Honestly, your claim seems to be that theism in general and Christianity in particular is a sin and the source of all evil and suffering in the world. And that people should recite daily mantras to free themselves of this sin and obtain enlightenment.
That's a religious claim. The extreme language, aggressive tone, and general scorn for a…
Honestly, your claim seems to be that theism in general and Christianity in particular is a sin and the source of all evil and suffering in the world. And that people should recite daily mantras to free themselves of this sin and obtain enlightenment.
That's a religious claim. The extreme language, aggressive tone, and general scorn for any other opinions is a poor approach to apologetics for your religion if you actually wish to make converts. I suggest trying some different tactics.
Of course, making converts may not be your goal. Bible thumping street preachers often enjoy the combination of feeling superior and feeling persecuted. They simply don't care that their approach doesn't work. That may be the case for you as well.
But if you're actually TRYING to represent your faith well and bring people around to your religion, reconsider your tactics. These ones don't work.
I have only referred to gods who demand absolute obedience from humans and threaten them with torture if they don’t comply. Not “theism in general”. Thomas Paine(the guy who wrote Common Sense, which sparked the American Revolution) was a theist. He didn’t worship such a god though. He didn’t believe in Yahweh. He wrote an entire book that dripped with disdain for the Bible. You need to work on your reading comprehension badly. Your perception of me is a projection of your own prejudices.
The “aggressive” language I have used comes no where near the language that is used repeatedly in the Bible, and from the mouths of mythological characters in it, which you seem zealously to defend from any dishonor and insult.
I don’t suspect I’ll be able to convince you of much. You seem to be beyond the reach of reason.
Here is your beloved Yahweh commanding his followers to commit genocide of Amalekites, which Netanyahu recently referred to regarding his military actions in Palestine:
1 Samuel 15:2
“This is what the Lord Almighty says: ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. 3 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy[a] all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.”
Go ahead and shamefully rationalize it. I think it is profane; but I’ll wager you think it is “sacred.”
Paul was arguably the first “Bible thumping” Christian, since Christianity was largely his invention, and he was quite successful unfortunately. After all he and his followers have convinced you to defend his religion of human sacrifice.
Here is Paul hexing people who teach something different than him:
Galatians 1:6
“ I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and turning to a different gospel— 7 not that there is another gospel, but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again, If any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed.”
Surely you think Paul, the inventor of Christianity, should have used different tactics???Right???? No I bet you will defend it. Go at it.
Most religion has been spread and maintained through violence or the threat of it. Simple historical fact. I have done neither here, but you seem to dislike me immensely nonetheless. You don’t like my “tone”. Do you prefer the tone when Jesus tells people that his imaginary god will torture them for being angry?
Check out the Hawaiian gods. They also demand obedience and are quite direct about enforcement. Pele makes her displeasure known with lava.
Human sacrifice has been a normal part of most religions up to a few thousand years ago. Absolute obedience to the gods, up to and including the sacrifice of your own children, has been normal. The story of Abraham and Isaac is the story of a god that refused human sacrifice. It was a rather radical departure from the norms of the time. It was a popular development, and a big part of the success of the Abrahamic religions. It was a substantial "carrot", and more than made up for the "stick" of potential damnation. Especially since most other religions also have some form of divine punishment, in this world or the next.
Perhaps you have a lovely new religion that is the next step in human advancement. If so, you're doing a poor job of sharing it. Your argument is all stick, no carrot.
There are plenty of ancient societies where no evidence of human sacrifice exists or demands for absolute obedience to gods. And just because some religions practiced human sacrifice in the region and the time of Judaism doesn’t mean all religions did. Nor does it mean that because it was not as evil as some religions around it that we should revere it now. That’s asinine. It’s like saying that because the Nazis were worse than the soviets Stalin should be honored. Furthermore, while Abraham didn’t sacrifice his child, enemies of Yahweh were sacrificed. Human sacrifice was practiced by Judaism.
Additionally, Christianity is a religion *centered* on human sacrifice. Jesus is a willing human sacrifice.
I don’t need to provide an alternative religion here when criticizing Christianity anymore than someone has to provide an alternative medicine when criticizing blood letting for the flu. But I have actually here honored reason, independent thinking, and the resistance toward tyranny, three values that should be a part of anyone’s “religion”.
Your statement toward me criticizing the Bible is like someone who hears someone condemn Nazism and says “perhaps you have a lovely new ideology that is the next step in human advancement.” Its grotesque. Judaism, Christianity, and Nazism were not advancements, they were just slightly different forms of degeneracy. The notion of moral progress though that you just revealed demonstrates that you likely think *you* have some sort of advanced religion, which is laughable. You are going to have to learn to read before you get beyond your slave religion.
I’ll give you a carrot once you say something that deserves it. Otherwise expect a lot of dung.
My value system generally requires having an improvement to offer before criticizing another person's belief system. Your value system lacks this requirement. That's okay.
It appears that in your ethical system, it is mandatory to honor reason, independent thinking, and resistance towards tyranny. Honoring human beings is optional.
Honestly, your claim seems to be that theism in general and Christianity in particular is a sin and the source of all evil and suffering in the world. And that people should recite daily mantras to free themselves of this sin and obtain enlightenment.
That's a religious claim. The extreme language, aggressive tone, and general scorn for any other opinions is a poor approach to apologetics for your religion if you actually wish to make converts. I suggest trying some different tactics.
Of course, making converts may not be your goal. Bible thumping street preachers often enjoy the combination of feeling superior and feeling persecuted. They simply don't care that their approach doesn't work. That may be the case for you as well.
But if you're actually TRYING to represent your faith well and bring people around to your religion, reconsider your tactics. These ones don't work.
I have only referred to gods who demand absolute obedience from humans and threaten them with torture if they don’t comply. Not “theism in general”. Thomas Paine(the guy who wrote Common Sense, which sparked the American Revolution) was a theist. He didn’t worship such a god though. He didn’t believe in Yahweh. He wrote an entire book that dripped with disdain for the Bible. You need to work on your reading comprehension badly. Your perception of me is a projection of your own prejudices.
The “aggressive” language I have used comes no where near the language that is used repeatedly in the Bible, and from the mouths of mythological characters in it, which you seem zealously to defend from any dishonor and insult.
I don’t suspect I’ll be able to convince you of much. You seem to be beyond the reach of reason.
Here is your beloved Yahweh commanding his followers to commit genocide of Amalekites, which Netanyahu recently referred to regarding his military actions in Palestine:
1 Samuel 15:2
“This is what the Lord Almighty says: ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. 3 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy[a] all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.”
Go ahead and shamefully rationalize it. I think it is profane; but I’ll wager you think it is “sacred.”
Paul was arguably the first “Bible thumping” Christian, since Christianity was largely his invention, and he was quite successful unfortunately. After all he and his followers have convinced you to defend his religion of human sacrifice.
Here is Paul hexing people who teach something different than him:
Galatians 1:6
“ I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and turning to a different gospel— 7 not that there is another gospel, but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again, If any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed.”
Surely you think Paul, the inventor of Christianity, should have used different tactics???Right???? No I bet you will defend it. Go at it.
Most religion has been spread and maintained through violence or the threat of it. Simple historical fact. I have done neither here, but you seem to dislike me immensely nonetheless. You don’t like my “tone”. Do you prefer the tone when Jesus tells people that his imaginary god will torture them for being angry?
Check out the Hawaiian gods. They also demand obedience and are quite direct about enforcement. Pele makes her displeasure known with lava.
Human sacrifice has been a normal part of most religions up to a few thousand years ago. Absolute obedience to the gods, up to and including the sacrifice of your own children, has been normal. The story of Abraham and Isaac is the story of a god that refused human sacrifice. It was a rather radical departure from the norms of the time. It was a popular development, and a big part of the success of the Abrahamic religions. It was a substantial "carrot", and more than made up for the "stick" of potential damnation. Especially since most other religions also have some form of divine punishment, in this world or the next.
Perhaps you have a lovely new religion that is the next step in human advancement. If so, you're doing a poor job of sharing it. Your argument is all stick, no carrot.
There are plenty of ancient societies where no evidence of human sacrifice exists or demands for absolute obedience to gods. And just because some religions practiced human sacrifice in the region and the time of Judaism doesn’t mean all religions did. Nor does it mean that because it was not as evil as some religions around it that we should revere it now. That’s asinine. It’s like saying that because the Nazis were worse than the soviets Stalin should be honored. Furthermore, while Abraham didn’t sacrifice his child, enemies of Yahweh were sacrificed. Human sacrifice was practiced by Judaism.
Additionally, Christianity is a religion *centered* on human sacrifice. Jesus is a willing human sacrifice.
I don’t need to provide an alternative religion here when criticizing Christianity anymore than someone has to provide an alternative medicine when criticizing blood letting for the flu. But I have actually here honored reason, independent thinking, and the resistance toward tyranny, three values that should be a part of anyone’s “religion”.
Your statement toward me criticizing the Bible is like someone who hears someone condemn Nazism and says “perhaps you have a lovely new ideology that is the next step in human advancement.” Its grotesque. Judaism, Christianity, and Nazism were not advancements, they were just slightly different forms of degeneracy. The notion of moral progress though that you just revealed demonstrates that you likely think *you* have some sort of advanced religion, which is laughable. You are going to have to learn to read before you get beyond your slave religion.
I’ll give you a carrot once you say something that deserves it. Otherwise expect a lot of dung.
My value system generally requires having an improvement to offer before criticizing another person's belief system. Your value system lacks this requirement. That's okay.
It appears that in your ethical system, it is mandatory to honor reason, independent thinking, and resistance towards tyranny. Honoring human beings is optional.
I will be answering on a single thread.