Why do you dislike Religion/ the religious?

[Reflection]

(I see the flood argument a coming!)

you can tell that this kind of thing is getting old /:

 

[Donna da Ragione]

(Hey Onasi you're doing it wrong.)

 

[Ophan]

He's not gonna make a valid argument, if he doesn't understand
what your trying to respond to him. Understanding should have been the point
of this thread, but like i said before, It can't be reached if the thread refers to the
reasoning of disliking religion, while being made by someone who isn't religious.

Their is no certain gain until he/she says that it's understandable and worthy of looking
into. I'm not a very religious person but i do understand the points being made by those
who are religious here. For me it's a learning experience, and observation i suppose.

 

[Forever Atlas]

He's not gonna make a valid argument, if he doesn't understand
what your trying to respond to him. Understanding should have been the point
of this thread, but like i said before, It can't be reached if the thread refers to the
reasoning of disliking religion, while being made by someone who isn't religious.

Their is no certain gain until he/she says that it's understandable and worthy of looking
into. I'm not a very religious person but i do understand the points being made by those
who are religious here. For me it's a learning experience, and observation i suppose.

That's so true.

 

[Shade737]

In fact up until recently I was a devout Catholic.

:/

 

[Reflection]

lol denominations

 

[Bukkake Sensei]

People that are constantly trying to disprove my belief (I'm not actually very religious, but whatever) are just as bad as people that try to push their religion on atheists.

No we aren't, because we back up our beliefs with facts and not archaic superstitions. Forgive me for being a realist, but I'm not going to instill any credibility in these religious belief systems by pretending that they're not ludicrous.

Am I the only one who hasn't run into zealous pushy atheists in real life? Because I see all this "but atheists do it too!" and I wonder if they're just referring to the internet.

My policy on discussing my opinions on religion is not to bring it up unless I'm explicitly given the soap box. Mind you, there was a time when I was a rabid Atheist, but years of debating people with opinions that hold no interest and no foundation in reality has made me a little jaded.

I think it was Richard Dawkins that said that we never hear about Atheists in the mainstream because trying to unite Atheists for a single cause would be like trying to herd cats; we are independent minded and lack the pack mentality that religious people seem to exhibit, and without the strength that comes from numbers, I think that secularists as a whole remain silent.

God's Holy book has nothing moral in it.

That's a bit of an exaggeration, isn't it? I'll be the first one to admit that I tend to think that Christian doctrine (not the mythological aspects) is fundamentally good. Look at the ten commandments; don't lie, don't kill people, don't steal, treat your parents with respect, don't succumb to jealousy...there are a few things on the list without any real practical application to an Atheist, but for the most part it is a wise list of ten that I've subconsciously applied to my everyday conduct all my life.

 

[Phoenix]

Keep in mind here that in the time these books were written, slavery was commonplace and accepted.
Does it say anything in here about the gruesome picture of slavery we have today?
No. It's teaching kindness. Can you even call this slavery? It's in passages next to parent and children and teacher and student.
I don't see anything wrong with it, because it teaches GOODNESS to each other.

You don't see anything wrong with slavery? Seriously? Do you think a few nice words and a pat on the head would make a person forget that he is legally owned by another person? Yes, if you want to leave but your master won't let you, we can indeed call it slavery, and o matter how sugarcoated it is, there's something very, very wrong with it.

Or do you believe that the nice Southerners should've been allowed to keep their cotton plantations?

 

[Reflection]

You don't see anything wrong with slavery? Seriously? Do you think a few nice words and a pat on the head would make a person forget that he is legally owned by another person? Yes, if you want to leave but your master won't let you, we can indeed call it slavery, and o matter how sugarcoated it is, there's something very, very wrong with it.

Or do you believe that the nice Southerners should've been allowed to keep their cotton plantations?

No, I just don't blame the Hebrews back then who didn't have enough power to put an end to it.

 

[qster]

It does more harm than good because when religions don't like that another religion has different beliefs, they go to war, ruin economies, and further our feeling of paranoia afterwhat happened on...that day.

 

[Phoenix]

Erm, those same guys backed by God?

Welp, I don't blame the Nazis for following Hitler. An individual nazi couldn't have done much, after all.

 

[Onasi]

Uh because they are still slaves. Slavery even without prejudice against them means some sort of work for no pay. Being nice to them is pointless because they are still slaves. It’s immoral to not compensate the worker if they are not just doing it out of the goodness of their heart.

So waiting for death and calling your friends and followers Satan when they try to keep you from letting yourself be killed is okay? So Jesus knew that his words would be written down in a book, misstranslanslated in every language, and presented to an audience?

You do know that every religion ever has proclaimed their words, holy prophets, and books as truth and every other religion is false right? Not only that but the books in the bible and Jesus being the son of God were both voted on by a council in Vatican City. If the bible was God’s holy word then reality should not be left up to a vote of a few self proclaimed holy men. If it was the divine word of God you wouldn’t need to leave any of his word out. To do so would be a crime against him.

How about these simple facts… SNAKES CAN’T TALK! There is no holy Garden of Eden. There were people other than Adam, Eve, and their sons.

Sure you could say it was a metaphor for a choice between innocence and responsibility but why do you need the fairy tale that people say is truth.

You have to base the ability for the Donkey to talk on the blind faith of there being an improbable God.

If God didn’t want his people to read it, then why let his prophets write it down in the first place? An all knowing God would know that people would adjust their moral beliefs and would not have let the occurrence happen to be misinterpreted.

Because we shouldn’t try to help people to change by rehabilitation or simply putting them in jail.

So if God told you to leave your brother, sister, mother, or father to die because he had a plan for you… you would. God asks that you put him first.

Very relevant. God’s first followers obeyed these laws and thought them sacred. You are going against God’s chosen people.

We have no written accounts of Jesus existing outside the holy books of the bible and Koran. There are plenty of people today who think they are God so there must have been similar people in the past. You don’t think the acts of Jesus could just be a compilation of many acts of different people?

Oh and the Jews weren’t the first to inhabit Israel. People existed there before the introduction of the Jewish faith. Natural history proves this. So the Israel is being fought over by the latest invaders. It’s not the bible God’s nation at all.

The Koran goes against many things the bible says. It says Marry was 12 years old, Jesus was not God’s son, ect. Who is to say that they aren’t right and you are wrong.

Umm… A few things in history the bible gets wrong. Egypt had no Jewish slaves, nothing about transitional mammals before humans, no dinosaurs, civilization before the bible says life was created, other religions long before the belief in monotheism, There were not 127 providences in the Persian empire, Darius the Mede did not capture Babylon Cyrus of Persia did, the universe is billions of years old, the world is round, the atmosphere is not a cloak draped over a glass dome, no mention of the massacre of male children by king Herod, and the Roman empire took no such census that the bible says drove Marry and Joseph to Bethlehem.

Is that enough inaccuracies? Plus if the flood was wrong what makes you think anything else in the bible is right?

God did not write the bible. Even if you believe in God the bible was written by mortal, human authors. These men had no incite to unknown knowledge. They followed a very sexist and prejudice set of laws that were reflected in the bible.

Do you have any more arguments? This time don’t use the bible to prove the bible as truth. If I don’t think the bible is truth what makes you think I will accept the bible as proof for the GOD DAMN BIBLE?

And what’s wrong with being a Catholic. Without Catholic cults in Rome Christianity may never have became the state religion. Without them the religion may have ended before the empire’s collapse.

Really, really believing in something doesn’t make it so and reality isn’t a democracy. Put up things that can be tested to prove a point. Faith is never a good thing. It’s rejecting truth to things you believe to be true.

Oh and Hitler was taught to be a leader. There was just as good of chance that some other member of the Nazi party with talent to have been picked. Hitler just happen to have enough of a pressence.

P.S. if I wanted to bring out haters (which I didn't) I failed at doing so. The poll shows that no one as of now has voted for the first option on the list.

 

[krexia]

My policy on discussing my opinions on religion is not to bring it up unless I'm explicitly given the soap box. Mind you, there was a time when I was a rabid Atheist, but years of debating people with opinions that hold no interest and no foundation in reality has made me a little jaded.

I sometimes feel the same way. But then this morning on forums elsewhere, I received a private message from a guy I barely know. Several months ago we'd had a long, involved debate about the scientific basis of evolution, in which I'd done my best to point out the obvious fallacies and inaccuracies in his presuppositions. Things actually got pretty heated. But in this PM he said that he's spent the time since doing a lot of research, and no longer considers himself a Christian. He thanked me outright for the fact that he is now able to look critically at how he was conditioned to think in a certain way for his entire life (his words), and also for spending so much time explaining the science behind evolution. He asked me why I even bothered - and the obvious answer is because of guys like him. Because just occasionally, you come across a person who isn't afraid to honestly consider and challenge rationality of their beliefs, and whose mind you can change with rational argument.

I don't consider myself a rabid atheist, but yeah, when someone brings the topic up I'll respond in kind. The argument we had only started when this guy linked to a ridiculous site supposedly pointing out all the holes in evolutionary theory.

 

[Bukkake Sensei]

Are we so quick to forget that slavery in the Bible was used to justify slavery in 19th century America?

There's no such thing as compassionate slavery. The difference between a slave and a person is that slaves are objects. And if you're capable of viewing your fellow man as an object, fuck you.

 

[Forever Atlas]

Are we so quick to forget that slavery in the Bible was used to justify slavery in 19th century America?

Which most people know was used in a twisted way. Even many people in the very same era.

There's no such thing as compassionate slavery. The difference between a slave and a person is that slaves are objects. And if you're capable of viewing your fellow man as an object, fuck you.

Lets put this in simple terms. Slavery that was going on then, is pretty much what is going on now.

An employee and an employer. A work relationship with a contract. Only difference was, at that time there were specific guidelines for the master to make sure they treated the "slave" right and if he didn't the contract was broken and the "slave" was allowed to go out on his own.

 

[Bukkake Sensei]

Which most people know was used in a twisted way. Even many people in the very same era.



Lets put this in simple terms. Slavery that was going on then, is pretty much what is going on now.

An employee and an employer. A work relationship with a contract. Only difference was, at that time there were specific guidelines for the master to make sure they treated the "slave" right and if he didn't the contract was broken and the "slave" was allowed to go out on his own.

I'd like to use the above quote as another example of why I dislike religion. As you can all see, it's managed to convince people that slavery is justifiable and even has them publicly defending it.

 

[Shade737]

I dislike denominations.

 

[Phoenix]

Lets put this in simple terms. Slavery that was going on then, is pretty much what is going on now.

"Slavery is a form of forced labor in which people are considered to be, or treated as, the property of others."

Now whenever you feel slavery is nicer than actual employment, repeat to yourself the definition of slavery 3 times.

 

[Forever Atlas]

I'd like to use the above quote as another example of why I dislike religion. As you can all see, it's managed to convince people that slavery is justifiable and even has them publicly defending it.

Then I hope you never get a job to pay off loans, credit card bills, or make a contract with anyone that involves money because then you'll be supporting the very thing you denounce.

"Slavery is a form of forced labor in which people are considered to be, or treated as, the property of others."

Now whenever you feel slavery is nicer than actual employment, repeat to yourself the definition of slavery 3 times.

Well if you are going to stand by that modern definition of it and not the fact that the term "slave" was used in a much broader sense in that time and in that culture, then of course your view on the subject matter will not change.

I'm not saying however that there weren't instances in the Bible where there were [even Israelites] that practiced slavery that was bad. However, that was denounced within the pages itself.

But I digress. This thread is taking that turn to debate that I didn't want to go down.

 

[Phoenix]

But I digress. This thread is taking that turn to debate that I didn't want to go down.

But I thought we were talking about exactly what the thread as about? You know, the part where you used the Bible to justify slavery in ancient times.

Well if you are going to stand by that modern definition of it and not the fact that the term "slave" was used in a much broader sense in that time and in that culture, then of course your view on the subject matter will not change.

So slaves couldn't be taken by loan collectors as payment?