The least original religion on earth is...

[andy1033]

The idea that since "scientists" were associated with the Church, therefore everything the church says is rational is a fallacy.

There is plenty of incredibly stupid science people.

What the roman catholic church is thousands of years of thoughts by humans. Whether you like it or not very intelligent people where in the vatican in that time, understanding.

The church is not not some sort of cult group just made up, it has people thinking behind it, and trying to understand. The church had just as many thinkers in it, as any science over the years.

No human beings know the truth, but you can be sure the church is as close as the human rational mind is to understanding the unknown from spiritual side of things. They must of collected every single bit of info on what humans believed over thousands of years, and somehow people think they just make up rubbish.

Amazing.

 

[spidergoat]

Call it a "framework for thinking" if you like.


Exactly. Religious thinking has different standards of judging what is likely to be true - different rules of vidence. But the process being used, going back to the scriptures to find evidence for one hypothesis or another, is not so very different from science.

It is very different in this way. If someone asks God for something and it comes true, then they conclude this is evidence for God. There is no control group, and certainly no repeated testing. This is superstition, and it's flawed. How do they know that thing would not have happened without God? And they ignore all the times they prayed and nothing happened. If this is a standard, it's worse than nothing. It's deeply biased based on the desire to believe something. Your predetermined conclusion is reinforced by one data point. No one would do science this way.

 

[spidergoat]

There is plenty of incredibly stupid science people.

What the roman catholic church is thousands of years of thoughts by humans. Whether you like it or not very intelligent people where in the vatican in that time, understanding.

The church is not not some sort of cult group just made up, it has people thinking behind it, and trying to understand. The church had just as many thinkers in it, as any science over the years.

No human beings know the truth, but you can be sure the church is as close as the human rational mind is to understanding the unknown from spiritual side of things. They must of collected every single bit of info on what humans believed over thousands of years, and somehow people think they just make up rubbish.

Amazing.

This is the same argument from authority, and argument from popularity. Science isn't just stuff that a scientist happened to say, their work and data is published, people can reproduce it, study the methodology. I'm sure that intelligent people were at one time or another employed by the Vatican, but that doesn't mean their core beliefs make any more sense. The Church is the same as a cult, just older and bigger. There is nothing rational about the spirit as the Church defines it. It's untestable nonsense.

 

[andy1033]

Spidergoat, whether you like it or not, the fact that religious beliefs all over the world came to same conclusions, that all of them where based on sex and satanism, shows a common denominator.

You go all over the world, and you find sacrifice is important to all religions, why?
You go all over the world and you will find sexual energy was very important to every single religion, why?

These are things that repeated over and over, and all our religions are based on them.

They are not some made up rubbish, all over the world people came to the same conclusions, and also without interacting with each other.

The catholic church and other religious groups rationalised these things into what there lens was, and made it into a religion that all can use. All other religions shaped there religion in slightly different ways. But all are based on what we call satanism, and sexual energies.

Humans all over our globe came to the same conclusions, without ever meeting.

Groups like the catholic church has taken the basics of above, and had thousands of years of people that thought over these things and rationalised it into what we know today. We still believe these two same things today like we did thousands of years ago, but the catholic church molded them into what it taught, and rationalised within there group. These people where not dummies.

The people in science try and claim people in religions are village idiots or something, but the opposite is true. Without the catholic church western society would never have formed, and it would still be like africa and india.

 

[sideshowbob]

If someone asks God for something and it comes true, then they conclude this is evidence for God.

It isn't about asking God for something. You don't ask science for stuff so that comparison doesn't work.

It's about determining what is "true". "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." (2 Timothy 2:15) That's the Christian (rough) equivalent to the scientific method.

This is superstition, and it's flawed.

I didn't say it wasn't flawed. I specified that the flaw is lack of rigor.

 

[spidergoat]

Spidergoat, whether you like it or not, the fact that religious beliefs all over the world came to same conclusions, that all of them where based on sex and satanism, shows a common denominator.

No they didn't. The religions of the world are very different from each other. Your lack of knowledge does not constitute an argument.

You go all over the world, and you find sacrifice is important to all religions, why?

Not all religions, but it basically goes like this; in human society, giving things up means you care for someone, and you expect reciprocation. So this is a product of being a social primate. It's common altruism misplaced to a cosmic ape.

You go all over the world and you will find sexual energy was very important to every single religion, why?

Not all religions, but sex is important to people in general, so religions tend to control sex because if you can control sex, there is nothing about that person you can't control. It's the formalization of instinctive sexual mores.

like the catholic church has taken the basics of above, and had thousands of years of people that thought over these things and rationalised it into what we know today. We still believe these two same things today like we did thousands of years ago, but the catholic church molded them into what it taught, and rationalised within there group. These people where not dummies.

I don't believe it, because it's not rational. I don't care how many thousands of years of foolishness it is, it's still foolish.

The people in science try and claim people in religions are village idiots or something, but the opposite is true. Without the catholic church western society would never have formed, and it would still be like africa and india.

The Church may have provided a degree of social organization and cohesion, as an institution it can do good things, but that doesn't mean their basic premises are true. We have reached the stage where faith is now an impediment to knowledge, because revealed science contradicts some ancient holy book.

 

[Magical Realist]

That's an over-generalization. Christianity postulates a progressive revelation; its members see it as an "improvement" on Judaism, a change that God revealed in His own good time. (Of course, they don't accept the further improvement of Islam - that would be a failed hypothesis.)

It's not exactly "progressive" to confine your whole religion to what a book written 2500 years ago teaches. I'd call that regressive in fact. And lets be honest. The main reason christians believe their doctrines is based on their faith in the revelatory authority of either the Bible or the Church. Such unconditional faith in authority is not thinking. It is the precise opposite of thinking. It is the acceptance of irrational ideas based solely on the authority of their source, a source taken to be infallble.

 

[GeoffP]

There is plenty of incredibly stupid science people.

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLCDFFE8747989BB61

 

[andy1033]

It's not exactly "progressive" to confine your whole religion to what a book written 2500 years ago teaches.

Some people believe the new testament is a book written from ancient knowledge. The story of the new testament may of been something put out there many times, as its meanings still apply today to the ones who see.

If there is truth for what ever humans are, then its always been truth, no matter what era we are in.

I myself believe that jesus lived. But i believe the the roman catholic church is the roman empire, just in another form. The emperor became the pope. There is nothing new under the sun as the saying goes. Instead of openly aggressive gov holding down people, they morphed into using spiritual knowledge to teach people how to live.

Now today humans have found the next step, i.e electronic mind control, and now they are morphing into that world to control the masses.

So they went from roman empire > catholic church > nwo((1 world gov run by electronic mind control) what we are morphing to today)
Same controllers, just different forms of control

You take from that what you want. The people whom made the bible are not stupid, as the book has stayed with us for thousands of years.

I also view the bible like this

Old testament + Jewish religion ( dark side of religion)
New testament + christianity (light side of religion)

Thats how you should view the bible, and duality of religion. All you people moaning about the bible should see it that way. The old testament is about the dark side, and the new testament is about the light side. Religions can both be towards the dark or the light, and that is what is represented in the bible.

So stop claiming religion is only about good, its not. Its about the fact that human spirituality can be used both ways.

Now you also understand why some religious groups do bad and do not care what you think, while others try and do good.

Judaism, laughs at christian values, and thinks we are soft for looking towards the light. So i say again for the people whom do not understand, and moan about the contradictions in religions.

Old testament + Jewish religion ( dark side of religion)
New testament + christianity (light side of religion)

 

[Captain Kremmen]

Adam was the first priest, and made up Judaism.
Everything else is a copy.

Scene at Eden 4025BC
Adam is chanting and waving incense. He has made a church out of a big apple tree.
Eve is running around in a white robe, wailing.

God: What are you doing Adam?
Adam: I'm being religious
God: What's that Adam?
Adam: I'm talking to God so I know what he wants us to do
God: But we meet every day, so why don't you just ask me?
Adam: It's a Man thing. We need to worship.
God:And what if I don't want you to worship?
Adam: Then you must be Satan, the evil one. God warned me about him.
God: You'd better carry on then. What's Eve doing by the way?
Adam: She ate a forbidden apple God told us about. She's repenting.
God: Forbidden apple. Right

 

[andy1033]

I personally think whom created the bible was very clever, like i said above

Old testament + Jewish religion ( dark side of religion)
New testament + christianity (light side of religion)

To understand the bible you have to see it in those terms. The story of the new testament is probably far older than the time of jesus.

Its your crossword puzzle to solve. But i just wrote why alot of skeptics claim contradictions in the bible. They see religion as spiritual teachings based on whats good. No religions are based on what human spirituality is, and we all can access the light or dark.

Never let people put you off when they claim contradictions, they just do not understand why religions are what we have, and why they where important. If you ever read the bible remember to see it as

Old testament + Jewish religion ( dark side of religion)
New testament + christianity (light side of religion)

Enough said. The people whom wrote the bible must of been very clever, and took this knowledge i assume from older texts or religions.

 

[origin]

Adam was the first priest, and made up Judaism.
Everything else is a copy.

But the story of Adam and Eve was based on an earlier story - Judaism is just a copy too...

 

[origin]

I personally think whom created the bible was very clever, like i said above

Old testament + Jewish religion ( dark side of religion)
New testament + christianity (light side of religion)

Enough said. The people whom wrote the bible must of been very clever, and took this knowledge i assume from older texts or religions.

So you are anti-semitic along with all of your other 'baggage'?

 

[exchemist]

The thing about christianity is this: it doesn't claim its information came from other cultures and religions. It wants nothing to do with this idea of historical descent or religious syncretism. It insists all of it's customs and dogmas are revelations straight from God Himself. For them to admit any other source for them is to undermine their own authority as God's sole spokesman on earth.

Do you really think the thousands upon thousands of Christian theological scholars, now and throughout history, will not have recognised that Christianity grew from Judaism and Greek philosophy? Of course they recognise this, and always did.

If you think for a moment, it will be obvious that recognising that fact is far from incompatible with the idea of truth being revealed to man by God.

 

[andy1033]

So you are anti-semitic along with all of your other 'baggage'?

No i care not for Judaism.

I think the Judaism, is based on the dark side and Christianity is based on the road to light.

There is a duality in human spirituality. People assume that religion means whats good about that, no it does not. You can follow the road to darkness or the road to the light. I care not about jews, i am just stating that i think thats how they wrote the bible, and the message inside it. That the new testament is older than jesus, but its the road to the light. While Judaism is the road to the dark.

I believe Christianity worships the sun. What Judaism worships is not for me to say. We hear all sorts of things, but i just believe that christianity is the worship of the sun.

You take from that what you want. Its got nothing to do with christians or jews, thats just what i think the old and new testaments are. There is a duality in human spirituality, and we all have a choice to go to the dark or the light.

I think christians worship the sun. On christmas day, energy comes into the earth from the sun, and thats why we worship christmas day. Christians worship the sun, the road towards the light. Judaism laughs at us for following what they think of as the weaker side.

Thats nothing to do with anti anything. What i wrote up here was alot to do with christianity, and alot of christians probably do not like this either. You cannot call me anti christian. Alot of chirstians do not like that idea. But i think and totally believe we celebrate christmas day as energy comes into the earth from the sun on that day. Thats what christmas day is. Therefore we worship the sun.

I care not what the jews worship, as what ever it is its the road to darkness. That has nout to with hatred of anyone, like i said above, i think thats what the old and new testaments where made for.

 

[sideshowbob]

It's not exactly "progressive" to confine your whole religion to what a book written 2500 years ago teaches.

I said, "progressive revelation." God supposedly revealed something through Moses and then a little more through Jesus. That's modification of the original idea, which is my whole point in this thread.

 

[Magical Realist]

Do you really think the thousands upon thousands of Christian theological scholars, now and throughout history, will not have recognised that Christianity grew from Judaism and Greek philosophy? Of course they recognise this, and always did.

If you think for a moment, it will be obvious that recognising that fact is far from incompatible with the idea of truth being revealed to man by God.

Yes..I think christians, including christian theologians, believe their religion is a revelation straight from God. That means they don't credit other religions with originating their own rituals and doctrines. That's just common sense.

 

[Magical Realist]

I said, "progressive revelation." God supposedly revealed something through Moses and then a little more through Jesus. That's modification of the original idea, which is my whole point in this thread.

In other words the original idea of Judaism was taken by Christianity and elaborated on as it's own. That's exactly what my op is stating.

So what progressive revelation has occurred since the Bible was composed? Nothing has changed about Christianity since then. At least with science you have progress. Religion never progresses.

 

[sideshowbob]

In other words the original idea of Judaism was taken by Christianity and elaborated on as it's own. That's exactly what my op is stating.

I'm not disagreeing with your OP. I'm saying that since science is similarly derivative, it isn't necessarily a bad thing to be derivative.

So what progressive revelation has occurred since the Bible was composed? Nothing has changed about Christianity since then.

On the contrary, there have been schisms, reformations, counter-reformations, ecumenical movements, etc. Christianity is in constant flux.

 

[spidergoat]

This is one positive aspect of Catholicism, that the Pope can change the religion on his own, by decree. However, that's probably why they always choose a very conservative person. They have finally acknowledged evolution, but they are about 50 years behind the times.