Religion needs to go away

[Janus1]

why does it matter who is going to heaven or hell? most likely, if you believe in something, you believe you are going to heaven. if not, you most likely have the capacity to change your fate. i dont see what it matters if nut thinks im going to hell. i think his beliefs are stupid and wrong. wonderful. we get along fine (unless he secretly dislikes me) so what does it matter? as long as there isnt violence, religious differences dont matter. when there IS violence, thats another story. i am a strong opponent of organized religion, as many of you know, but its not going anywhere.
everyone should read God’s Debris, and more pertinent to this topic, The Religion War. both excellent books, both very applicable to this topic.

[221B Baker Street]

The fun part of this:
It is the "christian’s"  fault that they (the religions) can’t and didn’t live in peace.
Christian here means western (roman catholic and what came from that) christianity.

Falk,  Clearly you are missing the big picture here.  In India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, there is considerable conflict between Hindu and Muslem.  In Israel and Palestine there is considerable conflict between Jews and Muslems.  It is not just the fault of "christians."Â

There is also conflict, though to a more limited extent, between the basically atheistic government of China and both Christians and Muslems within China (i.e. the churches and mosques must be state controlled).  We could also discuss Tibet with regards to China as well.

Moreover, I think a strong arguement could be made that these conflicts are caused by people who say they are christian, muslem, etc. but if you look at their actions (such as torture or murder) it is obvious that these people are not really christians, or muslems, or whatever religion they are claiming.

Also, I fail to see what is “fun” about this.  We are talking about people who die from these conflicts.

[Jennifer]

I’m going to agree with Janus here.  As there is no rock hard scientific proof you can present that one religion (or lack thereof) is correct and the rest are faulty, there’s no reason to be hostile.  However, there are in-duh-viduals out there that absolutely MUST convert or kill non-believers and this is where we run into problems.

The Catholics did it, the Muslims are currently doing it, many wars have been fought over religion, and as 221B said, it’s not just limited in scope to Christian/Muslim conflicts but also Hindus, Jews, I’m sure Buddists, Wiccans, etc.

[Wargaming_nut]

With Janus on this; while we disagree strongly on the religion subject, we tend to agree on most other topics, and can discuss things pretty rationally. As for your ahem points, ncscswitch:

1: Christ was the Son of God, and therefore a Christian (a Christian is simply anyone who believe Jesus was the Son of God). Jesus did indeed go to Hell temporarily, for three days by my reckoning, but that was to pay the price for human’s sins. God then decided the price had been paid, and resurrected Jesus. Merely being born a Jew doesn’t mean you’re going to Hell; it’s possible to be a Jew, and believe Jesus was the Messiah.

2: Anyone, of any race, creed, or color, who believes Jesus Christ was the Son of God, is a Christian, and going to Heaven. So, if a Mormon believes this, he’s a Christian. If a Branch Davidian believes this, so’s he. Simple enough.

3: So you’re saying that God should have no standards? That, Heaven being His home, he shouldn’t have the right to put down a cover charge? God doesn’t condemn people; people condemn themselves. If you hear the truth and ignore it, the consequences are yours to accept; blaming God for your own faults is simply an excuse to not take responsibility.

4: And as for the people born more than 2000 years ago, I honestly don’t know. I believe many of them are in Heaven, because I believe the requirements were different. At the point Christ entered the world, things changed, but previous to that I do not know how God judged. All I know is that He did, and I trust He had some pretty good reasons.

Falk: The Crusades were committed by Christians. But then, previous to that, it was the Muslims who took over the Holy Land. And I’d say the recent troubles involving certain Islamic loonies is pretty much their fault, not us Christian’s. So maybe, just maybe, it’s possible that there’s blame enough to go around…? Maybe…?

[Guest]

@221B:

Falk,  Clearly you are missing the big picture here.  In India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, there is considerable conflict between Hindu and Muslem.  In Israel and Palestine there is considerable conflict between Jews and Muslems.  It is not just the fault of “christians.”

I replied to the statement “no peace possible between christians and muslims - even historically”. There was no bigger picture involved there. If you want to discuss a bigger picture, we probably come to agreement quickly. But this was a really specific case.

Moreover, I think a strong arguement could be made that these conflicts are caused by people who say they are christian, muslem, etc. but if you look at their actions (such as torture or murder) it is obvious that these people are not really christians, or muslems, or whatever religion they are claiming.

That is absolutely true.

Also, I fail to see what is “fun” about this.  We are talking about people who die from these conflicts.

I apologize. It was meant to be bitter sarcasm, which i didn’t mark properly to make it obvious. You are correct. It is not funny at all.

@Wargaming_nut:

Falk: The Crusades were committed by Christians. But then, previous to that, it was the Muslims who took over the Holy Land. And I’d say the recent troubles involving certain Islamic loonies is pretty much their fault, not us Christian’s. So maybe, just maybe, it’s possible that there’s blame enough to go around…? Maybe…?

But what happened when the Muslims took the Holy Land?
The Jews stayed there, The christians stayed there (just got disconnected from Rome, but they were more attached to Byzantine anyway. The conquest of the ‘Holy Land’ was not really a religious battle. And in that days the three religions of the book could very well live together and in peace.
When the Ottomans finally conquered Constantinople/Byzanz … they left the Patriarch very well alive and in power and honour. The commander of the Ottmans explicitly forbade any looting of churches (something that the catholic Venetians did not do when they pillaged the city earlier).
The spite came from “our” side: we felt threatened. For the muslims, a christian always was “ok”, not the best but ok. Remember that muslim males are allowed to marry christian (or AFAIK jewish) women. The christians felt threatened and built the atmosphere of fear and then hatred.

[221B Baker Street]

Quote from: 221B Baker Street on Today at 08:02:27 AM
Falk,  Clearly you are missing the big picture here.  In India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, there is considerable conflict between Hindu and Muslem.  In Israel and Palestine there is considerable conflict between Jews and Muslems.  It is not just the fault of “christians.”

I replied to the statement “no peace possible between christians and muslims - even historically”. There was no bigger picture involved there. If you want to discuss a bigger picture, we probably come to agreement quickly. But this was a really specific case.

Thanks for clearing this up…you are probably right, we would probably agree on the big picture.

For the muslims, a christian always was “ok”, not the best but ok. Remember that muslim males are allowed to marry christian (or AFAIK jewish) women. The christians felt threatened and built the atmosphere of fear and then hatred.

It is complicated looking at this with our modern sense of civility and ethics.  But I had thought that the muslem males were also allowed to take any Christian/Jewish woman (married or not) as his wife (even if she objected).  However under no circumstances could a christian or jewish man take a muslem woman as his wife.  Certainly this would threaten both the christians and jews.  If your wife was forcibly taken from you, could you not have hatred?

I’m not saying the crusaders always behaved properly either, but neither side was entirely clean in their dealings.

[Guest]

@221B:

For the muslims, a christian always was “ok”, not the best but ok. Remember that muslim males are allowed to marry christian (or AFAIK jewish) women. The christians felt threatened and built the atmosphere of fear and then hatred.

It is complicated looking at this with our modern sense of civility and ethics.  But I had thought that the muslem males were also allowed to take any Christian/Jewish woman (married or not) as his wife (even if she objected).  However under no circumstances could a christian or jewish man take a muslem woman as his wife.  Certainly this would threaten both the christians and jews.  If your wife was forcibly taken from you, could you not have hatred?

Of course, the idea was to “starve out” the old book-religions. For the “she objected”, i am pretty sure it is not part of the Quran that any marriage is valid if one of them objects. It is not valid in any of the three religions. In all of the three (considering “older times”) men often enough used their superior physical power and forced the women ot “oblige”.
And if you compare the three religions, you will find that Islam is the one with most women’s rights in there (divorce can come from either side). Unfortunately, it was perverted by folk-lore and old habits … just as in our society we fortunately had the Age of Enlightenment that came up with universal irghts for all humans (later also regardless for race and much later for gender) … and as hard as it is, we had WWI which showed that women can do ALL jobs that men can do, giving the movement for equal rights a huge momentum.

[AgentOrange]

If God is almighty and has the power and the authority to judge people, then let Him do so.  He is the one who does that, not anyone else.  So if anyone chooses to let others know “Hey, don’t do that or you’re gonna go to Hell”, it’s like God is always having people double-checking his work.  If God is truly “the Man” being omnipotent and all, then leave Him be to do His thing.  This is why topics such as these are a double-edged sword:  I get fed up about people trying to push their beliefs on others, all the while reminding others of the “consequences”.  At the same time, I usually avoid this topic for the aforementioned reason, but at times like this, I get the opportunity to vent and tell people how I really feel.

Anyway, my golden rule when it comes to religion is “Live and let Live.”  If anyone disagrees with that, well then (say it with me now) “That’s fine with me.”  I happen to believe that I’m going to Heaven, and I believe that I can see everyone else on Earth there eventually.  Such is the nature of my belief structure.  So even if it seems like I’m arguing with any of you, I’m not.  In my opinion, getting into Heaven is like an entrance exam.  How we live our lives determines how well we do on this exam.  If we fail, no big deal.  Just re-take it after a certain amount of time, and then if we pass, we get into Heaven.  If more people throughout history had looked at it this way, there would definitely have been fewer wars. (at least for religious reasons  :roll:)

[AgentOrange]

If anyone has seen Spawn, the animated series by Todd McFarlane that was on HBO, then it helps to explain my previous point.

I hate to ruin the story for anyone who hasn’t seen it, but it will greatly clarify my beliefs.  The main character (Spawn/Al Simmons) failed the “entrance exam” that is life.  In fact, he failed miserably, and ended up being a servant of Hell.  His after-life might even be a bit worse than any ordinary person who ends up in Hell.  (I don’t know from experience)  Anyway, throughout the series, he learns how he messed up, how to correct his behavior (specifically, the ones that caused him to fail the test in the first place) and how he can go about regaining his humanity.  Now, this is fiction, but it illustrates a very good point, perhaps the best point, as far as how to learn from one’s mistakes.

[Janus1]

If God is almighty and has the power and the authority to judge people, then let Him do so.

to borrow (steal) an argument from God’s Debris, if God is omnipotent, then why would he have any unique interest in humans? What is special about humans that makes them more interesting then rocks? why would any one thing specifically interest an omnipotent God? nothing to God would be more interesting, important, or any other kind of qualifier than anything else.
why would he take any interest in us at all?

[Zooey72]

There is a quote from “Rudy” that I like as far as this goes.  "I have been in the Church over 30 years and I only absolutely sure of 2 things.  1)There is a God.  2)I am not him.

Any true follower of any “form” of God should take those 2 things to heart.  To assume otherwise would be to “assume to know the mind of God”.  This is specificaly true of Christians (or at least the people who claim to follow Jesus).  What happened to your humility?  Just skip those parts because you didn’t like them?

I don’t even pray for anything because I feel that is presumptious.  Who the heck am I to know what is good for me?  I am sure Job didn’t like what was happening to him, but those are the brakes.  There is only one thing I pray for, and that is to have the strength to do whatever it is that God wants me to do.  To ask for anymore than that is arrogance.

[Guest]

Well, I am going to upset a few folks here again…

Divinity IS within me.  I am alive, I have a spirit (or soul if you prefer), and that means I have the spark of the divine within me.

Now whether that spark is part of God or Allah, or Jehova, or Isis, or the Flying Spagetti Monster  http://www.venganza.org/ , that is up to an individual’s faith (or lack thereof).

Personally, even though I am a polytheist, I do not believe in omnipotent diety.  I believe that the will of Deity(s) is achieved through the actions of US.  That would mean that I view the christian “hand of god” as the actions of his followers; the holy spirit being their will and intent.

And since Deity is in and of ALL things (good and evil for example) then humans are both good and evil; from the Pope right on down to Tookie Williams.

What makes a person “good” is not his belief in one particular deity, or his acknowledgement of one form of salvation.  I am sorry, Jeffrey Dahlmer is not going to be in any “heaven” I can think of, even if, before the other inmate shanked him to death, he said “Jesus, I believe you are the way!”

ACTIONS determine if you are good or evil.  INTENT is an even better determiner.  The batterer who goes to church on Sundays may call himself Christian, may believe in Jesus all he wants to.  But every time he beats the snot out of his spouse, he proves how evil he is.  And if “God” has standards, I think standards of ACTION and INTENT mean a lot more than some baptismal water or confirmation ceremony where you “accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior.”

In the immortal words often voiced among neo-pagans… Jesus, save me from your followers.

[Jermofoot]

Live and let live is definitely my motto.  Actually, that falls back on the Golden Rule (or am I wrong?).
However, I have a problem when people tell me I’m going to Hell…that’s not very Christian at all.  The context isn’t what bothers me, it’s the audacity of their conceited claim.  But thanks, those kinda statements make me think I’m already there!  Then, I guess, they’d be right…
As for the violence:  violence is a characteristic of humans, just as much as spirituality.  If you think that violent Muslims or Christians are violent because they are Muslim or Christian, then I’d have to disagree.  You’d be sourcing and attribute upon another attribute, and it doesn’t work that way.  I’m convinced that it’s more the type of person, and if they weren’t religious at all, they’d still have an affinity for violence.
Now, I can respect other’s beliefs.  I happen to enjoy reading mythology, religious lore, traditions, etc., it truly fascinates me and can be quite moving (perhaps it’s what I instill in the text).  But, if you can’t respect me just the same, then I’ve no time for you (as a side note, I give people the benefit of the doubt and they have respect - until they lose it).

Alright, this is for Jennifer.  I need some clarification on this (as I’ve not conversed with you before…):

I’m going to agree with Janus here.  As there is no rock hard scientific proof you can present that one religion (or lack thereof) is correct and the rest are faulty, there’s no reason to be hostile.  However, there are in-duh-viduals out there that absolutely MUST convert or kill non-believers and this is where we run into problems.

Previous to that:

Personally, I think the only solution is to get rid of one of the two religions.  Since I’m christian based, I’d vote that it’s the muslims that are gotten rid of/retrained/converted.  But since the world is full of bleeding heart liberals, I highly doubt that will happen short of thermo-nuclear war started by a conservative hot head.  Just my two cents.

Sarcasm?

[Imperious Leader]

“I condemn Christianity. I raise against the Christian church the most terrible accusation that any accuser has ever uttered. It is to me the ultimate conceivable corruption. It has possessed the will to the final corruption that is even possible. The Christian church has left nothing untouched by its depravity: it has turned every value into a disvalue, every truth into a falsehood, every integrity into a vileness of the soul.”

Frederick Nietzsche-

[Guest]

He is speaking of the Roman Catholic church of the middle ages no? Even Christians will admit there was corruption in the church IL, power corrupts, and Christians are still human.

[Imperious Leader]

Yes true. nice point

[Mary]

The Koreans have a great word (learned it from my son’s Tae Kwon Do class).

Yendo: Peace and love. More Yendo, less bombings.

[Guest]

Peace and love taught in a combat class? :?

peace through superior firepower. :mrgreen:

[Janus1]

and that is to have the strength to do whatever it is that God wants me to do.

why would God want anything, in the way we as humans understand want? if god is omnipotent, anything he wanted would be reality. and then, why would he want anything for people? are they special in some way? how? why? God is omnipotent. who are we to presume we are special?

I am alive, I have a spirit (or soul if you prefer)

where is your soul? is it in your head? your heart? does it influence your actions? is it influence by your actions? cant you see the soul as merely the impact of your actions rippling into the future?

[cystic crypt]

@Janus1:

and that is to have the strength to do whatever it is that God wants me to do.

why would God want anything, in the way we as humans understand want? if god is omnipotent, anything he wanted would be reality. and then, why would he want anything for people? are they special in some way? how? why? God is omnipotent. who are we to presume we are special?

well - he tells us we are special.
To answer your first point, a parent can force his child to share, but there is much more joy in watching his child share because it is the right thing to do.

I am alive, I have a spirit (or soul if you prefer)

where is your soul? is it in your head? your heart? does it influence your actions? is it influence by your actions? cant you see the soul as merely the impact of your actions rippling into the future?

where is your motivation?  Is it in your head or your heart or your gut?  Well - your head, i suppose.  But there is the idea that there is more than the 3 dimensions that you can see.  As for the way it influences/is influenced i am not sure.  The idea is that our physical selves are a poor reflection of our souls in the 3-dimensional realm.