Welcome to Atheist Discussion, a new community created by former members of The Thinking Atheist forum.

Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Most religions have a version of this idea...
#51

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 03:40 PM)Critic Wrote: The best source to both understand and defend any religion, comes from those in that religion.

Believers certainly have vested interest in defending their own religion, that's true. As for understanding: [...]According to data released by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life (2009 survey), not only do a quarter of Americans believe in reincarnation, but 24 percent of American Christians expressed a belief in reincarnation.[...]* It seems to be lacking.

 
Quote:Looking at it from outside of the religion often fails to see the bigger picture with the right framework and so they weaken any of the persoectives of that religion that work with each other and give a philosophical structure to it.

So you mean to say that when person who isn't indoctrinated looks on the religion then said person does not see anything special but bullshit like in any other myth? Seems to be quite right.

Quote:Though looking at a religion as an outsider is a great tool to help question a religion and make sure the people or the religion is actually doing right, in order to defend a religion, any religion. It has to come from those inside the religion itself.  Sorry I'll pass on atheist debunking religions as contradicting itself when seen from an atheist mindset, just as much as I would pass on any other religion debunking another philosophy or religion as being contradicting.

Christian not wanting to hear truth about fairy tales he believes in. What a surprise.

*https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2015/10/21/25-percent-us-christians-believe-reincarnation-whats-wrong-picture
The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on Earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Reply
#52

Most religions have a version of this idea...
Quote: The best source to both understand and defend any religion, comes from those in that religion.


Bullshit.  QAnon has the same philosophy.

The best way to understand any of these human-created dogmas is to see what was going on in the world at the time.

Your comprehension of history and archaeology is obviously minimal.
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
The following 4 users Like Minimalist's post:
  • Szuchow, brunumb, SYZ, Bucky Ball
Reply
#53

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 03:34 PM)Dancefortwo Wrote:
(08-20-2021, 03:26 PM)Critic Wrote:
(08-20-2021, 03:10 PM)Dancefortwo Wrote: Most Old Testament scholars date Leviticus to around 540 to 340 BC during the exile and post exilic period.

That sounds off.  Leviticus was one of the main books in the old testament times.  Later on when Israel started to have a king as a ruler, Genesis through Deuteronomy were recommended to he read, ad well as have it read during at least one of the celebration festivals that were passed on within the bible.  To say that Leviticus was written only during or after the evil period sounds like a a huge miscalculation.

Ummm, the writing of the Bible happened far later than most Christians think but that's another discussion,  maybe another thread.  Feel free to start it.   Old Testament scholars date most of the writing of the Bible to the exilic period most of which are based on old tribal lore which is the reason archaeology often does not align with the Bible stories.  For instance, there is zero evidence Moses existed or that Exodus ever happened.  Just sayin.

I'll try to look into it again before starting such a topic.  Because I'm sure I've ran into other sources that point to much more than "zero evidance."  But yes I would appreciate letting that point be discussed in another thread.  One of the main points I wanted to discuss was the idea of the golden rule, which seems to be shared by many philosophies.  Both religious and non-religious. 

 I wasn't trying start this topic to streamline a defense of Christianity from.  But to start a topic that looks at religious concepts.  A subject matter that seems to be lacking in the "atheism and theism" topic section.  The golden rule being shared officially by many religions with a different version of phrasing it, so I though this was a good start.
The following 1 user Likes Critic's post:
  • Deesse23
Reply
#54

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 03:50 PM)Minimalist Wrote:
Quote:The best source to both understand and defend any religion, comes from those in that religion.


Bullshit.  QAnon has the same philosophy.

The best way to understand any of these human-created dogmas is to see what was going on in the world at the time.

Your comprehension of history and archaeology is obviously minimal.

If his comprehension of above mentioned would be better then he hardly could be christian. Ignorance [and indoctrination] is quite the important part of being believer I would say.
The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on Earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
The following 1 user Likes Szuchow's post:
  • Teddy
Reply
#55

Most religions have a version of this idea...
Quote:Sorry I'll pass on atheist debunking religions as contradicting itself when seen from an atheist mindset, just as much as I would pass on any other religion debunking another philosophy or religion as being contradicting.


It looks to me as though our lad has decided to de-cloak. If so there is some fine sport to be had.
The following 1 user Likes Inkubus's post:
  • Szuchow
Reply
#56

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 03:40 PM)Critic Wrote:
(08-19-2021, 05:15 PM)Alan V Wrote:
(08-19-2021, 05:10 PM)Critic Wrote: Islam has it's own version as well.  "Not one of you truly believe until you wish for others what you wish for yourself."  

As for the rest when it comes to justice in each religion or even divine judgement sort of thing, that is a counter point, but it us also explainable based on the outlook of the religion and it's set of rules/rational.

Religions are full of contradictions and rationalizations.  It's human nature to try to make sense of such things, especially if you have something you think is divine to try to justify.

The best source to both understand and defend any religion, comes from those in that religion.  Looking at it from outside of the religion often fails to see the bigger picture with the right framework and so they weaken any of the persoectives of that religion that work with each other and give a philosophical structure to it.  Though looking at a religion as an outsider is a great tool to help question a religion and make sure the people or the religion is actually doing right, in order to defend a religion, any religion. It has to come from those inside the religion itself.  Sorry I'll pass on atheist debunking religions as contradicting itself when seen from an atheist mindset, just as much as I would pass on any other religion debunking another philosophy or religion as being contradicting.

The dating of the writings of the Bible to this period is agreed to by many Christian scholars. They also hold that the oral tradition on which the writings are based is significantly older. Their scholarship is not at all coming from outside of the religion. I learned this sort of stuff in university from professors who were devout Christians and taught at the seminary that was part of my university as well as in the Religion Department. 

It's interesting that you refuse to consider information developed by Christians on the grounds that it was presented to you by an atheist.
god, ugh
The following 8 users Like julep's post:
  • Teddy, Inkubus, Szuchow, Deesse23, TheGentlemanBastard, brunumb, Kim, Thumpalumpacus
Reply
#57

Most religions have a version of this idea...
They have to substitute "belief" for "fact."  You're right, Szu.  If they start looking at facts that the whole silly story comes tumbling down like a house of cards.
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
The following 1 user Likes Minimalist's post:
  • Szuchow
Reply
#58

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 03:48 PM)Szuchow Wrote: Christian not wanting to hear truth about fairy tales he believes in. What a surprise.

I've learned through watching religious comparisons from any starting perspective is going to misrepresent the other religions it is comparing.  I don't believe the other religions, But I know that if you really want to know what they believe, you go straight to the source.  Instead if outside sources comparing that religion or philosophy to their own version of it and their own standards.    Your insults and taunts are not needed, and only add as a distraction.  No value to them.
Reply
#59

Most religions have a version of this idea...
The golden rule is just common sense for any type of herd animal. If the herd does well, you do well. Same for humans living in communities. The application is slowly expanding from being applied to members of the tribe that lives in your cave to the entire world, as the world grows smaller and smaller.
[Image: color%5D%5Bcolor=#333333%5D%5Bsize=small%5D%5Bfont=T...ans-Serif%5D]
The following 4 users Like Dom's post:
  • Inkubus, epronovost, brunumb, Kim
Reply
#60

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 04:01 PM)Critic Wrote:
(08-20-2021, 03:48 PM)Szuchow Wrote: Christian not wanting to hear truth about fairy tales he believes in. What a surprise.

I've learned through watching religious comparisons from any starting perspective is going to misrepresent the other religions it is comparing.  I don't believe the other religions, But I know that if you really want to know what they believe, you go straight to the source.  Instead if outside sources comparing that religion or philosophy to their own version of it and their own standards.    Your insults and taunts are not needed, and only add as a distraction.  No value to them.

Obviously you don't believe other religions, kid, you weren't indoctrinated into believing them during your childhood. I know very well what likes of you believe - as many atheists I also was indoctrinated, yet in my case reason prevailed. It's no wonder to me that you don't want to hear outside sources - they're not part of religious circle-jerk so they don't tell you what you want to hear.

Also if you think that calling fairy tale you were indoctrinated to believe in is insult you should grow up It's merely truth, no matter how unwelcome to sheep.
The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on Earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
The following 3 users Like Szuchow's post:
  • Minimalist, Kim, Thumpalumpacus
Reply
#61

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 03:57 PM)Inkubus Wrote:
Quote:Sorry I'll pass on atheist debunking religions as contradicting itself when seen from an atheist mindset, just as much as I would pass on any other religion debunking another philosophy or religion as being contradicting.


It looks to me as though our lad has decided to de-cloak. If so, there is some fine sport to be had.

Decloak?  Is that a specific term for trying to poke someone until you get a reaction of anger, and then claim, "hey look, he's just as bad as I've always said he would be."  If it gets to that point, I'll leave.  Look after my own welfare sort if thing instead of letting trash fester inside through trash spewed from others.

Hold off your congratulations of how bad I am until I insult you all as much as you taunt and insult me.
Reply
#62

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 04:09 PM)Critic Wrote:
(08-20-2021, 03:57 PM)Inkubus Wrote:
Quote:Sorry I'll pass on atheist debunking religions as contradicting itself when seen from an atheist mindset, just as much as I would pass on any other religion debunking another philosophy or religion as being contradicting.


It looks to me as though our lad has decided to de-cloak. If so, there is some fine sport to be had.

Decloak?  Is that a specific term for trying to poke someone until you get a reaction of anger, and then claim, "hey look, he's just as bad as I've always said he would be."  If it gets to that point, I'll leave.  Look after my own welfare sort if thing instead of letting trash fester inside through trash spewed from others.

Hold off your congratulations of how bad I am until I insult you all as much as you taunt and insult me.

You insult human dignity itself by worshipping tyrant that is nothing but modern, genocidal dictator clothed in vestments of benevolent deity.

Also you freely admit that you do not have a care for evidence when they comes from outside your circle-jerk and you expect to not be ridiculed for it? If you want safe space where all you will get are pats on the head for being good boy look to christian forums.
The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on Earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
The following 1 user Likes Szuchow's post:
  • Thumpalumpacus
Reply
#63

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 04:07 PM)Szuchow Wrote:
(08-20-2021, 04:01 PM)Critic Wrote:
(08-20-2021, 03:48 PM)Szuchow Wrote: Christian not wanting to hear truth about fairy tales he believes in. What a surprise.

I've learned through watching religious comparisons from any starting perspective is going to misrepresent the other religions it is comparing.  I don't believe the other religions, But I know that if you really want to know what they believe, you go straight to the source.  Instead if outside sources comparing that religion or philosophy to their own version of it and their own standards.    Your insults and taunts are not needed, and only add as a distraction.  No value to them.

Obviously you don't believe other religions, kid, you weren't indoctrinated into believing them during your childhood. I know very well what likes of you believe - as many atheists I also was indoctrinated, yet in my case reason prevailed. It's no wonder to me that you don't want to hear outside sources - they're not part of religious circle-jerk so they don't tell you what you want to hear.

Also if you think that calling fairy tale you were indoctrinated to believe in is insult you should grow up It's merely truth, no matter how unwelcome to sheep.

I wasn't indoctrinated.  *SIGH* That can also be a topic for another day.  Do you have anything about the subject matter on the philosophy of "treat others the way you want to be treated?" Or is all you have subject matter to try and put me on the defense on?  In other words do you have anything of value to add or not?
Reply
#64

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 04:13 PM)Critic Wrote:
(08-20-2021, 04:07 PM)Szuchow Wrote:
(08-20-2021, 04:01 PM)Critic Wrote: I've learned through watching religious comparisons from any starting perspective is going to misrepresent the other religions it is comparing.  I don't believe the other religions, But I know that if you really want to know what they believe, you go straight to the source.  Instead if outside sources comparing that religion or philosophy to their own version of it and their own standards.    Your insults and taunts are not needed, and only add as a distraction.  No value to them.

Obviously you don't believe other religions, kid, you weren't indoctrinated into believing them during your childhood. I know very well what likes of you believe - as many atheists I also was indoctrinated, yet in my case reason prevailed. It's no wonder to me that you don't want to hear outside sources - they're not part of religious circle-jerk so they don't tell you what you want to hear.

Also if you think that calling fairy tale you were indoctrinated to believe in is insult you should grow up It's merely truth, no matter how unwelcome to sheep.

I wasn't indoctrinated.  *SIGH* That can also be a topic for another day.  Do you have anything about the subject matter on the philosophy of "treat others the way you want to be treated?" Or is all you have subject matter to try and put me on the defense on?  In other words do you have anything of value to add or not?

So, as child you never were taught religion, you just came to it all by yourself as thinking adult?
[Image: color%5D%5Bcolor=#333333%5D%5Bsize=small%5D%5Bfont=T...ans-Serif%5D]
The following 2 users Like Dom's post:
  • TheGentlemanBastard, Kim
Reply
#65

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 04:13 PM)Critic Wrote: I wasn't indoctrinated.  *SIGH* That can also be a topic for another day.
  

Sure, you weren't. Obviously you chose christianity as an adult after long period of intense study of world various religion. Additionally you live in Iran so your religion of choice couldn't be merely result of your place of birth. 

Quote:Do you have anything about the subject matter on the philosophy of "treat others the way you want to be treated?" Or is all you have subject matter to try and put me on the defense on?  In other words do you have anything of value to add or not?

All what I said in this thread has value. Fault lies with you for not being intelligent enough to catch on. But you still have time to educate yourself I guess.
The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on Earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Reply
#66

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 04:13 PM)Szuchow Wrote:
(08-20-2021, 04:09 PM)Critic Wrote:
(08-20-2021, 03:57 PM)Inkubus Wrote: It looks to me as though our lad has decided to de-cloak. If so, there is some fine sport to be had.

Decloak?  Is that a specific term for trying to poke someone until you get a reaction of anger, and then claim, "hey look, he's just as bad as I've always said he would be."  If it gets to that point, I'll leave.  Look after my own welfare sort if thing instead of letting trash fester inside through trash spewed from others.

Hold off your congratulations of how bad I am until I insult you all as much as you taunt and insult me.

You insult human dignity itself by worshipping tyrant that is nothing but modern, genocidal dictator clothed in vestments of benevolent deity.

Also you freely admit that you do not have a care for evidence when they comes from outside your circle-jerk and you expect to not be ridiculed for it? If you want safe space where all you will get are pats on the head for being good boy look to christian forums.

outside sources often misrepresent any other philosophy,  is this something I'm the only one to have seen?  I can't be the only one here who's observed this phenomon.  When it comes to criticising a religion or any philosophy, an outside view can be very useful and cause both those in that philosophy and those outside of that philosophy to re examine it.  Yet I stand on the observation that I've never seen someone outside of a religion, and outside of a philosophical outlook, to accurately present the religion or philosophy they are describing.  

On another note.  You guys know how to have a conversation right?  It's not all about arguing.  If this is news to you, then I should leave.
Reply
#67

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 04:01 PM)Critic Wrote: ...But I know that if you really want to know what they believe, you go straight to the source.

Very few people who purport to be religious know what they believe or why they are supposed to believe it.
How many 'Christians' can name more 5-6 books in the bible?
Here's a question for you: who wrote the gospels? No word salad smoke screen please just the names of the gospel authors.
Reply
#68

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 04:20 PM)Critic Wrote: outside sources otmfthen misrepresent any other philosophy,  is this something I'm the only one to have seen?

Or perhaps outside sources don't feel the need to nod to any kind of bullshit that is being spoken?

Quote:I can't be the only one here who's observed this phenomon.  When it comes to criticising a religion or any philosophy, an outside view can be very useful and cause both those in that philosophy and those outside of that philosophy to re examine it.  Yet I stand on the observation that I've never seen someone outside of a religion, and outside of a philosophical outlook, to accurately present the religion or philosophy they are describing.

Just so we are clear - no non-nazi could accurately describe nazism? No non-Marxist could accurately describe Marxism? Or it's only some chosen if unmentioned religions and philosphies that are special?

Your belief is not surprising - outside sources can't be reliably expected to conform to orthodoxy so you accuse them of lack of accuracy.


Quote:On another note.  You guys know how to have a conversation right?  It's not all about arguing.  If this is news to you, then I should leave.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on Earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
The following 3 users Like Szuchow's post:
  • Teddy, Kim, Thumpalumpacus
Reply
#69

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 02:45 PM)Critic Wrote:
(08-19-2021, 05:20 PM)Minimalist Wrote:
Quote:Islam has it's own version as well.  "Not one of you truly believe until you wish for others what you wish for yourself." 



Pitticus of Mytilene had the same idea....

[Image: quote-do-not-to-your-neighbor-what-you-w...259498.jpg]


six centuries or so before this jesus-guy was invented.

Loving your neighbor, is a concept before Pitticus Mytilene.  It's first writteninthe bible in Leviticus 19:18.  The book of Leviticus was written around 1400BC.  So it's at least that old.  Just for your information.

The Jews sure loved the Amalekites.
  [Image: attachment.php?aid=31] Dog  
Reply
#70

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 04:20 PM)Critic Wrote: On another note.  You guys know how to have a conversation right?  It's not all about arguing.

A large part is asking and answering questions. Tell me who wrote the gospels?
The following 2 users Like Inkubus's post:
  • Teddy, Kim
Reply
#71

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 04:26 PM)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:
(08-20-2021, 02:45 PM)Critic Wrote:
(08-19-2021, 05:20 PM)Minimalist Wrote: Pitticus of Mytilene had the same idea....

[Image: quote-do-not-to-your-neighbor-what-you-w...259498.jpg]


six centuries or so before this jesus-guy was invented.

Loving your neighbor, is a concept before Pitticus Mytilene.  It's first writteninthe bible in Leviticus 19:18.  The book of Leviticus was written around 1400BC.  So it's at least that old.  Just for your information.

The Jews sure loved the Amalekites.

<Ahem> And in Star Trek the Klingons and Romulans were invented to be the "bad guys."

https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Amalekite

Quote:The Amalekites are unknown historically and archaeologically outside of the Bible except for traditions which themselves apparently rely on biblical accounts. In the Bible, the Amalekites are said to have descended from a common ancestor named Amalek, a grandson of Esau. In this sense they may be considered as one of the Edomite tribes. Jewish tradition sees the Amalekites as an implacable enemy of both God and Israel.
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
Reply
#72

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 03:52 PM)Critic Wrote:
(08-20-2021, 03:34 PM)Dancefortwo Wrote:
(08-20-2021, 03:26 PM)Critic Wrote: That sounds off.  Leviticus was one of the main books in the old testament times.  Later on when Israel started to have a king as a ruler, Genesis through Deuteronomy were recommended to he read, ad well as have it read during at least one of the celebration festivals that were passed on within the bible.  To say that Leviticus was written only during or after the evil period sounds like a a huge miscalculation.

Ummm, the writing of the Bible happened far later than most Christians think but that's another discussion,  maybe another thread.  Feel free to start it.   Old Testament scholars date most of the writing of the Bible to the exilic period most of which are based on old tribal lore which is the reason archaeology often does not align with the Bible stories.  For instance, there is zero evidence Moses existed or that Exodus ever happened.  Just sayin.

I'll try to look into it again before starting such a topic.  Because I'm sure I've ran into other sources that point to much more than "zero evidance."  But yes I would appreciate letting that point be discussed in another thread.  One of the main points I wanted to discuss was the idea of the golden rule, which seems to be shared by many philosophies.  Both religious and non-religious. 

 I wasn't trying start this topic to streamline a defense of Christianity from.  But to start a topic that looks at religious concepts.  A subject matter that seems to be lacking in the "atheism and theism" topic section.  The golden rule being shared officially by many religions with a different version of phrasing it, so I though this was a good start.


(08-20-2021, 03:52 PM)Critic Wrote: I wasn't trying start this topic to streamline a defense of Christianity from.  But to start a topic that looks at religious concepts.

Very seldom do topics stay completely 'on topic' around these parts.   I've seen threads that started out discussing BBQ sauce and ended up with memes of dinosaurs doing very weird things and then they devolve into cheese sandwiches.     Chuckle
                                                         T4618
The following 1 user Likes Dancefortwo's post:
  • Kim
Reply
#73

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 04:46 PM)Dancefortwo Wrote: Very seldom do topics stay completely 'on topic' around these parts.   I've seen threads that started out discussing BBQ sauce and ended up with memes of dinosaurs doing very weird things and then they devolve into cheese sandwiches.     Chuckle

The sandwich is named after John Montagu, 4th Earl of Sandwich, an eighteenth-century English aristocrat. It is said that he ordered his valet to bring him meat tucked between two pieces of bread.
Reply
#74

Most religions have a version of this idea...
(08-20-2021, 05:00 PM)Inkubus Wrote: The sandwich is named after John Montagu, 4th Earl of Sandwich, an eighteenth-century English aristocrat. It is said that he ordered his valet to bring him meat tucked between two pieces of bread.

And here I was, thinking sammiches were named after Samwise when he decided to tuck some rabbit, what Gollum killed in Ithilien, between two pieces of lembas. You live and learn!

[Image: 544223261c42440acb9d2e092f1a14e2.gif]
“We drift down time, clutching at straws. But what good's a brick to a drowning man?” 
Reply
#75

Most religions have a version of this idea...
Thank goodness they weren't named after the 4th Earl of Asshole.
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)