|
|
Still has no justification or support. The "weak-minded" part could be seen as more of an opinion, but it does have support. Wisdom (and a number of other qualities) is granted by God according to the Christian faith. If you believe that, then you would believe something like courage, wisdom, and knowledge are things God gave you and not things earned on your own. In my opinion, that makes you weak minded. However, no matter what my opinion, it is still fact that Christians do believe that. I debate to learn, so if you have any sources that have confirmed the existence of Abraham, then let me know. If not, my original point stands. Just because the Torah says it doesn't mean it's true. But, I don't want to get too far into the actual religious theology. If it starts heading that way, feel free to post that chunk in the other thread. Wrong. True, the Catholic church was somewhat tyrannical in history, but I never said or insinuated that for any other religion. I said that religion is used as a form of control as well as that many horrendous crimes and torture have been in the name of religion. You're putting them together and saying tyrannical. Tyrannical would insinuate that they are oppressing/harming people through their control of a society or government (as was the case with the Catholic church). However, I never once said that their crimes were through their methods of control, but that they were merely justified by religion. Here's an odd analogy: Someone is fat. They are also slow, but they're in a wheelchair. A comparison would be that you're saying they're slow because they're fat when infact, it's because of their wheelchair. Likewise, I'm not saying a religion is tyrannical because they control people, but because religion is used as a scapegoat. These two features can coexist without actually being related. If I made it look like the only culprit, then again, it was a failure to specify on my part. I never said that they were the only culprit and I never said that when the government did it that it was wrong (though I can see how that could be assumed--my bad). I merely said that the government at least had just cause to do so whereas the Church had no reason to. Violence is wrong either way, but it is worse when used to preserve/protect an obsolete idea (so it's not something that really helps people, at least not in ways that some other organization or religion can't) rather than a country and the people who live there. 1. I said theistic religions, so I'm not ragging on all religion. 2. Many times, it's the Clergy which uses religion as justification or a scapegoat. Either way, it's still the religion. 3. I've never heard of an atrocity involving an atheistic religion as a scapegoat. Like I said earlier, just the idea of an afterlife and a big, invisible guy in the sky is enough to rally thousands to your call and to justify injust acts. Everyone believes something (morals, that is), but atheistic religions just give it a name. It's the theistic religions that bring people and places into the picture which changes things drastically. OMG ITS ME!
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, I wasn't talking about the fact that Hitler killed the Jews, but rather that he justified his crusade by claiming it was in the name of God. There's a quote somewhere which I'll find if you want. Nevermind then. It is not that theists believe that they are weak without God, it is that they believe that they are stronger with God. Are you suggesting that some of the greatest thinkers in the world were weak-minded? Intelligence in this world is not defined on whether you are a theist or not. People's ability to think is not limited by their religious beliefs unless they choose to let them do so (once again delving into specific religions). By the way, the many sects of Buddhism have varying beliefs on the existence of gods, meaning that not necessarily all of them are atheist. Some even believe that they can become gods. The difference between religious wars and non-religious wars is that in non-religious wars the opposing side is looked at in a non-human way. You sort of missed what I was saying. The very morals that we base our society upon come from religion. I know this is a very old post but you my friend must not have read about many of the Great thinkers of all time if you think many of them were religous. Heres some examples 1. Despite the whole Da Vinci code mess and series that Discovery channel did on Da Vinci (Which says he was not religous) he did not believe in God or any other supreme being for that matter. He believed he was put on this earth to do and die. Nothing More 2. Einstein, though nowhere near as smart as Da Vinci, his mathmatical skills were quite good. Though there are several statements regarding God that he made, he was not a religous man. But to get off of you and get to someone else First... Do you think about what you say before you say it or do your fingers just move in a way that makes no sense and cant spell... First, with Christianity, the way Hell is used is often determined if you are Protestant or Catholic and sometimes breaks down into the different types of Protestants. Once again to even mention your spelling the bible does not use the word evangulize once, nor anything synonomous with it (You do know that you made that word up right?) The only things remotely like what you spelled is Evangelise, and in my opinion it is not Human nature to want to share "happiness" with strangers but instead to fend for yourselves and keep your "Happiness" (The Quotations have nothing to do with spelling, just my belief that happiness is something that doesnt exist) but back to the subject of Hell. It is used a punishment for bad deeds on earth. Most preachers will threaten it being their destiny if they go off and do something stupid. Priests often will too. Now off to another comment OK I dont want to pick out any more stupid comments as they come by the plenty and there are a ton more threads to get to. Ill leave with these words The Monotheistic religon of Christianity (Catholicism mainly) was created to stop the Jews from fighting with the Pagans and to create a more structured rule. There was nothing more or less to it.
|
|
|
|
|
Rinai, though you're more than welcome to share your thoughts and opinions, please refrain from attacking people's grammar and beliefs. If he spelled something wrong, tell him. Don't start insulting his entire message just because of one slightly misspelled word (you even deciphered it, so it's not as bad as you claim). Also, to call posts stupid because they disagree with you is also a no-no. Ignorance is one thing, but to claim something is stupid is just an insult. By all means, keep posting and sharing your thoughts, but try to make an effort to be a bit more courtious in the future, please. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry Lucifer, I did get carried away...
|
|
|
I went back and made sure to note that I meant theistic religions were bad and that atheistic religions (not just Atheism, mind you, but Satanism, Buddhism, etc) are mere philosophies. What makes them so different is that A) theistic religions like to think of themselves as weak without their god, thus resulting in weak-minded people and B) wars are wars, but when they're fought in the name of a supreme being that others can relate to, that's when they become much bloodier and more emotional.
) do. It clearly states in the bible that we're suppose to evangulize because we want to share our happiness with others, and because we want to save others because we care for them. It doesn't say anywhere to scare people with an "or ELSE!" type of additude. tisk tisk!