Religion, what's the point?
- Thread starter TheRedFlag
- Start date
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/25/creationist-trial-bible-genesis-evolution
Wibble, although you have found a new job, in case you need some extra cash
Wibble, although you have found a new job, in case you need some extra cash
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/25/creationist-trial-bible-genesis-evolution
Wibble, although you have found a new job, in case you need some extra cash
If I had $10,000 and were close enough I'd be tempted. The claims in Genesis are ludicrous and are easily shown to be untrue with even a basic knowledge of evolution. The stupid book says all sorts of odd things like plants existed before the sun, birds were created before insects etc etc.
"It turns out that there is nothing in the universe [that] is evolving, everything is devolving, everything is going in the opposite direction"
Is he talking about entropy? That'll be a quick court case.
Is he talking about entropy? That'll be a quick court case.
To quote one of the comments,
While I'd love to think it's just a very dumb naive rich kook about to make a fool of himself, I'm far more convinced by the "Semantic sham PR stunt" angle.
While I'd love to think it's just a very dumb naive rich kook about to make a fool of himself, I'm far more convinced by the "Semantic sham PR stunt" angle.
I think that he has a point that we're all devolving. He's the living proof.
Yes, a common mistake from religious people.
The only thing worse than Bill Maher is his audience.
So true. While the scientific theories of it are at the same levels as those of Greek mythology, and in a lower level than pirates of Somalia being linked with global warming (Spaghetti Monster satiric religion), still the most terrible part of the book is the God itself, who is a bigger monster than the Emperor Palpatine and Sauron mixed together.
Indeed. The God of the old testament like a good smiting.
Nah, Maher's alright. His audience is shit though, nothing but sheep who frantically clap their hands like seals whenever he opens his mouth.
Yes, but he also looked to me as an obsessed sadist maniac.
Completely agree with Dawkin's about him:
After I read the Old Testament I was really terrified how a God who theoretically must be just and good can be such a monster. He looked more like an omnipotent Hitler than anything good have to do.
Only loons would take it literally though.
Do the religious types have an explanation as to what happened to God? I mean, his acts, at least compared to modern times, seem to have been quite frequent back in the day.
I'm just jealous because God managed to get a publishing deal.
Contact him and see who his agent was. It can't have been published on content, the plot is all over the fecking place.
I blame the editors; they're only human though.
I was just having a discussion with a work mate today about the old and new testament. The old testament is essentially a load of old bollocks with cruel fairy stories told to explain the unexplainable to a simple people in order to scare them and keep them in-line. It has no worth in modern society and no value to modern Christianity. If I was a Church leader I would encourage all Christian services to focus solely on the New Testament which is a much more enlightened, free, modern and forgiving moral compass. Believe in God, Jesus, whoever or nothing, the teachings and instructions of Jesus are by and large pretty relevant today. In fact I would argue that the world would be a wonderful place if the whole world abided by the teachings of Jesus.
If you can park the whole son of God thing for a moment and just look at the preachings dealing with how we should deal with our fellow man, I think you would struggle to find a lot of fault with the overall teachings as a way of life. Forgive thy neighbour, share the wealth, do not judge others. All pretty good and nice sentiments.
A few times he spoke about divorce being wrong and was somewhat sexist, but you could also say he was hugely liberal for the day.
What say the caf on the teachings of JC?
If you can park the whole son of God thing for a moment and just look at the preachings dealing with how we should deal with our fellow man, I think you would struggle to find a lot of fault with the overall teachings as a way of life. Forgive thy neighbour, share the wealth, do not judge others. All pretty good and nice sentiments.
A few times he spoke about divorce being wrong and was somewhat sexist, but you could also say he was hugely liberal for the day.
What say the caf on the teachings of JC?
Isn't Jesus the fella who promises you forgiveness for all* your sins as long as you believe he exists?
*The 'all' is pretty vague too, and different people take it to different lengths. One of my in-laws, a Christian, believes that everyone who believes in Jesus will go to heaven regardless of how they live and everyone who doesn't is going to hell.
Effectively making God an insecure little baby.
*The 'all' is pretty vague too, and different people take it to different lengths. One of my in-laws, a Christian, believes that everyone who believes in Jesus will go to heaven regardless of how they live and everyone who doesn't is going to hell.
Effectively making God an insecure little baby.
I meant specifically the teachings about how we should be with each other rather than the god stuff.
Indeed, I see him in the Old Testament even worse than Hitler, but in the New Testament, he is as much as a pacifist as Ghandi. How can that be explained.
If it is "essentially a load of old bollocks", then we can actually go with the Scientific theory that the World was created 4.6 Billion years ago instead of believing that there was an Adam and Eve or he created it in 6 days or what have you.
The moral teachings of JC are good and much more advanced that those in the Old Testament. Anyway, I think that the New Testament has probably even more stupidity in itself than the Old Testament. Starting from the birth of Anakin Skywalker without a dad (sorry, I was mistaken cause his name was Jesus Christ), from the giant plot hole of 3 Gogs that are the same and continuing with the stupidity of the first sin.
But yeah, taking into context only the moral teachings I definitely agree with you. To me, Jesus (if he even had that name) was just a smart and good ***********. Probably later his status started to rise as much that we don't know what he is. Most likely the majority of the new Testament is entirely fabricated.
Your trying to say that there is a lot of idiots in the world?
If people need a book on how to be a good person, then they've got no hope.
Yeah he's really horrible and makes a complete joke of the positions he argues.
That is one of the specific teachings and interpretations of Jesus. You can be the most disgusting child molesting genocidal nazi sympathizer but you accept Jesus in your life you will be rewarded eternally.
Do people need moral guidance? Of course they do, the same way people need other teachings. I don't see that as being a negative at all. A lot of the morality my mother taught me came from Catholicism as she was deeply deeply religious and as she battled with terminal illness grew even closer. I'm somewhat of a lapsed Catholic, but I still bring my kids to church and will allow them to make their own mind up about it later. Some of the teachings are the cornerstones for how we try to lead our lives and I think that's a very good thing.
Yes.
That's not one of the teachings about how we should interact with each other, and that's the specific that I'm talking about.
Also, you are somewhat wrong in the 'specific' lesson you are talking about. Jesus also preaches that there is only a place for you in heaven if you repent for your sins and are truly sorry. I guess you could argue that disgusting child molesting genocidal nazi sympathizers could really and truthfully repent and be sorry for their sins and the crimes they have committed which all go against the basic other teachings then they will be rewarded. I'd see that as being pretty unlikely though.
I was mentioning one possible reading of his teachings, one which removes all notion of justice and morality from the afterlife.
IMO you are misinterpreting the teaching though. Just believing in God and Jesus isn't enough to guarantee eternal rest, but rather living your life well after you become a believer.
Is it just me that sees a difference between the two interpretations because I'd say that the one which your in-law believes is totally against the teachings of the church as they have been explained to me my whole life.
It's not my reading, I'm not religious, my reading of the bible is irrelevant - this is a real life Christian's reading. And I think that will largely depend on which church you belong to.
Clearly some things can be interpreted differently, but I know for a fact that it's pretty clear that the main lesson to be gained from the new testament is for people to life their lives well, be kind and generous, do not judge others.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beatitudes
You can chose to pick out one very twisted interpretation which is IMO wholly against the actual real teachings, but a fairer and truer thing to do would be to look at the actual parables, gospels and stories and then make an overall judgement. The beatitudes above are central to new Testament sentiments and I thing that they are a very good reflection of what Jesus was about.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beatitudes
You can chose to pick out one very twisted interpretation which is IMO wholly against the actual real teachings, but a fairer and truer thing to do would be to look at the actual parables, gospels and stories and then make an overall judgement. The beatitudes above are central to new Testament sentiments and I thing that they are a very good reflection of what Jesus was about.
Irwin. So if someone lives a perfectly good life and by coincidence follows the bible to the letter but doesn't believe in God or Jesus, would he be denied entry to heaven?
That's not my point GM and I think you know that. In fact in an earlier post I stated that I'm a lapsed Catholic and while I still bring my children to church I'm having trouble believing myself.
The point I was making was that from my discussions at work we concluded that if people by and large lived their lives using Jesus' teachings as a moral guide the world would be a better place.
Asking me the ecclesiastical question about whether someone who lives a good and noble life whilst not being a Baptised Catholic would be denied eternal rest then I would say that it would take a very spiteful God to deny them. While the church preaches that only believers and those Baptised will get into heaven I think that's more of a self-preservation thing.
The point I was making was that from my discussions at work we concluded that if people by and large lived their lives using Jesus' teachings as a moral guide the world would be a better place.
Asking me the ecclesiastical question about whether someone who lives a good and noble life whilst not being a Baptised Catholic would be denied eternal rest then I would say that it would take a very spiteful God to deny them. While the church preaches that only believers and those Baptised will get into heaven I think that's more of a self-preservation thing.
Yeah I wasn't saying that was your point, I haven't read through the thread so I don't really know what's been said just wanted to know your thoughts. God is supposed to be merciful so I couldn't personally understand why he would be so evil to send his "children" to hell.
On another note, I read some of the Quran a few years ago and there was so much talk of the hellfire that it was disturbing. There were even phrases which justified killing in the name of Allah if for example a mosque was being attacked or some other instances which I can't quite remember. That just did not sit right with me.
On another note, I read some of the Quran a few years ago and there was so much talk of the hellfire that it was disturbing. There were even phrases which justified killing in the name of Allah if for example a mosque was being attacked or some other instances which I can't quite remember. That just did not sit right with me.
I'm totally ignorant when it comes to other religions, but then again, I follow the right one so why bother with all those false Gods!
I'm totally ignorant when it comes to other religions, but then again, I follow the right one so why bother with all those false Gods!
that's what they all say