The Hazards of Belief

Absolam · 25-11-2015 11:30AM

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

The old testament is still valid scripture as Jesus said that the old laws had not changed so smash as many babies against rocks as you like.

Exactly. And just look at all the baby smashing going on, it's a disgrace! We should send them back where they came from Joe.

silverharp · 25-11-2015 12:50PM

Absolam wrote: »

Did that hippy Jesus not say
But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?
4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.
5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;
6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,
8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
and also
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

I imagine the Muslims being massacred by Christians in Africa find that very comforting.....

It still comes back to how the original religion was started and when the "book" is completed because that tends to be interpreted as the "from above" and is harder to change later. The Jewish religion is not a missionary one that gives it certain characteristics. Jesus was not a warlord Mohammed was. The founders of Christianity didn't specifically include a legal system whereas islam has one.
Ought not Christians be paraylised at the idea of going on a killing spree in Jesus name? because Jesus never talked about killing unbelievers wherever you find them but the other lad did?
The Jews seem to be a better example of a people that don't believe the nuttier parts of their books, but again because judsism is not an expansionary religion its not of much concern to the general public.
I don't know what your African examples are but are they not more like the stuff that went on in northern ireland? Where people and cultures get demarcated along religious lines?

Nodin · 25-11-2015 12:51PM

kylith wrote: »

If Christians aren't supposed to follow the OT why is it in every bible? And why do clerics use the OT to justify their stance on homosexuality? If only the NT is relevant to Christians then the OT should have been discarded, surely?

What I've gathered over the last few years - Generally the view is that the RC would ditch it, because they made up their own impenetrable guff. Protestants of certain hues say its irrelevant but context but it is but it isn't in the clear way we're all used to. People who like counting "begat" and "begot" and the like will probably split if any do move on.

Nodin · 25-11-2015 12:53PM

silverharp wrote: »

It still comes back to how the original religion was started and when the "book" is completed because that tends to be interpreted as the "from above" and is harder to change later. The Jewish religion is not a missionary one that gives it certain characteristics. Jesus was not a warlord Mohammed was. The founders of Christianity didn't specifically include a legal system whereas islam has one.
Ought not Christians be paraylised at the idea of going on a killing spree in Jesus name? because Jesus never talked about killing unbelievers wherever you find them but the other lad did?
The Jews seem to be a better example of a people that don't believe the nuttier parts of their books, but again because judsism is not an expansionary religion its not of much concern to the general public.
I don't know what your African examples are but are they not more like the stuff that went on in northern ireland? Where people and cultures get demarcated along religious lines?

Depends on which Jews you're talking about. Breaking it into three approximate branches you have reformed (relatively non nutty) conservative (nutty enough) and orthodox (odd/overnutty/both).

seamus · 25-11-2015 01:13PM

kylith wrote: »

If Christians aren't supposed to follow the OT why is it in every bible? And why do clerics use the OT to justify their stance on homosexuality? If only the NT is relevant to Christians then the OT should have been discarded, surely?

Because the NT is meaningless without the OT. The concept of original sin requires the existence of the OT and the story of Adam and Eve.

Without the OT, the NT is a book about a guy who believed something and died for it. That Jesus died for his beliefs rather than the world's sins and a lot of the core tenats would be in difficulty. The catholic church in particular would have a lot of practices which heavily rely on original sin, like baptising babies.

silverharp · 25-11-2015 01:31PM

Nodin wrote: »

Depends on which Jews you're talking about. Breaking it into three approximate branches you have reformed (relatively non nutty) conservative (nutty enough) and orthodox (odd/overnutty/both).

sure but when was the last time they stoned a woman for adultery? so they dont exactly fully believe their own wacky backy yet you could fill a conference in Europe with Muslims that would be up for this kind of cr@p.

oldrnwisr · 25-11-2015 01:46PM

silverharp wrote: »

It still comes back to how the original religion was started and when the "book" is completed because that tends to be interpreted as the "from above" and is harder to change later. The Jewish religion is not a missionary one that gives it certain characteristics. Jesus was not a warlord Mohammed was. The founders of Christianity didn't specifically include a legal system whereas islam has one.
Ought not Christians be paraylised at the idea of going on a killing spree in Jesus name? because Jesus never talked about killing unbelievers wherever you find them but the other lad did?
The Jews seem to be a better example of a people that don't believe the nuttier parts of their books, but again because judsism is not an expansionary religion its not of much concern to the general public.
I don't know what your African examples are but are they not more like the stuff that went on in northern ireland? Where people and cultures get demarcated along religious lines?

In the quiet words of the Virgin Mary, come again?

Firstly, Christians do have a legal framework baked into their religion. Since Christianity is essentially a heavily modded version of Judaism, they inherited the legal code from Judaism, you know the one that Matthew references:

" Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven." (5:19)

Judaism has a substantial and thoroughly elucidated legal system beginning in Exodus 20 and continuing through Leviticus. As kylith has pointed out, Christian preachers often use Leviticus to support their dubious arguments when the need suits.

As for Jesus commanding the death of unbelievers, well there's always Luke 19:27

"But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me."

In Chapter 19, Luke depicts Jesus telling the parable of the Ten Minas about a king and his reaction to three servants who have each been given a mina (about three months wages) to invest. At the end of the parable the king loses it and speaks the line above. However, the subsequent verses make it clear that the parable is referring to Jesus:

"When he came near the place where the road goes down the Mount of Olives, the whole crowd of disciples began joyfully to praise God in loud voices for all the miracles they had seen: “Blessed is the king who comes in the name of the Lord!”

“Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!”"

Not to mention that Jesus points out that one of his objectives is to sow unrest and violence:

"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household." Matthew 10:34-36

Now while we're on the subject:

silverharp wrote: »

christians have a book that says you cant murder anybody. Islam has a book that says punishing apostates or unbelievers in an earthly way is possible to the point of death. the fact that most dont is because people in general have their own ethics or they leave those kind of issues to whatever authorities are in place. However to claim that Islam is the religion of peace is a nonsense and it ought to be pointed out.

Actually Christians have a book (or more correctly books) which they inherited from the Jews, a book which speaks about murder but only within your own tribe. There is no indication of a shared humanity in the OT. The commandment against killing doesn't seem to apply in most stories in the OT. It certainly doesn't seem to apply when:

God helps the Israelites to wipe out the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Canaanites, Hivites, and Jebusites (Exodus 23:23)
God orders the entire city of Jericho to be slaughtered including animals (Joshua 6)
God orders the slaughter of everyone (well, except the virgin girls) in Jabesh-Gilead (Judges 21)
God destroys the inhabitants of no less than 60 cities so that they can be resettled by the Israelites (Deuteronomy 3)
God approves of the slaughter of a peaceful town called Laish (Judges 18)
God orders the slaughter of Amalek and specifically orders the killing of newborns and toddlers (1 Samuel 15)

To quote Steve Rogers I can do this all day, but I think you get my point.

Anyone who thinks that there's distasteful stuff in the Quran that just isn't in the bible needs to go back and read it in more detail. I know there are a lot of people blaming the theology for the current crisis but anything you could point to in the Quran which is immoral is either lifted from the bible in the first place or an equivalent or worse example can be found in the bible. To use the example of the Amalekite slaughter mentioned above, it's hard for anything in the Quran to top the notion of God himself ordering a slaughter which specifically targets newborn infants and toddlers.

Nodin · 25-11-2015 02:17PM

silverharp wrote: »

sure but when was the last time they stoned a woman for adultery? so they dont exactly fully believe their own wacky backy yet you could fill a conference in Europe with Muslims that would be up for this kind of cr@p.

Number of Jews in the world - about 16 million I think.

Number of muslims - roughly 1.6 Billion.

robindch · 25-11-2015 02:31PM

For anybody who's cut back on red meat, let us not forget the first time the US lost its head - during the Great Cranberry Scare of 1959:

http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/the-great-cranberry-scare?mbid=social_facebook

silverharp · 25-11-2015 02:40PM

Nodin wrote: »

Number of Jews in the world - about 16 million I think.

Number of muslims - roughly 1.6 Billion.

So what? What % of Muslims believe sharia law ought to be implemented?

Nodin · 25-11-2015 04:50PM

silverharp wrote: »

So what? What % of Muslims believe sharia law ought to be implemented?

No idea. Whats your point? You do know that theres a similar system of religious law that orthodox and many conservative Jews abide by?

silverharp · 25-11-2015 05:40PM

Nodin wrote: »

No idea. Whats your point? You do know that theres a similar system of religious law that orthodox and many conservative Jews abide by?

We are starting to circle here but do you accept that compared to the other 2 but mainly Christianity because there is only 16 million Jews their religion is irrelevant in global terms , Islam is either a more aggressive and intolerant religion based on its foundational beliefs and more Muslims take their religion more seriously to the point that several states specifically include religious law which would be unacceptable in a non Islamic country? Forget terrorism even, think apostacy or sanctions for infadelity for simplicity. Where else outside of Islam could apostacy cost you your freedom ?

And as an aside this forum spends most of the time for obvious reasons lampooning Christians and pointing out why their religion is stupid, homophobic and misogynistic. To be fair and consistant is it not perfectly valid to treat Islam with equal contempt and attack the ideas on the basis that the more Muslims that stop believing in it the better for them and us.

Nodin · 25-11-2015 06:33PM

silverharp wrote: »

We are starting to circle here but do you accept that compared to the other 2 but mainly Christianity because there is only 16 million Jews their religion is irrelevant in global terms , Islam is either a more aggressive and intolerant religion based on its foundational beliefs and more Muslims take their religion more seriously to the point that several states specifically include religious law which would be unacceptable in a non Islamic country? Forget terrorism even, think apostacy or sanctions for infadelity for simplicity. Where else outside of Islam could apostacy cost you your freedom ?

And as an aside this forum spends most of the time for obvious reasons lampooning Christians and pointing out why their religion is stupid, homophobic and misogynistic. To be fair and consistant is it not perfectly valid to treat Islam with equal contempt and attack the ideas on the basis that the more Muslims that stop believing in it the better for them and us.

It is true that the religion is full of crap. However suggestions that Islam is uniquely violent in human history, or that muslims generally pose a threat to society are dangerous and often echo the kind of bigotry exhibited against Jews, Catholics and others over the centuries.

You'll find that strong conservative beliefs in Islam usually (but not always) coincide with low economic development, much like any other religion.

silverharp · 25-11-2015 07:40PM

Nodin wrote: »

It is true that the religion is full of crap. However suggestions that Islam is uniquely violent in human history, or that muslims generally pose a threat to society are dangerous and often echo the kind of bigotry exhibited against Jews, Catholics and others over the centuries.

You'll find that strong conservative beliefs in Islam usually (but not always) coincide with low economic development, much like any other religion.

if you conflate too much you end up paralysed. in the past jews or catholics faced bigotry from the competition ie they had the wrong view of Jesus or whatever and today sure there is a christian right in the US that probably at some level sees Islam as demonic. But it doesnt mean you stay stumm or take the other side even. The world is too complicated for the enemy of my enemy logic. The reason for the "new Atheists" was to take the dialogue away from the right but the regressives want to paint them as the bad guys.

As for Islam and human development , there is a bit of a chicken and egg there. At this stage Islam is an anchor around whole populations and is holding them back

silverharp · 25-11-2015 07:55PM

oldrnwisr wrote: »

In the quiet words of the Virgin Mary, come again?

Firstly, Christians do have a legal framework baked into their religion. Since Christianity is essentially a heavily modded version of Judaism, they inherited the legal code from Judaism, you know the one that Matthew references:

" Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven." (5:19)

Judaism has a substantial and thoroughly elucidated legal system beginning in Exodus 20 and continuing through Leviticus. As kylith has pointed out, Christian preachers often use Leviticus to support their dubious arguments when the need suits.

As for Jesus commanding the death of unbelievers, well there's always Luke 19:27

"But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me."

In Chapter 19, Luke depicts Jesus telling the parable of the Ten Minas about a king and his reaction to three servants who have each been given a mina (about three months wages) to invest. At the end of the parable the king loses it and speaks the line above. However, the subsequent verses make it clear that the parable is referring to Jesus:

"When he came near the place where the road goes down the Mount of Olives, the whole crowd of disciples began joyfully to praise God in loud voices for all the miracles they had seen: “Blessed is the king who comes in the name of the Lord!”

“Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!”"

Not to mention that Jesus points out that one of his objectives is to sow unrest and violence:

"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household." Matthew 10:34-36

Now while we're on the subject:

Actually Christians have a book (or more correctly books) which they inherited from the Jews, a book which speaks about murder but only within your own tribe. There is no indication of a shared humanity in the OT. The commandment against killing doesn't seem to apply in most stories in the OT. It certainly doesn't seem to apply when:
God helps the Israelites to wipe out the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Canaanites, Hivites, and Jebusites (Exodus 23:23)

God orders the entire city of Jericho to be slaughtered including animals (Joshua 6)

God orders the slaughter of everyone (well, except the virgin girls) in Jabesh-Gilead (Judges 21)

God destroys the inhabitants of no less than 60 cities so that they can be resettled by the Israelites (Deuteronomy 3)

God approves of the slaughter of a peaceful town called Laish (Judges 18)

God orders the slaughter of Amalek and specifically orders the killing of newborns and toddlers (1 Samuel 15)

To quote Steve Rogers I can do this all day, but I think you get my point.

Anyone who thinks that there's distasteful stuff in the Quran that just isn't in the bible needs to go back and read it in more detail. I know there are a lot of people blaming the theology for the current crisis but anything you could point to in the Quran which is immoral is either lifted from the bible in the first place or an equivalent or worse example can be found in the bible. To use the example of the Amalekite slaughter mentioned above, it's hard for anything in the Quran to top the notion of God himself ordering a slaughter which specifically targets newborn infants and toddlers.

lol, you will need to do a better job of quote mining , you do know that Luke 19 is a parable and is a day of judgement thing. it wasnt a command to go out slaughtering non jews erm christians.

oscarBravo · 25-11-2015 09:01PM

silverharp wrote: »

Jesus was not a warlord...

Debatable.

Absolam · 26-11-2015 12:51AM

silverharp wrote: »

It still comes back to how the original religion was started and when the "book" is completed because that tends to be interpreted as the "from above" and is harder to change later.

Hang on, I thought you said

silverharp wrote: »

it still comes back to the fact that hippy Jesus supersedes all this right?

and before that

silverharp wrote: »

in the end it comes to the Islamic texts.

What it all comes down to is a bit of a moving feast here, isn't it?

Can I suggest that 'what it all comes down to' is you are invested in demonising followers of Islam, but prepared to offer excuses on behalf of the followers of other Abrahamic religions for some reason?

The fact is some Christians are and have been quite happy to butcher and torture in the name of religion, just as some Muslims are and have been. The Jews according to their own records, as Oldrnwisr has pointed out weren't exactly averse to a bit of ethnic cleansing when God gave the word; and they haven't had a Messiah come along to ask them to calm down a bit since either. Maybe some people are just nasty b*stards, regardless of religion.

silverharp · 26-11-2015 07:23AM

Absolam wrote: »

Hang on, I thought you said

and before that

What it all comes down to is a bit of a moving feast here, isn't it?

Can I suggest that 'what it all comes down to' is you are invested in demonising followers of Islam, but prepared to offer excuses on behalf of the followers of other Abrahamic religions for some reason?

no, just pointing out that the ideas of Islam are awful, and on a scale are more awful than christianity or Judiasm

Absolam wrote: »

The fact is some Christians are and have been quite happy to butcher and torture in the name of religion, just as some Muslims are and have been. The Jews according to their own records, as Oldrnwisr has pointed out weren't exactly averse to a bit of ethnic cleansing when God gave the word; and they haven't had a Messiah come along to ask them to calm down a bit since either. Maybe some people are just nasty b*stards, regardless of religion.

christianity is a sh1tty religion too , it creates an in group and an outgroup. Maybe some people are nasty bastards but if Mohammed had started a religion like Jainism , wouldnt the actions of the followers be different? Are you going to defend he idea that what a religion says makes no difference?

Absolam · 26-11-2015 11:40AM

silverharp wrote: »

no, just pointing out that the ideas of Islam are awful, and on a scale are more awful than christianity or Judiasm

Actually, yes. You did say all those things, that's how I was able to quite them. Still, how exactly do you figure that the ideas of Islam are more awful than the ideas of Christianity or Judaism? They seem by and large to be mostly the same ideas... as has been pointed out already.

silverharp wrote: »

christianity is a sh1tty religion too , it creates an in group and an outgroup. Maybe some people are nasty bastards but if Mohammed had started a religion like Jainism , wouldnt the actions of the followers be different? Are you going to defend he idea that what a religion says makes no difference?

I'd certainly say that if Jainism had 1.7 billion followers, you'd probably find a few who'd still managed to find an excuse to oppress and murder someone else, yes.

oldrnwisr · 26-11-2015 12:34PM

silverharp wrote: »

lol, you will need to do a better job of quote mining , you do know that Luke 19 is a parable and is a day of judgement thing. it wasnt a command to go out slaughtering non jews erm christians.

OK, three things here.

Firstly, I don't quote mine. Quote mining is a dishonest tactic which I try to avoid at all costs. I try to allow for as much of the surrounding context as my knowledge of history and ancient languages allow.

Secondly, I know it's a parable. I even said as much in my previous post. Specifically this bit:

oldrnwisr wrote: »

In Chapter 19, Luke depicts Jesus telling the parable of the Ten Minas about a king and his reaction to three servants who have each been given a mina (about three months wages) to invest. At the end of the parable the king loses it and speaks the line above. However, the subsequent verses make it clear that the parable is referring to Jesus:

"When he came near the place where the road goes down the Mount of Olives, the whole crowd of disciples began joyfully to praise God in loud voices for all the miracles they had seen: “Blessed is the king who comes in the name of the Lord!”

“Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!”"

Like I said the parable is a story that Jesus uses to make a point about himself. He is the king he is referring to who orders the deaths of those who don't want him to be king. The surrounding context of the parable given in the rest of that chapter makes it clear.

Finally, this notion of the parable as a metaphor for a distant day of judgement is ridiculous. It is a later Christian interpolation prompted by the failure of Jesus' prophecy in Matthew 24:30-34

“Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. “Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, right at the door. Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened."

There's no indication anywhere in the gospels that any of Jesus' stories or predictions relate to anything other than the immediate future. In fact, this "prophecy" from Jesus became the focus of much ridicule when it failed to happen as evidenced in 2 Peter 3:3-4

"Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.”

Jesus was referring to imminent events in the Luke 19 parable, not some far distant "day of judgement".

Now as for your more recent posts:

silverharp wrote: »

no, just pointing out that the ideas of Islam are awful, and on a scale are more awful than christianity or Judiasm

No. That's the point I and other posters have been making. Islam is a syncretic religion, a descendant branch of Judaism and Christianity. Anything Islam has in its teachings the Jews and Christians did earlier and better (or worse).

You mentioned apostasy in Islam in post #6823. Well how about apostasy in Judaism:

"If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people."
Deuteronomy 13:6-9

"If a man or woman living among you in one of the towns the Lord gives you is found doing evil in the eyes of the Lord your God in violation of his covenant, and contrary to my command has worshiped other gods, bowing down to them or to the sun or the moon or the stars in the sky, and this has been brought to your attention, then you must investigate it thoroughly. If it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, take the man or woman who has done this evil deed to your city gate and stone that person to death."
Deuteronomy 17:3-5"All who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, were to be put to death, whether small or great, man or woman."
2 Chronicles 15:13

or how about Christianity:

"For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles. Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them."
Romans 1:21-32

"Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!” Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’ and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’"
Matthew 15:1-4

The last passage above shows Jesus rebuking the Pharisees for placing Rabbinical tradition over the commandments (and their punishments) mandated by God through the commandments (including the death penalty for apostates).

And then of course there's this:

“If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them if a large millstone were hung around their neck and they were thrown into the sea. If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out. And if your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell. And if your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, where“‘the worms that eat them do not die,
and the fire is not quenched.’"

Mark 9:42-48

The phrase "to stumble" in the passage above (rendered as to fall in other translations) is translated from the greek verb skandalizo which means to fall away from faith (i.e. become an apostate). So here Jesus is saying that apostates will be punished eternally in hell. In what reality is a finite victimless crime like apostasy justifiably punished with eternal torture? Even Islam hasn't conceived of anything that barbaric.

AstraMonti · 26-11-2015 01:37PM

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34920068

The church teaches that a body must be buried in order to be resurrected at the second coming. Archbishop Anthimos of Thessaloniki, argues that cremation is the rendering of a human being into nothingness.
Archbishop Anthimos of Thessaloniki
"The Orthodox Church cannot accept cremation. Are we going to deny the teachings of the gospel after 2,000 years?" he says.
He rejects the idea that bones left in the ground will eventually decompose, turning to dust that is no more ready for resurrection than the ash of a cremated body.

It's sad in so many different levels.. both literally and figuratively.

silverharp · 26-11-2015 02:00PM

Absolam wrote: »

Actually, yes. You did say all those things, that's how I was able to quite them. Still, how exactly do you figure that the ideas of Islam are more awful than the ideas of Christianity or Judaism? They seem by and large to be mostly the same ideas... as has been pointed out already.

so which Christian country is it legally difficult to leave your religion without legal sanction or convert to another religion? and why is it different in Islam if the religions are basically the same?

Absolam wrote: »

I'd certainly say that if Jainism had 1.7 billion followers, you'd probably find a few who'd still managed to find an excuse to oppress and murder someone else, yes.

sure but they couldnt quote the religion surely? we are talking about "extremists" that would filter water so as not to kill bugs, they are unlikely to hang you legally or illegally based on being homosexual or throw you in prison for leaving he faith.

so every religion in the world you would have to rate them "5" out of 10 on a scale of peaceful/not overly conservative to the other extreme?

PopePalpatine · 26-11-2015 03:13PM

AstraMonti wrote: »

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34920068

It's sad in so many different levels.. both literally and figuratively.

I listened to the podcast version of that article, you'd think that an omnipotent god would be able to resurrect someone who's been cremated.

Kivaro · 26-11-2015 03:21PM

AstraMonti wrote: »

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34920068

It's sad in so many different levels.. both literally and figuratively.

So the argument is that the big guy can resurrect dust from bones but not smoke and ashes (that may be dispersed at various locations).

Pfff ......... amateur.

silverharp · 26-11-2015 08:06PM

oldrnwisr wrote: »

Like I said the parable is a story that Jesus uses to make a point about himself. He is the king he is referring to who orders the deaths of those who don't want him to be king. The surrounding context of the parable given in the rest of that chapter makes it clear.

Finally, this notion of the parable as a metaphor for a distant day of judgement is ridiculous. It is a later Christian interpolation prompted by the failure of Jesus' prophecy in Matthew 24:30-34

“Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. “Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, right at the door. Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened."

There's no indication anywhere in the gospels that any of Jesus' stories or predictions relate to anything other than the immediate future. In fact, this "prophecy" from Jesus became the focus of much ridicule when it failed to happen as evidenced in 2 Peter 3:3-4

"Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.”

Jesus was referring to imminent events in the Luke 19 parable, not some far distant "day of judgement".

it doesnt matter what Jesus actually meant , in reality the whole shooting match should have been closed down after when he didnt come back. As he didnt these versus are going to be interpreted as end of world type of stuff

oldrnwisr wrote: »

No. That's the point I and other posters have been making. Islam is a syncretic religion, a descendant branch of Judaism and Christianity. Anything Islam has in its teachings the Jews and Christians did earlier and better (or worse).

You mentioned apostasy in Islam in post #6823. Well how about apostasy in Judaism:

"If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people."
Deuteronomy 13:6-9

"If a man or woman living among you in one of the towns the Lord gives you is found doing evil in the eyes of the Lord your God in violation of his covenant, and contrary to my command has worshiped other gods, bowing down to them or to the sun or the moon or the stars in the sky, and this has been brought to your attention, then you must investigate it thoroughly. If it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, take the man or woman who has done this evil deed to your city gate and stone that person to death."
Deuteronomy 17:3-5"All who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, were to be put to death, whether small or great, man or woman."
2 Chronicles 15:13

or how about Christianity:

"For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles. Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them."
Romans 1:21-32

"Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!” Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’ and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’"
Matthew 15:1-4

The last passage above shows Jesus rebuking the Pharisees for placing Rabbinical tradition over the commandments (and their punishments) mandated by God through the commandments (including the death penalty for apostates).

And then of course there's this:

“If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them if a large millstone were hung around their neck and they were thrown into the sea. If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out. And if your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell. And if your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, where“‘the worms that eat them do not die,
and the fire is not quenched.’"

Mark 9:42-48

The phrase "to stumble" in the passage above (rendered as to fall in other translations) is translated from the greek verb skandalizo which means to fall away from faith (i.e. become an apostate). So here Jesus is saying that apostates will be punished eternally in hell. In what reality is a finite victimless crime like apostasy justifiably punished with eternal torture? Even Islam hasn't conceived of anything that barbaric.

But jews will tell you they dont feel bound by their crazier books and in any event Judaism is not a proselytising so they are not on any mission to convert the world. the "peace" bit in Islam is after the world has been converted to Islam or is under Islamic rule, a different kettle of fish no?

As for the Matthew 15 there is nothing there that is telling his followers to kill anybody for any reason , is seems to be more about throwing the old law back in their faces. there simply isnt a narrative that jesus raised an army and there isnt anything in Paul's writings that people were to be subjugated under Christain rule. The early Christian church look like a bunch of hippy communes.
Compare that to Mohammed who fought battles , had sex slaves , gave people the choice of converting or being killed.

oscarBravo · 26-11-2015 09:18PM

silverharp wrote: »

But jews will tell you they dont feel bound by their crazier books...

...and Muslims don't go around killing apostates. Neither assertion is without exception; both are useful generalisations.

silverharp · 27-11-2015 12:04AM

oscarBravo wrote: »

...and Muslims don't go around killing apostates. Neither assertion is without exception; both are useful generalisations.

as individuals I'd assume not but anyone that wants a state governed by Islamic law would be "voting" for civil sanctions of some sort. Otherwise you would need a secular law to override the religious law.

Here is Sam Harris and Maajid Nawaz talking around the issue. They both agree that Islam needs to be reformed and Maajid even concedes that ISIS have a plausible interpretation of the Qur'an.
The regressives have failed, out of fear of being accused of being "racist" everyone has their heads in the sand and an honest dialogue hasnt occurred or has being held back

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Eu_uKPzYys

Peregrinus · 27-11-2015 12:51AM

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I listened to the podcast version of that article, you'd think that an omnipotent god would be able to resurrect someone who's been cremated.

Kivaro wrote: »

So the argument is that the big guy can resurrect dust from bones but not smoke and ashes (that may be dispersed at various locations).

Pfff ......... amateur.

Read the article more carefully, guys. You are both attacking a straw man here. At no point does is the archbishop quoted as saying that God cannot resurrect someone whose remains have been cremated, or anything remotely like that.

Absolam · 27-11-2015 03:35AM

silverharp wrote: »

so which Christian country is it legally difficult to leave your religion without legal sanction or convert to another religion? and why is it different in Islam if the religions are basically the same?

Can you give me a list of Christian countries to choose from? I thought we were discussing the ideas of three religions, so your switch to the practices of countries seems a little off point. Let's take a look at those Christian countries, then I assume you'll be wanting to contrast them with Muslim countries? We'll probably need that list too. In the meantime, we can probably run with the actual question I asked; Still, how exactly do you figure that the ideas of Islam are more awful than the ideas of Christianity or Judaism?

silverharp wrote: »

sure but they couldnt quote the religion surely? we are talking about "extremists" that would filter water so as not to kill bugs, they are unlikely to hang you legally or illegally based on being homosexual or throw you in prison for leaving he faith.

How do you know until they try it? After all, if members of one religion of peace can do it, it's seems reasonable that members of another could; I suspect you're not sufficiently familiar with all of the texts of both faiths to claim no one will ever find a justification for any action in either one, are you?

silverharp wrote: »

so every religion in the world you would have to rate them "5" out of 10 on a scale of peaceful/not overly conservative to the other extreme?

I would have to? If say, 0.6% of the entire Jainist population engaged in genocide why would we rate them any more or less peaceful than Muslims? If we assume there are a million Muslims currently intent on being extremely not peaceful/not overly conservative, that's the kind of percentage we're talking about here.... based on that I certainly don't feel I would have to rate Islam as not being peaceful, so I can't imagine I'd do differently for Jainism. Heck, if there were 10 million that's still only 6%; not enough for me to condemn the other 94% by a long shot...

topmanamillion · 27-11-2015 03:53AM

I don't know if anyone has read the evolution of God by Robert Wright. He takes a simple historical view on the origins of religion.
Pound for pound the Koran is more violent than the Bible and Torah. But In terms of violent content the Bible wins.

There's plenty of gems like; "If your brother, the son of your mother, or your son or your daughter or the wife you embrace or your friend say ‘Let us go and serve other gods" you shall kill him. Your hand shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterward the hand of all the people. You shall stone him to death with stones"

There's also the fact many of jesus' stories were edited after the event. So Christians saying "jesus told us to love our neighbours". What was meant was a literal meaning and not the metaphorical meaning that's used today. It literally meant love your Israelian neighbour. The writer wanted Israelis to be United against all the empires that had been playing it for centuries.

Simple history has made Islam hang on to its violent past more strongly. If jesus had had an army and been a military leader as well as spiritual one, Christianity would be much more different today.

All of the ancient religions are violent because they originate in a time of violence when you had to kill or be killed. People regularly raided your village so believing in a diety that would strike the raiders down made sense.

The Hazards of Belief

Comments