Which religion is more poisonous?

BartenderElite said:
I wouldn't support the kind of forced removal of religion that some have tried, at all. People have to grow out of it.

Most religion is based on writing from thousands of years ago, from people who were fearful, superstitious and had very little actual knowledge to work with. EVERY country has religion - so of course the most successful cultures will too.

I believe in higher realms and other planes of existence - but that belief doesn't have to be "religious" and I don't ascribe it as such. Ultimately, everything - even God - can be scientifically explained. I reject the mysticism around our eternal lives.
Click to expand...
Agreed on "grow out of it".

Human beings haven't changed anatomically in about 300,000 years and, psychologically, in about 30,000 years. Therefore, ancient writings hold truths about human kind. That said, I agree that the science part of such writings is often lacking in facts. Most American Christians recognize that as true:
https://news.gallup.com/poll/394262/fewer-bible-literal-word-god.aspx
The majority of Christians (58%) say the Bible is the inspired word of God but not everything in it is to be taken literally, while 25% say it should be interpreted literally and 16% say it is an ancient book of fables.

Our Universe is orderly and logical. That doesn't mean the "higher realms and other planes of existence" are likewise. Agreed belief doesn't have to be religious AKA dogmatic and stick to a set script. I look at dogma as a primer for teaching spirituality. Like a primer teaches children to read, dogma helps educate people that there is something beyond their own noses. Some people may stop their education in reading to become functionally literate while others will go on to fully explore uses of the written word. Likewise, some people may stop their spiritual education at rote learning of Bible verses while others will advance to look at deeper meanings and seek the answers to deeper questions. Thomas Aquinas and John Donne are examples of the latter.

What primer would you use to teach spirituality to children?
 
Doc Dutch said:
Agreed on "grow out of it".

Human beings haven't changed anatomically in about 300,000 years and, psychologically, in about 30,000 years. Therefore, ancient writings hold truths about human kind. That said, I agree that the science part of such writings is often lacking in facts. Most American Christians recognize that as true:
https://news.gallup.com/poll/394262/fewer-bible-literal-word-god.aspx
The majority of Christians (58%) say the Bible is the inspired word of God but not everything in it is to be taken literally, while 25% say it should be interpreted literally and 16% say it is an ancient book of fables.

Our Universe is orderly and logical. That doesn't mean the "higher realms and other planes of existence" are likewise. Agreed belief doesn't have to be religious AKA dogmatic and stick to a set script. I look at dogma as a primer for teaching spirituality. Like a primer teaches children to read, dogma helps educate people that there is something beyond their own noses. Some people may stop their education in reading to become functionally literate while others will go on to fully explore uses of the written word. Likewise, some people may stop their spiritual education at rote learning of Bible verses while others will advance to look at deeper meanings and seek the answers to deeper questions. Thomas Aquinas and John Donne are examples of the latter.

What primer would you use to teach spirituality to children?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if one really exists today. But, I'd prefer to see children taught about what we can either know or at least theorize about without relying on the concept of "faith," which is a word I think is used just to get people to believe what their rational mind tells them is at minimum unlikely.

And there are ways to teach right & wrong without needing religion as an aid.
 
Nordberg said:
Christianity invented nothing. As man started moving into towns and cities, they found society required some rules to continue. Hammurabi codified what they came to conclude that society required. That was long before Abrahamic religions came along. It was a bit extreme in paying for crimes though. https://f5webserv.wright.edu/~christopher.oldstone-moore/Hamm.htm
Click to expand...

No society in the history of humans lacked some shared code of conduct. Nothing profound about having norms of behavior.
 
BartenderElite said:
I'm not sure if one really exists today. But, I'd prefer to see children taught about what we can either know or at least theorize about without relying on the concept of "faith," which is a word I think is used just to get people to believe what their rational mind tells them is at minimum unlikely.

And there are ways to teach right & wrong without needing religion as an aid.
Click to expand...
Are you a parent? Ever worked with kids? They believe monsters live in their closets and ask questions like "why is the sky blue". In the latter case, if you talk about refraction of light through the atmosphere, their eyes glaze over and then they ask again, "But why is it blue?"

Schools do it all the time. There are rules and there are consequences for breaking those rules. Or there used to be before the Liberal mindset of "Everyone gets an 'A'" came about and parents no longer respected teachers.
 
BidenPresident said:
No society in the history of humans lacked some shared code of conduct. Nothing profound about having norms of behavior.
Click to expand...

In Germany circa 1930s, it was the norm to hate Jews. In the US, circa 1830s, it was normal to consider Native Americans and Africans as lesser humans. Nothing profound there.
 
It's all subjective.

Catholicism and Protestantism are poisonous to the native people of North and South America, Australia, Brazil, etc.

Islam is poisonous to various sects of different religions in parts of Africa, Asia and their relative island nations.

Quite frankly, I see Buddhism as the least invasive and violent of religions (counting the fighting priests of Shaolin and Taoist monks).
 
Taichiliberal said:
It's all subjective.

Catholicism and Protestantism are poisonous to the native people of North and South America, Australia, Brazil, etc.

Islam is poisonous to various sects of different religions in parts of Africa, Asia and their relative island nations.

Quite frankly, I see Buddhism as the least invasive and violent of religions (counting the fighting priests of Shaolin and Taoist monks).
Click to expand...

And Israel thinks exterminating Palestinians is God's will.
 
BidenPresident said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
It's all subjective.

Catholicism and Protestantism are poisonous to the native people of North and South America, Australia, Brazil, etc.

Islam is poisonous to various sects of different religions in parts of Africa, Asia and their relative island nations.

Quite frankly, I see Buddhism as the least invasive and violent of religions (counting the fighting priests of Shaolin and Taoist monks).
Click to expand...


And Israel thinks exterminating Palestinians is God's will.
Click to expand...

And I believe that HAMAS and groups like them love to invoke Allah when making their proclamations. As I always say, no one's hands are clean in that hot mess. But I stand by my previous assertions.
 
Nordberg said:
Christianity invented nothing. As man started moving into towns and cities, they found society required some rules to continue. Hammurabi codified what they came to conclude that society required. That was long before Abrahamic religions came along. It was a bit extreme in paying for crimes though. https://f5webserv.wright.edu/~christopher.oldstone-moore/Hamm.htm
Click to expand...

The Code of Hammurabi is a civil and criminal code, not an ethical code. It was a list of rules for property, divorce, and criminal punishments..

These are ethical codes:

Bhagavad-Gita, chapter 16
Fearlessness, purity of being, knowledge, generosity, discipline, sacrifice, sacred study, austerity, honesty, non-harm, truth, non-anger, letting go, peace, non-slander, kindness to living things, non-greed, gentleness, modesty, non-caprice, energy, forgiveness, resolve, cleanliness, non-aggression, non-arrogance -- those exist in one born to godly assets.

Jesus, Sermon on the Plain:
Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the Earth. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the Sons of God. Love your enemies and turn the other cheek. Treat others the way you want to be treated. Don't judge and you won't be judged, don't condemn and you won't be condemned, forgive and you will be forgiven, give and you will receive. Remove the log from your own eye before attending to the splinter in your friend's. A good tree does not produce bad fruit and a bad tree cannot produce good fruit, each tree is known by its fruit.

Saint Paul, Acts:33-35
I have not coveted anyone’s silver or gold or clothing. In everything I did, I showed you that by this kind of hard work we must help the weak, remembering the words the Lord Jesus himself said: ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’ "
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top