Debate and Discussion

So.... I'm gonna talk about religion again...
Product Placement at 8:06PM, March 15, 2009
(online)
posts: 7,078
joined: 10-18-2007
Oh no.. haven't we talked about this enough.

Well… My angle for this discussion are the similarities between some of the mayor faiths that are around and the perplexing hatred that has existed between them for some odd reasons.

I apologize to all of Hindu faith, Buddhism or other religions I can't think of at the moment but this discussion was not styled for you but feel free to comment if you have anything to say.

Now the three core faiths I'm talking about is Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Three faiths that revolve around the idea that a singular entity that created everything, watches over us. It's sounds like I'm pretty much talking about the same faith so what's the difference?

I'll admit right now on the spot that I was raised as a Christian and thus my views on the other two faiths are naturally skewed but here's what I know.

At some point, long time ago, nomadic tribes in the middle east started to create ground rules on how to survive in their harsh environment. These rules included commandments like don't kill each other and don't steal from your fellow man because activities like that would certainly make hard life even more difficult. These rules banned things like eating of pork because the meat was packed with parasites, making it dangerous to eat. Most importantly, these people believed in a single entity that watched over us. Eventually these people formed what we know today as Islam and Judaism.

The difference between the two is a little lost to me but what I know is that originally science played a significant part in Islam. While Jewish followers sought to know God through prayer, Muslims wanted to understand God by understanding the universe. The Qur'an(the Muslim bible) talks allot about nature and the need to understand it in order to find God. The end result was the flourishing Arabic worlds that embraced science and understanding while Europe suffered through the dark ages. Islam created Algebra and the numerical system that we use today (1,2,3…etc). Hospitals are a Muslim invention and they are the cause of the European renaissance. Eventually the ideals changed and science declined because Islam scholars started to believe it was more important to focus on religious science instead of natural science.

The Jewish bible is called the Tanakh. It's basically the Old testament that Christians follow. Judaism spread to the Romans who took the parts they liked and replaced the stuff they didn't like with some of their own. Christianity came to be. Oh, and they also started to preach that Jesus, a well known prophet at the time, was Son of god and that he would show us the way to heaven. Neither Judaism nor Islam admits this as truth.

Ok. So they're not the same but surely they're close enough that everyone get's along? Well… Christians hunted the Jews for centuries trying to convert them. They also launched a series of crusades against the Muslims. Muslim radicals have issued a holy war against the western world and are responsible for most of the terrorist attacks today. And I've never known of a time when Muslims and Jews got along.

It gets even better. Each three factions have over time split up some more. We have Takfir, Ahmadiyya, Sunni, Shia, Kharijite, Mu'tazili, Alawites, and Druze. These are all different Muslim faiths. You can be an Orthodox Jew, a Conservative one, Reformed, Reconstructionist, Liberal, Karaite, Humanistic, Renewal or even an alternative one. Now the list of Christian subgroups is so long that I'm only going to list the four main categories of them which are Catholicism, Protestantism, Orthodoxy and Nontrinitarian.

Catholics and Protestants used to hate each other with passion. Today we have the Sunni and Shia muslims fighting on the streets. We can't even seem too contain the hatred within the core foundation of our faiths.

I'll admit I have no idea where I'm going with this, in fact I think I'm just thinking out loud (if that's even possible, using a keyboard) and I invite you to do the same. I think that What I'm trying to say is that the original teachings of the belief that all monotheistic faiths are based on was to love thy neighbor and we're not exactly doing a good job at that.
Those were my two cents.
If you have any other questions, please deposit a quarter.
This space for rent.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:50PM
kyupol at 8:51PM, March 15, 2009
(offline)
posts: 3,713
joined: 1-12-2006
There are various explanations as to why the 3 monotheistic faiths seem to have a problem with each other.

——-
A. Its not about religion but rather, politics

People split into different factions because they think they wanna be the big kahuna and somehow they are not as big as they want themselves to me. So they want power. Therefore they make their own religion.

It also revolves on issues like territory and such. For instance, in the Philippines, theres a conflict between the Government (mostly Christian) and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. The Philippine government claims the Mindanao island as part of the Philippines. However, the inhabitants of those lands do not consider themselves Filipino but rather they call themselves “Bangsamoro”.

The propaganda on both sides sometimes bashes the other religion (be it Christianity or Islam) but most of the time it is all about political issues!

———

B. Its all about the translation / interpretation of the bible

There's this raging argument even among the different subgroups of Christianity on things like:
- what are sins and what arent? For instance, in Catholicism, masturbation is a sin.

- Things like the immaculate conception, the holy trinity, and the legitimacy of the pope.

- A bible verse for instance (Romans 13:1)
“Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.”

This passage is interpreted by some Christian factions that you must submit to Big Brother or any government for that matter.

However, there are Christian factions who say that the authority that God established is a good one and not a police state. And that the real “governing authority” is GOD himself and not man.

———————
C. All of these religions are tools of enslavement. Created by the Illuminati and/or the Reptilians.

C-1)
Jesus Christ never existed. He was just a made up historical figure in order to enslave the masses. This argument is usually pushed by atheists.

C-2)
The Reptilians feed on negative vibration and they designed these religions specifically in order to forment hate and violence among mankind. Also, it serves a purpose to limit the perspective of the human being. That he may not realize that he is infinite consciousness in a holographic reality.

C-3)
The Reptilians do not exist. They are just another one of many holographic illusions designed to fool the people that the ancient “gods” are reptilian. As to the real masters of the holographic illusion (or “matrix”)? They are known as the “Old Empire” – they are apparently an intergalactic empire that is completely totalitarian in nature and makes Hitler or Pol Pot look like an angel compared to these guys.

And the beings at the top of the ladder are not bound by any physical body.

Interstingly enough, when I studied Philosophy in high school (it had a Christian slant to it), when demons and angels were discussed, the professor told us that these beings do not have a physical body because a physical body only serves to make you LIMITED.

And the reason these angels and demons take physical bodies when they go to our world, is because that their pure energy form would only totally destroy our world.


NOW UPDATING!!!
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:26PM
Aurora Moon at 9:57PM, March 15, 2009
(offline)
posts: 2,630
joined: 1-7-2006
That sort of crap was why I never believed in an organized religion. It's fine to have your own personal beliefs, but when you go to an church or whatever… it's way too easy for priests and such to push their political, personal biases on you and pass it off as god's will.

Like Kyopol said, a large part of it is politics.

The other large chunk of why everyone doesn't get along is the stuff that got lost in translation, so people can't really agree on what it really said.

and to add on to the problem… words and meanings tends to change over time! This was the reason why the Jewish people in the past used to update their Tanakh each generation or so to make sure that the current modern people would be able to understand and read the words passed on by their ancestors.
EVEN then… there was still some errors that happened with updating that. for instance, say there was an ancient word that meant something. but there was no modern word for it at all, so of course the people had to attempt to describe what the ancient word meant. But then there's no success with that at all… it's just like trying to explain colors to an blind person… it's just difficult.

For instance… The old Hebrew bible has a lot of words that nobody has words for in English. so of course an exact translation would be then impossible.

one of the most funny things that I discovered about the King James version (which I personally blame for a lot of the ill-informed prejudices in the world), is that they tended to use a lot of vague, prudish terms for things that they considered to be “too gross”. like when the Hebrew bible mentioned that somebody was going to the toilet or masturbating, the English one would describe it as “Covering their/her/his feet”.

English Verses that concerns with “covering of the feet”:
82: “Then Ehud went forth into the porch, and shut the doors of the upper room on him, and locked them.”

83: “Now when he was gone out, his servants came; and they saw, and behold, the doors of the upper room were locked; and they said, Surely he is covering his feet in the upper chamber.”

now that last verse didn't make sense, huh? why would a person lock the doors if all he did was cover his feet literally, etc…

and to this day that English verse tends to mean a lot of things to those who didn't know what it really meant.

Those confusing, vague terms that the king James version translators loved to use led to a lot of agruements amongst people years later. And that wasn't even the worst part… sometimes they would deliberately twist the meanings of words around to suit their own biases and their own prejudices.

like the whole infamous “homosexuality is an sin” bit. In the Herbew bible they were far more lenient towards homosexuality… they just said gay male sex couldn't happen in a woman's bed, etc. They were kind of anal (no pun meant) about keeping things separate. No sex of any kinds in temples. Sex worship in such temples was forbidden… sex was something that was supposed to stay at home. You couldn't have sex in other people's beds, or even in guest beds (as previously stated). you had to stay in YOUR own bed for that. That way things were kept separate– personal life kept separate from your public life, Two different plants growing but kept sperate… fabric types kept separate.. etc.

But of course the priests of the King James version had to turn That into one hate fest and drama fest. don't even get me started on that “city of Sodom” thing… all I'm going to say about that was the original story was supposed to be about the lack of hospitality and lack of compassion towards strangers, not about their supposed gay sex.
I'm on hitatus while I redo one of my webcomics. Be sure to check it out when I'n done! :)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:10AM
Product Placement at 10:26PM, March 15, 2009
(online)
posts: 7,078
joined: 10-18-2007
Aurora Moon
But of course the priests of the King James version had to turn That into one hate fest and drama fest. don't even get me started on that “city of Sodom” thing… all I'm going to say about that was the original story was supposed to be about the lack of hospitality and lack of compassion towards strangers, not about their supposed gay sex.
I take it that you've seen the documentary “For the Bible tells me so”. That particular issue is covered in it.
Those were my two cents.
If you have any other questions, please deposit a quarter.
This space for rent.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:50PM
bravo1102 at 5:33AM, March 16, 2009
(online)
posts: 3,385
joined: 1-21-2008
Let's simplify this: (A little reductionist for brevity and to get some basic points across)

Hebrews were originally typical Semetic pastorialists with a sky god (YHWH) over all overs (you'll have no other gods before me; not that there are no other gods) Their god gave them power as His chosen people the same way that Maarduk did for Babylon. Except the Hebrews lost. They went into exhile and wrote everything down to give themselves excuses, pump themselves up and came up with sin and guilt as a people and their redemption.

Along the way some ideas some Persian seeped in about Dualism (GOOD versus EVIL) that are not present in the first books of the Torah, which was not finished being compiled until after Alexander and some of it is clearly a reaction to Helleneistic culture and was even written in Greek.

Judiasim over the centuries evolved into Temple Judiaism with some groups who wanted to simplify things. Out of this came Jesus. He attracted a group in what were widely viewed as millenial/apocolytic times. Because of better salesmanship (Thank you Paul) his religion survived because it was expanded to gentiles and adapted beliefs as necessary to impress others. Plus many of its adherents were truely good and “saintly” and charismatic and well organized and Catholic (Orthadox not heterodox). Then came Constantine and it's the religion of the empire. Within a generation they're hunting Jews.

Meanwhile out in the deserts of Arabia the peoples are a varied bunch of animists who worship a big black rock and fear the Jinn. Among them are small scattered groups of Christians and Jews. However unlike those communities they are split over tribalism and belief. What better way to get them together than to unite them in one faith like those Jews and Christians and keep the animist spirits and that big black rock. Over half a lifetime Muhammed does just that. Much of Islamic belief is established after his death just like much of Christian belief came after Jesus. To establish an ancient pedigree (to make a religion people will respect it has to be old) Muhammed ephasised a lineage back to Abraham.

As for why they came to blows? Politics and we want your land. Why do they want your land? Well their revelation is Truth and yours is incomplete (you infidel/heretic/dummy) so they should rule and not you. No one is more prone to conquer than when they have God on their side and His revealed Truth.

Bibliography of about 20-30 works about the ancient world where a majority of the recent works cite one book as the best compilation of all this: Pagans and Christians by Robin Lane Fox. There's also The First Coming and the various works of the Jesus Project. A History of the Arab Peoples is considered among the best English language history of the Arabs and Islam. Reading the Nag Hammadi texts as well as the Dead Sea Scrolls is helpful but a difficult undertaking.

As for biblical translation: the translation we usually go with is based on a corrupt Hebrew translation of a Greek text. The most famous gaffe is “young woman” Mary versus “Virgin” Mary.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:33AM
Product Placement at 6:20AM, March 16, 2009
(online)
posts: 7,078
joined: 10-18-2007
kyupol
Jesus Christ never existed. He was just a made up historical figure in order to enslave the masses. This argument is usually pushed by atheists.
I believe that Jesus or someone very similar to him existed. He must have been a very well known prophet who gained allot of powerful friends and enemies during his life. If he or anyone ever claimed that he was the son of god then it must have angered the Jewish community resulting in them demanding his blood. Like what happens in the bible. That being said, the bible should never be taken literally. The story of Jesus just seems to be one of those no nonsense story about the rise and fall (and rise again) about a powerful religious icon.

Since there's talk about misinterpretation and botched translations, I'm reminded reading that someone once pointed out that the oldest texts that depict Jesus walking onthe water could have been a mistranslation where originally it read that he walked by the water. When the original stories got skewed others followed and more and more written documentations of his miracle works started to appear.

It's like how superman came to be. At first his powers only encompassed on being more powerful then a locomotive, faster then a speeding bullet and capable of leaping tall buildings. Then as more and more stories came out, different writers with different views on him started giving him more powers to explain how he got out of this and that pickle. Now he has impervious skin, super hearing, heat ray, X-ray vision, flight, super viewing, time travel powers, the ability to throw his logo from his chest, etc.
Those were my two cents.
If you have any other questions, please deposit a quarter.
This space for rent.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:50PM
Faliat at 6:31PM, March 16, 2009
(online)
posts: 582
joined: 10-17-2006
You've been watching Zeitgeist again haven't you… HAVEN'T YOU?!?!?!?!

Call that jumped up metal rod a knife?
Watch mine go straight through a kevlar table, and if it dunt do the same to a certain gaixan's skull in my immediate vicinity after, I GET A F*****G REFUND! BUKKO, AH?!

- Rekkiy (NerveWire)
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:25PM
Gohlico at 8:42PM, March 16, 2009
(offline)
posts: 158
joined: 2-27-2006
Although it's likely that Jesus never existed, there was one man in the same time period who cpuld be the basis for Christ. His name was Apollonius of Tyana, the so-called pagan Jesus.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollonius_of_Tyana


As for the hate that comes with the Abrahamic religions, yeah it's all about politics and control. In my country, the Church is using its influence to gain the upper hand. I swear, the Philippines has become a theocratic country. This is the exact reason why I left the Catholic faith. I refused to be some kind of puppet to priests and pastors.



last edited on July 14, 2011 12:38PM
Aurora Moon at 10:04PM, March 16, 2009
(offline)
posts: 2,630
joined: 1-7-2006
Actually, the name “Jesus” was a rather common name back then, just like how the name “John”, or even “Sam” is very common today. in fact when unearthing graves today we find many graves that was etched with the “Jesus” name.

They even had many women named “mary” too as well.

So The way I see it, it could had been very possible for there to have been a prophet named Jesus. or even possibly many different prophets named Jesus…. and every one of them got confused as being one person.

just like how poor Mary Magdalene (jesus's love interest), got mixed up by readers as also being Mary The prostitute who cried at Jesus's feet and asked for forgiveness in order to cleanse her sins as an prostitute.

Apparently, in the bibles, the translators felt that having too many Marys in the stories would confuse readers so they actually compacted nearly half of the Marys into two people– The Mother Mary who fathered Jesus, and Mary Magdalene, who was an faithful follower of Jesus.

In a way I wouldn't be surprised If the same was done to Jesus…. because I have noticed at times that Jesus's behavioral traits and attitudes would change in a strange way when I read about the stuff that wasn't allowed to be a part of the bible, even though it was all about Jesus.
There was actually whole chunks of Jesus's personal life completely taken out in the revised bibles, because they didn't want o have to explain to readers about how Jesus could had been an self-centered asshole at a young age who actually cursed his teachers with many dieases and then somehow become this holy, loving and forgiving man.

and I'll very honest with you… at times it the different sections would read as if I was reading about two different Jesuses.
So that's why I wouldn't be surprised, if there was actually two guys out there that the people kept on mistaking to be one person. After, it'd be easy to do eseically if the two looked very simlar.

I can just picture it now… Romans kills one Jesus and the other Jesus's mother thinks it's her son, goes to mourn, etc. Only to have that other Jesus appear before her and tell her that he's still alive, but he goes into hiding because of how he's been doing the same prophet gig as the dead one, and he doesn't want to be killed neither. The dead one was already buried and given the proper respect… leaving behind an empty tomb, which leads to the legend that Jesus came back from the dead.
I'm on hitatus while I redo one of my webcomics. Be sure to check it out when I'n done! :)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:10AM
ozoneocean at 11:23PM, March 16, 2009
(online)
posts: 25,085
joined: 1-2-2004
kyupol
A. Its not about religion but rather, politics

People split into different factions because they think they wanna be the big kahuna and somehow they are not as big as they want themselves to me. So they want power. Therefore they make their own religion.

It also revolves on issues like territory and such. For instance, in the Philippines, theres a conflict between the Government (mostly Christian) and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. The Philippine government claims the Mindanao island as part of the Philippines. However, the inhabitants of those lands do not consider themselves Filipino but rather they call themselves “Bangsamoro”.

The propaganda on both sides sometimes bashes the other religion (be it Christianity or Islam) but most of the time it is all about political issues!
That's it right there. Forget the other shit, none of it matters.

And you can't escape it by “not believing” lol!
That'd be like thinking you'll be ok living next to a volcanoes because you don't believe in fire. belief is irrelevant, but it's important to know and be aware of these things because they are REAL -i.e. there are millions of people that practise those faiths , have strong opinions, do the rites, have their cultural views and personalities shaped by them, so what you think about the existence of Jesus or Allah doesn't matter.

The generally accepted super simple chronology is:
* Arab-type peoples —>
* one of those groups become Jews —>
* Judaism goes through a reform at the time of “Jesus” and the splinter group “Christianity” is born —>
* Christianity passes on to the Greeks and the Romans —>
* The Romans and Greeks Christianise all of Europe through war and commerce—>

* In Parallel but a few hundred years after Christianity, Christianised Judaism Combines with the older “Arab” religions to form Islam… Apparently because of the Prophet Mohamed. —>
* These Arab groups spread Islam mainly through commerce all over north Africa and the Middle East. —>
* Groups on the edges of the Islamic empire spread it far further through war and conquest: Moors, Mongols, Tartars, and finally the Turks.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:33PM
Product Placement at 11:58PM, March 16, 2009
(online)
posts: 7,078
joined: 10-18-2007
Faliat
You've been watching Zeitgeist again haven't you… HAVEN'T YOU?!?!?!?!
Actually I've never seen it. You don't need to watch documentaries to have an opinion you know. I've always meant to do it one day though so I guess I'll check it out.

*Two hours later*

Ok… what did that documentary have to do with this discussion? It talk about religion in the first 10 minutes and then goes on to try and convince me that 9/11 was an inside job and that everything is controlled by the elites. They don't even offer a good link between the two subjects so I almost feel like I was duped into this. “Ah we're gonna start by explain to you how Jesus is in fact an substitute for the pagan sun gods of various religions by demonstrating the similarities between them and that of the zodiacs. Moving on the world trade center was an inside job and the central bank is behind all of it.” Don't get me wrong, it was a good documentary that really made me think but how were these two things relevant?

What I liked the most about the religious part of the documentary was the introduction to the age of the zodiacs. That every 2150 years, Earth enters a new age where the sun rises behind a different zodiac. We live in the age of Pisces which signaled the coming of Jesus while the age before that was the age of Aries which signal the coming of Moses. The whole reason behind the story where Moses lashes out at the people worshiping the golden calf is because they were leaving the age of Taurus and thus should abandon such ungodliness. In 2150 we will enter the age of Aquarius which will signal the end of this Age. I guess I now know what year people will focus on as their doomsday prediction of their choice in the near future because it will signal the end of the age of Jesus.


The whole conspiracy theory part was… for the lack of better words… difficult to watch. It was the most professionally made movie that I've ever seen that suggested that the 9/11 attacks was an inside job. It knew exactly what to say to get you to doubt the official reports and cited numerous amounts of eye witness interviews from that day, supposed facts and pointed out many problems with the picture that I've been aware of for a long time. That being said, I know that these planes were hi-jacked. The attack on the Pentagon and the plane crash of flight 93 can't have been forged simply because you'd have to assume that the government actually confiscated those planes and executed the people inside them. My wife personally knows people who lost family members who rode those planes. She's from the state where most of them took of. You can't fake missing family members.

Now. Ignore that last part and keep the discussion on talking about religion. If you want to comment on my off topic ramblings then please start another discussion where we can focus on the Zeitgeist documentary.
Those were my two cents.
If you have any other questions, please deposit a quarter.
This space for rent.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:50PM
ozoneocean at 12:51AM, March 17, 2009
(online)
posts: 25,085
joined: 1-2-2004
Ugh. All that Ziegiest zodiac crap is “off-topic” start to finish. That's just fantasy, plain and simple.
And not fantasy in the way idiots term religion either; religions aren't “silly beliefs”, they're massive cultural institutions that made the world what it is today and just happen to have silly beliefs as part of their decoration. It's like the rearing horse badge on a Ferrari- take it away and you still have the same fast car. Take away the silly belief and you still have that gigantic cultural institution, history, legacy, country, language, and most importantly- the groups of people.

———————-

Yeah… Nothing personal but I don't see the point of these discussions anymore.

If you want you can always easily learn about the real histories of these religions- thousands of historically minded sensible people, archaeologist's, sociologists, and anthropologists have already traced the paths quite clearly.
-When you get into the “unravelling the mysteries” bit though, that's where the sense tends to falter and you get what ranges from educated guess to straight invention based on wishful thinking.

If you don't like those, you can subscribe to the mysterious origins that the religions themselves claim they have.

…But for some reason people always prefer to either make up their own origins for these things or subscribe to someone else who has -using strange pop-culture fantastical ideologies that rival the weirdest things anybody EVER based an actual religion on.

-For that fact these discussions are both entertaining and depressing.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:33PM
Product Placement at 1:59AM, March 17, 2009
(online)
posts: 7,078
joined: 10-18-2007
Well you seem to be saying that everything that the documentary is telling us is an outright lie. I was willing to believe the religious part of it until it took a sharp turn at the intersection and started to tell me a completely different story. I just watched the thing so I haven't checked for any confirmation yet but I'm currently reading reviews and was gonna look up more on the part with the zodiacs. So far, what I can tell you is that most reviewers criticize it for not providing any good references for most of its claims.

Now I know that Earth spins at an angle that shifts over time. It is the reason why we have seasons. If Earths rotation was completely 90° then the suns position would never alter. The reason why the zodiac part interested me was because it was right up my alley. If it turns out that it's completely factual then I will be deeply disappointed.

Edit. Right… it's taking an increasingly downwards slope. I apparently was quoiting the most positive review of the movie that I've seen so far. I even found a site that offers a cash price for anyone who can conclusively prove 1 “fact” that the movie provides.

Fuck. I hate that movie now. It did such a good job at convincing me.
Those were my two cents.
If you have any other questions, please deposit a quarter.
This space for rent.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:50PM
bravo1102 at 4:38AM, March 17, 2009
(online)
posts: 3,385
joined: 1-21-2008
Zeitgeist should really have a bibliography. The zodiac thing has been expounded by Graham Hancock among others who are arguing some rather far-fetched theories about human pre-history. The Sphinx was made in the age of Leo, Jesus the Age of Pisces and we're entering the Age of Aquarius (a cool song and lots of water?)

Meld together conspiracy theories and far-fetched amatuer archeology and that's what you get. The only thing missing was Velikovsky. ;)

To segue back into religion, it is amazing the lengths people will go to crowbar evidence into their belief system. Like Velikovsky and the creationists as well as the Church scholars and their angels on the heads of pins debates. This discussion whenever it appears on any forum soon degenerates into those angels dancing on the head of a pin.

Where there is faith; reason need not apply.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:33AM
ozoneocean at 7:50AM, March 17, 2009
(online)
posts: 25,085
joined: 1-2-2004
bravo1102
Where there is faith; reason need not apply.
You know, I tend to thing that religions survive in spite of the faithful, not because of them. I am seriously amazed that all the world's major religions managed to last this long with some of the idiots that purport to follow them.

This is why we can be pretty damn sure that to loonies DON'T make up the majority of the followers and supporters of any religion and never have (except at their inceptions).

It would be like the modern U.S.A. being made up entirely of ultra-right-wing “patriots”. How long do you think that great country would last then? And yet people in some countries still imagine that to be the case.

I think that's a nice analogue. :)

————–

That Zodiac stuff just gets funnier and funnier. As for convincing people of things, man, that's not hard. I was talking to my dad tonight about these idiots who've gone off to see “Jesus” depicted on a church cushion.
HE said “it's all a con”.
I said "It's not a con. It's a group of credulous idiots in SEARCH of a con."

And so we come back to that. As bravo says, all it takes is a bit of critical thinking. REAL critical thinking. -What culture is mostly responsible for the Zodiac? Does that apply to all other cultures?
And remember, ultimately the beliefs at the hearts of religion and where they came from do not actually matter. A religion is a lot more than the belief.

That reminds me of when I was talking to a Japanese Buddhist friend about how that religion is supposed to have come from Hindu originally, with Buddha being Indian or even Afghani… and she getting all upset and insisting on the mysterious origins the believers like to go on about…
And I realised that I was being an utter cock-head: she's the believer, she knows how she wants to believe. My apparent knowledge doesn't invalidate her cultural rights and the validity of an institution that's a few thousand years old, and a massive unifying and changing force in the East Asian world in the past and right through to today.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:33PM
kyupol at 8:57AM, March 17, 2009
(offline)
posts: 3,713
joined: 1-12-2006
Zeitgeist appeared to be coming from an atheist perspective at first. But if you watched Zeitgeist: Addendum, the author appears to be getting a little “new-agey”.

He talked about a better world that is not enslaved by money or religion. There were ideas of clean technology and all that but it also had a Marxist slant into it.

It was confirmed on the interview on the Alex Jones Show.

Peter Joseph (creator of Zeitgeist) said some things that implied that in this new world, if you do not fit in, you would have to be “re-educated”.

Either Zeitgeist is a disinfo film to co-opt the awakening group of humans (there is a great awakening going on in this planet. People everywhere are getting SICK AND TIRED of corrupt governments and are realizing that there is more to life than what is acknowledged by mainstream religion and science), or Peter Joseph is a well-meaning person but with communist-leaning tendencies.


But its alot more complex than that. I imagine a world that finally gets rid of the bankers, the bilderbergers, illuminati, etc.

And what will happen next? I see a conflict that will probably be started by:
- Christian fundamentalists. This group opposes the Illuminati because of issues like abortion, euthanasia, and the destruction of the family unit. This group still follows what you call the “old matrix”. Whether or not you agree with Christian dogma, it still has good things like loving thy neighbor and being a family-oriented religion. However, it is a belief system that claims to have the monopoly on truth and it has a tendency to go to war with the unbelievers.

Same thing applies with other religious fundamentalists (most likely factions that are derived from Christianity, Islam, and Judaism). The monopoly on truth and the tendency to foam at the mouth over disagreement with their version of reality. Is a bomb waiting to explode.


- Extreme right or left wing groups. These groups would probably fight for control in their respective nations.


But the ones who would most likely be left out of the next conflict would be:

-libertarians (they would probably get into conflict with the leftist groups because the leftists might try to impose a form of communism / socialism)
- spiritually awakened people (they would probably be attacked by the religious fundamentalists)

In the end, however. Its gonna be a world with multiple points of power and its not gonna be a centralized world government. It is still an evil in itself but its much better than a globalist New World Order run by private banks with a few elite at the top and the rest are peasants.



That's it right there. Forget the other shit, none of it matters.

I'm interested into WHY it really happens. What is it in religions that make em fight one another? There has to be a deeper explanation than simple political disagreements.

There has to be something IN THE DESIGN of the religion itself. Its like the difference between detecting a problem in your car and the problem in the ENGINEERING of your car.

For instance, I noticed that Catholicism (like other religions that have dogma) can be co-opted into a mechanism of enslavement.

Why do parents force their religion down the throat of their children?

Its not because they are bad. Its because they want their children to be saved – EVEN IF IT MEANS DESTROYING THE CONCEPT OF THE INDIVIDUAL. Its one reason why I'm not a fan of organized religion. They enslave your mind and destroy your individuality.

And if you grow up in a system of hate and oppression, you have a tendency to lash out at the world and hate more and more and more. For some reason I cannot understand.

I remembered the phase of my life as a hardcore Catholic. I used to hate homosexuals and I honestly believe that ALL OTHER RELIGIONS are an inferior class compared to Catholicism.

Inside I felt something was wrong. And that was one of the things that triggered my awakening from (one layer of) this matrix of lies that we live in.
NOW UPDATING!!!
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:26PM
krisikas at 10:01AM, March 17, 2009
(offline)
posts: 93
joined: 3-30-2007
THERE IS NO GOD!!!!!! THE END/FIN :DD
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:22PM
Tantz Aerine at 10:11AM, March 17, 2009
(online)
posts: 1,618
joined: 10-11-2006
Now the three core faiths I'm talking about is Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Three faiths that revolve around the idea that a singular entity that created everything, watches over us. It's sounds like I'm pretty much talking about the same faith so what's the difference?

I'll admit right now on the spot that I was raised as a Christian and thus my views on the other two faiths are naturally skewed but here's what I know.

I haven't yet read the thread so if I reiterate some points, please bear with me.

Whenever there is hatred sown between elements that are not naturally mutually exclusive, then it is a fairly safe bet that there are politics and power struggles going on in the sidelines which have NOTHING to do with the actual belief system or ideas.

In essence, if anyone cared to pay attention to what Jesus time and time again would say regarding His teachings, it was that He did not intend to abolish Judaism, but rather offer an interpretation that would not allow for the corruption and decadance that had taken place within the particular religion's clergy/ leaders over the centuries. Nothing more, nothing less. So in essence, Christianity IS Judaism, and actually what some would say Reform Judaism, and a return to some very few, very central, pivotal values stripped bare of whatever interpretation had been put in place by the assorted power mongers, such as some Pharisees, Zealots and the like.

Regarding Islam now- I have not looked into Islam as much as I have into Judaism, but I have taught Muslim students and have had discussions with them to know that Islam is yet again another take, another road to direct communication with God, same as Judaism and Christianity.

Now, regarding the enmity and the wars, pogroms and holocausts launched on the excuse of religion (either of those three or any other) the way the assorted atrocity is linked to the religion is most often loose, an interpretation of some out-of-context part of a scripture or even more often, something that is related to the scriptures but is not an actual part of them, like an essay by some renowned ranking person within the religious who-is-who of the religion. Then indoctrination sets in and all free thought is killed from the get go, so you have ready, fanatic minions that on top of everything think they have God on their side for whatever horror they are committing.

It's interesting to see that religious justifications for wars, invasions and annihilations of any kind come into play when political interests are very much existent in an area. The same type of situation in an area that is not of any political interest to the aggressors, is never the object of ‘holy wars’, and if anyone brings up the issue of ‘religion orders us to do this and that’, this is quickly laughed off or argued against.

So really, it is irrelevant what the religion is- the enmity is there for manipulation reasons only. Had those not been existent, there would be no enmity between people of different denominations, except if the actual belief systems were at odds and clashing. (Something like any of these religions and uh, Satanism, let's say.)
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:07PM
Tantz Aerine at 11:16AM, March 17, 2009
(online)
posts: 1,618
joined: 10-11-2006
Someone
here has to be something IN THE DESIGN of the religion itself.

No, it is not in the religion and its design. It is in the social construct of having many follow the few, of ‘forging the masses’ and ‘getting a leader’ that is just another fellow just like you, that you must look to in order to see why the struggles occur.

What causes such struggles is Fanaticism, which can be caused and inspired about anything (if the fanaticism instigators are accomplished enough and know how to do it), from religion to sports to even specific school names, to the use of a product over another, anything. It doesn't matter what one is Fanatic about, just that he/she is a Fanatic. You can virtually fanatize a person about anything and everything, and you will see that the same elements that you are concerned about regarding religion surface regardless the actual issue or object relevant.

It's wrong to blame religion or any subject at all for the enmity and struggles caused with these subjects/issues as excuses.

These are only the pretexts for some very base, vulgar desires that have pre-existed every issue known to man and which is used as ‘reason’ for the struggle, war, violence: to steal, usurp, conquer, dominate someone else and their possessions. That's all there is to it.

The rest is just beautification attempts to sell it to those who are eligible minions.

 
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:07PM
bravo1102 at 11:56AM, March 17, 2009
(online)
posts: 3,385
joined: 1-21-2008
Faith doesn't mean the believer is a looney, just willing to suspend disbelief to accept some pretty ridiculous things. Willing suspension of disbelief; that's what faith is. Accepting what is impossible to believe otherwise without evidence.

After reading some of the philoshical games played to explain the virgin and birth and Mary's perpetually renewing hymen so she always remained a virgin… then St. Augustine's rationalization of Original Sin. If you have faith you don't need an explanation because faith is it's own explanation and reason does not apply. (a gross over simplification of Thomas Aquinas)

Sadly, I wish it was a simple as a misunderstanding of scripture or listening to a charismatic leader. It is the monopoly of truththat is inherent in religious systems. There is only ONE truth; ONE belief system has it and everyone else must convert or die (Infidel/heretic/dummy/pagan etc) Us-them.

As for religion as enslavement: the very first urban civilizations probably developed kingship for precisely those reasons. How can one argue with the will of the gods? The king is god's ambassador on earth! Therefore if he is not obeyed the wrath of nature(gods) will be upon us!

Now it's Salvation versus Damnation, but it is still following the will of God because one is born in Sin and to be saved one must follow the revealed Truth. One cannot question the revealed WORD of GOD no matter how ridiculous it would appear in any other context.

What makes most of Christian belief any more believable than a talking rabbit handing our painted eggs?

Faith.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:33AM
Tantz Aerine at 1:38PM, March 17, 2009
(online)
posts: 1,618
joined: 10-11-2006
Faith is not what gives rise to struggle and hate and enmity. That is at least superficial a deduction. It would be tantamount to claiming science is responsible for World War II, or economics.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:07PM
DAJB at 2:32AM, March 18, 2009
(online)
posts: 1,462
joined: 2-23-2007
bravo1102
What makes most of Christian belief any more believable than a talking rabbit handing our painted eggs?
Hey - knocking my belief in a talking rabbit is in very bad taste. Especially at this particular time of year, when the Festival of the Veneration of Chocolate Eggs is almost upon us!
;-)
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:03PM
bravo1102 at 5:17AM, March 18, 2009
(online)
posts: 3,385
joined: 1-21-2008
Tantz Aerine
Faith is not what gives rise to struggle and hate and enmity. That is at least superficial a deduction. It would be tantamount to claiming science is responsible for World War II, or economics.

No, it is the result of faith in a system that has a monoply on truth I don't recall scientists running around claiming that theirs was the only truth and massacring Poles/Russians/Jews/etc. Most scientists were against the Nazis because the system did not stand up to empirical study. It was politics, convienence or pre-existing personal beliefs that converted some to serving the Third Reich.


The Nazis (and Fascists and Imperial Japanese) had a self-proclaimed monopoly on truth that had a lot more to do with religious belief than science. (Read the Nazi Conscience and Hitler's Willing Executioners .)

That is a specious religious argument used by those holding on to a faith based system to defend themselves. I guess you saw Expelled? Darwin caused eugenics and Social Darwinism and that caused WWII… that connection is tenuous at best if any serious study of Evolution by Natural Selection is undertaken as opposed to faith based criticism that bends all evidence through that lens of faith and distorts it past all reason. I referred to that above with my mention of Creationism and using a crowbar to make the evidence fit into a system based on a pre-supposition based on faith as opposed to what the evidence indicates when tested empirically.

Nationalism is also a form of a faith based system that claims to have a monoploy on truth. We're blank and everyone else isn't worth shining our boots and we'll impose our way of life on everyone else; convert or die.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:33AM
ozoneocean at 9:05AM, March 18, 2009
(online)
posts: 25,085
joined: 1-2-2004
Tantz Aerine
Someone
here has to be something IN THE DESIGN of the religion itself.
No, it is not in the religion and its design. It is in the social construct of having many follow the few, of ‘forging the masses’ and ‘getting a leader’ that is just another fellow just like you, that you must look to in order to see why the struggles occur.
That's part of it, but that's part of the description of politics in a lot of ways. Kyupol's problem is that he wants to make religion fit into his theories about deeper and darker truths. He HAS to make things fit somehow…
bravo1102
No, it is the result of faith in a system that has a monoply on truth
Again, that's politics. What's the opposite to your set-up there? Democratisation? It's an illusion. Besides, scientists are just as happy with their own “monopolies” on truth. This is why we still have the universally accepted system of “doctors” in medicine. (for example)
-I love doctors, they help my family members when they're ill, but the culture is set up in such a way so as to enable some privileged access to certain knowledge that excludes the wider public (through various means*) and they also tend to have higher social standing and some measure of authority in most spheres- not all relating to their occupation etc and so on -this is changing, everything does, even priesthoods.

There is NOTHING special in religion that makes it better or worse than any other form of politics. It's simply another example of the social institutions set up by humanity- We are a social species, that's what we do. It helps us maintain this whole “civilisation” thing we love so much. :)

(* the academic qualifications it takes to get that level of medical training, the money it costs, the limited places, the obscure and specialised language used, Journals that are not widely available, hidden medical records etc.)

krisikas
THERE IS NO GOD!!!!!! THE END/FIN :DD
That's neither the end, the start, or even the middle. It's nothing. It's totally and absolutely irrelevant. Romulus and Reemus weren't suckled by a she-wolf, does that invalidate the Roman Empire? No. It still existed and much of the things in today's modern world only exist because it did.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:33PM
Tantz Aerine at 12:31PM, March 19, 2009
(online)
posts: 1,618
joined: 10-11-2006
I was going to answer but Ozone covered it nicely on the monopoly on truth! *thumbs up*
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:07PM

Forgot Password
©2011 WOWIO, Inc. All Rights Reserved