Religion, what's the point?

Carolina Red said:
You're not refuting me, you're refuting John Chapter 1...

The concept of the Trinity means that Christians profess a belief in a triune God. Each of the Divine Persons is 100% God at the same time. If that doesn't make sense, don't blame me, blame the theology that has existed for 2000 years.

Also, the reason why I called the Trinity a "conundrum" is because Red Defense's church seemingly overlooks the Old Testament. You cannot have the Trinity without the Old Testament, and there is the conundrum... without the Old Testament, you don't have the Trinity, the basis of the entire Christian faith.
Click to expand...
It's almost astounding that the billions of christians are strictly divided on some of the most basic tenets of christianity.

is homosexuality bad? some christians say yes, others say no.
is the bible literal word of god or not? some christianians say it is, others say it isn't.
is human saved by works or faith? some christians say faith, others say works. some say both - which is more important? idunno.
does the old testament count? some christians say yes, others try to shy away from it for obvious reasons.

bible is supposed to be the perfect word of god. yet there are over 30000 denominations that are divided due to differing interpretations, biblical contradictions, etc.
 
@Winrar
Indeed, massive amount of diversity on fundamental issues for a religion derived from a book that claims to be the word of God.

My thing is, some churches/denominations have gotten so far from the fundamental tenants of Christianity that they've actually created something wholely different, while still co-opting the term "Christianity".
 
Organized religions are the Trump University of yore. They sell feelings, not facts, so debating theology is a pointless exercise.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Organized religions are the Trump University of yore. They sell feelings, not facts, so debating theology is a pointless exercise.
Click to expand...

I worked with an older guy that was working on his Masters in Theology. We would talk and debate. I was at a disadvantage seeing as I was arguing against a field he was studying and thus was a SME compared to me as the outsider.

However, one sticking point that I seemingly stumped him on was why the bible condoned slavery. He told me that because slavery was accepted during the time of Jesus, god permitted it as it was a slow process to eradicate. We would go back and forth on it. I'd try to ask him to step outside his bubble and realize the illogical and irrational apologetic response that is. This god supposedly rid the world of evil with a great flood but condoned slavery. He'd come up with the same rebuttal about the slow process.

After a few weeks of chats/debates, I finally told him that I was no longer interested in discussing religion with him. Neither of us where changing the others mind.
 
Carolina Red said:
Maybe you're right. Maybe there's something to the adage that the average non-believer knows more about a religion than the average believer in it.
Click to expand...

We read it with an open (skeptical?) mind versus a closed view, a view biased by belief.

I was raised Baptist and believed in this nonsense until my late 20s. All those questions I had growing up never went answered, or I was provided apologetic responses, or simply ignored. I kept my faith and belief. But gave up on that stuff a while back. I find myself much happier not worrying about pleasing an absentee landlord to save my eternal soul.
 
Just think of the Abrahamic God as a cigarette. Non-smokers stare in disgust, while smokers, knowing all of the adverse social and health effects, try to explain them away because they enjoy it.

Might be completely wrong and a shit analogy on top, but that's how I came to empathize a bit with believers.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Just think of the Abrahamic God as a cigarette. Non-smokers stare in disgust, while smokers, knowing all of the adverse social and health effects, try to explain them away because they enjoy it.

Might be completely wrong and a shit analogy on top, but that's how I came to empathize a bit with believers.
Click to expand...

It's not a bad analogy. Especially when you consider that when you perform actions that you consider to be good (ie morally correct) your brain releases chemicals, creating an almost addiction like effect.
 
MrMarcello said:
We read it with an open (skeptical?) mind versus a closed view, a view biased by belief.

I was raised Baptist and believed in this nonsense until my late 20s. All those questions I had growing up never went answered, or I was provided apologetic responses, or simply ignored. I kept my faith and belief. But gave up on that stuff a while back. I find myself much happier not worrying about pleasing an absentee landlord to save my eternal soul.
Click to expand...
I have the exact same story. Denomination and everything. As I have said in another post, my college experience led to me to start thinking critically of the Bible.

I've read before somewhere that if humans were not indoctrinated in religion at such a young age, but first introduced to it in their 20s, that religion would be almost non-existent.
 
MrMarcello said:
I worked with an older guy that was working on his Masters in Theology. We would talk and debate. I was at a disadvantage seeing as I was arguing against a field he was studying and thus was a SME compared to me as the outsider.

However, one sticking point that I seemingly stumped him on was why the bible condoned slavery. He told me that because slavery was accepted during the time of Jesus, god permitted it as it was a slow process to eradicate. We would go back and forth on it. I'd try to ask him to step outside his bubble and realize the illogical and irrational apologetic response that is. This god supposedly rid the world of evil with a great flood but condoned slavery. He'd come up with the same rebuttal about the slow process.

After a few weeks of chats/debates, I finally told him that I was no longer interested in discussing religion with him. Neither of us where changing the others mind.
Click to expand...

It was an interesting question that you asked him. And the answer is quite simple and answered by these questions: Who was able to read and write at the time of the "creation" of the bible, what positions did they had in the society?
 
Last edited:
JPRouve said:
It was an interesting that you asked him. And the answer is quite simple and answered by these questions: Who was able to read and write at the time of the "creation" of the bible, what positions did they had in the society?
Click to expand...
This! There's a reason the Bible is geared towards a male dominated society.
 
MrMarcello said:
I worked with an older guy that was working on his Masters in Theology. We would talk and debate. I was at a disadvantage seeing as I was arguing against a field he was studying and thus was a SME compared to me as the outsider.

However, one sticking point that I seemingly stumped him on was why the bible condoned slavery. He told me that because slavery was accepted during the time of Jesus, god permitted it as it was a slow process to eradicate. We would go back and forth on it. I'd try to ask him to step outside his bubble and realize the illogical and irrational apologetic response that is. This god supposedly rid the world of evil with a great flood but condoned slavery. He'd come up with the same rebuttal about the slow process.

After a few weeks of chats/debates, I finally told him that I was no longer interested in discussing religion with him. Neither of us where changing the others mind.
Click to expand...
Another great question is why is kol eretz translated as "whole earth" when almost every other time it is used it meant "area" or "region". The first 11 chapters of Genesis all talk about the region of Mesopotamia, except Noah's flood, there you randomly have the translation of the flood story talking about the entire planet, the size of which they had an incredibly limited understanding of.
 
Ok, I know we don't need too many excuses to bash religion on this forum, but the Orlando shooting and subsequent information about the shooter attending the gay club numerous times before, has got me thinking.

Now maybe he was scouting the place, taking in information on when was busiest, strategic points etc. That would certainly make some sense. But it's also possible the man was gay and was so confused as he had abviously been brought up to believe that homosexuality was a mortal sin. His confusion and anger may have got the better of him and he decided to end it all, while taking some other sinners with him.

Now, thinking about that in relation to the wider world and devout Muslims, Christians and Jews who may think of homosexuality as a mortal sin. If the wider world accepts that homosexuality is not a choice and that it is a natural occurance, do governments have a duty of care to their citizens to make it known in schools from a young age that it is natural and that there is nothing wrong with being gay?

I mean, everyone is entitled to their religious freedom, but children are religious based on their parents religion and possibly the faith schools that they attend. Yet, if you are taught from a young age that homosexuality is an abomination and then you reach sexual maturity and realise you are gay, that must be a terrible time for a religious adolecent. The confusion, bitterness and anger that they must endure is awful. I know in Ireland, in the past (Thankfully, we're progressing), many gay men either joined the priesthood or got married and lived unhappy lives rather than come out to their families who would have been staunchly catholic. And those were the lucky ones. Many others took their own lives. I knew some personally.

Surely as progressive countries, it's our duty to say to teens, "It's alright, you're normal", because for many people, what they might hear at home would be very different than that.
 
@RexHamilton you would hope that something like that could be the case in progressive societies with secular governments, but unfortunately I think you'll see a major backlash to that (at least here in the United States). Just look at the pushback from Christianity in this country against evolution being taught in school... I can't imagine the calls and emails and conferences I would get from parents should I start dropping things like "people are born gay" in class.
 
Religions encroaching into public sphere is nothing new. Tony Abbott wanted to install chaplain into every public school a couple of years back. Thankfully the cvnt is gone.

Their tax-exempt status is galling. People are dying on the streets yet those tossers are living it large and using their money to influence legislations. Pointing that out, though, and you are a bigot.
 
Carolina Red said:
@RexHamilton you would hope that something like that could be the case in progressive societies with secular governments, but unfortunately I think you'll see a major backlash to that (at least here in the United States). Just look at the pushback from Christianity in this country against evolution being taught in school... I can't imagine the calls and emails and conferences I would get from parents should I start dropping things like "people are born gay" in class.
Click to expand...

:lol: I don't mean to offend, but I wasn't including the USA when I was talking about progressive countries.

Edit: Obviously certain states are as progressive as anywhere in the world. But as a whole, it's not.
 
MrMarcello said:
I worked with an older guy that was working on his Masters in Theology. We would talk and debate. I was at a disadvantage seeing as I was arguing against a field he was studying and thus was a SME compared to me as the outsider.

However, one sticking point that I seemingly stumped him on was why the bible condoned slavery. He told me that because slavery was accepted during the time of Jesus, god permitted it as it was a slow process to eradicate. We would go back and forth on it. I'd try to ask him to step outside his bubble and realize the illogical and irrational apologetic response that is. This god supposedly rid the world of evil with a great flood but condoned slavery. He'd come up with the same rebuttal about the slow process.

After a few weeks of chats/debates, I finally told him that I was no longer interested in discussing religion with him. Neither of us where changing the others mind.
Click to expand...
"process"? is this LVG's man utd? :lol:

why would an omnipotent, omniscient being need "process" to eradicate clearly immoral laws?
 
Last edited:
Carolina Red said:
@RexHamilton you would hope that something like that could be the case in progressive societies with secular governments, but unfortunately I think you'll see a major backlash to that (at least here in the United States). Just look at the pushback from Christianity in this country against evolution being taught in school... I can't imagine the calls and emails and conferences I would get from parents should I start dropping things like "people are born gay" in class.
Click to expand...

Out of interest, as I have known few Americans in my life well enough to have had a chance to have this conversation, why do you believe a society as wealthy and privileged, with such strong educational systems and a history of democratic sensibilities as the US seems to be regressing in large swathes to a very simplistic and backwards (to European eyes at least) religious position? I ask not just out of interest, but because I fear that,as tends to be the case often, that the UK may follow. The mere thought of this both repulses and terrifies me.
 
Fingeredmouse said:
Out of interest, as I have known few Americans in my life well enough to have had a chance to have this conversation, why do you believe a society as wealthy and privileged, with such strong educational systems and a history of democratic sensibilities as the US seems to be regressing in large swathes to a very simplistic and backwards (to European eyes at least) religious position? I ask not just out of interest, but because I fear that,as tends to be the case often, that the UK may follow. The mere thought of this both repulses and terrifies me.
Click to expand...
It is a combination of many things, in my opinion.

I think part of it is that some of the statistics on religion in America are exaggerated, people tend to overstate their views here rather than understate them. Don't want someone you like to think you're going to hell and all, despite the fact that your lifestyle in no way adheres to the Book you claim to wholeheartedly follow and believe. It's really an amazing phenomenon with high school aged individuals... They'll profess to be so devoutly religious, yet when I cover their religion in the world religions unit in class, it turns out they know so very very little about it.

I think part of it is that people have begun to feel the slipping away of that wealth and privilege and when you have preachers saying every Sunday it's because America has turned away from God, people react to that in hopes that God will make America wealthy again (because God cares about the fiscal wellbeing of a secular nation, right?). Either way, this has happened many times in our history in which people have turned to religion in times of national strife.

I also think part of it is because religious zeal has been part of what created America. We were colonized by religious zealots and dissenters.

Finally, I believe that our lack of an established state religion has kept religion strong in America. I wrote on this in college, that state religion weakens religion in that country, basically.
 
Last edited:
Carolina Red said:
I have the exact same story. Denomination and everything. As I have said in another post, my college experience led to me to start thinking critically of the Bible.

I've read before somewhere that if humans were not indoctrinated in religion at such a young age, but first introduced to it in their 20s, that religion would be almost non-existent.
Click to expand...

I don't think many would disagree with this.
Can you imagine if we could brainwash the entire planet into forgetting everything they've ever known about religion and gods. I wonder how many would revert back to their past religion when being taught about all religions and given the choice of over 3000 different ones? Or even how many would believe period?
This thing about proof would be discussed a whole lot more at least..

(yes I know it's a silly argument, but still)
 
Zlaatan said:
I don't think many would disagree with this.
Can you imagine if we could brainwash the entire planet into forgetting everything they've ever known about religion and gods. I wonder how many would revert back to their past religion when being taught about all religions and given the choice of over 3000 different ones? Or even how many would believe period?
This thing about proof would be discussed a whole lot more at least..

(yes I know it's a silly argument, but still)
Click to expand...
I don't think it silly. I think you have a point there. I have a bit of an experience with the matter...

My wife has always been much more religiously inclined than I, however, she's not as well studied in the intricacies of religion than I am because she focused her college studies on science and nursing. She did take one world religions class while in college that she said she thoroughly enjoyed. One of the lasting impressions I have of her speaking about that course was that she stated that had she not been brought up Christian, she would most likely have been a Buddhist.

Some conversations that I've had with her about studying the Bible in college and its role in my shift away from faith in organized religion, I believe, has caused her to question some of hers as well. For worse or for better... she's the one who asked me about it though, so I had the conversation with her.
 
Religion exists for 7 very exact reasons.

1. Money for your communion.
2. Money for your confirmation.
3. Presents for your wedding.
4. Money for your kids christening.
5. Presents at Christmas.
6. Easter eggs.
7. Big piss up when you die.
 
Green_Red said:
Religion exists for 7 very exact reasons.

1. Money for your communion.
2. Money for your confirmation.
3. Presents for your wedding.
4. Money for your kids christening.
5. Presents at Christmas.
6. Easter eggs.
7. Big piss up when you die.
Click to expand...
Seems more like a possible list for Christianity than religion in general.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
marukomu said:
I thought it was more like
1. Generate tax free money.
2. Place to hide paedos.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/04/sex-abuse-catholic-church_n_5085414.html
Click to expand...
Ye know the thing that upsets me about the sex abuse is that there are sex abuse scandals in every walk of like. Imams in Islam but we dont automatically tar all Muslim Imams as peados. Politicians, rock stars, sports stars, scientists... you name it they have their fair share of peados.

Given the numbers of perpetrators to overall priests the numbers are tiny too. And given the number of victims to the number of followers even smaller.

Ive sometimes felt that people who attack the catholic church as being peado land either have some sort of agenda against the religion and the people who follow it in general or are ignorant and cant manage to work out the massively obvious numbers...

Men rape women!!! Whoa is the world... all mem are rapists. Something along those lines. Either youre intelligent enough not to be swayed by the sensationalism of it or youre an idiot.

Another important point is that the majority of cases are years old, from the 60s and 70s, even earlier in some cases. Yet the media has blackened every priest today.

Its pretty sad if youre a honest to god good man / woman practising your faith in an honerable way to then have some ignorant wanker come along and portray you as a peado.
 
Green_Red said:
Ye know the thing that upsets me about the sex abuse is that there are sex abuse scandals in every walk of like. Imams in Islam but we dont automatically tar all Muslim Imams as peados. Politicians, rock stars, sports stars, scientists... you name it they have their fair share of peados.

Given the numbers of perpetrators to overall priests the numbers are tiny too. And given the number of victims to the number of followers even smaller.

Ive sometimes felt that people who attack the catholic church as being peado land either have some sort of agenda against the religion and the people who follow it in general or are ignorant and cant manage to work out the massively obvious numbers...

Men rape women!!! Whoa is the world... all mem are rapists. Something along those lines. Either youre intelligent enough not to be swayed by the sensationalism of it or youre an idiot.

Another important point is that the majority of cases are years old, from the 60s and 70s, even earlier in some cases. Yet the media has blackened every priest today.

Its pretty sad if youre a honest to god good man / woman practising your faith in an honerable way to then have some ignorant wanker come along and portray you as a peado.
Click to expand...

The problem is that a massive, global authority, which holds itself up as a bastion of morality, deliberately institutionally chose to conceal and cover up the abuse. This decision was taken at the highest levels of authority and shows a withering contempt for the victims whilst displaying a callous prioritisation call of self preservation over the moral standards which this self serving organisation is supposed to be defined by.

So, no, I don't think the Catholic church is hard done by really. That's not an agenda, nor is it ignorance.

This does not mean all priests are paedos, but the organisation to which they belong at best chose to protect paedophiles. That is, at least, a moral quandry I'd have thought.
 
Fingeredmouse said:
The problem is that a massive, global authority, which holds itself up as a bastion of morality, deliberately institutionally chose to conceal and cover up the abuse. This decision was taken at the highest levels of authority and shows a withering contempt for the victims whilst displaying a callous prioritisation call of self preservation over the moral standards which this self serving organisation is supposed to be defined by.

So, no, I don't think the Catholic church is hard done by really. That's not an agenda, nor is it ignorance.

This does not mean all priests are paedos, but the organisation to which they belong at best chose to protect paedophiles. That is, at least, a moral quandry I'd have thought.
Click to expand...
I get the coverup but its a stretch to say it was widespread coverup. Yes there were coverups at the highest level. But it also begs the question whether the church is the only organisation that is implicated. Surely the police and judicary are culpible to some extent too.

What I am saying is its unfair to label the whole thing as rotten. Parts yes, but should all catholic priests feel a sense of guilt?
 
Green_Red said:
I get the coverup but its a stretch to say it was widespread coverup. Yes there were coverups at the highest level. But it also begs the question whether the church is the only organisation that is implicated. Surely the police and judicary are culpible to some extent too.

What I am saying is its unfair to label the whole thing as rotten. Parts yes, but should all catholic priests feel a sense of guilt?
Click to expand...
I think they should, for perpetuating religion. I do admit that their viewpoint might slightly differ from mine on this one.
 
MrMarcello said:
I worked with an older guy that was working on his Masters in Theology. We would talk and debate. I was at a disadvantage seeing as I was arguing against a field he was studying and thus was a SME compared to me as the outsider.

However, one sticking point that I seemingly stumped him on was why the bible condoned slavery. He told me that because slavery was accepted during the time of Jesus, god permitted it as it was a slow process to eradicate. We would go back and forth on it. I'd try to ask him to step outside his bubble and realize the illogical and irrational apologetic response that is. This god supposedly rid the world of evil with a great flood but condoned slavery. He'd come up with the same rebuttal about the slow process.

After a few weeks of chats/debates, I finally told him that I was no longer interested in discussing religion with him. Neither of us where changing the others mind.
Click to expand...

You were making a good argument that he just couldn't answer. The answer would of course be that human behaviour evolves just as human biology does. What is right and what is wrong evolves so you can't follow rules laid out in an ancient book.

If ever there was a time for a second coming it would be now.
 
To me religion illustrates just how young we are as humans. We're only just starting to leave the stage of believing in Gods and entering a stage of true technology and science.
If advanced aliens came and found us they'd see many people still believing in religion, most buildings made out of rock, people chugging around in clunky vehicles etc. and think these are some primitive beings. Earth would probably be stunning though, so we have that.
 
Carolina Red said:
I also think part of it is because religious zeal has been part of what created America. We were colonized by religious zealots and dissenters.
Click to expand...
Indeed.

Thanksgiving is a bizarre celebration.

It's giving thanks to the arrival of religious zealots in a reasonably stable place, who were very unhappy with the tolerance and reasoning breaking out in England, and wanted somewhere to have their own fanatical utopia, free to impose their own vision without other morals.

They weren't escaping from persecution, they were running to a place where they could ignore evolution, tolerance, progression, science and fact.
 
VeevaVee said:
To me religion illustrates just how young we are as humans. We're only just starting to leave the stage of believing in Gods and entering a stage of true technology and science.
If advanced aliens came and found us they'd see many people still believing in religion, most buildings made out of rock, people chugging around in clunky vehicles etc. and think these are some primitive beings. Earth would probably be stunning though, so we have that.
Click to expand...
It's probably vaguely alright in the grand scheme of things. It's like saying "beautiful country", as if there's many ugly ones.
 
Silva said:
It's probably vaguely alright in the grand scheme of things. It's like saying "beautiful country", as if there's many ugly ones.
Click to expand...

It's pretty incredible. Imagine never having seen it, coming through the clouds and seeing all the blue and green.

For a second then I thought wtf are we talking about? Then I realised this is more plausible than any religion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.