Something strange I've noticed

[YAboi]

Greater than 98% of guys on this site discredit the christian bible and its efficacy in making them true don juans.

Riddle me this though...if the holy bible is a book of fairy tales, do you know anyone who has read it from cover to cover and not been changed? I mean fully, not partially but, every single page.

 

[Mr Wright]

I'm sure there are Muslims, Jews, Baha'i and Hindu's all saying the exact same thing about their holy books. They all have "evidence" to back up their claims.

Most people don't read the whole thing because it doesn't take a genius to work out that a lot of it is nonsense. It was put together with a purpose, to control the masses. Behind most the motives of many men, it is the lust for power and the church has a lot.

 

[PeasantPlayer]

I'm sure there are Muslims, Jews, Baha'i and Hindu's all saying the exact same thing about their holy books. They all have "evidence" to back up their claims.

Most people don't read the whole thing because it doesn't take a genius to work out that a lot of it is nonsense. It was put together with a purpose, to control the masses. Behind most the motives of many men, it is the lust for power and the church has a lot.

Co Sign

 

[TheMonkeyKing]

I've read quite a few verses, and some of it is quite nice motivational stuff so long as you keep in mind that it was more like a law-enforcement strategy when it was put together. With regard to other books, the Koran, the Torah, they're all derived from the same scriptures apparently (read up on the religions of Abraham, and not just the wiki entry). A bit like law today, different countries/groups have their own interpretation of conventional wisdom.

One of my mates read it all he reckons, but he seems largely un-phased. I think the original messages were meant for good, but the power-mongering followed, as it always does.... some might say, a bit like the law-makers of the current day...

 

[ArcBound]

I've read quite a few verses, and some of it is quite nice motivational stuff so long as you keep in mind that it was more like a law-enforcement strategy when it was put together. With regard to other books, the Koran, the Torah, they're all derived from the same scriptures apparently (read up on the religions of Abraham, and not just the wiki entry). A bit like law today, different countries/groups have their own interpretation of conventional wisdom.

One of my mates read it all he reckons, but he seems largely un-phased. I think the original messages were meant for good, but the power-mongering followed, as it always does.... some might say, a bit like the law-makers of the current day...

The point of the Bible is not that there won't be people who abuse power and the laws in the Bible. The laws were seen as an incomplete precursor to the gospel, whose point is to ultimately reconcile us with God. The fact is you can go look at any person and find faults within them where they violate the law given by God. Every person fails the law on some level (some more than others), but if one only looks at it from the law level, then that person is just like the Pharisees and high priests that Jesus constantly rebuked and they do not see the point of Christianity.

Reading quite a few verses only paints a small picture. There is a clear structure, timeline, and organization to the Bible, with ongoing themes and characters. If you only read verses independent of themselves and take them as a "moral" like Aesops Fables/Stories, it will give you a wrong understanding of the Bible. Only a few verses you can take like that and most of them are in Proverbs (which even our great POOK has quoted in his teachings about women). You have to take the grand narrative into account and it spans multiple books in the Bible. This takes time to understand even for a person who proclaims to be a Christian.

I'm sure there are Muslims, Jews, Baha'i and Hindu's all saying the exact same thing about their holy books. They all have "evidence" to back up their claims.

Most people don't read the whole thing because it doesn't take a genius to work out that a lot of it is nonsense. It was put together with a purpose, to control the masses. Behind most the motives of many men, it is the lust for power and the church has a lot.

Acts 5:29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

Acts 4:19 19 But Peter and John replied, “Which is right in God’s eyes: to listen to you, or to him? You be the judges!

And if you read most of the prophet books in the Old Testament, most of the prophets are indeed arguing and going against the religious authorities of their time, who have usurped the laws and words of God for their own power. So its not like people aren't warned or given ways to deal with churches abusing power. It is right there in the Bible.

Acts 20:29-31 I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. So be on your guard! Remember that for three years I never stopped warning each of you night and day with tears.

If after all the warnings, countless chapters devoted to the topic, the churches still grow controlling the masses rather than obeying God, then it is no fault of the Bible. It is probably the most warned about thing in the entire Bible with the exception of Hell. Organized religion can be both a good and a bad thing. That's why there are people like the Russian Leo Tolstoy who was a Christian Anarchist (basically wants no structure or hierarchy) who inspired Gandhi himself to do peaceful revolutions. But to reduce religion to a method of controlling the masses, despite evidence to the contrary is a gross over simplification of what the church has done throughout history. This is true whether you believe in God or not.

 

[YAboi]

I'm sure there are Muslims, Jews, Baha'i and Hindu's all saying the exact same thing about their holy books. They all have "evidence" to back up their claims.

Most people don't read the whole thing because it doesn't take a genius to work out that a lot of it is nonsense. It was put together with a purpose, to control the masses. Behind most the motives of many men, it is the lust for power and the church has a lot.

then how come so many people who are Christian claim to experience supernaturally outstanding results that are tangible . Are they all CRAZY? Lets talk the fruits of following the tenets which are mainly ALL positive as for islam well let islam speak for itself in terms of how it has helped to improve and create Don juans the world over cos I ain't no muslim...

 

[Mr Wright]

then how come so many people who are Christian claim to experience supernaturally outstanding results that are tangible . Are they all CRAZY? Lets talk the fruits of following the tenets which are mainly ALL positive as for islam well let islam speak for itself in terms of how it has helped to improve and create Don juans the world over cos I ain't no muslim...

There are roughly about 1.6 billion Muslims and about 2 billion Christians in the world. Clearly there are billions of people in the world who have got it wrong, I'm not passing judgement on who but these are facts. These people could be experiencing one of a few things, the placebo effect has been well documented. Also when you read the history of the Church and how the Bible was put together(the rejected gospels), you begin to see the agenda. I understand why sex before marriage was chastised, in those days pregnancy and bastard children were burdens and certain STD's could kill you off, it was a positive thing for society. But then you see the other side, look at the treatment of people like Giordano Bruno. Tell me there wasn't an agenda which was enforced by violence. It looks just like Russian Communist history but the Church don't want you to think that. Until God tells me personally, I won't leading my life based on a book written almost 2000 years ago which is not really relevant to my life today. I make my own happiness, I'm at peace with my own mortality and I "do good" based on my own interpretations of the world.

It's important to remember you, like myself, have been spoon fed since you were born. If you were born in Pakistan, you would be a Muslim and be just as passionate about it's teachings are you are to Christianity. There is a remarkably strong correlation to family upbringing and a persons religion but people tend to ignore that because it makes them uncomfortable when they start to realise the truth.

(Btw I notice how you capatalized 'Christan' but not 'muslim' or 'islam', a subtle way of degrading them?)

If after all the warnings, countless chapters devoted to the topic, the churches still grow controlling the masses rather than obeying God, then it is no fault of the Bible. It is probably the most warned about thing in the entire Bible with the exception of Hell.

The problem is that whether you like it or not the Bible and the Church come hand in hand. The Bible was written by the hand of men who claim to be speaking the word of God. Instantly we're looking at secondary sources, the message gets diluted, who do you trust? But clearly the main issue with religious texts is that they are so open to interpretation that we end up with the world as it is today. Look at how many people who basically believe in the same thing end up killing each other over semantics. It's laughable and I'd rather steer well clear of that.

 

[Dhoulmagus]

The only reason I used to follow Christianity was because they preach you to fear god.

 

[JohnChops]

im not a religious person at all, most likely because my background in science discredits a lot of the bible.

 

[ArcBound]

There are roughly about 1.6 billion Muslims and about 2 billion Christians in the world. Clearly there are billions of people in the world who have got it wrong, I'm not passing judgement on who but these are facts. These people could be experiencing one of a few things, the placebo effect has been well documented. Also when you read the history of the Church and how the Bible was put together(the rejected gospels), you begin to see the agenda. I understand why sex before marriage was chastised, in those days pregnancy and bastard children were burdens and certain STD's could kill you off, it was a positive thing for society. But then you see the other side, look at the treatment of people like Giordano Bruno. Tell me there wasn't an agenda which was enforced by violence. It looks just like Russian Communist history but the Church don't want you to think that. Until God tells me personally, I won't leading my life based on a book written almost 2000 years ago which is not really relevant to my life today. I make my own happiness, I'm at peace with my own mortality and I "do good" based on my own interpretations of the world.

It's important to remember you, like myself, have been spoon fed since you were born. If you were born in Pakistan, you would be a Muslim and be just as passionate about it's teachings are you are to Christianity. There is a remarkably strong correlation to family upbringing and a persons religion but people tend to ignore that because it makes them uncomfortable when they start to realise the truth.

(Btw I notice how you capatalized 'Christan' but not 'muslim' or 'islam', a subtle way of degrading them?)



The problem is that whether you like it or not the Bible and the Church come hand in hand. The Bible was written by the hand of men who claim to be speaking the word of God. Instantly we're looking at secondary sources, the message gets diluted, who do you trust? But clearly the main issue with religious texts is that they are so open to interpretation that we end up with the world as it is today. Look at how many people who basically believe in the same thing end up killing each other over semantics. It's laughable and I'd rather steer well clear of that.

If they wanted to assemble a Bible with the agenda of controlling the masses, they probably should have taken out all the gospels that are anti-authoratative, yet they didn't.

I fail to see how it is like Russian Communism, since the Russian Orthodox Church was the hardest hit group in Russia with most of its members killed or sent to camps in Siberia when communism was instated. So much so that when missionaries went to Russia after the collapse of the USSR, there were many regions without even a single Bible.

Also funny how Hitler when he rose to power replaced Christian pastors with Nazi approved pastors and when Cuba went communist, the Church was suppressed with less than 10% practicing Christians in a country that used to have well over 50%. It seems whenever a regime tries to control the masses, the first thing they do is get rid of, or usurp Christianity. I'd argue there are many instances, in fact the majority, where Christianity serves as a bulwark against oppressive regimes, and when you see it go down is where you see the strength of the government rise to autocratic levels.

Your spoon fed argument does not work, because I was a Muslim for 21 years of my life and in fact the majority of the church I go to are converts from either atheism or Buddhism. Not to mention countries with no to little history of Christianity being evangelized or converted. Two centuries ago Christianity was outlawed in Korea. 5 Centuries ago there were no Christians in Phillipines. Today Philippines is the 5th largest Christian country in the world, and Korea is the number 1 or 2 country sending missionaries around the globe. Both were certainly not "spoon fed", they were evangelized by small groups or individuals which led to thousands then millions converting. They were not "born into it". As to the question of who to trust, there are many arguments that lead to denominational issues, but there are core teachings agreed upon by the vast majority because these values are clear in the bible.

The book written 2000 years ago is still relevant because human psychology has not changed that much if at all. Your ideas of sh!t test hark back to Adam & Eve and Samson & Delilah, social proof to King David, hypergamy to King Solomon and the book of Proverbs (wonder why Pook who knew more about women than perhaps even Rollo quoted that "2000 year old book"?). And that's only in terms of women, not even considering general human nature.

im not a religious person at all, most likely because my background in science discredits a lot of the bible.

OK I could respect that if you put a specific argument rather than using the argument my science background > bible. I too have a science background. A Neuroscience degree from Johns Hopkins Degree which is pretty weighty. But obviously that doesn't mean much unless I use what I've learned in a specific argument. Appeals to authority arguments don't work unless you actually use what you learned according to that authority to make the argument, rather than the authority itself.

 

[foreverAFC]

most people ive met who were super religious were hiding something, they were either gay and afraid to come out, full of hatred and intolerance, or want to rape kids. when i worked in construction there was this one guy who was always preaching the bible and jesus christ to everyone, yet when he was asked by my boss to show up to a job at a school he said he couldnt work cause he legally wasnt allowed to be near a school. then it made sense to me why this guy was always hiding behind religion.

 

[PeasantPlayer]

I follow the path of Buddha and no I am not a Buddhist. It resonates with me more. I follow no religion I am spiritual and opened minded. I will not be made a fool and believe in some book called the bible because of the cult following it has. Most people are stupid or average intelligence.

 

[Mr Wright]

I fail to see how it is like Russian Communism, since the Russian Orthodox Church was the hardest hit group in Russia with most of its members killed or sent to camps in Siberia when communism was instated. So much so that when missionaries went to Russia after the collapse of the USSR, there were many regions without even a single Bible.

I mean it in the sense that force was used to install an ideology and anybody who strayed from that mindset was killed. Don't stick your head up your ass and pretend that the Church doesn't have blood on it's hands...or is it justified because it was God's will?

Your spoon fed argument does not work, because I was a Muslim for 21 years of my life and in fact the majority of the church I go to are converts from either atheism or Buddhism. Not to mention countries with no to little history of Christianity being evangelized or converted. Two centuries ago Christianity was outlawed in Korea. 5 Centuries ago there were no Christians in Phillipines. Today Philippines is the 5th largest Christian country in the world, and Korea is the number 1 or 2 country sending missionaries around the globe. Both were certainly not "spoon fed", they were evangelized by small groups or individuals which led to thousands then millions converting. They were not "born into it". As to the question of who to trust, there are many arguments that lead to denominational issues, but there are core teachings agreed upon by the vast majority because these values are clear in the bible.

You've taken a small sample size and acted like the anomalies are the norm. If I was to list 10 countries, you could have a pretty good guess at what religion the vast majority of those people are. You can't ignore the base rates to suit your argument. Google "base rate neglect" and you'll see how often people make that error. Secondly have you noticed the spread of Christianity is strongly correlated to the success of war campaigns. Look through history, everywhere the Spanish conquered, are Catholic so there's the reason why the Philippines had a sudden influx of Christian values. Or do you actually believe that they all saw the light? I have a feel it may have been forced upon them and it's easier to conform that be an outcast.

 

[ArcBound]

I mean it in the sense that force was used to install an ideology and anybody who strayed from that mindset was killed. Don't stick your head up your ass and pretend that the Church doesn't have blood on it's hands...or is it justified because it was God's will?



You've taken a small sample size and acted like the anomalies are the norm. If I was to list 10 countries, you could have a pretty good guess at what religion the vast majority of those people are. You can't ignore the base rates to suit your argument. Google "base rate neglect" and you'll see how often people make that error. Secondly have you noticed the spread of Christianity is strongly correlated to the success of war campaigns. Look through history, everywhere the Spanish conquered, are Catholic so there's the reason why the Philippines had a sudden influx of Christian values. Or do you actually believe that they all saw the light? I have a feel it may have been forced upon them and it's easier to conform that be an outcast.

To your first paragraph, I don't believe I said anything of that sort.

Secondly, yes one way culture and ideas can spread is through war. And you also ignore all of the cases where religion and colonialism did not spread hand in hand. Let's use some larger examples to satisfy "base rate neglect". What percentage of India is Christian after being colonized for so long under Christian Britain? Both the Philippines and India were colonized by Christian empires yet have drastically different results. Korea was colonized by Japan the most recently, so why didn't Korea adopt the religion and god(s) of Japan? Yet we see Christianity growing there, a religion that is very minuscule in Japan. In these two examples big and small we can see that colonialism by itself does not induce a large scale religious change. There has to be something else. Or when Christianity was in its infancy, starting from one man Jesus to even under a thousand people, how did it spread throughout the middle east and then become the official religion of the vast Roman Empire? Did they take a campaign of war against the Roman Empire and convert them? History would disagree. Yet that example is probably the biggest increase in terms of both percentage and christians per capita increase in the number of Christians the world has ever seen. While I don't doubt war has also seen the spread of Christianity it certainly wasn't the only way.