Actually, a major component of many religions is altruism.
This would be a lesson humanity could indeed stand to learn from.
What do you wish religious people would teach you?
- Thread starter wynn
- Start date
Actually, a major component of many religions is altruism.
This would be a lesson humanity could indeed stand to learn from.
They could equally well be in Aesop's fables or a thousand one nights, etc etc... The bible is a poorly written fiction, with stories taken for other past myths. What's your point?
No sir that is what it is to be human, man does not need a book to tell him how to behave, being a part of humanity is enough, we are social animals. Religion and it's books and beliefs only brought the worse out in man, once man placed an imaginary god above himself then he became malevolent, so no sir altruism is not a major component of religion/theism malevolence is.
Last edited:
the bible is the story of my life, thanks to the spirit who wrote it. actually, the spirit is the point, not the literary work.
no sir, you have it all wrong. humans are by nature good and evil, benevolent and malevolent, therefore any and all institutions they participate in will be so as well.
But not the books they write? A diverse set of people wrote the bible. Committees of people decided what would be included and not included. IOW the Bible is the work of institutions and fallible people. If you want to say Spirit made sure it was all OK, how do you know Spirit is not making certain other committees, indlviduals, institutions, books infallible?
Why are you infallible in your sense of what must be fallible and what must not be?
because it's not up to me, or committees, individuals, institutions, or books. it's up to the spirit, which is inherently infallible. it would be kind of silly to think that humanity could thwart god, don't you think?
Then you haven't read the bible.
No Wrong, humans just are, we are social animals, our main moral guidance, is our need to be accepted, we don't wish to be chastised, so we can empathise with our fellow man. Good and evil are religious constructs, Morals are relative.
Maybe so , but we are talking about religion right now, that is the worse culprit.
pineapplepizza
Registered Senior Member
I wish they would teach me how to tolerate them.
Malevolence is as much a part of the human psyche as altruism, geezer; reciprocal altruism rather than true altruism is the evolutionary expectation.
i have read the bible.
good and evil are law, and morality is propaganda for the most part.
and i disagree with you that religion is any worse than the government, or financial institutions, or big business, or anything else.
bad form dude..don't start with those words..just skip them and go on to what you think of as right..
true enough..see my posts on worthlessness..(i start in at post 18)
why empathise?
you don't have to be religious to see good and evil..a murderer is still a murderer whether you believe or not. are you saying murder can't be described as evil?
true..(see above link)
i agree with the no worse part..ALL have their dark side..
Were did I say malevolence wasn't part of the human psyche. And give me an example of true altruism, and how it doesn't relate to reciprocal altruism?
What in the bible.
Well that your prerogative, however religion has caused more harm to humanity than any of the others.
It's is the right thing to do and they reciprocate.
Don't be ridiculous, it's not evil because evil has religious connotations, it's harmful and wrong. Humans do apathetic things, mainly by being forced to. But most of the time they are empathic towards each other.
correct me if im wrong, but isnt the bible up to the readers interpretation? yet if i intemperate different than some pastor Im wrong and should be condemned
so true but the religious nuts will call bullshit
Mohaunthir
Registered Member
Don't ever think too much about how you live.Merely keep from harming others.I'm Irish and I've heard that some of the worst perpetrators of paedophilia were considered amongst the holiest of people.To believe in any deity and to have faith in it lends a sense of divinity to that person.Sadly we all know that we are fallible,imperfect nature and this will contradict with any faith based on self denial. A person must sate themselves but only in ways that will not hurt others. Many religions teach temperance,they however are in the main run by autocrats answerable only to themselves.Absolute power corrupts absolutely.If you do not want someone to hurt others they have to be answerable to you.How many priests are answerable to anyone?
so because it has religious connotations we should avoid the word? how about the idea?
saying it doesn't exist, doesn't make it not exist..
yes it is..
yes
there are lots of reasons..but why do you say this?
only when they want something..
i disagree with that statement..
and im not discounting a persons emotional state of being..i am saying we get too focused on it..your view confirms this..
He is correct on that ONE issue though. By its very nature the word 'evil' should not be used because evil has a supernatural connotation. Yet these same people will say "evil does not exist" BUT you often hear these same people (even Atheists on here) calling a person evil. This gets to the very root of the issue and it offers false hope to the person not believing that evil exists but calling a person evil.
What price truth setting one free?
What price truth?
W.W.III will be based on a media war more than Nukes. And which ever group pays more will win. Wiki is facing a host of legal challenges in court for subsidising Islamic distortions of history. It gets away with it because Christians have kept silent, thinking it only targets Israel. But keeping silent that the Jewish temple in Jerusalem was a Zionist myth effects Christians far more than Israel: the gospel claims one JC visitied this mythical temple?
Is it not disgraceful the Vaitican keeps silent of stories like blood libels and the Protocols presented as history in the Islamic world - when these heinous falsehoods came from the Pope's own backyard? WIKI calls 30's Gospel era Judea as Palestine - which is historically impossible, this name emerging in 70 CE, 40 years later. Now you know why Jesus was a Palestinean and thus also a Muslim. Read, Christianity & Judaism are a lie and its a blessing to kill the infidels.
Wikipedia Battle Intensifies as PA Joins the Fray
by Maayana Miskin
Following the opening of the first-ever Zionist editing group aimed at defending Israel on Wikipedia, a group of Palestinian Authority journalists plan to join the fray and create their own Wikipedia editing program.
Palestinian Journalists Syndicate head Abdul Nasser An-Najar told the Bethlehem-based Maan news agency that his organization plans to set up editing groups to counter attempts to present Israel's view on Wikipedia. He called on the PA to take part in the initiative.
An-Najar warned that the next regional war would be a “media war.” Online information on the Israeli-Arab conflict shapes world opinion, he said.
Last week the Zionist “Yisrael Sheli” (My Israel) organization opened a course to address the problem of pro-Arab bias on Wikipedia. In a one-day seminar, lecturers taught dozens of participants how to ensure that Israel's view is presented on the online encyclopedia.
Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia that provides information based largely on anonymous contributions. Many Israelis who have attempted to change information on Wikipedia that they believe is inaccurate have found that their edits were rejected; last week's course strove to change that by teaching would-be Wikipedia editors how to make changes last.
What price truth?
W.W.III will be based on a media war more than Nukes. And which ever group pays more will win. Wiki is facing a host of legal challenges in court for subsidising Islamic distortions of history. It gets away with it because Christians have kept silent, thinking it only targets Israel. But keeping silent that the Jewish temple in Jerusalem was a Zionist myth effects Christians far more than Israel: the gospel claims one JC visitied this mythical temple?
Is it not disgraceful the Vaitican keeps silent of stories like blood libels and the Protocols presented as history in the Islamic world - when these heinous falsehoods came from the Pope's own backyard? WIKI calls 30's Gospel era Judea as Palestine - which is historically impossible, this name emerging in 70 CE, 40 years later. Now you know why Jesus was a Palestinean and thus also a Muslim. Read, Christianity & Judaism are a lie and its a blessing to kill the infidels.
Wikipedia Battle Intensifies as PA Joins the Fray
by Maayana Miskin
Following the opening of the first-ever Zionist editing group aimed at defending Israel on Wikipedia, a group of Palestinian Authority journalists plan to join the fray and create their own Wikipedia editing program.
Palestinian Journalists Syndicate head Abdul Nasser An-Najar told the Bethlehem-based Maan news agency that his organization plans to set up editing groups to counter attempts to present Israel's view on Wikipedia. He called on the PA to take part in the initiative.
An-Najar warned that the next regional war would be a “media war.” Online information on the Israeli-Arab conflict shapes world opinion, he said.
Last week the Zionist “Yisrael Sheli” (My Israel) organization opened a course to address the problem of pro-Arab bias on Wikipedia. In a one-day seminar, lecturers taught dozens of participants how to ensure that Israel's view is presented on the online encyclopedia.
Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia that provides information based largely on anonymous contributions. Many Israelis who have attempted to change information on Wikipedia that they believe is inaccurate have found that their edits were rejected; last week's course strove to change that by teaching would-be Wikipedia editors how to make changes last.
it's up to the spirit's interpretation to you.
the majority of it, why?
that's conjecture.
what has caused harm to humanity is called sin (by some).
But you asserted that institutions do thwart God all the time. And you said it as if you could tell that only this one project, the Bible, is where God was not thwarted. That assertion was made by you and is therefore up to you.