The idea that something exists that is greater than you is inspiring. The idea that there is something more to your existence than what all scientific evidence suggests is not only inspiring but comforting and necessary for some people to function.

It could be argued that religion is a shield to protect people from the terrifying thought that they will cease to exist in about 80 years and that their life has no greater purpose than that which they create for themselves.

At its base, there is no harm in this - excepting perhaps the failure for humans to fully think for themselves and truly *think*. There may be something more, there may not be. The problems arise when a religion sets itself up as the only "true" religion and their doctrine as the only "truth". Human nature takes over at that point and uses the religion as an excuse to persecute those who are different. The ignorant use it as the justification to remain ignorant and to fuel and bolster their hatred.

Not all who have faith fall into this category. Not all who are ignorant are religious. It just happens to coincide often. It's best to just try to not be offended by every little thing. For example, I'll try not to be offended at the ignorance displayed by Amaru's comment regarding the "red indians".

It's not religion that's the problem. Humans created religion. Humans abuse religion. The problem is humans.

Sorry, I didn't know you were a... Native American! Or that anyone was, for that matter. I'm just ignorant about America and even more ignorant about pre-colonial America.

Ok boys and girls!!! I'm BACK to argue THEOLOGY!!

Firstly: You can't judge a religion by the abuses made of it. That is the fault of human nature. Not the Religion itself.

You simply can't argue that the Christian Religion isn't peaceful. Because it is. And don't start giving me Old Testament quotes because they are superceeded by the two over-arching commandments of Jesus in the New Testament.

However, People are generally bastards. And they do silly things, and they twist things to suit their own ends. Thus, no matter how well intentioned something is, someone will screw it up eventually.

Secondly: The first mistake all bible bashers (by which I mean those who bash the bible, not those who bash other people with the bible - I shall misuse clichés as and when I please for I am AIAKON) make is to assume that there is only one reading of the bible: the Literal.

But what about metaphor? What about allegory? What about eschatological reference? What about historical and cultural symbolism? One theory argues that the 6 days to create the Earth in Genesis and the 7th day of rest is in fact an expression of identity: that what defined the Jews in their slavery in Egypt was that on every seventh day, they had some time off, and that this became so key to their identity that it was incorporated in Genesis.

The early Church fathers came up with 4 different levels of interpretation: it's normally called Patristic Exegesis. Using it, one may read the bible on the following levels:

The Literal Level - what's on the page
The Tropological Level - the edifying moral
The Allegorical Level - allegory/prefiguring symbols of later biblical happenings
The Anagogical Level - the way it fits into God's plan

http://www.wsu.edu/~delahoyd/medieval/exegesis.html - has a nice useful plagirised internet version.

Thus, you cannot jso easily take verses from the bible with which to make your point. You need to place them in a context. Ultimately that context is essentially: Love your neighbour as yourself, Love God more than anything else. All other arguments are beaten by that one.

There are a lot of native americans in the US but I'm not full-blooded and wasn't raised on a reservation or anything so I can't really speak for them.

It just struck me as rather off that you were saying they didn't have religion and their civilization didn't progress far. One might argue that all the civilizations you think of as primitive and the like simply never got the chance to develop as fully as they might have before the Western Christians started "saving" everybody. It also could be argued that some cultures ideas of "success" are extremely different than that defined by the western culture.

I'd just stay away from comparing cultures/civilizations/etc. It just shows you for a western conquerer devil! With horns!

That is an appalling and reductive overstatement.

To which I may add that your "the only art that was tolerated was religious art" is a vast bracket that has immeasurably enriched European culture.. and by extension, your own. Go download Byrd's Five Part Mass, open a beer.. and listen.. and reconsider your statement.



Rubbish. Again, I can think of a whole load of exceptions.



Nazi religion has spawned more history books than I can shake a stick at. It's not a simple matter... I'm almost positive that Hitler was atheist. Photos of him with the Pope.. who would have had little choice in the matter.. are proof of nothing more than an efficient propaganda machine.

Aiakon you seem to be arguing that while those who follow religion might get it wrong, the basis of the religion itself is accurate. But that begs the question, what IS religion?

Since Christianity seems to be the theme here, is Christianity itself a religion, or an ideal? Or is it that Catholicism, Mormons, Evangelicals, Episcopalian, and all the other protestant flavors are the religions? If the argument is that Christianity itself is the religion than I'd agree with you. The core of Christianity is simply the golden rules as you stated.

If however, the religions are all the different versions of Christianity than I'd say that whether the religion is a force for war or peace is entirely up to whoever is laying out the doctrine for that religion at any given time.

As far as my definitions go, Christianity = the religion.

Catholicism/etc are variants on a theme.

Hoorah to Aiakon, I have a friend in this thread at last!



Sorry. I'm struggling with my imperialistic definition of 'civilisation'.



Christianity = Catholicism = religion

Protestants = assorted heretics, deviants and cultists

Well, not much to argue then since Christianity as a religion involves the belief in one god as the creator etc., the belief in Jesus Christ as the son of god, and the following of his primary teachings in the form of the golden rules. It's also largely based on individual interpretation since there is no governing body for Christianity, only the variants of it. It's all very free lovish and who can have a problem with that?

Weren't you just told to stop using posts with only a smiley?

And ya lost one. I'll have time to rise to that later. And give your catholic bottom a good whacking.

Don't you ever get tired of 'all things bright and beautiful'?

Don't your priests ever get tired of 'all things tight and beautiful'?

Tried to Quote your quotes but meh....

And this is the conclusion I came to through my years of church

The Old Testament is representative of the covenant between God and the Jews. It teaches us the history of the religion and what not. However, Jesus is the new covenant between God and man and as such Christianity is not bound by the laws of the old testemant. But instead follow the new testemant (man I hope I am spelling that word right) Those Christians who feel the need to recite Leviticus should also be reminded to sacrifice some sheep to repent for their sins.

Belief in the Bible lies in the faith that while the words may have changed the message that was intended is getting across and God would not allow that message to die.


I have more to say but its food time

That's just plain rude. But I bet one of your feisty vicars has a lot more sex than every Catholic priest in history. Married priests.

...

Hmm.

Episcopal > Catholic

I go to a private catholic school in which they try to instill upon us their opinions for everything. It's insane and I strongly dislike it. They are such jerks... not to say that all catholics are, just my religion teacher.

Really, I think religion in itself is a bit of a farse. People have always wanted to believe that something greater is out there, so they took a wise man named Jesus and turned him into God. In the bible, does it ever say Jesus wanted to be worshipped? No. And then of course, my whole favorite part about catholicism is how backward it is. In the ancient roman times they were 'weird' because they practiced rituals other people didn't understand and were persecuted for their beliefs. They didn't like it. So in return they go and do it to all the other religions for the rest of time! Woo? God. That's what pisses me off about religion. It makes people close minded and biased against other. It creates fanatics like fundamentalist christians who interpret the Bible as the word of God... yeah.. like he came down here himself and wrote the damn thing. NOT... or the all too well known Islamic terrorists who we all really really really really hate. Really.

I have my own 'religious' (if you wish to call it that) beliefs. I do not belief Jesus was Christ, but I believe he existed and impacted our world greatly with his wisdom. I believe in a higher power, and that we do have a soul of sorts. That's my beliefs pretty much. But I don't go around preaching it and forcing them upon others. And that's how it should be.

Narsrim, Those bible quotes you quoted are not Contradictions.

Firstly, the bible defines adultrery as marring a women who is allready married. Getting a harlot wife, is therefore not adultery as the woman is not married to anyone.

If you read the 9 definitions of Incest, which are stated explicitly, Avram and Sarai were cousins, not brother and sister.. Avram however TOLD the king of Egypt that Sarai was his sister hoping that the King would not kill Avram and marry Sarai for himself. Avram is later punished for this action.

I didn't know anger was a sin, however god is not describe as angry, he is describe as Jealous and Vengenfull. Also, its a commandment to be Angry at evil acts.



Now as for the basic claim that "religion" has cuased more death or even more wars than non religion.. I don't see much proof to back that up.

I know if you just take Amercian wars, and compare religion being an aspect or not, on the side of religion you have the America vs Indians and Iraq war II... On the side of secularism you have French American war, Spanish American war, 1776, Civil war, Vietnam war, Korean War, WWII, Iraq war I, WWI.

I'm about to go online and find a listing of all the major world wars starting from whenver I can find... I have a strong suspicion that the number of wars with religion as a factor is going to be a small fraction.


As for religion being a means to "control" the masses.... Russia and China have proved that Communism is a MUCH stronger force in controlling the masses than any religious society. Atleast in Saudi Arabia, the men are allowed to choose what they wish to do for a living. Marxism is infact a wonderfull way to control the masses because YOU arn't poor, the Country is. And while you CAN do something about your own condition, even if god says you should be poor (i.e you can pray) you cannot do anything about the condition of OTHER people if your entire country is poor.

Meh, I couldn't find a good list of wars that wasn't european centric.

However I did find this wikipedia article interesting

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

It gives about 7 theories on why wars accur, NONE of the theories are "religion."



Now the real question is... Did the Greeks, Assyrians, and -early- romans have a concept of Charity? were they known for thier giving of good to those who did not work for them and did not "deserve" them. I don't know the answer to that. So I'm asking.

Also, you must remember that Paganism is itself a religion. The stories in the bible about places such as Sodom and Gamora, talk about civil socities where everything was run on justice and equality.. in a world of pure justice there is no charity or mercy. The famous story was that It was forbiden to give charity, because giving charity robs a person of thier own ability to rise above thier environment. There is also the metaphor of everybody having the same size bed.. if you were too short to fit in the bed, they streched your body, if you were too tall, they chopped off your legs. Many poeple in the modern era are beggining to feel these same restrictions when Equality is forced upon them, and there isn't a rhyme or reason to the ethical decisions.

I've seen ethical papers that explain why murder is a moral responcibilty, using all the same language as the papers that say murder is an inherent evil.




Interesting, is Christinaity the only religion in the world now?

Just read that quote by narsrim about Lot...

Judaism has existed as a religion, and people have been raped and murderd just for saying they are Jewish for over 2500 years. (minimum)

You would think that if the bible was full of "inconistant" and "immoral" teachings, people would say "Oh hey, your right, don't kill me, I'll convert!" in a much higher percentage then they do. I could explain to you any inconsistancy you can bring up within the Jewish bible, because people have allready adressed every concern you could ever have 1500 years ago. I can go look up a book written in the 1200s that explains things that 'modern' science is just now starting to have a question about.

I would suggest that before you start deciding to mock everything you don't understand, you do a little research and see what has allready been said on the subject. However, if your too lazy to do that, I'm more than happy to write out the explanations as I understand them.

Ok I'm silly, I didn't scroll down to the bottom.. Here is a wikipedia list of wars seperated by years...

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

You can do your own counting and see what percentage of wars are for "religious" reasons.

i'd doubt that, what about animals and plants and everything like that preying on one another? i think that's caused much more death since the begining of time but i'm just being technical.