Religion: *#@$&~^!!!!

[Riverwolf]

In fact, one of the earliest Christian leaders believed that the God of the Tanakh was evil, and not the true God from whom Jesus came.

I should also point out that eternal hell; in fact, hell at all, doesn't even exist in the Torah, and I don't think it's anywhere in the Tanakh.

 

[Wakeup]

Repetition of the point without actually providing a counter.

Not all Christians accept the Tanakh, many believe it doesn't apply anymore.

You say "a" church, as if Christianity were just one entity, when it's not. I've been to a church where a woman was a priest.

Repetition is important. Everytime you think something you make a copy.

False,I say "a" church because I realize I have been generalizing. By saying "a" church and following it by a particular belief system i'm generalizing the very least. And I'm not uing the word church to literally mean a place of worship.

 

[Riverwolf]

Repetition is important. Everytime you think something you make a copy.

But continuously repeating something that's false doesn't make it true.

False,I say "a" church because I realize I have been generalizing. By saying "a" church and following it by a particular belief system i'm generalizing the very least. And I'm not uing the word church to literally mean a place of worship.

Your generalization has been continually shown to be false, because it cannot be applied to all forms of Christianity. You seem to be ignoring those points entirely.

 

[Wakeup]

Theism = Belief that God exists.

A more narrow interpretation of theism = God exists and is personal.

If we use the first definition...

Polytheism is still theism.
Monotheism is still theism.
Panentheism is still theism, even.

Even if we use the second definition, not all religions fit your bill.

Sikhism is a theistic religion, but it does not damn people to Hell for being homosexual, and is silent on homosexuality as a topic. There is no idea of eternal Hell in Sikhism.

The Bahá'í Faith is a theistic religion. It's not exactly the most supportive of homosexuality, but it does not damn people to Hell. There is no idea of eternal Hell in the Bahá'í Faith.

Mormonism is a theistic religion. It has been quite strongly opposed to homosexuality in a lot of circles, but it does not damn people to Hell for homosexuality. There is no idea of eternal Hell in Mormonism.

Hinduism can be a theistic religion. Its views of homosexuality can vary from full support to extremely opposed. There is no idea of eternal Hell in most forms of Hinduism, and Hell is not a place where you go for being gay, at least to my knowledge of how they interpret it.


So... nah, man. You're failing here. You're moving the goalposts a bit.

Im just going to stop you at your premise. "Theism = Belief that God exists."
that's absolutely wrong. Tha'ts deism sir.

 

[Riverwolf]

Im just going to stop you at your premise. "Theism = Belief that God exists."
that's absolutely wrong. Tha'ts deism sir.

Deism is a form of theism. :yes:

Speicifcally, Deism is about believing that there was a Creator, but that it hasn't interfered since Creation.

 

[newhope101]

Christians teach their tiny children, at the same time they teach them the horrible force of hell, that every baby is born in sin. This sin is Adam's sin, who they now admit never existed. We have generations of children being told their sins will result in eternity in hell, and their good deeds will land them a spot up in heaven. Morality should be based not on punishment or reward after death, but rather effectually based on sympathy, mutual understanding, and education. It's about time humanity wake up and adopt a morality that is thought-out, reasoned, argued and discussed. It sickens me that most people accept an absolute morality written in a book a little less than 2,000 years ago. We are poisoning our children. Christianity is an enemy of gay's, bestowing on them the type of bigotry it reserved for Jews before 1962. Christianity is an enemy of woman, keeping them from priesthood. An enemy of truth, denouncing condoms as infective. An enemy of science and well being, keeping advancements in genetics from saving lives. Most of all, Christianity is an enemy of education, corrupting children's minds by feeding them lies and subjecting them to guilt.


[It should be noted that I only refer to Christianity in this post because I am most familiar with it. However. this post was directed toward any thiest religion]

A bigot is one who desplays religious intolerance. I'd say you may be a good example of one yourself.

Many Christians and non Christians alike, teach their kids to believe in Santa, the great lie, right from an early age. Then one day they find out their parents have lied to them in the name of tradition all their lives. Good one!.

I hope you give back your Christmas presents. It is meant to be a celebration of Christ's birth, one of which many here are quite happy to partake in.

Hence one may describe such anti Christians as hypocritical bigots.

 

[Wakeup]

But continuously repeating something that's false doesn't make it true.



Your generalization has been continually shown to be false, because it cannot be applied to all forms of Christianity. You seem to be ignoring those points entirely.

The eastern Orthodox Church claims to be one of the only secularists religions that still holds the apostolic faith unchanged from 40 years after jesus's death. Secularist Christian Churches reformed from the Eastern Orthodox Church,according to them, and much of history. The Orthodox Church does in fact believe the old testament was the inspired word of God. God justified death as punishment for homosexual acts. You can break off the original teachings of the apostolic faith 2000 years ago and say that part of the bible, or the old testament as a whole, doesn't have any relevance today. But it is still the book that predicted the coming of Jesus, of which your religion would then be founded on.

 

[Wakeup]

A bigot is one who desplays religious intolerance. I'd say you may be a good example of one yourself.

Many Christians and non Christians alike, teach their kids to believe in Santa, the great lie, right from an early age. Then one day they find out their parents have lied to them in the name of tradition all their lives. Good one!.

I hope you give back your Christmas presents. It is meant to be a celebration of Christ's birth, one of which many here are quite happy to partake in.

Hence one may describe such anti Christians as hypocritical bigots.

So how is Santa any different than believing in an anthropomorphic God?

 

[Riverwolf]

The eastern Orthodox Church claims to be one of the only secularists religions that still holds the apostolic faith unchanged from 40 years after jesus's death. Secularist Christian Churches reformed from the Eastern Orthodox Church,according to them, and much of history. The Orthodox Church does in fact believe the old testament was the inspired word of God. God justified death as punishment for homosexual acts. You can break off the original teachings of the apostolic faith 2000 years ago and say that part of the bible, or the old testament as a whole, doesn't have any relevance today. But it is still the book that predicted the coming of Jesus, of which your religion would then be founded on.

So, you're basing your entire argument over the teachings of the Eastern Orthodox Church? A Church that, to my understanding, is actually not very prominent in the West?

I don't care if they claim to have the "original" teachings. The fact remains: there isn't a single Christian denomination that can be used as a microcosmic representation for all denominations.

 

[Riverwolf]

BTW:

the·ism

–noun 1. the belief in one god as the creator and ruler of the universe, without rejection of revelation ( distinguished from deism).

2. belief in the existence of a god or gods ( opposed to atheism).

de·ism


–noun 1. belief in the existence of a god on the evidence of reason and nature only, with rejection of supernatural revelation ( distinguished from theism).

2. belief in a God who created the world but has since remained indifferent to it.




The first definitions of these words are distinguished from each other, but the second definitions are compatible. Therefore, deism and theism are only distinguished in certain contexts.

 

[Wakeup]

It seams to me you described Religion at the same time you described santa:

"Teach there kids to believe in great lies fright from an early age"
"their parents lied to them in the name of TRADITION"

It's funny you say celebration of Christ's birth. Because it's also the celebration of Horus', Mithra's, and Dionysis' birth, all of which were born of a virgin December 25th and adorned by 3 kings roughly 2500 years BC

 

[Wakeup]

BTW:

the·ism

–noun 1. the belief in one god as the creator and ruler of the universe, without rejection of revelation ( distinguished from deism).

2. belief in the existence of a god or gods ( opposed to atheism).

de·ism


–noun 1. belief in the existence of a god on the evidence of reason and nature only, with rejection of supernatural revelation ( distinguished from theism).

2. belief in a God who created the world but has since remained indifferent to it.




The first definitions of these words are distinguished from each other, but the second definitions are compatible. Therefore, deism and theism are only distinguished in certain contexts.

Theism in the specific sense. In the sense that intellectuals who debate religion use the word. I think my first post was more then evident that I intended the first definition you provided. Based on the entirety of my post why would you imply I was using the word theism to mean deism. If i wanted to use the word in a broad sense to mean God in general, I would have said deism.

Considering that all Christian sects broke off the Orthodox Church I don't see how that argument didn't make sense to you.

 

[Levite]

Considering that all Christian sects broke off the Orthodox Church I don't see how that argument didn't make sense to you.

Presuming, of course, that one takes the claims of the Orthodox Church to be inerrant historical fact.

Which not even all denominations of Christianity do, let alone non-Christian religions.

You seem to be deeply attached to the idea that all practitioners of theistic religion not only are fundamentalists, but all uniformly take all dogmatic or doctrinal claims with equal lack of questioning. Which is simply incorrect, and shows a profound lack of knowledge about religion in general, if not Christianity in particular.

I find it ironic that someone who seems to have such a problem with fundamentalists' lack of critical thinking himself seems to be so dedicated to black and white thinking.

.... the old testament...is still the book that predicted the coming of Jesus, of which your religion would then be founded on.

You realize that claiming that the Hebrew Bible ("Old Testament") predicts the coming of Jesus is an entirely eisegetic reading, overlaid by non-Jews onto Jewish texts centuries after they were written. There is absolutely nothing in the Hebrew Bible that has anything to do with Jesus, nor was any of it ever intended for non-Jews. I say again that you really ought to look into educating yourself a little.

 

[Wakeup]

Presuming, of course, that one takes the claims of the Orthodox Church to be inerrant historical fact.

Which not even all denominations of Christianity do, let alone non-Christian religions.

You seem to be deeply attached to the idea that all practitioners of theistic religion not only are fundamentalists, but all uniformly take all dogmatic or doctrinal claims with equal lack of questioning. Which is simply incorrect, and shows a profound lack of knowledge about religion in general, if not Christianity in particular.

I find it ironic that someone who seems to have such a problem with fundamentalists' lack of critical thinking himself seems to be so dedicated to black and white thinking.



You realize that claiming that the Hebrew Bible ("Old Testament") predicts the coming of Jesus is an entirely eisegetic reading, overlaid by non-Jews onto Jewish texts centuries after they were written. There is absolutely nothing in the Hebrew Bible that has anything to do with Jesus, nor was any of it ever intended for non-Jews. I say again that you really ought to look into educating yourself a little.

No the point is, secularist Christian Churches branched off the Eastern Orthodox Church, for the most part. The Eastern Orthodox Church took the bible literally for many years, denied evolution, and then took it metaphorically saying that they had always interpreted it metaphorically. These Sects broke off from a corrupt belief in the first place, that claim absolute truth. Also, the eastern OT and NT were likely adopted from ancient myths anyways. The epic of Gilgamesh is practically the OT.

Honestly, I don't need to know anything about religion to denounce it. It does indeed sound ignorant, but having a strong understanding of history and science does not leave room for the existence of superstition.

I specifically said Christian OT. So you shouldn't put words in my mouth and infer I was talking about the OT as Jewish people believe. In luke 24:44: Jesus said "These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled." Jesus more than affirmed that the his ministry was intended to fulfill bbiblical prophecy. "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." Mattw 5:17

 

[Levite]

Honestly, I don't need to know anything about religion to denounce it.

 

[Wakeup]

I'm not denying my certain knowledge of religion. I am an interdisciplinary studies major. But I do believe any individual who has a rationale, non-deluded view of history and the cosmos could logically destroy anyone in a debate who believes in a God that intervenes on earth

 

[Breathe]

Im just going to stop you at your premise. "Theism = Belief that God exists."
that's absolutely wrong. Tha'ts deism sir.

Deism is a form of theism under the umbrella of theism when used in its broadest sense. What I've said is not "absolutely wrong". Your conception is absolutely wrong.

What you're thinking of, is a more personal, and even "kingly" form of theism specific to certain conceptions of God. You're also not giving Deism its beliefs by doing this. Deism = God exists but does not intervene with the world.

If Theism = God exists, then Deism = Theism.
If theism = God exists and is personal and anthromorphic, then Deism =/= Theism. Then, though, neither would pantheism, or many forms of panentheism, or even many forms of theistic religions.

Really, now.

 

[Rakhel]

It probably should be noted that the OP looks to be referring to Catholicism. Eastern Orthodox is not Roman Orthodox(which is now Roman Catholic) but Greek Orthodox which predates Roman Orthodox, which in turns predates modern Christianity.

 

[Riverwolf]

Theism in the specific sense. In the sense that intellectuals who debate religion use the word.

Which intellectuals? I've never seen it. Frankly, they don't seem very smart. Theism isn't a word that refers to a specific type of God. To be more specific, you need to add a prefix, such as monotheism.

After all, if we use theism to refer to the type of God you describe, then why do we add prefixes to it in order to create completely contradictory words?

I think my first post was more then evident that I intended the first definition you provided. Based on the entirety of my post why would you imply I was using the word theism to mean deism. If i wanted to use the word in a broad sense to mean God in general, I would have said deism.

Which would have been inaccurate, because Deism is a specific word that refers to a specific type of God-concept.

Considering that all Christian sects broke off the Orthodox Church I don't see how that argument didn't make sense to you.

It doesn't work, because 1. what evidence do you have that all sects broke off from the Orthodox Church? From what I understand, most of the modern denominations in the West are spin-offs from the churches that broke off from the Roman Catholic Church. And 2. it still doesn't matter, because there are still plenty of denominations that say that the Torah doesn't apply anymore. They still count as Christianity, which is only dependent on worshiping Christ in some fashion.

 

[Klaufi_Wodensson]

No sir, your the bigot. My disclaimer at the bottom said, "theist religions." I assumed you would have the brain power to understand that would be religions whose anthropomorphic God intervenes in the human world. Presumably a "merciful" God who rewards or dams it's creation to eternity in hell. I never said all religions, and you really shouldn't put words in my mouth

Well I'd like to know first of all how I am the bigot. And second, the name of your thread is "Religion: A Vile, Depraved, Inhuman theory to base your life on"

Does that not mean all religions? You can't condemn religion itself without condemning all religions. So I am not putting words into your mouth.