Is Religion A Problem? The Superior's Evil War On Faith

[Xemmy]

A spin-off of "Would You Elect an Atheist?"

I ask a question that's been allowed to be asked for only the last few centuries.

*IMPORTANT*
Before anyone of a singular faith, such as Christianity, storms in ready to hate--This covers ALL religions, from the minor ones, to the three desert dogmas themselves. Defend your own religion if you must, but do not forget that this subject incumbers all faiths.

The case can be made fairly well for both sides. Religion today does many good things. It makes life barable for alot of people. If you're in a foxhole, or in prison you probably have, and probably NEED Faith. Many religions hold charities giving food and even financial help to those that need it. It gives morals, values, and rules to people all over the world.

However, many would also make the claim (Myself included) that religion has ties with bigotry, misogyny, homophobia, violence, and ignorance. This certainly does not mean that religious people in general have these attributes. Those that do are a minority.

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstatz.htm#RelCon

^- The following is a list of conflicts that were based primarily on Religion. According to Tdigle, the death toll lies at 105,884,000. I dispute this number, believing it to be much higher. Regardless, I use this number because...

1. I won't get shit about it later.
2. It's still roughly the same or higher than World Wars I & II combined. (depending on estimates) So, it suits my purpose.

This number does not include - deaths that do not involve battle, such as witch burnings, human sacrifice, religious murder, terrorism, or religious propaganda. (Such telling people with AIDS that condoms don't work.)


It does however include the Holocaust, which though not done directly under the name of Christianity, Christianity was a factor due to the years of persecution as "Christ-Killers" that helped lead up to this. - Totally disputable.

Most of that was in the past. Christianity is no longer the religion of the sword it once was.
However that gap has been filled by Islam.

Islam has gotten alot attention as of late for being responible for most modern terrorism, and it's incrediblely stunning suppression of women. Though it is as bad the old Christianity, one of the things that stands out here in the twenty first century is The burqa. Even if it's not law, many women in the middle east must still wear it, simply for personal saftey.


None of this claims that Religion is the root of all evil. I argue in this subject because I'm good at it, not because it's the most important thing in the world.
I made this thread because I was told that my views on this subject make me the most ignorant person here on WrestleZone. I welcome your opinion.

With all this said- Why is Religion good? What great good has it done for humanity that justifies over 100 million people dying? Do you think Religion is a strong source of science denial and poor education?

 

[LigerBomb]

Is religion a problem? No, I wouldn't think so, nor is it humanity's saving grace.

It's quite difficult if nigh impossible to measure or quantify avoidance or the non-event. Because of this I—nor anyone else— don't have the ability to say for certain what role religion has played in avoiding/outright preventing tragedies. Likewise, unless they go out and proselytize after their being saved I've no numbers to tally with regards to religious based aid and service and humanitarian aid. Does it "justify" 100 million deaths? Absolutely not. It would be absurd to argue otherwise. But then again thinking in such a sum total vs sum total fashion seems to miss the point and message many religions and basic humane morals rallies against. The point of religion is not to give yourself over to blind faith that removes all choice and free will—and by proxy guilt and responsibility of consequence—leaving you to think and behave in end result absolutes, hence when people get it "wrong" they tend to do harmful things in their god's name, whereas those who seem to understand and practice their faith in a different light tend feel compelled to do good works.

Also, in the grand total of all of human history I find it particularly meaningless to total and separate potential cause(s) of death. I wonder how many people have died due to poverty, hate, greed, lust, anger, jealousy, accident, laziness, inaction, circumstance, situation, random "bad luck", lack of medical care, etc. I'd imagine the numbers would be great, and perhaps interesting to know from a statistical standpoint, but also somewhat powerless. Simple knowledge doesn't always affect change or improvement.

It's not my interest, personally vested or otherwise, to defend or absolve religion as a concept or practiced activity. As a humanist of the highest order, all those people who are purported to have killed in the name of their personal faith also had personal responsibility and sole control of their actions. Much like guns, religion doesn't kill people, people kill people. Of course the reverse is also quite obvious; religion doesn't save lives per se either.

In the end were we to remove religion I'm quite positive we'd have other ways and reasons to harm and destroy one another. If anything humanity is the problem. Here's to hoping we evolve past it before it ends us, or we disappear before we do too much damage to everything else.

 

[Xemmy]

Is religion a problem? No, I wouldn't think so, nor is it humanity's saving grace.

It's quite difficult if nigh impossible to measure or quantify avoidance or the non-event. Because of this I—nor anyone else— don't have the ability to say for certain what role religion has played in avoiding/outright preventing tragedies. Likewise, unless they go out and proselytize after their being saved I've no numbers to tally with regards to religious based aid and service and humanitarian aid. Does it "justify" 100 million deaths? Absolutely not. It would be absurd to argue otherwise. But then again thinking in such a sum total vs sum total fashion seems to miss the point and message many religions and basic humane morals rallies against. The point of religion is not to give yourself over to blind faith that removes all choice and free will—and by proxy guilt and responsibility of consequence—leaving you to think and behave in end result absolutes, hence when people get it "wrong" they tend to do harmful things in their god's name, whereas those who seem to understand and practice their faith in a different light tend feel compelled to do good works.

Also, in the grand total of all of human history I find it particularly meaningless to total and separate potential cause(s) of death. I wonder how many people have died due to poverty, hate, greed, lust, anger, jealousy, accident, laziness, inaction, circumstance, situation, random "bad luck", lack of medical care, etc. I'd imagine the numbers would be great, and perhaps interesting to know from a statistical standpoint, but also somewhat powerless. Simple knowledge doesn't always affect change or improvement.

It's not my interest, personally vested or otherwise, to defend or absolve religion as a concept or practiced activity. As a humanist of the highest order, all those people who are purported to have killed in the name of their personal faith also had personal responsibility and sole control of their actions. Much like guns, religion doesn't kill people, people kill people. Of course the reverse is also quite obvious; religion doesn't save lives per se either.

In the end were we to remove religion I'm quite positive we'd have other ways and reasons to harm and destroy one another. If anything humanity is the problem. Here's to hoping we evolve past it before it ends us, or we disappear before we do too much damage to everything else.

That's a very fair assesment. However I see a major difference between guns and religion. Religion influences thinking, while guns do not. Religion is not a weapon, it's a justification. A catalyst in many instances. There will always be far reasons for the members of the human race to destroy each other regardless.

As I said, people have died from many other reasons and causes. Religion just seems to be the one that should be easy to control. Also, it's still left as the primary reason for homophobia, It's very difficult to explain in a well reasoned argument why homosexuality is bad, and why women shouldnt be allowed any of the roles of men. Religion takes that problem away with three words. "God said so."

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Religion has more than just ties to bigotry, racism, genocide and the like — it authors them outright. All of them, and more, takes their cues directly from it — verbatim. You needn't read much farther than from the violent excerpts of the Qu'ran or any version of the Judeo-Christian bibles to find exacting proof of that.

Scour any of the three major monotheistic religions—the only three I'll argue about, as they are the only three that truly matter—and you'll have read more violence, hatred and bigotry than you might have otherwise reading any historical book that for the sake of this example would have excluded any part of human history that wasn't dictated by zealots, Kings and Popes acting directly on the behalf of heavenly command.

I've said it before and I'll say it again — religion is the most evil thing on this planet, bar none, if for no other reason than because it condemns the ideals of fundamental human freedoms and replaces them with the chains of servility for fear from damnation. Let alone it's vicious appreciation of immorality, or it's capricious [modern day] renunciations of the aforementioned historical atrocities...

You preachers and pimps can chalk up your faith to look innocent in the grand scheme of things until you're blue in the face, but the bottom line is that not a single one of you can fundamentally disprove the sheer violence, hatred, homophobia, bigotry and genital mutilation it has been directly responsible for since it's inception — regardless of sect. Not a single one of you can repudiate it's historical penchant for repression. And not a single one of you can convince me otherwise.

 

[Arkham Noir]

To be honest, I could probably write a novel on religion being evil, but its really not worth my time.

But I will say this without going into too much depth , anything that shapes people's views while demanding blind obedience is wrong in my opinion. I understand why people turn to religion. like the OP said, it makes things tolerable when they feel like they are going to destroy you. But so do drugs.

I like to think that humans have advanced to a point where relying on something like religion for its "good" while trying remain ignorant of the negative is foolish and I think that humanity will never truly be able to advance any further without cutting out religion entirely.

So ya, its a problem.

 

[Cena's Little Helper]

A spin-off of "Would You Elect an Atheist?"

I ask a question that's been allowed to be asked for only the last few centuries.

*IMPORTANT*
Before anyone of a singular faith, such as Christianity, storms in ready to hate--This covers ALL religions, from the minor ones, to the three desert dogmas themselves. Defend your own religion if you must, but do not forget that this subject incumbers all faiths.

The case can be made fairly well for both sides. Religion today does many good things. It makes life barable for alot of people. If you're in a foxhole, or in prison you probably have, and probably NEED Faith. Many religions hold charities giving food and even financial help to those that need it. It gives morals, values, and rules to people all over the world.

However, many would also make the claim (Myself included) that religion has ties with bigotry, misogyny, homophobia, violence, and ignorance. This certainly does not mean that religious people in general have these attributes. Those that do are a minority.

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstatz.htm#RelCon

^- The following is a list of conflicts that were based primarily on Religion. According to Tdigle, the death toll lies at 105,884,000. I dispute this number, believing it to be much higher. Regardless, I use this number because...

1. I won't get shit about it later.
2. It's still roughly the same or higher than World Wars I & II combined. (depending on estimates) So, it suits my purpose.

This number does not include - deaths that do not involve battle, such as witch burnings, human sacrifice, religious murder, terrorism, or religious propaganda. (Such telling people with AIDS that condoms don't work.)


It does however include the Holocaust, which though not done directly under the name of Christianity, Christianity was a factor due to the years of persecution as "Christ-Killers" that helped lead up to this. - Totally disputable.

Most of that was in the past. Christianity is no longer the religion of the sword it once was.
However that gap has been filled by Islam.

Islam has gotten alot attention as of late for being responible for most modern terrorism, and it's incrediblely stunning suppression of women. Though it is as bad the old Christianity, one of the things that stands out here in the twenty first century is The burqa. Even if it's not law, many women in the middle east must still wear it, simply for personal saftey.


None of this claims that Religion is the root of all evil. I argue in this subject because I'm good at it, not because it's the most important thing in the world.
I made this thread because I was told that my views on this subject make me the most ignorant person here on WrestleZone. I welcome your opinion.

With all this said- Why is Religion good? What great good has it done for humanity that justifies over 100 million people dying? Do you think Religion is a strong source of science denial and poor education?

Obviously, you want me to respond to this thread, so I will, with the following questions: Why is it so hard for you to understand that all I did was take a calculator and tally up all of the death tolls attributed to religion in the link that you provided? What is there to dispute exactly? Are there more death tolls that aren't appearing on the website when I access it?

Oh, and to answer your question: no, religion is NOT a source of poor education, and it, at the very most, only intermediately has an effect on denying the validity of science.

 

[justinsayne]

Religion is not bad or evil, it's the closed-minded religious extremists that take shit way way to fucking far, and kill in the name of their god that are evil, there are plenty of people who simply just rely on their religion as a basic guideline for how to live THEIR life, and religion still exists because their are those people who NEED something to beleive in, it gives them a reasons to wake up everyday

I am not a religious person, but I think telling people they should pull their heads out of their asses and stop believing is no better than someone trying to shove their religion down a "non-believers" throat, if believing in a god helps them get through their life then so be it, as long as the practice their religion in a sane manner and don't use it as an excuse to cause harm to others, again not everyone who practices any particular religion is "bad" or "evil"

 

[Xemmy]

Obviously, you want me to respond to this thread, so I will, with the following questions: Why is it so hard for you to understand that all I did was take a calculator and tally up all of the death tolls attributed to religion in the link that you provided? What is there to dispute exactly? Are there more death tolls that aren't appearing on the website when I access it?

Oh, and to answer your question: no, religion is NOT a source of poor education, and it, at the very most, only intermediately has an effect on denying the validity of science.

I know your opinion on religion. I was after everyone elses to make sure I wasn't the only one that's so obviously misinformed about religions obvious greatness. I dispute the number because my math gave me a higher number than yours. Regradless it doesn't matter. In this thread we're using your number. I already listed why.

We've been through creationistism being taught in schools and the detriments of science. I know your answer for that. Please answer the first two questions. They're the most important.

 

[LigerBomb]

That's a very fair assesment. However I see a major difference between guns and religion. Religion influences thinking, while guns do not. Religion is not a weapon, it's a justification. A catalyst in many instances. There will always be far reasons for the members of the human race to destroy each other regardless.

Major? I dunno 'bout that. Carrying a gun does indeed influence behaviour and thinking both of the holder and of those around the weapon holder. Likewise guns do indeed act as catalysts. For instance, it's kind of hard to be shot when no one around is in possession of a firearm.

As I said, people have died from many other reasons and causes. Religion just seems to be the one that should be easy to control. Also, it's still left as the primary reason for homophobia, It's very difficult to explain in a well reasoned argument why homosexuality is bad, and why women shouldnt be allowed any of the roles of men. Religion takes that problem away with three words. "God said so."

I've known my share of atheist misogynists and homophobes. You could misinterpret neuroscience/biology/psychology just as much as you can misinterpret religion for example. Anything can be the basis for prejudice. Anyway religion is easy to control, people's actions in the name of their interpretations of their faith much less so.

 

[Xemmy]

Major? I dunno 'bout that. Carrying a gun does indeed influence behaviour and thinking both of the holder and of those around the weapon holder. Likewise guns do indeed act as catalysts. For instance, it's kind of hard to be shot when no one around is in possession of a firearm.

That's an odd way of putting it. Guns are the instruments, not the conductors. The only time a gun acts as a catalyst is when someone reacts in fear of it. If person holding the gun wants to hurt someone, he's going to find a way to do it, with or without. The gun doesn't indoctrinate the user so that they'll use the gun, In a proper way, or unlawful way. (To keep the comparision.)

I've known my share of atheist misogynists and homophobes. You could misinterpret neuroscience/biology/psychology just as much as you can misinterpret religion for example. Anything can be the basis for prejudice. Anyway religion is easy to control, people's actions in the name of their interpretations of their faith much less so.

Liger, with all due respect- I've never met an atheist that's said women and homosexuals shouldn't have equal rights. Those that I've met that misinterpret biology and try and use it in argument have been Christians, though the kind that aren't really religious, but are merely poorly educated southern white people that have never been out of the county they were born in. But that's just personal experience speaking.

Saying religion is easy to control is overestimating the power of human will. One problem with that is Religion has a heirarchy, and people under the guise of faith gain power, which they tend to abuse because that's what people with power tend to do. AKA- The Vatican, Evangelical Preachers, and any other authority figure.

 

[LigerBomb]

That's an odd way of putting it. Guns are the instruments, not the conductors. The only time a gun acts as a catalyst is when someone reacts in fear of it. If person holding the gun wants to hurt someone, he's going to find a way to do it, with or without. The gun doesn't indoctrinate the user so that they'll use the gun, In a proper way, or unlawful way. (To keep the comparision.)

Carrying a weapon does indeed change the behaviour and actions of the holder therefore it is it's own catalyst for it's use. Secondly, a firearm—as well as it's relating culture—can certainly indoctrinate a user.

Liger, with all due respect- I've never met an atheist that's said women and homosexuals shouldn't have equal rights. Those that I've met that misinterpret biology and try and use it in argument have been Christians, though the kind that aren't really religious, but are merely poorly educated southern white people that have never been out of the county they were born in. But that's just personal experience speaking.

Xenny, WADR I've met a few *shrug*. Our experiences are different, go figure.

Saying religion is easy to control is overestimating the power of human will. One problem with that is Religion has a heirarchy, and people under the guise of faith gain power, which they tend to abuse because that's what people with power tend to do. AKA- The Vatican, Evangelical Preachers, and any other authority figure.

Any position or institution of power can be abused –largely due to human will to do so. It can also be refuted as can be seen by the increasing number of agnostics and atheists in the case of religion's sway of power to adherence, for example.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Religion is not bad or evil, it's the closed-minded religious extremists that take shit way way to fucking far, and kill in the name of their god that are evil, there are plenty of people who simply just rely on their religion as a basic guideline for how to live THEIR life, and religion still exists because their are those people who NEED something to beleive in, it gives them a reasons to wake up everyday

I am not a religious person, but I think telling people they should pull their heads out of their asses and stop believing is no better than someone trying to shove their religion down a "non-believers" throat, if believing in a god helps them get through their life then so be it, as long as the practice their religion in a sane manner and don't use it as an excuse to cause harm to others, again not everyone who practices any particular religion is "bad" or "evil"

False.

Religion is bad and it is evil because it's fundamentally flawed — all three major monotheistic religions condone genital mutilation, rape, slavery, genocide, murder and intolerance, hence all three major monotheistic religions are bad and evil.

You can sit here and try to blame it on the zealots and extremists, but how you can blame anyone for taking biblical law out of context is beyond me when the very books themselves demand you do exactly what these people do.

Your shock and disgust at anyone who buries a homosexual beneath a wall of stone is misplaced, because that's exactly what Sharia commands you do to them.

Your shock and disgust at anyone convicted of murdering someone he/she thinks is a witch is misplaced, because that's exactly what Exodus commands (22:17 NAB).

Need I go on?

It's because of religion these people murder and enslave and rape and torture and mutilate and so on and so forth. Without it, they have no reason to do so, because no heavenly body commands it, and no high priest or agent of faith says he does, either.

 

[Cena's Little Helper]

False.

Religion is bad and it is evil because it's fundamentally flawed — all three major monotheistic religions condone genital mutilation, rape, slavery, genocide, murder and intolerance, hence all three major monotheistic religions are bad and evil.

You can sit here and try to blame it on the zealots and extremists, but how you can blame anyone for taking biblical law out of context is beyond me when the very books themselves demand you do exactly what these people do.

Your shock and disgust at anyone who buries a homosexual beneath a wall of stone is misplaced, because that's exactly what Sharia commands you do to them.

Your shock and disgust at anyone convicted of murdering someone he/she thinks is a witch is misplaced, because that's exactly what Exodus commands (22:17 NAB).

Need I go on?

It's because of religion these people murder and enslave and rape and torture and mutilate and so on and so forth. Without it, they have no reason to do so, because no heavenly body commands it, and no high priest or agent of faith says he does, either.

Seriously, man, just stop it. You list all of these abominable practices, but the truth is that monotheistic texts have little, if anything, to do with why they're practiced. Female genital mutilation? This is more of a cultural than religious practice (if you don't believe me, compare the incidence of female genital mutilation with monotheistic affiliation in the geographical areas where it is most prevalent). Rape, murder, and intolerance? These things occur without any religious impetus whatsoever. Slavery? Are you kidding me? Religion may have turned a blind eye to the Atlantic slave trade, but, obviously, who didn't? As for genocide...to the best of my knowledge, these are ethnically, not religiously, motivated events.

 

[Xemmy]

Carrying a weapon does indeed change the behaviour and actions of the holder therefore it is it's own catalyst for it's use. Secondly, a firearm—as well as it's relating culture—can certainly indoctrinate a user.

Guns don't give out specific commands to their users. It's not saying, "Shoot Me! Shoot Me Damn You!" Religion, via the holy books, DOES give out commands which many see as infallible. And as for culture....that's on culture, not the gun. Guns themselves aren't really the problem. It the mindset of the people.

1.United States - (2.97 per 100,000)
2.Germany – (0.47 per 100,000)
3.Australia – (0.292 per 100,000)
4.Canada – (0.54 per 100,000)

For one reason or another UK, and Japan were not on the list. Bugged the hell out of me, but if you want to look them up, be my guest, the numbers will be similar. Canada is one I'd like to point out in paticular. It has similar Gun Laws to the United States, and yet the U.S. is on the low end of the list, next to third world countries.

My point is- It takes ideology, media, culture, and other people to influence people. Not an object.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence#Homicides_by_country

Xenny, WADR I've met a few *shrug*. Our experiences are different, go figure.

I love that nickname.

Any position or institution of power can be abused –largely due to human will to do so. It can also be refuted as can be seen by the increasing number of agnostics and atheists in the case of religion's sway of power to adherence, for example.

Yes, but none of that is in religions favor is it?

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Seriously, man, just stop it. You list all of these abominable practices, but the truth is that monotheistic texts have little, if anything, to do with why they're practiced. Female genital mutilation? This is more of a cultural than religious practice (if you don't believe me, compare the incidence of female genital mutilation with monotheistic affiliation in the geographical areas where it is most prevalent). Rape, murder, and intolerance? These things occur without any religious impetus whatsoever. Slavery? Are you kidding me? Religion may have turned a blind eye to the Atlantic slave trade, but, obviously, who didn't? As for genocide...to the best of my knowledge, these are ethnically, not religiously, motivated events.

They have little to do with the monotheistic texts? So you remove the Qu'ran and the Old Testament entirely from the historical world perspective and you think the mutilation of childrens genitals, rape, murder and homosexual intolerance (among countless other evil deeds and actions) still hold as prevalent today as they do in a world where they're backed by their respective religions? Please.

Where do you think these ethnic and geographical motivations derive from? The religious texts that mandate that "region" belong to them in the first place. Where do you think the cultural practice of genital mutilation came from? The dominant religion in that region. Circumcision and the removal of the clitoris are most prevalent in the United States and the Middle East respectively — wanna take a guess at the dominant religions in both regions? But I'm sure it's purely circumstantial, right?

Rape, murder and intolerance may occur without religious impetus, but they appear far more frequently by mandate of heavenly accord than they do not, and they are condoned by all three major monotheistic religions fundamentally. The idea that biblical law is the guiding force to our moral compass is astoundingly misguided.

 

[LSN80]

The problem with religion that I see so much is that it's followers take what they hear, and use it to adapt it to justifying their actions.

From the crusades to the 9/11 bombings, people have been killing in the name of religion for centuries. And if you take a closer look at these religions, be they Muslim, Christianity, Catholicism, etc., NONE of them through their teachings advocate vilence as being the answer to anything. when they were taking jesus to be crucified even, his followers, his disciples, drew their swords. What did Jesus tell them to do? He told them to PUT THEM DOWN.

Im not as familar with other religions as I am with Christianity, but I do agree that the misinterpretaion of scripture, by HUMAN beings, does lead to bigotry, homophobia, and even genocide. Does the Bible teach that homosexuality is wrong, and a sin? Sure does. But Jesus' message was always the same. Hate the sin, but LOVE the sinner. Hardly seems like he himself was a proponent whatsoever of hate crimes against people.

Why do I think religion is a good thing? Because I believed, if practiced properly, it can do a TON of good in the world. If more Christians were more "Christ-like", there would be alot less of the bigotry, homophobia and genocide. It's not religion's fault that people have killed over 100 million people, lets put the blame where it lies: On sorely misguided people who somewhere, somehow, were taught incorrectly, and began to believe in ways that went AGAINST what the true teachings of their religions are.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Is religion a problem? In general, I'd have to say no. When it comes to an actual problem, I'd have to say that people in and of themselves are the real problem. I'm not just talking about people today but rather people as a whole stretching back maybe to the very beginning of civilization.

We all know that religious belief has been used as justification by people in the present day and the distant past to justify some of the greatest atrocities ever perpetrated against other human beings. Religion has been used by many to justify sheer hatred of those of different skin color, for instance. There are passages in the Bible, for instance, that some racists claim is proof that Whites are superior to others or that people of skin color are "mud people". The hateful thoughts and feelings these people had were there already, they simply use a cryptic passage to give creedence to those beliefs.

When you talk about religion and violence, it's obvious that Christianity and Islam are the two right at the top of the list. The Holy Scriptures of both religions were written by the hands of men. That's especially true of the Bible as bits and pieces were added onto it over a span of many centuries, some books of the Bible were intentionally left out by those of religious and political power at the time because they felt they were inappropriate. The Quaran, sorry if I misspelled it, and Bible weren't created with God snapping His fingers and saying "Ok boys and girls, here you go. Knock yourselves out."

Anything that's intended as good and hopeful can be twisted to serve evil purposes. You can be an extremely good person without religious belief just as you can with them. I do believe in God personally, but I'm not nearly arrogant enough to believe that I understand his will or purposes.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

The problem with religion that I see so much is that it's followers take what they hear, and use it to adapt it to justifying their actions.

From the crusades to the 9/11 bombings, people have been killing in the name of religion for centuries. And if you take a closer look at these religions, be they Muslim, Christianity, Catholicism, etc., NONE of them through their teachings advocate vilence as being the answer to anything. when they were taking jesus to be crucified even, his followers, his disciples, drew their swords. What did Jesus tell them to do? He told them to PUT THEM DOWN.

Im not as familar with other religions as I am with Christianity, but I do agree that the misinterpretaion of scripture, by HUMAN beings, does lead to bigotry, homophobia, and even genocide. Does the Bible teach that homosexuality is wrong, and a sin? Sure does. But Jesus' message was always the same. Hate the sin, but LOVE the sinner. Hardly seems like he himself was a proponent whatsoever of hate crimes against people.

Why do I think religion is a good thing? Because I believed, if practiced properly, it can do a TON of good in the world. If more Christians were more "Christ-like", there would be alot less of the bigotry, homophobia and genocide. It's not religion's fault that people have killed over 100 million people, lets put the blame where it lies: On sorely misguided people who somewhere, somehow, were taught incorrectly, and began to believe in ways that went AGAINST what the true teachings of their religions are.

Bullshit.

The Old Testament strictly commands you to do all these things you think people are "taking out of context". There's nothing to be taken out of context when your text reads as blatantly as "If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives."* (Leviticus 20:13 NAB).

The Qu'ran is just as bad, too.

...kill the disbelievers wherever we find them" (Koran 2:191); "fight and slay the Pagans, seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem" (Koran 9:5); "murder them and treat them harshly" (Koran 9:123).

Now, you wanna try again — this time with a point that actually makes sense?

There's something supremely ironic about an omniscient and omnipresent god who creates faulty human beings of his own image and then blames them for his own short-comings.

So yes, let's put the blame where it truly belongs — in the hands of the very book that commands it's readers to do such atrocities in the first place.

 

[Cena's Little Helper]

They have little to do with the monotheistic texts? So you remove the Qu'ran and the Old Testament entirely from the historical world perspective and you think the mutilation of childrens genitals, rape, murder and homosexual intolerance (among countless other evil deeds and actions) still hold as prevalent today as they do in a world where they're backed by their respective religions? Please.

This is precisely what I'm saying.

Where do you think these ethnic and geographical motivations derive from? The religious texts that mandate that "region" belong to them in the first place.

All right, man, you are generalizing from one geographical region to the whole world.

Where do you think the cultural practice of genital mutilation came from? The dominant religion in that region.

This might be the case, but, where it's most prevalent, I seriously doubt this cultural tradition comes from one of the monotheistic religions you're condemning.

Circumcision and the removal of the clitoris are most prevalent in the United States and the Middle East respectively — wanna take a guess at the dominant religions in both regions? But I'm sure it's purely circumstantial, right?

...why are we debating circumcision now? When did circumcision become evil? I am very, VERY confident that genital mutilation, that is, the type that intentionally makes sex extremely discomforting, is extremely rare in the US.

Of course, your argument here could possibly work if you focused on all religions instead of just the Abrahamic ones (I'll give you female genital mutilation being something mandated by Islamic scripture, but that doesn't explain away FGM's prevalence in non-Islamic African nations).

Rape, murder and intolerance may occur without religious impetus, but they appear far more frequently by mandate of heavenly accord than they do not, and they are condoned by all three major monotheistic religions fundamentally.

This is just flat-out wrong. As I said already, I took Xenmas's source on religious death tolls, added up all of the liberal estimates, and came up with a number that's less than the liberal estimates for the death tolls of both World Wars. I think it's also noteworthy that the religious estimate spanned over approximately 1000 years...the combined length of both World Wars was only 10 years.

 

[Xemmy]

The problem with religion that I see so much is that it's followers take what they hear, and use it to adapt it to justifying their actions.

From the crusades to the 9/11 bombings, people have been killing in the name of religion for centuries. And if you take a closer look at these religions, be they Muslim, Christianity, Catholicism, etc., NONE of them through their teachings advocate vilence as being the answer to anything. when they were taking jesus to be crucified even, his followers, his disciples, drew their swords. What did Jesus tell them to do? He told them to PUT THEM DOWN.

Im not as familar with other religions as I am with Christianity, but I do agree that the misinterpretaion of scripture, by HUMAN beings, does lead to bigotry, homophobia, and even genocide. Does the Bible teach that homosexuality is wrong, and a sin? Sure does. But Jesus' message was always the same. Hate the sin, but LOVE the sinner. Hardly seems like he himself was a proponent whatsoever of hate crimes against people.

Why do I think religion is a good thing? Because I believed, if practiced properly, it can do a TON of good in the world. If more Christians were more "Christ-like", there would be alot less of the bigotry, homophobia and genocide. It's not religion's fault that people have killed over 100 million people, lets put the blame where it lies: On sorely misguided people who somewhere, somehow, were taught incorrectly, and began to believe in ways that went AGAINST what the true teachings of their religions are.

None of them through their teachings advocate violence? I'm afraid I have to completely disagree. Both have their good peaceful passages, and their horrificlly violent ones. While Jesus, and the New Testament is mostly a good message, the Jewish old testament (which Christians still look upon even if the Catholics think they shouldn't) is monsterous. God spends the first 5 books of the bible commanding death. For example, directly following the Ten Commandments, God gives Moses even more laws and practices which are downright offensive in today's society.

As for the Quran, it's completely different from the Bible. It has earlier peaceful passages, however it is superceded by more violent passages written later. The contridictions in the Quran are explained in the Quaran-
When you have two condricting passages, the later written passage supercedes the earlier ones.
Muslims do not often cherry pick because...

1. It's not full of vauge symbolism open for interpretation like the Bible. It's mostly direct commands.
2. It is a sin to alter or ignore any part of it's clear and direct message.

Not to mention Sharia Law which allows husbands to hit their wives, demands homosexuals to be executed, adulterers to be stoned to death, orders death to any critics of Islam, and unmarried sexually active couples to be whipped. Not to say that the bible doesn't have this stuff, but most of that is in the Old Testaent, who's laws are mostly ignored due to the later teachings of Jesus and Christianity no longer being a religion of the sword. Muslims still practice these customs in many middle-eastern countries.

So no, it's not just people twisting religion for a justification.

 

[Xemmy]

...why are we debating circumcision now? When did circumcision become evil? I am very, VERY confident that genital mutilation, that is, the type that intentionally makes sex extremely discomforting, is extremely rare in the US.

This is just flat-out wrong. As I said already, I took Xenmas's source on religious death tolls, added up all of the liberal estimates, and came up with a number that's less than the liberal estimates for the death tolls of both World Wars. I think it's also noteworthy that the religious estimate spanned over approximately 1000 years...the combined length of both World Wars was only 10 years.

Um, to butt in---I consider circumcision to be a bit evil from what I've learned of it. Though it does not make sex extremely discomforting to my knowledge, it does effect pleasure. Not that any of that matters....that's not actually a bad thing. The bad part is that your cutting flesh off of a baby for the sake of Jewish tradition. THAT's why it's bad.

And that's hardly fair. Bittling the death tole for that because it took place over the span of a thousand years. That still brings the total 100,000 every year doesn't it? Even if it was only 100,000 people dying in religious war instead of 100 million- What justifies that? What great good does religion bring us that was worth their lives?

 

[LSN80]

Bullshit.

The Old Testament strictly commands you to do all these things you think people are "taking out of context". There's nothing to be taken out of context when your text reads as blatantly as "If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives."* (Leviticus 20:13 NAB).

The Qu'ran is just as bad, too.

...kill the disbelievers wherever we find them" (Koran 2:191); "fight and slay the Pagans, seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem" (Koran 9:5); "murder them and treat them harshly" (Koran 9:123).

Now, you wanna try again — this time with a point that actually makes sense?

There's something supremely ironic about an omniscient and omnipresent god who creates faulty human beings of his own image and then blames them for his own short-comings.

So yes, let's put the blame where it truly belongs — in the hands of the very book that commands it's readers to do such atrocities in the first place.

EVERYTHING you quoted was from the Old Testament man. I see where you'rre coming from, I really do. But the New Testament was a completely different story.

Take John 8:1-8:11 for example.

1 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.
2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, wet out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more."\

Jesus was essentially saying that the readings you discussed, the ones about putting people to death for adultery, were no longer in effect. In other words, insteads of being harsh, and having the woman stoned to death, he chose to show the relgious leaders of the time another way. Mercy and forgiveness. In essence, he was saying that not one sin was greater then any other. Please tell me how in there that Jesus in ANY way condoned putting someone to death for their sin? Or murder in any way?

This is exactly the type of taking out of context I was referencing. You can examine one passage, one reading, and completely take it to mean one thing. But if you examine it as a whole, especially Christ's teachings(which, again, I referenced earlier) you find that he taught forgiveness. Second chances. That's just one example.

Try Matthew 19:18:

"Which ones?" the man inquired. Jesus replied, "'Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony."

Id say, again, pretty good principles to live by. He doesn't go on to mention any sort of punishment if you commit these actions, he was just responding to what commandments a man should follow.

One more, Matthew 7:3.

"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?"

Again, here's where my argument of how Jesus' teachings differ from those of the Old Testament. Safe to say here that he was talking about judging others. His issue was for us, as people, to examine ourselves first, not look at faults in others. Thats a FAR cry from any instruction that advocates murder, bigotry, discrimination, or hatred. It certainly doesn't advocate slaying people for their sins! I respectfully disagree with you. That's hardly the sound of a God who makes men in His Own image, then condems them for it.

Its also hard for me to blame a book, regardless of who wrote it, or whom it was directed to, for the actions of others. Choice. Free Will. Nobody forces someone else to take a passage, out of context, and commit a horrible act. It's human beings that do that.

 

[LSN80]

None of them through their teachings advocate violence? I'm afraid I have to completely disagree. Both have their good peaceful passages, and their horrificlly violent ones. While Jesus, and the New Testament is mostly a good message, the Jewish old testament (which Christians still look upon even if the Catholics think they shouldn't) is monsterous. God spends the first 5 books of the bible commanding death. For example, directly following the Ten Commandments, God gives Moses even more laws and practices which are downright offensive in today's society.

As for the Quran, it's completely different from the Bible. It has earlier peaceful passages, however it is superceded by more violent passages written later. The contridictions in the Quran are explained in the Quaran-
When you have two condricting passages, the later written passage supercedes the earlier ones.
Muslims do not often cherry pick because...

1. It's not full of vauge symbolism open for interpretation like the Bible. It's mostly direct commands.
2. It is a sin to alter or ignore any part of it's clear and direct message.

Not to mention Sharia Law which allows husbands to hit their wives, demands homosexuals to be executed, adulterers to be stoned to death, orders death to any critics of Islam, and unmarried sexually active couples to be whipped. Not to say that the bible doesn't have this stuff, but most of that is in the Old Testaent, who's laws are mostly ignored due to the later teachings of Jesus and Christianity no longer being a religion of the sword. Muslims still practice these customs in many middle-eastern countries.

So no, it's not just people twisting religion for a justification.

Jesus NEVER advocated violence in any of his teachings. None of them. What Ive discussed, and stated repeatedly, is that when Jesus came, it was to abolish the horrific teachings of the Old Testament. He stopped the Pharisees from stoning a woman due to adultery by asking them to examine their own sins. Isn't that something we can agree on?

As for the ten Commandments, can u explain to me what makes them so offensive? I think they would be wonderfully APPLICABLE to today's society. Some examples.

"Honor your father and mother. Do not steal. Don't covet your neighbor's wife or commit adultery. Do not commit murder. Do not make false statements against your neighbor."

I see NOTHING offensive whatsoever about those man, sorry. Can you explain to me how those are in any way downright offensive? I disagree with you man, sorry. What would be the problem of applying ANY of those aspects to our lives, religious or not?

As I stated earlier, my beliefs reside within the practices of the New Testament, not the Q'Ran, or what the Muslims believe. Going back to your original question, I believe that religion is not the problem, people are. Who wrote the Q'Ran? People. People have faults, flaws, and misinterpet things all the time. Religion is NOT the problem in my mind man.

It's people. Flawed humans who make egregious mistakes and try to hide behind religion. Religion, and more importantly, a relationship with a higher being is not the probem. We ALL misinterpret and make mistakes. Some worse then others. Its what makes us human. Religion is not the problem.

 

[LSN80]

Originally posted by Xemnas

Um, to butt in---I consider circumcision to be a bit evil from what I've learned of it. Though it does not make sex extremely discomforting to my knowledge, it does effect pleasure. Not that any of that matters....that's not actually a bad thing. The bad part is that your cutting flesh off of a baby for the sake of Jewish tradition. THAT's why it's bad.

I agree that circumcision is wrong and I personally shudder at the thought of it. But for whatever reason, its LEGAL in the United States. Im not talking about Israel, Iran, Iraq, or the United Arab Emarites. Its legal in the United States for some reason. How can you blame that on religion?

And that's hardly fair. Bittling the death tole for that because it took place over the span of a thousand years. That still brings the total 100,000 every year doesn't it? Even if it was only 100,000 people dying in religious war instead of 100 million- What justifies that? What great good does religion bring us that was worth their lives?

Theres nothing good about killing, or death in the NAME of religion. The fact that 1 person has lost their life in the name of religion appals me. I dont believe for one minute that is the way it was meant to be practiced. That God intended men to behave that way. That the way religion was meant to be practiced was in any way, indicative of killing. But it was men, flesh and blood, who committed those attrocities. Its even worse, and sadder, that it was done in the name of religion, because I dont believe thats the way it was meant to be. But religion, its only a tool. Its men, and women, that make choices, both good and evil.

 

[LigerBomb]

My point is- It takes ideology, media, culture, and other people to influence people. Not an object.

I know what your point is, and I refute it, or more accurately amend/edit it. A firearm is powerful, fear inducing, give a sense of protection etc. just by it's very nature. While ideology, media, and other people certainly have sway, the object and it's innate capability have influence all on it's own.

Yes, but none of that is in religions favor is it?

Nor would it be thought of as a negative. Which was my point, neutrality. Again, religion is a tool, and in that sense nothing more, nothing less. It can be used for good and evil.