the Old Testament God is, and then they say "well of course, it doesn't exist..." So why spend so much time pointing out how evil and vile something that doesn't exist is ? It doesn't make any sense.

[Space Commander Travis]

Criticizing religion is now a religion. I see you put a lot of thought into that.

It is. R. Dawkins has stated many times that his mission is to steer people away from primitive superstition. What's that if not a messiah complex? To say nothing of the way that his followers seem to regard him in very much the same way as Catholics see the Pope, infallibility and all. Edited March 23, 2016 by Otto von Pickelhaube

[GlitterRose]

It is. R. Dawkins has stated many times that his mission is to steer people away from primitive superstition. What's that if not a messiah complex? To say nothing of the way that his followers seem to regard him in very much the same way as Catholics see the Pope, infallibility and all.

What exactly is wrong with at least trying to steer people away from primitive superstition? Primitive superstition has been responsible for an overwhelming amount of atrocities.

Wouldn't you like to persuade would-be religious extremists not to kill people? That might require examining a belief system or two.

Edited March 23, 2016 by ChaosRose

[Space Commander Travis]

What exactly is wrong with at least trying to steer people away from primitive superstition? Primitive superstition has been responsible for an overwhelming amount of atrocities.

Wouldn't you like to persuade would-be religious extremists not to kill people? That might require examining a belief system or two.

You could also point out the record of officially atheist states, such as Stalin's USSR, Mao's China, and Pol Pot's Cambodia, if you wanted to compare atrocities, and how it would be nice if would-be supposedly secular leaders could be persuaded not to kill people, but it'd probably be a waste of time.

[GlitterRose]

You could also point out the record of officially atheist states, such as Stalin's USSR, Mao's China, and Pol Pot's Cambodia, if you wanted to compare atrocities, and how it would be nice if would-be supposedly secular leaders could be persuaded not to kill people, but it'd probably be a waste of time.

I would still argue that such "atheist states" harbored supernatural beliefs about their rulers. Religion does currently hold the record, although it's true that no ideology can be free from potential abuse of power.

And maybe it is a waste of time to argue over religion, but you still seem to be here. What's your mission?

If he manages to convince even one person not to kill people, that seems worthwhile to me.

Religious people make appeals for peace all over the place, but somehow, it's only a waste of time when an atheist does it. It seems like atheist appeals for peace are a bit more authentic. Religious people do it out of one side of their mouth, while still giving lip service to the ideologies that call for the violence in the first place.

Edited March 23, 2016 by ChaosRose

[Space Commander Travis]

What's my mission? Can't someone just comment on threads without having to have a Mission? Is everyone who's posted in this thread, yourself included, on a Mission? What prominent atheist appeals for peace have there been recently, and what religious people have also done so, and why is the latter more hypocritical? Would (for example) the Pope appealing for peace be hypocritical because he'd secretly like to launch a crusade to convert everyone to Catholicism or something?

[seeder]

So is there any point to this thread other than to provide a vehicle for Seeder's hatred of religion? He posts a video entitled "Religion is bullsh*t", and says "please listen... objectively pls". Right, so a video entitled Religion is bullsh*t" is really going to approach the subject from an objective viewpoint isn't it.

My hatred of religion? I was raised a Christian - ha! Tho Im perhaps a lousy one....Baptized and all..... I just offered a link for discussion about dubious parts of the bible

Did you watch Carlins video? If so was his comedy logic lost on you? And if you didnt watch you can hardly criticise can you?

[StarMountainKid]

What would happen if everyone went home and tended to their own garden? "Garden" is symbolic of yourself, your family, your friends, your neighbors... You love and care for a garden to make it grow healthy and bloom in beautiful flowers or food for nourishment.

All the miracles or lies of religion will not make one flower grow. It's up to us individually to plant the seeds and cultivate our own gardens as best we are able. I see this as the best way to live our lives regardless of our beliefs or non-beliefs. These seem to me to be irrelevant to the flower.

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

It is. R. Dawkins has stated many times that his mission is to steer people away from primitive superstition. What's that if not a messiah complex?

Education?

[Space Commander Travis]

Education?

Supreme arrogance? "You should all come round to my way of thinking".

[GlitterRose]

What's my mission? Can't someone just comment on threads without having to have a Mission? Is everyone who's posted in this thread, yourself included, on a Mission? What prominent atheist appeals for peace have there been recently, and what religious people have also done so, and why is the latter more hypocritical? Would (for example) the Pope appealing for peace be hypocritical because he'd secretly like to launch a crusade to convert everyone to Catholicism or something?

When atheists try to steer people away from superstition, why do you think they might be doing that? Do you think it might have something to do with our current atmosphere of religious extremism? Someone like Richard Dawkins may well feel that his mission is to promote peace by trying to bring people to their senses.

An Imam can promote peace, but his religious text will still say what it says. The same goes for the Pope. Abrahamic religious texts are steeped in blood. Yes, it is kind of hypocritical to be mouthing both messages at the same time.

[GoldenWolf]

I've never understood that. The militant atheist brigade spend so much time pointing out what a genocidal despotic tyrant the Old Testament God is, and then they say "well of course, it doesn't exist..." So why spend so much time pointing out how evil and vile something that doesn't exist is ? It doesn't make any sense.

The construct of your guy's imagination is very real. I will quote the U.S. declaration of independence:

“A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.”.

[DingoLingo]

i have said this before the catholic church is not a christian church, it is a pagan one. some of it's members may be but the church isn't.

excuse me.. I resent that remark.. pagans do not believe in a single god.. but many gods and goddesses..

[GoldenWolf]

Another thing:

Genesis 1:27

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Exodus 15:3

The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.

How can the first amendment ever work? War is the antonym of peace. Don't you guy's get it?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

[Stubbly_Dooright]

What would happen if everyone went home and tended to their own garden? "Garden" is symbolic of yourself, your family, your friends, your neighbors... You love and care for a garden to make it grow healthy and bloom in beautiful flowers or food for nourishment.

All the miracles or lies of religion will not make one flower grow. It's up to us individually to plant the seeds and cultivate our own gardens as best we are able. I see this as the best way to live our lives regardless of our beliefs or non-beliefs. These seem to me to be irrelevant to the flower.

I have found it very interesting, that quite a few religious people tend to go off an find some real world example and metaphorically insert what is going on in example to establish how a unproven thing is the same. One, it seems it is pushing the audience to force themselves to see mundane example as the same as an unproven subject, and that doesn't always happen. Some people will still see something different and not see the comparison. And frankly, if you cannot explain the reasoning behind the 'unproven' subject, then using a mundane example is not going to work. It just goes to show how it really cannot be explained away and side stepping to such examples I find reaching.

[GlitterRose]

Supreme arrogance? "You should all come round to my way of thinking".

There are people who deny most science and adopt extreme religious beliefs that lead to horrible things. We don't have to imagine this. We can see it every day. And yes it would be great if they would become more reasonable. It wouldn't hurt if they were occasionally exposed to facts.

Edited March 23, 2016 by ChaosRose

[DingoLingo]

If someone one can't stand up and say this is bullsh*t, then all discussion ends. As a Pagan I am told my religion is bullsh*t on a regular basis, I am amoral and going to hell for my sins by people who have know idea as to what it is about. Fine with me, I'll have lot of friends there. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. If your faith can't stand up to opposing points of view, then maybe it is bullsh*t. It hurts me to no end when Abrahamics say the Earth is a place of evil and Satan's kingdom. You're talking about my mother. We have created the societies we live in, if the Earth is Satan's kingdom it is because we have made it so. By saying the Earth is Satan's kingdom it was given permission to those who way waste to her for their own proposes of greed. You have every right to your opinion, but don't think I don't have a right to mine.

totally hearing you with this post ..I used to get that kind of stuff from my grandmother (seriously catholic) loved her to bits and still miss her..

[WoIverine]

What exactly is wrong with at least trying to steer people away from primitive superstition? Primitive superstition has been responsible for an overwhelming amount of atrocities.

Wouldn't you like to persuade would-be religious extremists not to kill people? That might require examining a belief system or two.

Goodluck with that, let us know when you succeed.

[Space Commander Travis]

The construct of your guy's imagination is very real. I will quote the U.S. declaration of independence:

“A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.”.

But if this Tyrant doesn't exist, why do people get so angry about it? It still doesn't make sense.

[simplybill]

Ok, if I'm going to come to a conclusion of my question, you are saying the OP are lies. Is that correct, that you are saying that?

To me, it's not that they are coming across as lies, but questions that make some very good points. Given the situations, I have found that A should have equaled B, and since it didn't, that seems glaringly wrong. So, I still feel the five points that was made, as good points.

Now, you seem to be intent in saying that without a particular religion will go into chaos. Here's the thing, how does this connect to the points in the article in the OP? Do these questions and points in the article even talk about the world going to hell in a hand basket if it doesn't have that religion?

TML-

At this point in history, the message of the OP is irrelevant. We've had thousands of years to analyze all of the available ideologies. Now we're at the point where we're arguing over which fire hose to use as the house is burning down.

I'm going to quote Richard Dawkins again:

“There are no Christians, as far as I know, blowing up buildings,” Dawkins said. “I am not aware of any Christian suicide bombers. I am not aware of any major Christian denomination that believes the penalty for apostasy is death.”

Dawkins wondered aloud whether Christianity might indeed offer an antidote to protect western civilization against jihad.

“I have mixed feelings about the decline of Christianity, in so far as Christianity might be a bulwark against something worse.”

I'm going to extrapolate a concept from his remark:

Even if you believe that all religions are based on fairy tales, you can still acknowledge that the lessons drawn from the Judeo/Christian fairy tales lead to a better society than the lessons drawn from the other fairy tales.

Edited March 23, 2016 by simplybill

[+Hammerclaw]

There are people who deny most science and adopt extreme religious beliefs that lead to horrible things. We don't have to imagine this. We can see it every day. And yes it would be great if they would become more reasonable. It wouldn't hurt if they were occasionally exposed to facts.

Facts like 75% of scientists, engineers and technical people work in the private sector and are busy as little beavers arming us to the teeth with more and even deadlier weapons of mass destruction? Y-a-a-a-y Science!