Jump to content
matrix

For All Those Opposed To Organized Religion..

By matrix, in Open Discussion

Recommended Posts

matrix

matrix

Posted
  • Author
Posted
In the end, think about it: does it even matter if god exists?

 

If the belief in god (and an afterlife) makes people do good deeds in life (more on this later, but I'm referring to Mother Teresa style goodness) then it is obviously a good thing. However, if a belief in a certain book written by flawed humans causes us to reject each other and commit acts of evil (crusades, homophobia, racism, etc.) then it is obviously a burden on our souls. The real question is, when you balance out the scales of consequence, has religion caused more happiness in the world than it has caused destruction?

 

Also, I do NOT believe that it is right for people to do good deeds solely because that's what god wants them to do. You should decide not to murder someone because you're a good person and believe murder is wrong, not because you're scared of going to hell.

Wow, that's what I intended to write when I originally started the thread. Can you be like my speach writer? Such good and valid points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Prometheon

Prometheon

Posted
Posted (edited)
I will say, Owen, that I do tend to lose a bit of respect for people when they say something religious or spiritual that is below what you expected their intelligence to be.

 

Especially when it comes to this new age spirituality bullshit.  Astrology is not real, and "fate" is just the epitomy of "I can't think straight".

Yes, I do too, but isn't that true of hearing someone say ANYTHING stupid below their intelligence? Why would it be singled out for religious stuff? Just as someone can be an idiot in english, math, or common sense, people can be idiots in religion. It's no exception, and the fact that it isn't shouldn't be a knock against it.

 

Edit: heh, and no problem Matrix. I'm glad you agree with my opinions ;)

Edited by Prometheon
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ecnarf

ecnarf

Posted
Posted

Because people's religious beliefs are different than how well they understand math. They're hidden. You find out pretty quickly whether or not someone can derive an expression or not, and that forms your opinion of them. Now, if you got to know someone first and then find out that they don't understand the concept of pi, that'd be different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lauren

Lauren

Posted
Posted

i don't think intelligence has anything to with religion. to me, to say that someone is less intelligent (or to at least think this about them) because of their beliefs is like saying that they are less intelligent because they don't like seafood. i understand the "how could someone believe the earth is only x number years old when there is definate proof otherwise" type of thing, but religious people see that about the non-religious. how could they not see all the unexplainable things out there and just chalk it up to chance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crusader

Crusader

Posted
Posted
I suppose you have a point in that if I were dating a girl, I'd be more weirded out to discover that she thinks all gays should burn in hell under His righteous justice than if she failed Grade 12 Algebra.

I'd probably leave her right then and there. Leave her with the bill too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Prometheon

Prometheon

Posted
Posted (edited)
I suppose you have a point in that if I were dating a girl, I'd be more weirded out to discover that she thinks all gays should burn in hell under His righteous justice than if she failed Grade 12 Algebra.

I'd probably leave her right then and there. Leave her with the bill too.

Hahahahaha, I've always wanted to do that. Go out to dinner with people I hate and then 'go to the washroom.'

 

Edit: Good point Lauren, and that's what I was trying to get at with my post. When I meet an intelligent person, my opinion of them is not diminished at all if I find out that they are Catholic, Buddhist, whatever. However, Astrology IS busllshit, plain and simple. if you believe in astrology, you are most likely a flaky idiot.

Edited by Prometheon
Link to comment
Share on other sites
no yu begin wher i end

no yu begin wher i end

Posted
Posted

Let's have some fun with the Bible and homosexuality.

 

"As anyone who has read any recent literature on the topic will be able to tell, there is no word for homosexuality in Greek or Hebrew so while the Bible condemns many things, what we call homosexuality isn't one of them. First we have to define homosexuality. But that's a digression. Let me leave that aside and turn to the texts.

 

What does Romans 1 and I Cor 6:9 condemn? In the former case, idolatry. One of the behavioral consequences of idolatry is people who engage in same-sex relations by substituting the truth of God for a lie and who do things that are para physin (beyond nature). Romans 8 makes it clear that even while the pagan world of Romans 1-2 and the Jewish world of 3 falls under the judgment of God, nothing separates either from the love of God. I Cor 6:9 lists behaviors that will not enter the kingdom, including the Greek terms malakos and arsenokoites. When the term homosexuality was invented in the 19th Century, it appeared in some modern translations and replaced earlier translations relating the terms correctly to men e.g. tyndale for arsenokoites "abusers of themselyves with the mankynde." Sometimes an attempt was made in modern translations to separate the act from the person, so for arsenokoites read "practicing homosexuals." (This was at one time proposed for the NRSV).

 

A way to get at the meaning of arsenokoites is to look at other contexts in which the Greek word appeared independently of Paul. These other occurrences (Sibylline Oracles 2.70-77, Acts of John; Theophilus of Antioch Ad Autolycum) suggest that the word refers to some kind of economic exploitation by means of sex (but not necessarily homosexual sex). Perhaps the more important question is why some scholars are certain the word refers to male-male sex in the face of evidence to the contrary. Perhaps ideology has been more important than philology!

 

Malakos occurs widely in ancient sources and refers to the softness of expensive clothes, the richness of food, the gentleness of winds and breezes. The term refers to the effeminacy or softness of which penetration by another man is a sign or proof; it does not refer to the sexual act itself. In philosophical texts, the plural term malakoi are those who cannot put up with hard work. Xenophon uses the term for lazy men. In Josephus and Plutarch (both first century writers from different cultural backgrounds), cowards are malakoi.

 

In the ancient world effeminacy was implicated in heterosexual acts just as much as homosexual. Chariton in his novel Chaeras and Callirhoe provides a typical portrait of an effeminate man: he has a fresh hairdo, is scented with perfume, he wears eye makeup, a soft (malakos) mantle, and light swishy slippers; his fingers glisten with rings. He is off to seduce a woman! Why, given all the ancient evidence, some of which I have mentioned here, was the translation "effeminate" for I Cor 6:9 rejected by Bible translations? Because it reinscribes the misogyny of the term? Because condemnation of something socially embarrassing could hardly be called the word of God?

 

In short: the allegation that the New Testament condemns homosexuality is not just poor but lazy and inexcusable scholarship. An attempt by some scholars to interpret I Cor 6:9 by taking malakos to mean the passive partner and arsenokoites the active partner is based on circular reasoning. The meaning of arsenokoites is problematic. There is no evidence that malakos was ever considered as a technical term for a passive partner. (There are other terms for passive and active partner in Greek. They never appear in the NT) Malakos' general meaning of effeminate is independent of sexual position or object. To define malakos arsenokoites is to define something already clear by something that is obscure."

 

http://members.aol.com/DrSwiney/gensem.html

 

Just some food for thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

  I accept