As a follower of Jesus Christ, I’m disappointed you think that. I firmly believe there’s a religion for everyone on this planet. And that hatred of religion as a concept can easily lead to dismissing foreign cultures’ spiritual practices.
Why would you center your life around something that neither you, not any single person in the past 2000+ years has been able to verify or prove in even the most basic fashion?
Unfortunately. No thanks I have no hole to fill with lies.
In unevidenced claims. Nothing original to Christianity besides false prophet Jesus who didn’t fulfill Judaism prophecy. Not that it matters because that’s also not original. A messy evolution from beliefs Canaanites, Mesopotamia, and and other earlier civs had. Your god was just a violent minor god of among many, son of El. Hmm, IsraEL.
Nobody should be impressed by faith in Paul’s acid trip fan fiction and anonymous pick and choose your adventure authorship. Especially after learning history.
I agree with you completely, Christianity is a disease on society. I am not a Christian. I consider Christianity to be a blatant heresy against our lord and saviour, Jesus Christ. I, like Jesus, believe in the principles of Judaism. You might say I’m part of the Jesus-worshipping Jewish cult. Paul is the inventor of Christianity, and his innovation was to twist Judaism to fit with Roman ideals. Elohim is the god to the oppressed, and Paul thought he could make Him god to the oppressors. It’s a paradox.
I am deeply opposed to Roman ideology. Did you know the Nazis considered themselves to be Romans? And now we have a Fourth Reich of the Roman Empire gathering strength in the west. All very Christian, of course. So I tell you truly that I think as poorly of Christianity as you do, because I am a follower of Christ.
. And that hatred of religion as a concept can easily lead to dismissing foreign cultures’ spiritual practices
Yes, I’m going to dismiss foreign culture religion, just like I dismiss my culture’s religions. They’re not special just because they’re not from here, it’s still the same humans
Worshipping people 2 thousand years dead is stupid.
And if you found out the natives of the land you live on were teaching religion to their children, would you support the government kidnapping the children and putting them with white families to learn science and writing and “civilised manners”? That’s the kind of actual historical event I’m concerned about happening when religious knowledge is valued less than white people’s idea of academic knowledge.
Religious knowledge is explicitly less valuable than academic knowledge.
I’m not talking about christian, white people’s idea of manners and civilization. That is still awful. Instead of kidnapping, that’s what public schools should be for, teaching reading, writing, and science.
Those kidnappings were genocide. I advocate for religion to be suppressed, especially the sexist and racist ones(but not only), not for all forms of culture and tradition to be suppressed.
Well I will describe a religious belief I hold to you, and I’m eager to hear what you think of it.
Burning fossil fuels is a sin. We’re not supposed to dig them out of the ground and burn them. When fossil fuels are burned, they react and turn to greenhouse gases, which warm the planet and bring natural disasters. And because Elohim is a god of great wrath, the disasters do not just harm those who sinned, but everyone, and disproportionately the poorest who don’t have the resources to survive natural disaster. To find peace with the world around us, we must stop fossil fuel emissions and sacrifice our billionaires to Elohim upon a ritual pyre.
A great example on why religious knowledge is less valuable than scientific knowledge. The belief that the issues are that simple and blocks understanding of why it happens and how to prevent similar situations from recurring.
More however, the god parts have no value. If you insert science into religion, it’s still science. The science information should be extracted from the religious knowledge, and the less valuable religious parts discarded.
If you insert science into religion, it’s still science
And all religions have science in them. Pacific Islanders know things about wayfaring and wave dynamics that physicists are just now discovering. Colonisers in Australia spoiled the environment by disregarding indigenous conservation practices. Buddhists have been teaching western psychologists about the uses of meditation for the past two decades. The Haudenosaunee taught Karl Marx’s friends about communism. Muslims were avoiding dangerous meats before germ theory was invented. For hundreds of years, westerners have dismissed religious knowledge and said oopsie when they later learned there was science inside the religion. I caution you not to make the same mistake.
I’m appreciative that you’re entirely misunderstanding what I think should be happening in favor of writing your own narrative. I do not think that religious texts and oral histories should be erased. They should be studied. I think that religion deserves suppression. There will be no magical discoveries religious people make anymore. Most of that was likely not religious until they made it as such to get people to believe them in the first place.
The scientific information can and should be taken in. But, I explicitly said “less value” not no value in regards to religious knowledge, which you so kindly ignored, again to write your own narrative, one where you condescendingly assume I did not already know what you just stated
There will be no magical discoveries religious people make anymore
I implore you to consider the fact that every living culture on this earth is still changing, evolving, and growing, and even some dead religions have been revived. And these religions have access to the scientific method just as you do.
So unless you mean to imply that science is finished making discoveries, which I’m certain you don’t, then religions will keep making discoveries. The Buddhists are still improving their meditation techniques. The Pacific islanders are still training to be better wayfarers. The Australian Aboriginals are learning to care for a land ravaged by climate change.
Religions as dead things written in an old book is a western idea and I fear you have projected this onto distinctly nonwestern religions where truth comes from a connection to the ancestors and the land, constantly evolving as the people and the land evolve. And to nonwestern religions where truth comes from exploration of the mind, and surely you can see the mind is a highly dynamic environment in the modern day, ripe for fresh discoveries.
You do realise that atheism is not a religious position right? Atheist people don’t hate God despite what various Bible bashes try to claim, atheists don’t believe in God. It hard to hate someone that you don’t believe exists.
Equally atheists don’t hate religion as a concept, they just don’t find any of it to be convincing.
I do understand that. Theism and atheism are pretty much perpendicular to the issue of religion. There are many theistic religions, many atheistic religions, many irreligious theistic beliefs, and many irreligious atheistic beliefs. Though fewer irreligious people on both sides of the theism debate than I think most are willing to admit. For example any atheist who watches Andrew Tate’s videos is not, I think, an atheist or irreligious.
if those spiritual practices are being used to oppress, as is often the case, then good. We should disregard them. There are cultures who believe that sexually abusing young men is just, because they need to consume “the spirit of life” through another man’s semen in order to produce offspring. Should we be respecting those practices?
People are allowed to believe in whatever nonsense they like in the comfort of their own homes, but the second that shit spills out into the real world, it almost universally becomes a problem.
Religion is just believing without evidence. And with that “logic” you can make up anything and get people to believe in it. That is how every cult starts. A religion is just a long lasting cult. It is nothing more than a bit for control over people like you.
No wonder that the majority of religious people believe in the religion they were taught when they couldn’t think critically yet.
There are plenty of things that require belief without evidence that aren’t religion (conspiracy theories, pseudoscience). There are also religions that rely on science for answers, and so they do require evidence.
Yeah I’m totally flummoxed because I’m atheist so obviously I believe in the healing power of crystals. I don’t know what the scientific religion been alluded to is, but I’m assuming it’s Scientology, the fact that they think that shows you everything you need to know about them.
I’m afraid I don’t have time to answer all your hastily listed arguments with a well thought out response, so I’ll just pick one. You said religion is belief without evidence, but that’s faith. Religion is actually organised belief or worship. There are many religions that don’t require any faith to believe in.
For example many Buddhists don’t believe in any of the parts of the religion they consider supernatural, and instead focus on the philosophy and life advice, which is still religious in nature because of its organisation.
Worshippers of the Antichrist, Donald Trump, also don’t tend to believe without apparent evidence. The evidence they do believe in is all lies, but what they’re doing still isn’t faith. Being lied to with bad evidence isn’t faith.
And as a third example, the religion of Mammon, the worship of money, can be practiced entirely unknowingly and without the slightest suggestion of false belief. It’s clearly true that money runs the world, and many people worship money and capitalism because of its obvious and true power over us.
And I think if you don’t choose a religion consciously, then like many worshippers of Mammon, you may end up joining a system of organised worship unconsciously. The Lemmy developers are in a religion without knowing, it’s that easy.
It doesn’t matter how organised the belief is or how established the belief is, it’s still belief without evidence. I have no idea why you brought Trump up he has no bearing on this conversation whatsoever since his supporters don’t believe in him, they can see him right there in front of them. You don’t need to believe in things that demonstrably exist.
The Lemmy developers are Marxists, that’s a political opinion not a belief (for what it’s worth they would probably claim to be Christian). Do you seriously think it is impossible to hold opinions about any particular matter without them being religiously based, if so how does my preferred brand of peanut butter relate to religious dogma?
a state or habit of mind in which trust or confidence is placed in some person or thing. e.g. I believe in president Trump’s leadership
something that is accepted, considered to be true, or held as an opinion : something believed. e.g. Donald Trump is truly one of the presidents of all time
conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence. e.g. *President Trump sure does exist, alright, I looked at the evidence and I believe he’s real.
Trump’s worshippers fit all three definitions for belief in Trump, even if you and I wish they wouldn’t fit the first.
I’m sorry you’ve been lead to believe that belief is only for things that aren’t true. I hope one day you learn how to believe in true things like staplers and giraffes.
Your condescending attitude not withstanding I’ll address your point.
We are talking about religious belief, no one religiously believes in Trump, now you can use the word to describe his supporters if you want, but it’s a corruption of the idea (and before you start “corruption” here refers to redefining a words original concept). They like him a lot, that’s it. You can’t believe in Trump any more than you can believe in potatoes.
As for the education system having failed me, I think we’re operating far beyond anything the education system ever bothered to tackle.
Now if we could stop talking about Trump that would be great, because despite the fact you think you’re being clever, he’s completely irrelevant to the concept of religion. Just like most people who are losing the arguement you have reframed it to talk about a different subject matter to try and make me argue a point which is miles away from the original talking point.
There are plenty of people who don’t have a religion, and they seem to be just fine. I personally don’t think that I need religion, but since it seems to make my life better, I’m glad that I have it.
As a follower of Jesus Christ, I’m disappointed you think that. I firmly believe there’s a religion for everyone on this planet. And that hatred of religion as a concept can easily lead to dismissing foreign cultures’ spiritual practices.
Why would you center your life around something that neither you, not any single person in the past 2000+ years has been able to verify or prove in even the most basic fashion?
Don’t you care about believing true things?
Unfortunately. No thanks I have no hole to fill with lies.
In unevidenced claims. Nothing original to Christianity besides false prophet Jesus who didn’t fulfill Judaism prophecy. Not that it matters because that’s also not original. A messy evolution from beliefs Canaanites, Mesopotamia, and and other earlier civs had. Your god was just a violent minor god of among many, son of El. Hmm, IsraEL.
Nobody should be impressed by faith in Paul’s acid trip fan fiction and anonymous pick and choose your adventure authorship. Especially after learning history.
I agree with you completely, Christianity is a disease on society. I am not a Christian. I consider Christianity to be a blatant heresy against our lord and saviour, Jesus Christ. I, like Jesus, believe in the principles of Judaism. You might say I’m part of the Jesus-worshipping Jewish cult. Paul is the inventor of Christianity, and his innovation was to twist Judaism to fit with Roman ideals. Elohim is the god to the oppressed, and Paul thought he could make Him god to the oppressors. It’s a paradox.
I am deeply opposed to Roman ideology. Did you know the Nazis considered themselves to be Romans? And now we have a Fourth Reich of the Roman Empire gathering strength in the west. All very Christian, of course. So I tell you truly that I think as poorly of Christianity as you do, because I am a follower of Christ.
Give me a fucking break.
Yes, I’m going to dismiss foreign culture religion, just like I dismiss my culture’s religions. They’re not special just because they’re not from here, it’s still the same humans
Worshipping people 2 thousand years dead is stupid.
And if you found out the natives of the land you live on were teaching religion to their children, would you support the government kidnapping the children and putting them with white families to learn science and writing and “civilised manners”? That’s the kind of actual historical event I’m concerned about happening when religious knowledge is valued less than white people’s idea of academic knowledge.
It’s like you’re incapable of going a single comment without at least one logical fallacy.
Religious knowledge is explicitly less valuable than academic knowledge.
I’m not talking about christian, white people’s idea of manners and civilization. That is still awful. Instead of kidnapping, that’s what public schools should be for, teaching reading, writing, and science.
Those kidnappings were genocide. I advocate for religion to be suppressed, especially the sexist and racist ones(but not only), not for all forms of culture and tradition to be suppressed.
Well I will describe a religious belief I hold to you, and I’m eager to hear what you think of it.
Burning fossil fuels is a sin. We’re not supposed to dig them out of the ground and burn them. When fossil fuels are burned, they react and turn to greenhouse gases, which warm the planet and bring natural disasters. And because Elohim is a god of great wrath, the disasters do not just harm those who sinned, but everyone, and disproportionately the poorest who don’t have the resources to survive natural disaster. To find peace with the world around us, we must stop fossil fuel emissions and sacrifice our billionaires to Elohim upon a ritual pyre.
A great example on why religious knowledge is less valuable than scientific knowledge. The belief that the issues are that simple and blocks understanding of why it happens and how to prevent similar situations from recurring.
More however, the god parts have no value. If you insert science into religion, it’s still science. The science information should be extracted from the religious knowledge, and the less valuable religious parts discarded.
And all religions have science in them. Pacific Islanders know things about wayfaring and wave dynamics that physicists are just now discovering. Colonisers in Australia spoiled the environment by disregarding indigenous conservation practices. Buddhists have been teaching western psychologists about the uses of meditation for the past two decades. The Haudenosaunee taught Karl Marx’s friends about communism. Muslims were avoiding dangerous meats before germ theory was invented. For hundreds of years, westerners have dismissed religious knowledge and said oopsie when they later learned there was science inside the religion. I caution you not to make the same mistake.
No, people invented religions in an attempt to explain things that they did not understand.
Things that the scientific method has allowed us to understand.
That is not science.
I’m appreciative that you’re entirely misunderstanding what I think should be happening in favor of writing your own narrative. I do not think that religious texts and oral histories should be erased. They should be studied. I think that religion deserves suppression. There will be no magical discoveries religious people make anymore. Most of that was likely not religious until they made it as such to get people to believe them in the first place.
The scientific information can and should be taken in. But, I explicitly said “less value” not no value in regards to religious knowledge, which you so kindly ignored, again to write your own narrative, one where you condescendingly assume I did not already know what you just stated
I implore you to consider the fact that every living culture on this earth is still changing, evolving, and growing, and even some dead religions have been revived. And these religions have access to the scientific method just as you do.
So unless you mean to imply that science is finished making discoveries, which I’m certain you don’t, then religions will keep making discoveries. The Buddhists are still improving their meditation techniques. The Pacific islanders are still training to be better wayfarers. The Australian Aboriginals are learning to care for a land ravaged by climate change.
Religions as dead things written in an old book is a western idea and I fear you have projected this onto distinctly nonwestern religions where truth comes from a connection to the ancestors and the land, constantly evolving as the people and the land evolve. And to nonwestern religions where truth comes from exploration of the mind, and surely you can see the mind is a highly dynamic environment in the modern day, ripe for fresh discoveries.
You do realise that atheism is not a religious position right? Atheist people don’t hate God despite what various Bible bashes try to claim, atheists don’t believe in God. It hard to hate someone that you don’t believe exists.
Equally atheists don’t hate religion as a concept, they just don’t find any of it to be convincing.
I do understand that. Theism and atheism are pretty much perpendicular to the issue of religion. There are many theistic religions, many atheistic religions, many irreligious theistic beliefs, and many irreligious atheistic beliefs. Though fewer irreligious people on both sides of the theism debate than I think most are willing to admit. For example any atheist who watches Andrew Tate’s videos is not, I think, an atheist or irreligious.
It’s like you’re just inventing your own definitions of words on the fly.
What THE FUCK does Andrew Tate have to do with atheism?
if those spiritual practices are being used to oppress, as is often the case, then good. We should disregard them. There are cultures who believe that sexually abusing young men is just, because they need to consume “the spirit of life” through another man’s semen in order to produce offspring. Should we be respecting those practices?
People are allowed to believe in whatever nonsense they like in the comfort of their own homes, but the second that shit spills out into the real world, it almost universally becomes a problem.
I beg you to take a moment to understand and empathise with your neighbours. The Haudenosaunee, the Koori, the Maya, have done nothing to harm you.
Oh damn, well you better drop the mic after that one 🙄
And why should everyone have a religion?
Religion is just believing without evidence. And with that “logic” you can make up anything and get people to believe in it. That is how every cult starts. A religion is just a long lasting cult. It is nothing more than a bit for control over people like you.
No wonder that the majority of religious people believe in the religion they were taught when they couldn’t think critically yet.
Look at their profile. You’re falling for a troll lol
There are plenty of things that require belief without evidence that aren’t religion (conspiracy theories, pseudoscience). There are also religions that rely on science for answers, and so they do require evidence.
Well I’m sold
Yeah I’m totally flummoxed because I’m atheist so obviously I believe in the healing power of crystals. I don’t know what the scientific religion been alluded to is, but I’m assuming it’s Scientology, the fact that they think that shows you everything you need to know about them.
That’s not the stellar arguement you think it is. Believing in aliens is also nonsense.
That’s my point.
I’m afraid I don’t have time to answer all your hastily listed arguments with a well thought out response, so I’ll just pick one. You said religion is belief without evidence, but that’s faith. Religion is actually organised belief or worship. There are many religions that don’t require any faith to believe in.
For example many Buddhists don’t believe in any of the parts of the religion they consider supernatural, and instead focus on the philosophy and life advice, which is still religious in nature because of its organisation.
Worshippers of the Antichrist, Donald Trump, also don’t tend to believe without apparent evidence. The evidence they do believe in is all lies, but what they’re doing still isn’t faith. Being lied to with bad evidence isn’t faith.
And as a third example, the religion of Mammon, the worship of money, can be practiced entirely unknowingly and without the slightest suggestion of false belief. It’s clearly true that money runs the world, and many people worship money and capitalism because of its obvious and true power over us.
And I think if you don’t choose a religion consciously, then like many worshippers of Mammon, you may end up joining a system of organised worship unconsciously. The Lemmy developers are in a religion without knowing, it’s that easy.
It doesn’t matter how organised the belief is or how established the belief is, it’s still belief without evidence. I have no idea why you brought Trump up he has no bearing on this conversation whatsoever since his supporters don’t believe in him, they can see him right there in front of them. You don’t need to believe in things that demonstrably exist.
The Lemmy developers are Marxists, that’s a political opinion not a belief (for what it’s worth they would probably claim to be Christian). Do you seriously think it is impossible to hold opinions about any particular matter without them being religiously based, if so how does my preferred brand of peanut butter relate to religious dogma?
I’m sorry that the education system has failed you so.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/belief
a state or habit of mind in which trust or confidence is placed in some person or thing. e.g. I believe in president Trump’s leadership
something that is accepted, considered to be true, or held as an opinion : something believed. e.g. Donald Trump is truly one of the presidents of all time
conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence. e.g. *President Trump sure does exist, alright, I looked at the evidence and I believe he’s real.
Trump’s worshippers fit all three definitions for belief in Trump, even if you and I wish they wouldn’t fit the first.
I’m sorry you’ve been lead to believe that belief is only for things that aren’t true. I hope one day you learn how to believe in true things like staplers and giraffes.
Your condescending attitude not withstanding I’ll address your point.
We are talking about religious belief, no one religiously believes in Trump, now you can use the word to describe his supporters if you want, but it’s a corruption of the idea (and before you start “corruption” here refers to redefining a words original concept). They like him a lot, that’s it. You can’t believe in Trump any more than you can believe in potatoes.
As for the education system having failed me, I think we’re operating far beyond anything the education system ever bothered to tackle.
Now if we could stop talking about Trump that would be great, because despite the fact you think you’re being clever, he’s completely irrelevant to the concept of religion. Just like most people who are losing the arguement you have reframed it to talk about a different subject matter to try and make me argue a point which is miles away from the original talking point.
Can you help me with a christlike waffle recipe?
There are plenty of people who don’t have a religion, and they seem to be just fine. I personally don’t think that I need religion, but since it seems to make my life better, I’m glad that I have it.