Man, its probably a generational thing but look the state of the last page.. A Physicist like Marcelo Gleiser who worked in the Fermilab and Nasa, who was awarded by the President of the United States, who is a great scientific writer said something(he is wrong i think) and look the disrespectful way some posters refer to him as if the scientist were a nobody and some random guy in the internet a brilliant public intellectual..Sorry for the off topic but its trully the Dunning-Kruger effect generation.
Religion, what's the point?
- Thread starter TheRedFlag
- Start date
The earth is fixed? 
Then that demonstration with the water. Oh my dear Allah.
Edit: actually its not funny. These guys dress and talk like they represent Allah and His Word but do damage instead.
Then that demonstration with the water. Oh my dear Allah. Edit: actually its not funny. These guys dress and talk like they represent Allah and His Word but do damage instead.
The earth is fixed?
Edit: actually its not funny. These guys dress and talk like they represent Allah and His Word but do damage instead.
How or why does Allah, an all seeing and all knowing being allow mere mortals to do damage to his word? The same can be asked about the Christian God btw
It's the same God btw.
Its the same as asking why were we given the Word? Why not just wings and the ability to see God (if He exists - added for the atheists). Its part of the Plan.
Both monotheistic gods, and one is a rip off of the other that came first but they simply cannot be the same going by the different tenets of both religions. How can the god of the koran be the same as Yahweh? They are different beings, otherwise Allah would have a son named Jesus for instance. If they are the same, then this God has serious dissociative identity disorder (which both have already in my opinion). There are too many fundamental differences between the two
Its part of the plan to allow people to be misled in his name?
Same God. Differing Theology. Common Prophets such as Abraham and Moses.
Everything I said stands IMO. Just because they share common prophets and are based on the same principle doesn't make them one and the same. Theology is the study of the nature of the devine, and these two gods couldn't be any more different fundamentally. There are several other monotheistic gods outside the Abrahamic religions. Are they all one and the same?
I'm not arguing with you, merely attempting to assist.
Im not trying to argue either, that's just my understanding of it.
I know you like to be correct about things so perhaps you might want to do some more research, there's obviously no point in having a counterpoint discussion over the matter.
Fair enough my man. Perhaps you can shed more light on the topic?
Pope Francis has stated that we worship the same God, Pope John Paul said the same. The Quran says “our God and your God is One, and unto Him we surrender” (29:46)
http://catholicnews.sg/index.php?op...hip-the-same-god&catid=119&Itemid=473&lang=en
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_and_Islam
A couple of links to get you started.
I was raised Catholic and believed in this concept for most of my life. Why do you think there is such a dichotomy in how the (supposed) word of god is interpreted by different sets of believers in both faiths? Taking out the human element, do you think its down to god in singularity, imparting a different way of 'being' to different tribes, or is it completely down to individual and tribal human perception in your opinion? Having read the bible growing up, and reading some of the Koran and examing the tenets of both religions, I simply cannot see how they can both be talking about the same deity. Just wondering what your opinion is on this.
Greed, corruption, power-broking, stupidity, Chinese whispers etc.
Muslims believe Jesus was a prophet but not the son of God, Baptists won't drink alcohol at communion. I'm not a theologian, I haven't studied different religions I'm afraid but even today our different sects all branch off in different directions. Who knows what we'll end up with in another 500 years?
Muhammad was born nearly 1500 years ago but the Quran and Judaism share many of the same scriptures back to Adam, they just took different roads I guess. When we can say that we all started on the same road maybe we will begin to look at our similarities more than our differences. I believe in one God is the beginning of both the Catholic and the Church of England Creeds. Henry VIII just needed a new Church so he could get a divorce.
God post, and some of the things you've mentioned, among others, are the reasons why im an atheist today. Don't tell my mom
. The war of the roses and Henry VIII's reign are some of my favorite periods in history.
Last edited:
CoE is best, everyone knows its BS, no hellfire, its just about getting your kids into the best free school and singing some hymns.
That's okay, I was an atheist once too or at least I wasn't interested.God post, and some of the things you've mentioned, among others, are the reasons why im an atheist today. Don't tell my mom
What made you a believer, if you don't mind sharing?
I was an agnostic when I wasn’t interested. I became an atheist when I was. Nothing dissuades you from the myths of organised religion quite like reading them.
It's a bit personal and probably boring so I'd rather not at the mo.
Well you seem to know your own mind.
These differences in faith not only exist between the three Abrahamic religions, but they exist within their own specific faiths. Eastern Orthodox, Protestants, Catholics all believe in different stuff. Even among the Protestants you have quite a lot of difference.
Moreover, if you have to make the argument that Islam does not worship the same God that Christians do, then, you should also make the same argument regarding Christians and Jews.
Finally it's about faith, you don't have to believe it, but they do believe it. Correct me if I am wrong, I bet you could find Jews who say the same thing about Christianity, that God isn't Yahweh, like some Christians say Allah isn't God.
If we're going to explain the differences, you have to approach it I think in at least two different ways. First, from the theist point of view. We will assume God is in fact real, and that these holy books do in fact represent the word of God. In which case, what it would mean is, God has many faces, there is no one path to God, and God shapes its message for the individuals receiving it.
If we approach it from the point of view of someone who isn't religious, then we can introduce things like culture, and use cultural archaeology to explain why things are the way they are, like Arabs codifying veils into the religion, because it was part of desert survival. Then we can look at other human traits, like greed, power, corruption, and understand that these holy books are not the word of God, rather they are the word of men looking to enforce control over other men, and a great way to do that, is to piggy back on a pre-existing set of beliefs that are already widely popular.
I went through a militant phase of atheism, where I was obnoxious and argumentative about it, which I think many do for a stage (and which I think many more who are faithful have done for centuries - with far more leniency, in a World that is still overwhelmingly religious, in its many disparate forms) And whilst I still believe everything I did then, I’ve mellowed somewhat in confrontation.
In part due to it being a pretty boring drum to keep beating in largely like minded company, and in part due to the rise of the far right, abetted by Islamaphobia, and the concern that aggressively prioritising “truth” at the expense of the increasing demonisation of an already persecuted section of society, is a poor humanitarian trade off, all things considered.
Punching up at the massive multiplicitous cultural and societal behemoth of regressive nonsense that is Western Christianity, is a very different thing to punching down at the populous but powerless symbol of modern villainy that is Islam..
So while I'd like to be able to roast Christianity as the inherently hypocritical soundclash of diametrically opposed texts that it is. And how their respective depictions of God differ as dramatically as Burton and Schumacher’s Batmen, and a million other silly things, all the way down to how the official religion of our country (still!!) is a literal proto-Scientology, invented by a fat idiot solely so he could bang around a bit more, I worry if I do that, some arsehole is always bound to say "you'd never say that about Islam!"... Even though I would, and have, but have simply decided that the potential collateral is not currently worth it.
Last edited:
I sort of miss atheists being the edgiest cnuts around. Simpler times.
As soon as it started organising itself into a group, with a "thing", as opposed to a vague existential position shared by all manner of people, connected only by their general opposition to the very idea of being in a group with a "thing", it was inevitable that the worst kind of angry extremists would take over, and make it intolerable for everyone.
But even when it was a thing, I never felt like it was that bad. Mildly insufferable teenagers generally pales in comparison to religions who used to casually burn people alive because it was Friday.
Even the arsehole atheists like Dawkins were generally making alright points and tended to have some form of logic behind them. And it felt like back in the day they were the mildly edgy cnuts, the sorts the weirdos online fluctuated to in order to seem cool, even if they were being a little bit insufferable, as opposed to the edgy cnuts now who're trying to tell you the Nazis were alright and stuff.
Yeah, a lot of religos (primarily of the Christian Right, but of all stripes really) have definitely managed to weaponise that faux victim mentality of Conservatives, where “being a bit mean to us now, in the historically tiny bit of recent modern time you’ve been able to, is pretty much as bad as anything we’ve done, and also basically bigotry”
But while ultimately not as awful, there’s still the occasional worrisome crossover in those kind of atheist circles that like to group themselves, with things like Gamergate, and the generally right leaning “intellectual dark web”, where winning the “debate” is all that matters... which seems like an unfortunate run off from the much less overtly political Hitchens/Dennet/Dawkins days... but is now a gateway to (bizarrely, given their religious views) people like Shapiro and Peterson.
It’s a tough one, ‘cos part of me (the atheist part) feels some of the reason the Right has been allowed to take such triumphant ownership of free-speech, when its always predominantly been a flag of the left, is due to our rather wishy washy inability to take a stand on speaking truth to religion, in case it offended... but then another part of me (the bleeding heart liberal part) feels it was an impossible trade off, and that sticking up for a minority under attack, was ultimately the more moral choice.
Also, it’s 5 in the morning on a Saturday, and I’m chatting shit.
But while ultimately not as awful, there’s still the occasional worrisome crossover in those kind of atheist circles that like to group themselves, with things like Gamergate, and the generally right leaning “intellectual dark web”, where winning the “debate” is all that matters... which seems like an unfortunate run off from the much less overtly political Hitchens/Dennet/Dawkins days... but is now a gateway to (bizarrely, given their religious views) people like Shapiro and Peterson.
It’s a tough one, ‘cos part of me (the atheist part) feels some of the reason the Right has been allowed to take such triumphant ownership of free-speech, when its always predominantly been a flag of the left, is due to our rather wishy washy inability to take a stand on speaking truth to religion, in case it offended... but then another part of me (the bleeding heart liberal part) feels it was an impossible trade off, and that sticking up for a minority under attack, was ultimately the more moral choice.
Also, it’s 5 in the morning on a Saturday, and I’m chatting shit.
Last edited:
it's not hard, hit up Owen Jones, Anna Sarkeesian and a handful of extremely online leftists and tell them spam "free speech" all the time, wether or not they want it, and it'll seem like they do which
is what that has meant in recent years, just spamming xyz and having people repeat it ad nauseam
which is why on leftist internet you're cancelled if you don't want free healthcare and on reactionary internet you're cancelled if you don't deadname a trans person
Last edited:
I appreciate your point of view. I'm not here to proselytise but wanted to set straight a misnomer. However I'll always do my best to respond to posts made to me.
I find the first bolded part very disingenuous if I understand it correctly. So Xtinaity is "regressive nonsense" but Islam is merely a "powerless symbol of modern villany", meaning, it isn't regressive nonsense but is just hapless in the hands of villains who abuse it? The same (what you said about Islam) can be said for Xtianity in the hands of pedophile padres, for instance.
If you are going to condemn faiths, condemn them all. Exhibiting a bit of leeway for one while condemning another implies bias, though the second bolded part seems to imply I'm an Arsehole for asking this.
Note that I'm not saying I endorse any of those opinions here. I prefer to keep my opinion/appraisal of faiths private and neither abuse nor recommend anyone's so long as they don't bother me.
Exactly right. Seemingly the religious never actually bother to read their holy texts.
So much truth in this.
I was raised a Christian and spent my whole life in Christian churches. I went to college and took higher criticism Bible classes and came out of them a non-believer. Actually reading and analyzing the book is what changed my view of it.
Still waiting on your 'context' for all of those inarguably horrible passages from your bible - you know the ones that clearly show your Yahweh endorsing: slavery, abortion, rape, torture, human sacrifice, misogyny, infanticide, genocide, kidnapping, homophobia, murder, pedophelia and so many other equally horrible things.
It's been months now, surely you've had enough time to muster some kind of excuse?
Or maybe just admit that you simply can't provide any context whatsoever, and admit that it was laughable to suggest that to could in the first place.
There was a study done in the US that showed that Atheists know more about the stories in the bible than the Christians do. And that really explains a whole lot.
Mind you the majority of Christians go to church and are told a selection of nice stories, and not the ridiculous, horrible and literally unbelievable ones.
I believe it. I've seen it for years. Case in point: I had a debate about predestination vs. free will with a hardcore Christian colleague on the last teacher workday before we went on summer break. Her mind was blown when another colleague whose father is a Baptist minister chimed in and told her I was right and she was wrong and that what I'm saying is in the Bible and what she's saying isn't. She was in stunned disbelief.
Having grown up in churches in the South, I can tell you... the stories people are told in sermons are repetitive. Preachers basically tell the same ones repeatedly throughout their careers and mix the order they tell them in up a bit each year. There's stories they always leave out, too... like the one where God has a bear kill a bunch of kids.
Haha, I'm not surprised.
Almost every single debate that I've watched, read or seen has gone the same way. Hell, that guy I'm challenging above epitomizes this whole discussion.
This was indeed a long time ago and I’m sorry if you’ve been waiting as I’ve forgotten what you even posted. The fact you’re still mulling over this suggests to me that you have a God-shaped hole in your life.