Re: The vent thread

[Thelos]

And if this offended anyone, I am sorry. If you want me to delete the post, tell me to. I just got so tired of these christian fanatics that keep coming by my neighbourhood and ranting on how Islam is bad when they are no better.

Its not that I am offended or anything, as I am quite capable of reading this like a joke. I cannot really read the whole "Christianity is hypocritical' part of your post without thinking of it as such.

But allow me to just say you aren't really helping your case by adding fuel to the fire if you ridicule religion like that. As I said, there are idiots on both sides of the fence, dont add to the problem by spouting hate from the other side just because they're throwing poo at you. That'll just provoke them to throw more of it.

[corleth]

Also, if look back on history, religions such as Islam, Buddishm and such have been spread by words, talking to other people.
Christianity? The christians massacred people in the middle east at Jerusalem for example, to spread the word of God.

This is incorrect. If by "massacring people in the middle-east" you mean the Crusades, they were not an attempt to spread the word of God but to reclaim the Christian Holy-land from the Muslim Turks that had cut off access to Jerusalem. Christianity was the largest religion in the world at the point, and the Church had been established for many years; so where you got 'the Christians originally spread their teachings by massacring people in the Middle-East' I do not know. The claim that Islam wasn't spread by the sword is ludicrous also, Islam waged religious wars just as, if not more, brutally than their Christian counter-parts, the Prophet Muhammad was a military-leader himself, for heaven's sake. I suggest you read up, as opposed to watching a few of Christopher Hitchens' videos on youtube, listening to 'God Hate's Us All' by Slayer and getting into zealous atheist-mode.

So, yeah - not offended by any critique of religion (I'm all for it), but I am offended by the ignorance your critique highlights. And I'm offended by my own ignorance if your post was some kind of elaborate, satirical trolling.

[Shaelyssa]

...the Prophet Muhammad was a military-leader himself, for heaven's sake...

Yep, this is true. They even taught us this in Islamic Studies, except they mostly only taught us about the wars against old, Arab pagans.

[Nithel]

And if this offended anyone, I am sorry. If you want me to delete the post, tell me to. I just got so tired of these christian fanatics that keep coming by my neighbourhood and ranting on how Islam is bad when they are no better.

It didn't offend me. However I was pointing out if you want to turn arguments on a nearly 2000 year old book/religion. You need something better than a hasty internet post written by someone who has probably never even read the bible or any book about the bible, religion or anything remotely written by anyone who actually took the time to research and not just vent an opinion.

Ironically a lot of atheists now are doing what the Vatican (Not religion) did to scientists in the middle ages. In that time, science was trying to get a spot next to religion. It wanted to say that a lot of things that religion tries to explain, cannot be explained by the church or religion and shouldn't. Nowadays a lot of people are saying religion has nothing to say and that science can explain everything. In my eyes, it's the same debate, except the sides switched this time.

Ps: I am raised a Catholic, I believe in the values in the messages but I am still searching wether or not I believe in God.

pps: I'm probably being trolled because I find it hard to believe someone would come up with such poor arguments to flame on something. But oh well. Jokes on me I guess

[Thelos]

And dont forget that Christianity once started out as the underdog once, the guys that were being massacred by the Romans. Heck, the symbol of Christianity is the very cross that was used to hang 'em. Martyrdom is a central idea of Christianity.

Whatever, though. Most hate against "religion" seems to be directed at the Church, the Catholic Church in particular and I'm all for that. If you ask me it all went downhill from the point that the Roman empire adopted it as a state religion. That's when it stopped being the persecuted and instead became the persecutor. It is sort of like the bullied sort of taking over and becoming the bully.

[Nithel]

I agree. I very much believe in the christian (Roman-Catholic) values I grew up with. But I disagree with the way Vatican and its church works.

This however hardly interferes with my thought on the religion seperated from that. As I said, one of my favourite theologists, Hans Küng, himself isn't in line with the Vatican. But he still works as a theologists. (Albeit his licence I believe was removed. Don't quote me on this. I'm not sure)

[Shaelyssa]

So you're basically a confused Catholic, Nithel? :p And what sort of values do you mean?

[Lyniath]

I'm converting to Old Norse.

[corleth]

If you ask me it all went downhill from the point that the Roman empire adopted it as a state religion. That's when it stopped being the persecuted and instead became the persecutor. It is sort of like the bullied sort of taking over and becoming the bully.

I agree with this, I like the analogy.

I agree. I very much believe in the christian (Roman-Catholic) values I grew up with.

Do you agree with the Roman-Catholic values regarding homosexuality and abortion then? Just a yes or no will suffice, as my Mother also holds the Catholic values she was brought up with close to heart, but does not fall in line with the Catholic view regarding homosexuality and abortion...

I agree with Thelos though really, I think we can all agree that dogmatic and completely literal interpretations of religious Scripture are nearly always a bad thing, given that these texts were written in a by-gone age. This is especially evident in fundamentalist Islam which - and I'm not making excuses for fanatic Christians here - I believe is a greater threat to the world than even fundamentalist Christianity. I also hope we can all agree on the merits some people see in having a faith, or believing in a God (even if they are fools fooling themselves) and the great literature, art and music that has been inspired by religion. The 'fence' argument is what it comes down to.

[Lyniath]

Someone show me one line from the bible that explicitly says Gay = Evil.

[corleth]

Leviticus 18:22 - "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

Thats the most known, and the only one I can remember to search on the internet from the top of my head, but there are more in there too.

[Nithel]

I am kind of Shael I'm not sure yet in which room I fit in. I'm not sure I ever will. All I know is that I'm searching and reading a lot to try to find out.

To me, being a Roman Catholic, is about so much more than believing in the holy trinity and God. It's about values that are embodied in the religion and the bible. Compassion. Helping the local beggar community. Understanding. Holding sessions with other religions to bring each other closer. And so much more: There are some questions that pure logic will never answer.

I am situationally for abortion. However I think that we should never stop asking the question, is this too far? From what point is the merging of an eggcell and a spermcell, a true human? These are important questions that religion can ask for a person and not necesarily answers.

Another example: I believe in the Catholics way of handling sex. Not the way the church advocates, but the way I see it (which is based on theologists.) In my eyes Christianity is about the ABC: Abstain(A) from sex if possible. If you can't, be faithful(B) to the partner you are with. If you can't, use a condom(C).

I disagree with the A but I take the B and C as values that I hold close to me.

See what I mean? I take certain values I've read and that are inspired by Christianity and I apply them. I don't necesarily agree with everything, but I don't think you should. I agree with what applies to me. I dismiss what doesn't fit me.

@ Corleth: I do not agree with the Vatican's stance on many things. Such things include but aren't limited to: homosexuality, condoms, abortion and euthanisy. I however do agree with what some theologists wrote on it which is based on Christianity.

[Shaelyssa]

I am kind of. I'm not sure yet in which room I fit in. I'm not sure I ever will. All I know is that I'm searching and reading a lot to try to find out.

To me, being a Roman Catholic, is about so much more than believing in the holy trinity and God. It's about values that are embodied in the religion and the bible. Compassion. Helping the local beggar community. Understanding. Holding sessions with other religions to bring each other closer. And so much more: There are some questions that pure logic will never answer.

I am situationally for abortion. However I think that we should never stop asking the question, is this too far? From what point is the merging of an eggcell and a spermcell, a true human? These are important questions that religion can ask for a person and not necesarily answers.

Another example: I believe in the Catholics way of handling sex. Not the way the church advocates, but the way I see it (which is based on theologists.) In my eyes Christianity is about the ABC: Abstain(A) from sex if possible. If you can't, be faithful(B) to the partner you are with. If you can't, use a condom(C).

I disagree with the A but I take the B and C as values that I hold close to me.

See what I mean? I take certain values I've read and that are inspired by Christianity and I apply them. I don't necesarily agree with everything, but I don't think you should. I agree with what applies to me.

@ Corleth: I do not agree with the Vatican's stance on many things. Such things include but aren't limited to: homosexuality, condoms, abortion and euthanisy. I however do agree with what some theologists wrote on it which is based on Christianity.

You know I love you Nithel, and I'm not trying to poke holes in your beliefs or anything, but are you really accepting Christian values? It seems like you're taking moral values which you already innately have or have come to a conclusion about, and then saying they coincide with Christian values, no?

[Lyniath]

The real problem is failure to modernise.
Or any attempt being just exterior and seeming weak and forced, while still keeping outdated ideas.
I was also forced to spend a week at a Christian youth camp, and OMG, how preachy.
They showed constant videos of "FOLLOW JESUS OR GO TO HELL, THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND"
Which I think is part of the problem. You have to do everything they say 110%, or suffer eternal.

[Nithel]

I love you too snookums. No worries.

I am not saying my moral values equal Christian values. I believe we base our own opinion on things from taking little snippets from different ideas. I took a lot of mine from reading literature written by people who were inspired by Christianity. I took a lot of my ideas from seeing the work of people who worked for God who did amazing things for humanity. I focus on the good that Christianity inspired and take that. I also try to understand the evil and avoid that.

I don't accept everything Christianity has to offer me. And I'm sure a lot of people would say this doesn't make me a catholic. I however think myself a catholic.

Probably the most important tidbit however is, people should learn that Christianity =/= The Vatican Church (Or any church for that matter) I see Christianity as a set of ideas and morals, regardless of the Vatican. Christianity has lived long without the vatican and it will live on without it again if it should. It already lives on like that in my mind.

[Thelos]

You know I love you Nithel, and I'm not trying to poke holes in your beliefs or anything, but are you really accepting Christian values? It seems like you're taking moral values which you already innately have or have come to a conclusion about, and then saying they coincide with Christian values, no?

Well the fact that you suggest you can make an easy distinction already misses the point I think. Just what exactly are "moral values which you innately have or have come to conclusions about" ? There are many out there who would argue that there is no such thing as an innate moral value, for example, and many more (including myself) that would argue that most of the values that are inherent in Western society are still largely based on Christian values. The thought that you can easily make a distinction between Christian values on the one hand and "your own or innate" values or the other is a bit...How do I put it, naive?

[Shaelyssa]

I can't really speak for Christians or Christainity, but in Islam's case, Mohammed said that Islam is a religion for all ages and people, that it is eternal and timeless, which is I think one of the main reasons why Muslims don't adapt Islam's teachings to the modern society.

What I don't like is hypocrisy in believers. I don't like how people pick and choose what suits them best in religion. Like when some people go to church/mosque/holyspaghettimonster'stemple, and then go and have pre-marital sex or whatever. Or even when you see some people saying they belong to this faith and that faith, but are still pro-LBGT even though part of their religion is very anti-LBGT. I don't get how you can believe in one thing and then not believe in another. You're not exactly a "true" believer in the faith then, right?

[Rmuffn]

Also, if look back on history, religions such as Islam, Buddishm and such have been spread by words, talking to other people.
Christianity? The christians massacred people in the middle east at Jerusalem for example, to spread the word of God.

This is incorrect. If by "massacring people in the middle-east" you mean the Crusades, they were not an attempt to spread the word of God but to reclaim the Christian Holy-land from the Muslim Turks that had cut off access to Jerusalem. Christianity was the largest religion in the world at the point, and the Church had been established for many years; so where you got 'the Christians originally spread their teachings by massacring people in the Middle-East' I do not know. The claim that Islam wasn't spread by the sword is ludicrous also, Islam waged religious wars just as, if not more, brutally than their Christian counter-parts, the Prophet Muhammad was a military-leader himself, for heaven's sake. I suggest you read up, as opposed to watching a few of Christopher Hitchens' videos on youtube, listening to 'God Hate's Us All' by Slayer and getting into zealous atheist-mode.

So, yeah - not offended by any critique of religion (I'm all for it), but I am offended by the ignorance your critique highlights. And I'm offended by my own ignorance if your post was some kind of elaborate, satirical trolling.

Didn't. And not saying I'm right as I'm purely guessing from vague knowledge, Rome once being christian rather than greek-gods-with-fancier-names force christianity onto the nations they already claimed and stuff?

But I'm tired so don't blame me for being wrong. Like when I said jewism. My tired brain felt it was correct..

[Rmuffn]

I can't really speak for Christians or Christainity, but in Islam's case, Mohammed said that Islam is a religion for all ages and people, that it is eternal and timeless, which is I think one of the main reasons why Muslims don't adapt Islam's teachings to the modern society.

What I don't like is hypocrisy in believers. I don't like how people pick and choose what suits them best in religion. Like when some people go to church/mosque/holyspaghettimonster'stemple, and then go and have pre-marital sex or whatever. Or even when you see some people saying they belong to this faith and that faith, but are still pro-LBGT even though part of their religion is very anti-LBGT. I don't get how you can believe in one thing and then not believe in another. You're not exactly a "true" believer in the faith then, right?

Conviniency.

[corleth]

Also, if look back on history, religions such as Islam, Buddishm and such have been spread by words, talking to other people.
Christianity? The christians massacred people in the middle east at Jerusalem for example, to spread the word of God.

This is incorrect. If by "massacring people in the middle-east" you mean the Crusades, they were not an attempt to spread the word of God but to reclaim the Christian Holy-land from the Muslim Turks that had cut off access to Jerusalem. Christianity was the largest religion in the world at the point, and the Church had been established for many years; so where you got 'the Christians originally spread their teachings by massacring people in the Middle-East' I do not know. The claim that Islam wasn't spread by the sword is ludicrous also, Islam waged religious wars just as, if not more, brutally than their Christian counter-parts, the Prophet Muhammad was a military-leader himself, for heaven's sake. I suggest you read up, as opposed to watching a few of Christopher Hitchens' videos on youtube, listening to 'God Hate's Us All' by Slayer and getting into zealous atheist-mode.

So, yeah - not offended by any critique of religion (I'm all for it), but I am offended by the ignorance your critique highlights. And I'm offended by my own ignorance if your post was some kind of elaborate, satirical trolling.

Didn't. And not saying I'm right as I'm purely guessing from vague knowledge, Rome once being christian rather than greek-gods-with-fancier-names force christianity onto the nations they already claimed and stuff?

But I'm tired so don't blame me for being wrong. Like when I said jewism. My tired brain felt it was correct..

Wait... wasn't I responding to Eowale? :s

[Amaryl]

The Thing is though.

400 years ago, The Church Approved of Slavery.

Now, the Church Doesn´t Approve of Slavery.

The Zeitgeist Changes the Morals and Values of Relgious Institutions. Instead of The Opposite.

[Mandui]

Someone should start a new thread about this! Also, are we talking organized religion here or spirituality/faith? Because one can very much believe in a known god/s without necessarily following the respective religion.

What I don't like is hypocrisy in believers. I don't like how people pick and choose what suits them best in religion. Like when some people go to church/mosque/holyspaghettimonster'stemple, and then go and have pre-marital sex or whatever. Or even when you see some people saying they belong to this faith and that faith, but are still pro-LBGT even though part of their religion is very anti-LBGT. I don't get how you can believe in one thing and then not believe in another. You're not exactly a "true" believer in the faith then, right?

Example: Someone can believe in the typical christian thing (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) but can choose not to follow what is written in any of the religious books or partake in any ceremonies/customs that religion may have, simply because they claim that anything written in said books, along with all other religious acts, is merely something organized religion came up with in order to control the masses. Just an example

[Nithel]

I don't think I am a believer as the Church would have it yes. I see believing as an entirely different thing than you do for example.

I think you should be able to pick and choose what suits you best in religion. I'm fine with saying I'm not a true believer or a hypocrite believer. I believe I'm a catholic in my own way and a lot of people I know and read do too.

It's not hypocrity, it's seeing religion different. You believe it as a set standard of values and truths you cannot deviate from. I see it as an interpretal basis for choosing your own values and truths.

[Thelos]

Well that's just the thing, isn't it? It changes the morals and values of religious institutions of institutions, not religions. In all fairness Christanity should have never approved of slavery, and the arguments from the Church to support it were always clunky and awkward.

Jesus would not have let that shit fly.

Oh yeah bitches I used a "What would Jesus do" argument. That's how we rollin'.

Edit:

Someone can believe in the typical christian thing (Father, Son and Holy Spirit)

That would be a typical Catholic thing but not a typical Christian thing. There are plenty of flavos of Christanity that have rejected it. This is part of the problem: People can no longer make the distinction, which is actually inmensly harmful for Christianity's image.

[Rmuffn]

Also, if look back on history, religions such as Islam, Buddishm and such have been spread by words, talking to other people.
Christianity? The christians massacred people in the middle east at Jerusalem for example, to spread the word of God.

This is incorrect. If by "massacring people in the middle-east" you mean the Crusades, they were not an attempt to spread the word of God but to reclaim the Christian Holy-land from the Muslim Turks that had cut off access to Jerusalem. Christianity was the largest religion in the world at the point, and the Church had been established for many years; so where you got 'the Christians originally spread their teachings by massacring people in the Middle-East' I do not know. The claim that Islam wasn't spread by the sword is ludicrous also, Islam waged religious wars just as, if not more, brutally than their Christian counter-parts, the Prophet Muhammad was a military-leader himself, for heaven's sake. I suggest you read up, as opposed to watching a few of Christopher Hitchens' videos on youtube, listening to 'God Hate's Us All' by Slayer and getting into zealous atheist-mode.

So, yeah - not offended by any critique of religion (I'm all for it), but I am offended by the ignorance your critique highlights. And I'm offended by my own ignorance if your post was some kind of elaborate, satirical trolling.

Didn't. And not saying I'm right as I'm purely guessing from vague knowledge, Rome once being christian rather than greek-gods-with-fancier-names force christianity onto the nations they already claimed and stuff?

But I'm tired so don't blame me for being wrong. Like when I said jewism. My tired brain felt it was correct..

Wait... wasn't I responding to Eowale? :s

Is it wrong of me to make conversation?

[Sponsored content]