Religion

celtic origin

Registered Member
I Believe Religion Is All Complete Nonsense And Is Just A Way Of Segregating Us .

If You Look At Every Major War They Where All Started With Some Sort Of Religion Being Involved.

Why Is It Most Different Religions Tell Similiar Stories But With Different Character Names Why Can't We Just Look Past Religion And Put All Religion Together To Find The Real Myths Behind These Stories.

If You Look At The " Jesus " Aspect Of Things It Never Said Anything About His Childhood And Also If He Was Alive Today He Would Be Percieved As A Madman So Why Is It People Continue To Believe Ancient Stories About A Man Who I Believe Was Nothing More Than A Storyteller

.agree Or Disagree Think About It With Open Eyes.
 
Last edited:
It's amazing, how arrested and arduous a process it was trying to read a paragraph typed like that.

People are naturally scared of their own mortality.

When confronted by a religious text that tells them that, for the small price of their devotion, all their worries about death and trouble in life will be assuaged, they fail to recognize that the words being spoken are metaphor, and do not correspond to "real" events or people.

However, they blindly accept the words as gospel, and begin to impose this symbolic artifice upon the apparent world, thus they begin to believe that a sun-baked Jew with a resentment to nature could actually turn water into an alcoholic beverage.
 
Blaphbee,

People are naturally scared of their own mortality.

Real fear cannot be overcome with mere words. If fear has been overcome then it becomes transparent for all to see.

When confronted by a religious text that tells them that, for the small price of their devotion, all their worries about death and trouble in life will be assuaged, they fail to recognize that the words being spoken are metaphor, and do not correspond to "real" events or people.

I fail to see where you have the right to assert that all religious people are simple and gullable, especially in light of the fact that you're understanding of what religion and scriptures is terribly influenced by what everyone else spouts, also without realising that you're ignorance has been easily uncovered.
Maybe if you elaborated on your claims,giving examples and experiences which we can all share in, i would be prepared to change my mind.

However, they blindly accept the words as gospel, and begin to impose this symbolic artifice upon the apparent world, thus they begin to believe that a sun-baked Jew with a resentment to nature could actually turn water into an alcoholic beverage.

Do you actually have anything intelligent to say?

Jan Ardena.
 
Jan Ardena said:
...transparent for all to see.
HUH?
Jan Ardena said:
I fail to see where you have the right to assert that all religious people are simple and gullable, especially in light of the fact that you're understanding of what religion and scriptures is terribly influenced by what everyone else spouts.
Well said.
 
Jan Ardena said:
1 - Real fear cannot be overcome with mere words. If fear has been overcome then it becomes transparent for all to see.

2 - I fail to see where you have the right to assert that all religious people are simple and gullable, especially in light of the fact that you're understanding of what religion and scriptures is terribly influenced by what everyone else spouts, also without realising that you're ignorance has been easily uncovered.
Maybe if you elaborated on your claims,giving examples and experiences which we can all share in, i would be prepared to change my mind.

3 - Do you actually have anything intelligent to say?

1 - That's hilariously incoherent, and a terrible analogy, yet I do agree. However, I fail to see what it has to do with the statement it is supposed to refute...?

2 - Meaningless rhetorical questions about "rights" [I was not born with "rights" - these are a human construct, not something which existed in nature before the evolution of Homo erectus. The truth (which can be found through many different doorways) is not bound by arbitrary social distinctions or handouts], and your ham-fisted efforts to pompously declare my words "ignorant" without providing any substantive reasons why aside, I will attempt a brief elaboration.

Some links:

http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/gutbook/lookup?num=4363
http://www.fns.org.uk/ac.htm
Read Sections 8 to 10 of the first essay.

Say what you will to demonize Nietzsche and thus attempt to discredit his ideas, these books paint the psychological portrait of Judeo-Christianity. Understanding this, you might see that Christians are a death-fearing lot, and seek whatever solace from their own mortality that they can find. I would never generalize all religious practitioners as being "gullible", but when looking for easy answers to hard questions, or an escape out of terrible situations (in this case, escape from a life which holds nothing but struggle for a person or people not constitutionally equipped to deal with it), most people will begin to believe whatever you tell them;* if this happens to include some rather strange events, like someone being raised from the dead, or the ocean bisecting itself at a wave of a hand, then you will maybe be halted for a moment in skepticism, but think to yourself, "Well, it was pretty hot in those deserts. Who knows what mirages they thought they saw?"

Basically, religious stories of this sort are exactly that: stories. Metaphor. Symbolic representations of the truth (as perceived by that religion). Parables to describe esoteric concepts with which to guide oneself through life. When people begin to interpret these symbolisms literally, insanity is manifesting itself.

3 - Do you have anything other than Pavlovian reactions to a little good-humoured mockery?

* - Somewhat related is a description of Stockholm Syndrome, thusly:

STOCKHOLM SYNDROME
The Stockholm Syndrome is an emotional attachment, a bond of interdependence between captive and captor that develops 'when someone threatens your life, deliberates, and doesn't kill you.' (Symonds, 1980) The relief resulting from the removal of the threat of death generates intense feelings of gratitude and fear which combine to make the captive reluctant to display negative feelings toward the captor or terrorist. In fact, former hostages have visited their captors in jail, recommended defense counsel, and even started a defense fund. It is this dynamic which causes former hostages and abuse survivors to minimize the damage done to them and refuse to cooperate in prosecuting their tormentors.

"The victims' need to survive is stronger than his(sic) impulse to hate the person who has created his(sic) dilemma." (Strentz, 1980) The victim comes to see the captor as a 'good guy', even a savior. This condition...occurs in response to the four specific conditions listed below:
-A person threatens to kill another and is perceived as having the capability to do so.
The other cannot escape, so her or his life depends on the threatening person.
-The threatened person is isolated from outsiders so that the only other perspective available to her or him is that of the threatening person.
-The threatening person is perceived as showing some degree of kindness to the one being threatened.
-It takes only 3-4 days for the characteristic bond of the Stockholm syndrome to emerge when captor and captive are strangers. After that, research shows, the duration of captivity is no longer relevant.
 
Last edited:
Blaphbee said:
It's amazing, how arrested and arduous a process it was trying to read a paragraph typed like that.

People are naturally scared of their own mortality.

When confronted by a religious text that tells them that, for the small price of their devotion, all their worries about death and trouble in life will be assuaged, they fail to recognize that the words being spoken are metaphor, and do not correspond to "real" events or people.

However, they blindly accept the words as gospel, and begin to impose this symbolic artifice upon the apparent world, thus they begin to believe that a sun-baked Jew with a resentment to nature could actually turn water into an alcoholic beverage.

Right sorted out my paragraphs for you but I fail to understand where you have managed to answer my question .
Yes people may need something to believe in but why not believe in there own experiences and mind without people trying to brain wash people in certain ways with what I believe where no more then very good books and story tellers .
I'm a believer in evolution not creation and understand some of these stories may be true but still am unsure because in different religions they have very similiar stories but with different characters and I believe most religion is just different peoples perseption on certain events.
 
celtic origin said:
I Believe Religion Is All Complete Nonsense And Is Just A Way Of Segregating Us .

If You Look At Every Major War They Where All Started With Some Sort Of Religion Being Involved.

No major Civilization has risen up without the structure of a Religious Framework. And the deadliest Wars have come out of Barbaric Invasions where Religion was not an issue.

The Deadliest Wars and Revolutions the World has yet seen came in the 20th Century and were entirely Secular.

You need to go to school, or at least read a book or two.
 
Leo Volont said:
No major Civilization has risen up without the structure of a Religious Framework. And the deadliest Wars have come out of Barbaric Invasions where Religion was not an issue.

The Deadliest Wars and Revolutions the World has yet seen came in the 20th Century and were entirely Secular.

You need to go to school, or at least read a book or two.

Name these major wars that have not been started by religious backround to them and I will correct you and I do read plenty of books you cocky B******.
 
celtic origin said:
Name these major wars that have not been started by religious backround to them and I will correct you and I do read plenty of books you cocky B******.

Hitite Invasion of Egypt

Babylonnian Invasion a Assyria

Assyrian Invasion of Israel

Babylonian Invasion of Israel

Persian Invasion of Greece

The Peloponesian Wars

Alexanders Invasion of Persia

The Civil Wars of the Three Alexandrian Territories

The Roman Carthegenian Wars

Roman Conquest of Gaul

Barbarian Invasions of Rome

Norman Conquest of Europe

The Slavic Border Wars

The Mongol Conquest of China

The Mongol Conquest of Persia

The French Revolution

The Napoleanic Wars

The Manchu Conquest of China

The Crimea War

The American Revolution and Civil Wars

The Two World Wars

The Russian Revolution

The Chinese Revolution

The Vietnam War

The Iraqi Iranian War

The Balkan Civil Wars -- still ongoing.


There is a partial list.
 
and now name the ones, that were started by religion, far too many.
you dont have a page long enough.

oh by the way, I dont think he meant christian only, all religions past and present.

romans believed there ceasar was a god, as did the egyptians believe pharoah was.

bablonians,persians and hitites had their own religions. etc (if I continue I will be here forever.)
your arguement is invalid. leo (99% of wars were directly due to religion)
 
Well, with that argument: name any socio-political system that didn't rise out of "religion". You'll have to look for a society that didn't practice any form of religion. I dare you to find one.
 
hence, why she said his arguement was invalid.
and I'm sure she would thank you for you comment.
it helps her tremendously.
 
And she's welcome to it. My point is that if you move the bar back far enough, everything is attributable to "religion", not just wars (for as much as they are influenced by purely religious thought). The argument relies on making religion a foreign actor in events, and artificially isolating it as a negative influence. You can't do that.
 
Jenyar: My point is that if you move the bar back far enough, everything is attributable to "religion", not just wars (for as much as they are influenced by purely religious thought). The argument relies on making religion a foreign actor in events, and artificially isolating it as a negative influence. You can't do that.
*************
M*W: I disagree. Not everything has been based on "religious thought." The PHILOSOPHY of Jesus was one of mysticism. He wasn't practicing a new religion -- he was a Jewish Rabbi! Perhaps the powers that be in his time saw him as a "new age" cultist. Jesus' intent was not to start a new religion but to teach about the greatness of the soul -- something that Jews didn't talk about apparently. Jesus was truly enlightened, and his immediate followers were at times confused by what he "preached." I believe it was only MM who understood his true enlightenment and wisdom. I also believe that it was MM who showed Jesus the way of wisdom. Of course, she could not be credited with that at the time. After all, it was MM who anointed Jesus. That should say it all.
 
mustafhakofi said:
and now name the ones, that were started by religion, far too many.
you dont have a page long enough.

oh by the way, I dont think he meant christian only, all religions past and present.

romans believed there ceasar was a god, as did the egyptians believe pharoah was.

bablonians,persians and hitites had their own religions. etc (if I continue I will be here forever.)
your arguement is invalid. leo (99% of wars were directly due to religion)

THANKYOU
 
expand please
if i were to philosophize on religion, would that make me religious? the philosophy of any given subject deals with the epistemological underpinnings, the methodology and ontologies of said subjects. is that not a valid distinction from studying or following any particular religion?

everything is attributable to "religion"

well, get specific. i wish to learn
 
Jenyar: M*W, no matter how you try to twist it: philosophy about God = religion.
*************
M*W: No, Jenyar, YOU are the one who twists the meanings of things! Even atheists have a philosophy about God, and it
doesn't include religion. You are truly blinded by the light of Christianity! Jesus was a Jew, therefore, Christianity is the Antichrist! Dance around that!
 
Kasi,

That's because "religion" is a very broad term itself. People don't realize that because they immediately associate it with a specific religion, like Christianity. Philosophy about religion isn't religion, because it says nothing about God. To say Jesus was just a philosopher is inaccurate. Theology and philosophy does overlap, but they're not the same thing.

everything is attributable to "religion" just means that people were religious before they were scientists, philosophers, farmers or any other profession - and every institution known to man has developed out of professions. They're the infrastructure of society. I doubt we would have moral codes at all if it wasn't for religious convictions. Have a look at the code of Hammurabi for instance. And the Bible contains one of the very first constitutions, regulating the nation of Israel.

I'm not saying that everything that anybody ever did was a direct result of religious thinking, but that religion was always a context. Today, the West likes to think of science, logic and reason to be that context - but these still rely heavily on the foundations of the previous era.
 
Back
Top