The Faith & Religion mega Thread

.

.

.

Chisels out... begin!

The Big Bang Theory S03E01 now my mom has me buying her BR is that volution, I think so?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3589872/

Originally Posted by bluesclues227 We have guns for a very valid reason, to defend against tyrannical government(s), and to defend ourselves from anyone who wishes to do harm on us or others, that may occur in any environment.. History taught us governments can't be trusted, even our own, and is why they are meant to be limited in power.. Our separation from the British is a pristine example of this, and is the foundation of what America stands for.. And of course having a gun will put you in dangerous situations, but for heroic reasons, TO SAVE LIVES..

You miss my point. I am not against weapon ownership but there is a very real difference between not only the justification but the advisability of gun ownership by rural families who need them on a daily basis and who grow up with training in use and responsibility and city dwellers who have less need and are most often completely ignorant and unskilled in proper use. There is also the difference in response time of neighbors and police to consider, affecting any perceived need.

"Defend against tyrannical governments" ? Do you really not realize how antiquated and absurd that concept has become? There are extremely few governments anymore that are so small and so weak that even hundreds of revolutionaries can possibly hope to overcome by head-on violent confrontation that the notion is delusional. This is not to say there are no means, just that guns no longer are a key factor since they require line-of-sight proximity. If you were a citizen of, for example, North Korea, exactly how far do you imagine even the most modern assault rifle would get you?

Originally Posted by bluesclues227 This is appalling to hear, to blame a peaceful group of people for the actions of radicals who do atrocities against humanity. That is no excuse for what they do, and anyone with an unbiased mind will know in this modern world money is the root of all evil...

Peaceful? Do you not know anything of The Crusades or mere recently of the callous, inhumane treatment of so many people who happen to subscribe to Islam? Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo are just tips of the iceberg. Most of these radicals can be divided into two types, those who have suffered some personal indignity (including death of loved ones they see as murder) and those who simply align us with Israel since we support them which they view as 'against us". However if we weren't there in force, do you really think "against us" would be at the level that it is today?

I am not in any way absolving those of Islam their atrocities or their religion-driven fear and hatred. I'm only pointing out our part and what we could do to or could have done to minimize directed fear and hatred resulting in violent conflict. That is one of the reasons for discussing this tangent to this thread, here. Religion does account for a lot of good but it also promotes "divinely justified" condescension and even violence. This crap is just an extenuation of Manifest Destiny and still just as misguided, self-aggrandizing and stupid as it was when justifying atrocities against Native Americans. Peaceful? Read some history or even some Ayn Rand about "Attila and the Witch Doctor". Get your head out of the sand.

Christianity, like most religions, is only peaceful with those who comply. The message is clearly not only "join or die" but "join or burn for eternity".

Actually, Christianity as implemented is a bit unusual, showing itself to be very-clearly an outgrowth of its beginnings as the Official State Religion of the Roman Empire. One of its loudest loudmouths ... ... Paul of Tarsus, "was as Roman as one could get," as he hastened to prove when the wrong people started to call him the "Good Jew" that he liked to call himself. Like every native son of that Turkish city, he was "a Roman citizen by birth," and entitled to "appeal to Caesar," which he impetuously did when the going got tough. (And the local officials, probably feeling very glad to get rid of him, promptly packed him off on a boat.)

In the hands of Empire, the Christian religion became an overt implement of State control of the populace. "Sin" is a very important part of that. The Christian religion teaches that you have "the eternal Stick" hanging over your head from the moment of your birth, unless you profess to love "the eternal Carrot." In some versions of the religion, you are bound to do whatever the Good Priest tells you to do, and to always feel guilty because you tell the Priest, "in confidence" , all of your dirty deeds. It is a powerful and well-crafted instrument of crowd control.

You don't have to live that way. If you do, you have subjected yourself to it. Which is okay, unless you do it because you have been told, and because you have accepted, that: "you dare not do otherwise," i.e. "on pain of Eternal Death."

To me, that has nothing at all to do with the words and the thoughts of a man who said, "Neither do I condemn you. Go, and sin no more." A man who, by speaking those words, saved a woman's life ... both literally and effectively. There was a man who saw through the trappings of religion, who thereby broke its power, and who was executed for doing so at a very young age. How very strange it is, then, that "what [is said to have] happened three days later" brought an entirely new religion back into power, "Roman Empire style."

I recently read a scholarly comment that "Christianity could have survived without Christ, but not without Paul". Interesting concept.

Well, part of it actually did. (So to speak.)

As the Roman empire was splintering, the Roman State Church did, also. (See WikiPedia, of course ...) But don't overlook, of all things, "For Dummies", either!

Maybe it was partly that Eastern (and, Far Eastern) groups didn't care too much for what little was left of the Empire by this time, but some of them apparently didn't care too much for our Number-One Roman, either. Although I am not aware that the writings of Paul were in any way exorcised, there are obvious differences regarding many things that "Paul held dear," such as the role of women.

(But you also get a definite sense, in reading snatches of Acts of the Apostles and The Book of Peter, that there was a growing rift even from the earliest times, and that Peter might have thought of Paul as an imposter ... as a pretender to the role of "Apostle." But, then again, we can't be entirely sure that The Book of Peter was actually written by "Peter." The real man might have been dead by then, crucified-upside-down or not. Even though the Biblical texts are pretty-much sanitized, you still catch a whiff of conflict.)

It is difficult for many "modern folk" to realize just how extensively the Christian religion was mind-melded to the notion of "[T-h-e] Empire," at least in Western thought. Many Christians of the day simply could not conceive of Christianity without an Emperor.

- - - - -

So, yes, I would share the opinion that, at this point, "Jesus of Nazareth," whoever he actually was and whatever he actually said, "had very little to do with it anymore." The religion came to be used, for a (long) time, as an unabashed and unapologetic instrument of Imperial control.

... but then, the Empire disappeared, and the Christian religion did not.

One of the endless-speculations orbiting the topic of "the Quest for the Historical Jesus" concern which of "His sayings" are likely to be "His," versus other sayings also attributed (in the Gospels as we now have them) to "Him," but that appear to be inconsistent in thought, word, or character. Obviously, these are "speculations," and clearly understood to be so. Nevertheless, I find the topic quite fascinating.

And yet ... To me, there is something else: "no matter what The Hand of Man has done to Christianity," or, I should say, "has sought to do (to it, with it, or in its name ...)," it is still here, and it is still strong. Somehow, "Jesus of Nazareth" remains the most influential human being in history, "in spite of everything." He is still influencing people's lives, throughout the world, on both a global and an intensely-personal, even intimate, level. All at the same time.

"Do I detect in this the handiwork of Deity?" As a matter of fact, personally speaking, I do.

I'm tired of arguing, despite our differences I love you all as an extended family. One day there will be world peace no matter how many generations it takes!

Originally Posted by bluesclues227 I'm tired of arguing, despite our differences I love you all as an extended family. One day there will be world peace no matter how many generations it takes!

Either that, or we will be the death of us all. I do not hold out much hope.

Ebb and flow away we'll go...

have fun!

Ambiguous Cylinder Illusion
http://3dprintingindustry.com/news/v...rinting-84188/
https://youtu.be/oWfFco7K9v8
https://youtu.be/SKpOKXAVjGo

https://youtu.be/l4M1MbzZbXg

(The average) religious peoples are so blind with their "beliefs" they try and feel sorry for us without it... teaching is both a cure and a disease. They may say "so you don't believe in infinity?" I felt my response was appropriate in that, not as a fairy tail. While on that subject let's get rid of the red pointy ones!

Don't be yourselfs, be the planet!

Originally Posted by bluesclues227 I'm tired of arguing, despite our differences I love you all as an extended family. One day there will be world peace no matter how many generations it takes!

With that I wholeheartedly agree! Maybe you might agree that argument can have good purpose as long as animosity is "left at the door". My point was that violence works but as civilization progresses it works less and less well, being replaced by understanding, tolerance, negotiation, and cooperation.