A world without the Bible?

[Man of Faith]

You know, a couple beers can also work wonders for a crappy life too!:tigger:

Really, how do you know that you it was Jesus that you needed in your life? Why not Mohammed or Buddah?

I don't drink beer, it distorts my witness.

 

[RedOne77]

Who can say how the world would be now?
However I think that Christians and Muslims have done an incredible amount of violence in this world, destroyed cultures and civilisations and distorted other religions that have miraculously survived dispite the attempts to demonise everything by Christians and Muslims.

I heard of an interesting view of Islam from an atheistic perspective of comparative religious studies. In this view they state that Muhammad made up nearly everything he wrote in an attempt to unify the middle east region under a single religion that could survive mostly uncorrupted over time. They think that Muhammad turned to Judaism, as they have been through an insane amount of hardship throughout history and have retained their culture and language quite effectively. For some evidence of this they turn to some practices that have been lost among Christianity but have survived in Judaism. Some of them being reading and writing the Qur'an only in the original language, as well as practices such as fasting, which have been lost in Christianity and today is seldom practiced in Judaism. I do not know if this next point is historically verified or if this group just suggested it, but they think that Muhammad had several in-depth conversations with Jewish leaders to learn about their culture and how they've retained their identity despite all that they have gone through. Whether true or not, I think it is an interesting view of one of the major religions of the world today.

I honestly think that a wolrd without Abrahamic influence could be a lot more peaceful, a lot more respectful but who knows how history could have turned out. Some other oppressive force might have risen to power and spread around the world.

If eastern religions had become more widely spread the world would have those very same principles that Jesus attempted to teach. I think that every denomination is corrupt, not just Catholicism, and people like Calvin and Luther helped to spread ideas that have resulted in so much hate and bloodshed.

If you are suggesting that Eastern religions would have made the world more peaceful, I would disagree. Not because one religion is more or less peaceful than the other, but because I think that people will be violent regardless of what religion is dominant. Even in the East there is violence and war.

I actually think that the original Islamic faith was quite peaceful; before the crusades Christians would live with zero problems in the middle east where Islam was present. The only condition was an extra tax that would have been equivalent of what they were supposed to give to the Islamic Masques if they were Muslim. I'm no historian or anything, but IMHO, if the crusades never happened Islam would be a much more peaceful religion today.

In any case, if Islam or Christianity never existed I would think it would leave those regions open to any number of other religions to become dominant, and it really becomes a wild card at this point if the religion instilled would be more or less violent then what we've witnessed in history.

 

[Thesavorofpan]

You know, a couple beers can also work wonders for a crappy life too!:tigger:

Really, how do you know that you it was Jesus that you needed in your life? Why not Mohammed or Buddah?

Beers don't help anything. In the morning you'll wake up with the same problems and a head ache too boot too.

Because Jesus solves problems. Mohammed was an inmoral man. Buddah was just a prince before he became all wise and what not therefore he can't be a god.

 

[Madhuri]

Beers don't help anything. In the morning you'll wake up with the same problems and a head ache too boot too.

Because Jesus solves problems. Mohammed was an inmoral man. Buddah was just a prince before he became all wise and what not therefore he can't be a god.

Wait...are you saying Jesus is God because he solved problems? What problems?

 

[Madhuri]

If you are suggesting that Eastern religions would have made the world more peaceful, I would disagree. Not because one religion is more or less peaceful than the other, but because I think that people will be violent regardless of what religion is dominant. Even in the East there is violence and war.

I actually think that the original Islamic faith was quite peaceful; before the crusades Christians would live with zero problems in the middle east where Islam was present. The only condition was an extra tax that would have been equivalent of what they were supposed to give to the Islamic Masques if they were Muslim. I'm no historian or anything, but IMHO, if the crusades never happened Islam would be a much more peaceful religion today.

In any case, if Islam or Christianity never existed I would think it would leave those regions open to any number of other religions to become dominant, and it really becomes a wild card at this point if the religion instilled would be more or less violent then what we've witnessed in history.

I agree and disagree. I think that abrahamic religions hold all of the ingredients to abusing others and doing violence. Christians and Muslims tend to feel like warriors of God, spreading his mission and converting as many people as possible. The scriptures are full or references to killing people for being this or that.

On the other hand, eastern religions in general teach about the illusions of material nature and the equality of every living thing. We are taught about karma, we are taught that there is truth in all things. You will find that in India, before it was invaded by Muslims (hence the violence), there were all sorts of religious beliefs. People would get together and debate but they all lived very peacefully together. When Buddha rose to prominence instead of crucifying him they decided he must be an avatar of God. Even today, any person leading a religious life or professing to be spiritually dedicated is highly respected despite their religion. You do get violence from some individuals but this is a natural human struggle that has been born from mostly the muslims and christians who have both invaded India and tried to destroy eastern religions there.

Those regions you speak of already had religions. Either those religions would have survived much longer or some other oppressive religion may have sprung up and done something similar. We can't really know.

 

[RedOne77]

I agree and disagree. I think that abrahamic religions hold all of the ingredients to abusing others and doing violence. Christians and Muslims tend to feel like warriors of God, spreading his mission and converting as many people as possible. The scriptures are full or references to killing people for being this or that.

Unfortunately true. :sad:
I think it is actually very hard to separate violence done because of religion versus basic human failure as a general rule. I think this comes distorted (at least partially) as for much of human history a persons religion was synonymous with their country/tribe. Even today, although we can generally choose our religion, many retain the religion they grew up in, or some variant closely related (i.e. a different sect of Christianity but still Christianity).

What better way to rally people behind your cause (violent or not) if you play off of people's religion.

On the other hand, eastern religions in general teach about the illusions of material nature and the equality of every living thing. We are taught about karma, we are taught that there is truth in all things. You will find that in India, before it was invaded by Muslims (hence the violence), there were all sorts of religious beliefs. People would get together and debate but they all lived very peacefully together. When Buddha rose to prominence instead of crucifying him they decided he must be an avatar of God. Even today, any person leading a religious life or professing to be spiritually dedicated is highly respected despite their religion.

While history may not have favored Easter religions (perhaps as a result of religious and cultural natural selection), I do have a feeling that if humanity was greatly influenced by these religions an overall net gain of peacefulness would be seen.

You do get violence from some individuals but this is a natural human struggle that has been born from mostly the muslims and christians who have both invaded India and tried to destroy eastern religions there.

I'm afraid I don't know much about India's history (born and raised in the US. Go figure :sarcastic). Granting that this is true, and maybe it's a leap to tie violence with social justice, but India has several customs that I do find quite disturbing; Such as the role of untouchables (which I think does promote violence). I also think the caste system helps support the notion that while religion can influence peacefulness etc. it can only go so far on the (pragmatic) macro scale before basic human thought creeps in instilling violence and injustice.

Those regions you speak of already had religions. Either those religions would have survived much longer or some other oppressive religion may have sprung up and done something similar. We can't really know.

One reason why I think that getting rid of Christianity wouldn't decrease violence on any meaningful level is because of the way religions and cultures propagate and evolve via memes. Religions that will propagate via oppression and do it well can incorporate some trivial things (like Christmas trees) from the religion/culture it wishes to overtake - and such religions will tend to be more violently inclined I think. So if it wasn't Christianity, I would think another religion would proliferate that people could use to justify any wrongdoing that previous Christians used. While I agree we can't really know, I don't think it is a 50-50 chance based on what I understand.

 

[Madhuri]

I'm afraid I don't know much about India's history (born and raised in the US. Go figure :sarcastic). Granting that this is true, and maybe it's a leap to tie violence with social justice, but India has several customs that I do find quite disturbing; Such as the role of untouchables (which I think does promote violence). I also think the caste system helps support the notion that while religion can influence peacefulness etc. it can only go so far on the (pragmatic) macro scale before basic human thought creeps in instilling violence and injustice.

This is the only part of your post that I can disagree with. People commonly percieve the caste system to be part of the religion but it was/is actually part of India's culture just like social heirarchy has been part of so many societies. It wasn't always a part of India's culture (especially when it comes to the untouchables) and it came about when Hinduism was already in existence.

 

[dust1n]

Hi,

I'm interested in understanding creationist's world views and beliefs. For any creationists reading this, I'm curious... hard though it may be, if you imagine that the Bible had never been written, how do you think you might view the world and the origins of life? Where would you look for answers?

I know this question might seem silly because the Bible obviously WAS written and the development of history and society have greatly been affected by it- to imagine a world without the Bible would likely imply a world with many differences.... but if you can try to imagine what your beliefs might be like without the Bible, I'd be really interested to hear them!

Thanks for sharing!

If the Bible did not exist, it's exact moral teachings could be found in other books, as it can now.

 

[Big_TJ]

Beers don't help anything. In the morning you'll wake up with the same problems and a head ache too boot too.

Because Jesus solves problems. Mohammed was an inmoral man. Buddah was just a prince before he became all wise and what not therefore he can't be a god.

Well, you can keep doing beers just as you pray. You dont pray once then expect all to be fixed, I presume. You pray daily. So don't drink one beer and expect your problems will go away; drink several beers (and keep drinking).

So Jesus was not a mortal man? you said "Buddah ... can't be a god." Should I presume that Jesus was a god? And why can't buddah be a god? I don't think some Chinese would agree with you

 

[Wotan]

Quote:


Originally Posted by Wotan


"It would be a sad world because without the bible we wouldn't have Jesus and without Jesus we would die in our sins."

Why does anyone/thing have to?​

​

I don't understand your question.​

(Why am I not surprised?)

Try to grasp this new concept. It will require examining so new ideas and re-thinking old ones – hard work but I’m sure someone of your demonstrated perspicacity will manage.foot

Sin is a theological concept. It has no meaning beyond that murky discipline and even there no unambiguous definition exists. Therefore it not always possible to declare a particular act “sin.”

Suppose there is NO universal supernatural power concerned with “sin” however defined. Suppose each of us individually is solely responsible for our own acts? Suppose Macbeth was right and nothing exists on this bank and shoal of time but an even handed justice?

If that were true then no one would have to die for ANY sins real or not. There would not BE a “debt” to be paid and no sacrifice needed. No one need to die for anyone – ever - for anything.

Why can’t this be the way it is?

 

[Half Asleep]

This is the only part of your post that I can disagree with. People commonly percieve the caste system to be part of the religion but it was/is actually part of India's culture just like social heirarchy has been part of so many societies. It wasn't always a part of India's culture (especially when it comes to the untouchables) and it came about when Hinduism was already in existence.

Hinduism may be historically syncretic (ie, the traditions of the Aryans and the Dravidians mixing) but it is typically seen as an indigenous religion. Because of this, Indian traditions and Hindu traditions are often only separated by the personal prejudices of the historian/theologian/etc. questioning them.

Added to that is the connection between the caste system and the Hindu concept of Samsara.

 

[Madhuri]

Hinduism may be historically syncretic (ie, the traditions of the Aryans and the Dravidians mixing) but it is typically seen as an indigenous religion. Because of this, Indian traditions and Hindu traditions are often only separated by the personal prejudices of the historian/theologian/etc. questioning them.

Added to that is the connection between the caste system and the Hindu concept of Samsara.

True, and yet Hinduism as a religion/s existed prior to the caste system we see today as part of Indian culture (specifically referring to untouchables).

 

[Half Asleep]

True, and yet Hinduism as a religion/s existed prior to the caste system we see today as part of Indian culture (specifically referring to untouchables).

Do you mean Hinduism as we see it today? Because Vedic Hinduism is a lot different than Modern Hinduism. . . I think we should probably take this discussion to another forum.

 

[Madhuri]

Do you mean Hinduism as we see it today? Because Vedic Hinduism is a lot different than Modern Hinduism. . . I think we should probably take this discussion to another forum.

Sure, would you like to start a thread? I'm not certain what you want to place emphasis on: caste system or modern Hinduism. Send me a link to the thread once you've created it.

 

[Renji]

A world without a bible? hmmm, I don't know. Maybe there would be no Jesus without it . For me, I think bible is not just a religious book. It is also a book with great principles.