RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge

RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

MsMJAY -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/9/2014 5:17:56 PM)
For starters I did not say I believed this. I said this is what modern Christianity teaches. I didn't make it up neither do I follow it. I think its false teachings but it is still what Christianity teaches. That Jesus is not just the son of God but God in the Flesh. That accepting Him is the way to get to heaven. So according to this teaching. It is very hard for the church to then turn around and say that someone is "not a Christian" because the Christian churches (and I do not mean the Catholic Church) teaches that it is by faith and not works. quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: MsMJAY Christianity is not about following the teachings of Christ. Really then why call it "Christianity"? quote: Christianity recognizes Jesus as God. Then how come Jesus never once said; "I am God"? Jesus said many times I am God's Son but never ever once said: "I am God". quote: It is about accepting Him as your savior. Salvation= (Admit you are sinner. Believe that Jesus died for you. Confess Christ as your Saviour) It is much easier to worship Jesus as a God than it is to actually follow Him as a living breathing teacher. Admit it, you've been reading those little "Salvation" pamphlets again. quote: That is why Christianity actually follows the teachings of Paul not Jesus. (and no, they did not teach the same thing.) The Bible is a coherent whole and so both Paul and Jesus teach the same thing, God's word. quote: As long as these people who led the Crusades went through the ABC's of salvation then they were indeed Christians according to Christian teachings. Yeah right, let's all throw away our Bibles and run out and get one of those little "Salvation" pamphlets, run through the "ABC's of salvation", then kill a commie and a Gay for Christ and join the local Baptist bowling league. On second thought I think I'll keep my Bible and follow the teachings of God and his Son Jesus Christ.

MsMJAY -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/9/2014 6:12:46 PM)
quote: The question is not whether the the Bible contains accounts that are very bloody, violent and brutal because it does, because all of human history is very bloody, violent and brutal and the Bible is a truthful slice of that history and so the real question is what God's role in the history of mankind is and the Bible points out that God has never stopped working to try and save at least a portion of mankind from self-destruction while he worked out man's salvation. That was my point. That bloody history exists and we should not try to pretend it doesn't. I will not get into a debate about all of the apologetics Christianity use to justify what happened under the law because that would take way too long. I was only showing that the things I mentioned, violence, genocide, racism, sexism did indeed occur under the law. What God's role was in it? Undetermined because people threw around "thus saith the Lord" a little too loosely in the Bible. I do always find it interesting that most Christians try to justify the genocide by saying "God okayed/condoned it." Is it really easier to believe that God ordered them to kill of entire races of people than it is to believe that maybe they were misled?

vincentML -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/9/2014 6:29:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: I have to decide if it is worthwhile to discuss this with you. This is not the first time I've had this discussion, not my first rodeo. It seems this subject upsets you and you maybe even have a "dog in this fight". I do not, I just enjoy discussing it and have no vested interest in the subject and could argue either side but usually defend God and the Bible because there always seems to be more on the other side. Most of what you say is new to you but it is "old stuff" to me. So if you feel willing to stretch the discussion and not just keep repeating the same things over and over again without thinking about and addressing the points I've given, lets go for it but if not then I give up, you win, I've never read such insightful arguments in my life. ;-) It is 'old stuff' to you and you still evade rather than try to explore the issue. If you would reply to my comments I would happily move on. Your idea of insightful arguments seems to be to issue quotes from the Bible. Instead you adopt a pose of transparently phony superiority. Pathetic. [:-] See what I mean I ask you one thing are you going to be civil and this is what I get. Thanks but no thanks. If you want to read my discussions with others to see my answers fine but if you can't be civil then I'm done with you. Like I said; "I give up, you win, I've never read such insightful arguments in my life." ;-) Hmmmm. . . your feathers are ruffled rather easily it seems. Truth is I asked you to account for the loving god in the face of innocent children suffering illness and death in nature and your response was to blame people who live in zones of danger. As if there is anywhere we can all gather to avoid tumultuous weather events. So, no attempt by you to explore the goodness or potency of god. You give me a cockamamie answer about personal responsibility that I have seen appear on these boards zillions of times in discussing politics. And you call me uncivil because I will not accept such an inane and irrelevant reply to my question. In addition you posture that it is all so beneath you. Do you not see your own responsibility in dodging the issue? Do not blame me for your feeble response. If you asked me if I am going to be civil it was in your dreams not in this thread. You add insult by making shit up.

njlauren -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/9/2014 6:33:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MsMJAY quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: MsMJAY True. But we must not forget that the Old Testament contained a harsh, brutal and unforgiving law. There was no salvation or deliverance in the Old Testament. There was no hope. There was no "Abundant Life." Sometimes we are taught by being shown what to do. But a good deal of the Old Testament is to show us "what not to do." I don't really agree that the "Old Testament contained a harsh, brutal and unforgiving law". It was a tutor leading to the Christ and thus I don't see the Law as "harsh, brutal and unforgiving" because nothing that would lead us to the Christ could be so. So why do people consider the "Old Testament" to be so "harsh, brutal and unforgiving"? When the Israelites followed the law they were the most blessed people that have ever existed on the Earth. What happened? Most of what is considered "harsh, brutal and unforgiving" comes from people who have turn away from God. Thus, as you say, are examples of what not to do. The Old Testament is the written account of the faith that Jesus was born into and came out of. It is filled with Rape, incest, murder, revenge, racism, genocide...... you name it. These things did not happen among people who turned away from God. Most of it happened amongst people who believed they were called by God and believed that they were ordained by God to do these things. I have often tell people that without Jesus, the Bible would have been a completely wasted book. I know Christians like to downplay the brutality that took place in the Old Testament but the Bible does not downplay it. Based on Biblical accounts alone we cannot even count the millions of people who were slaughtered in the OT. (Then everyone praised God after the slaughter.) I could even allude to the despicable way that women were treated in the OT. We cannot deny these things happened and it is disingenuous to pretend that it "wasn't that bad" or that it was somehow good because later on Jesus was born. The legacy of Christianity is that it stems from a very violent and brutal history. We need stop denying that. One of the things about the Hebrew Scripture/OT is what that book is about, and more importantly, how much of it is truth and how much of it is myth or allegory. The thing that makes the Hebrew Scripture compelling is that the people in it are flawed, there are all kinds of horrible things, they are quite human...yet the OT is also full of a lot of the things that would be recognizable in the NT, the duty to treat others kindly, the ideas of hospitality and mitzvah. The NT is basically a book of the perfect, of Jesus, the OT acknowledges the reality of man, what they can do and how even someone who is very flawed (David) can be also a hero...... Women weren't treated well in the NT, either, while it doesn't have the proscriptions the OT does, it is not exactly affirming of women in many ways. Even ignoring Timothy (which I doubt was written by Paul), the NT doesn't exalt women either (and what the disciples and Bishops did after Christ died was as bad as anything in the OT towards women). Both books have their flaws and the things you have to read through. What is ironic is that Christians, at least the evangelicals, read Genesis as literal fact whereas most Jews see it for what it is, a creation myth. The OT, while not perfect, has something the NT doesn't have, historical lineage. Jewish Scripture can be traced back, there is one set of Jewish Holy scriptures and they were kept under control of religious scribes, that continues to this day; whereas the Christian texts have no original documents, from their writing in the mid to late 1st century, the documents were copied by hand, often by illiterate slaves, they were edited, changed, and by the time Jerome got around to writing the vulgate bible, there were already a plethora of NT texts.....(these days, there are about 1500 texts of the NT, oldest from the 4th century, and among them, there are 350,000 discrepencies). In the end, both are very human books and have to be read that way, they are not perfect, and need to be discerned. I always thought that the common thread is pretty plain in both books; When Christ says "love others as you love yourself and God", that is the underlying idea of the OT, when you wade through all the tribal BS; the golden rule is in both books , and the rabbinic judaism that Christ came from holds that as the highest ideal.

vincentML -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/9/2014 6:36:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MsMJAY quote: The question is not whether the the Bible contains accounts that are very bloody, violent and brutal because it does, because all of human history is very bloody, violent and brutal and the Bible is a truthful slice of that history and so the real question is what God's role in the history of mankind is and the Bible points out that God has never stopped working to try and save at least a portion of mankind from self-destruction while he worked out man's salvation. That was my point. That bloody history exists and we should not try to pretend it doesn't. I will not get into a debate about all of the apologetics Christianity use to justify what happened under the law because that would take way too long. I was only showing that the things I mentioned, violence, genocide, racism, sexism did indeed occur under the law. What God's role was in it? Undetermined because people threw around "thus saith the Lord" a little too loosely in the Bible. I do always find it interesting that most Christians try to justify the genocide by saying "God okayed/condoned it." Is it really easier to believe that God ordered them to kill of entire races of people than it is to believe that maybe they were misled? Either the books were the word of god or they were not. Who is to pick and choose today? It is not a smorgasbord. Either you believe the Judeo/Christian dogma or you do not call yourself of that faith, imo. Why are we to believe that the Creator is loving? Why are we to believe that with all the hundreds of billions of galaxies he has to play with he has special concerns about one species on one tiny planet, especially concerns about what we do when we are naked? (credit to Sam Harris)

Milesnmiles -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/9/2014 6:37:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MsMJAY For starters I did not say I believed this. Great I don't either. quote: I said this is what modern Christianity teaches. It is what you think "modern Christianity" teaches but it has almost nothing to do with actual Christianity quote: I didn't make it up neither do I follow it. Great, I wouldn't recommend that anyone that want to be a Christian follow it. quote: I think its false teachings but it is still what Christianity teaches. It is false teaching but it it not what Christianity teaches quote: That Jesus is not just the son of God but God in the Flesh. Is this something you believe or is it just more of what you think "Christianity" teaches. quote: That accepting Him is the way to get to heaven. So according to this teaching. this too, has nothing to do with Christianity. quote: It is very hard for the church to then turn around and say that someone is "not a Christian" because the Christian churches (and I do not mean the Catholic Church) teaches that it is by faith and not works. And "the church" once again has know idea what it is talking about. Jesus, you know the guy who Christianity is named after, gave this illustration: “The kingdom of the heavens has become like a man that sowed fine seed in his field. While men were sleeping, his enemy came and oversowed weeds in among the wheat, and left. When the blade sprouted and produced fruit, then the weeds appeared also. So the slaves of the householder came up and said to him, ‘Master, did you not sow fine seed in your field? How, then, does it come to have weeds?’ He said to them, ‘An enemy, a man, did this.’ They said to him, ‘Do you want us, then, to go out and collect them?’ He said, ‘No; that by no chance, while collecting the weeds, YOU uproot the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest; and in the harvest season I will tell the reapers, First collect the weeds and bind them in bundles to burn them up, then go to gathering the wheat into my storehouse.’”(Matthew 13:24-30) It points to the fact that two groups would grow at the same time, that at first would look similar but after time there would be distinguishing traits to tell them apart. To anyone who has read the Bible it is easy to see that what you call "modern Christianity" and it's teachings are what Jesus spoke of as being the weeds.

Milesnmiles -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/9/2014 6:42:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MsMJAY That was my point. That bloody history exists and we should not try to pretend it doesn't. I will not get into a debate about all of the apologetics Christianity use to justify what happened under the law because that would take way too long. I was only showing that the things I mentioned, violence, genocide, racism, sexism did indeed occur under the law. What God's role was in it? Undetermined because people threw around "thus saith the Lord" a little too loosely in the Bible. I do always find it interesting that most Christians try to justify the genocide by saying "God okayed/condoned it." Is it really easier to believe that God ordered them to kill of entire races of people than it is to believe that maybe they were misled? I answered all of this and more in recent post #175. ;-)

njlauren -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/9/2014 6:44:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MsMJAY For starters I did not say I believed this. I said this is what modern Christianity teaches. I didn't make it up neither do I follow it. I think its false teachings but it is still what Christianity teaches. That Jesus is not just the son of God but God in the Flesh. That accepting Him is the way to get to heaven. So according to this teaching. It is very hard for the church to then turn around and say that someone is "not a Christian" because the Christian churches (and I do not mean the Catholic Church) teaches that it is by faith and not works. quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: MsMJAY Christianity is not about following the teachings of Christ. Really then why call it "Christianity"? quote: Christianity recognizes Jesus as God. Then how come Jesus never once said; "I am God"? Jesus said many times I am God's Son but never ever once said: "I am God". quote: It is about accepting Him as your savior. Salvation= (Admit you are sinner. Believe that Jesus died for you. Confess Christ as your Saviour) It is much easier to worship Jesus as a God than it is to actually follow Him as a living breathing teacher. Admit it, you've been reading those little "Salvation" pamphlets again. quote: That is why Christianity actually follows the teachings of Paul not Jesus. (and no, they did not teach the same thing.) The Bible is a coherent whole and so both Paul and Jesus teach the same thing, God's word. quote: As long as these people who led the Crusades went through the ABC's of salvation then they were indeed Christians according to Christian teachings. Yeah right, let's all throw away our Bibles and run out and get one of those little "Salvation" pamphlets, run through the "ABC's of salvation", then kill a commie and a Gay for Christ and join the local Baptist bowling league. On second thought I think I'll keep my Bible and follow the teachings of God and his Son Jesus Christ. Good points, but when you say modern Christianity, there is ambiguity there. The idea of believing in Christ, rather than works, the idea that believing is everything is not modern per se. It is the fundamental belief of evangelical Christians and orthodox Catholics and so forth, but I wouldn't say it is modern, that in fact is very old, going back to the foundations of the Church. Keep in mind that the idea of Jesus as God was not really established in scripture, and the trinity definitely wasn't, that came about when a group of Bishops dominated at Nicea, and decided that was what Christ was, in about 325......what 'true believers' believe is not modern. A lot of progressive, modern Christian churches emphasize acts and works, that Jesus was not only teaching us how to live, but modeled it, including sacrificing himself. As a Rabbinic Jew, Christ saying he was the son of God had specific meaning.....One of the worst parts of evangelicals is the idea that Christ died on the cross for our sins, and therefore if you believe you are absolved. To me hat is a perversion of what Christ taught, because they have turned it into a get out of jail free card. Just take a look at when evangelicals like Ted Hagerty or Jimmy Swaggert get caught, or Ralph Reed with Abrahamoff, and note something, there is no real repentance, they moan about tempation and the devil, but they never acknowledge the wrong they did, there is no repentance; more importantly, they often are serial abuses, yet feel fine cause Jesus loves them, and that wasn't the point. The last church I belonged to was uber liberal, that was non dogmatic, etc (evangelicals reading the website used to send all kinds of hate filled e-mails and such, and a local evangelical "Church" used to actually picket our church and yell nastry things at people going to church......we had a whole wall of their hateful e-mails)....as liberal as they were, they stressed repentance, and not the mea culpa crap, but rather than when you do wrong you need to repent, to make amends to those you may have done wrong to (including yourself) and more importantly,work on the damage to yourself with what you did, clear out the scars, and also try and work out why you did it, to free yourself...and it isn't cause Jesus is there to bail you out, but rather that you need to do the work because otherwise you can never really achieve the fullness of that love, even if forgiven..big difference.

MsMJAY -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/9/2014 6:52:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: MsMJAY quote: The question is not whether the the Bible contains accounts that are very bloody, violent and brutal because it does, because all of human history is very bloody, violent and brutal and the Bible is a truthful slice of that history and so the real question is what God's role in the history of mankind is and the Bible points out that God has never stopped working to try and save at least a portion of mankind from self-destruction while he worked out man's salvation. That was my point. That bloody history exists and we should not try to pretend it doesn't. I will not get into a debate about all of the apologetics Christianity use to justify what happened under the law because that would take way too long. I was only showing that the things I mentioned, violence, genocide, racism, sexism did indeed occur under the law. What God's role was in it? Undetermined because people threw around "thus saith the Lord" a little too loosely in the Bible. I do always find it interesting that most Christians try to justify the genocide by saying "God okayed/condoned it." Is it really easier to believe that God ordered them to kill of entire races of people than it is to believe that maybe they were misled? Either the books were the word of god or they were not. Who is to pick and choose today? It is not a smorgasbord. Either you believe the Judeo/Christian dogma or you do not call yourself of that faith, imo. Why are we to believe that the Creator is loving? Why are we to believe that with all the hundreds of billions of galaxies he has to play with he has special concerns about one species on one tiny planet, especially concerns about what we do when we are naked? (credit to Sam Harris) I believe Jesus. Everyone else is suspect. Jesus was from the lineage of Israel. I am not. My personal faith does not require me to believe in the Old Testament, dogma, Judaism, religion or anything else that was not taught by Jesus (and even then it must be interpreted the correct way.) Why are we to believe it? I believe it because I choose to believe. If you choose not to, that is fine for you. I am not attempting to proselytize you or convince you of anything. I am very comfortable with the notion of each person choosing for themselves what they believe or don't believe.

njlauren -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/9/2014 6:52:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: I have to decide if it is worthwhile to discuss this with you. This is not the first time I've had this discussion, not my first rodeo. It seems this subject upsets you and you maybe even have a "dog in this fight". I do not, I just enjoy discussing it and have no vested interest in the subject and could argue either side but usually defend God and the Bible because there always seems to be more on the other side. Most of what you say is new to you but it is "old stuff" to me. So if you feel willing to stretch the discussion and not just keep repeating the same things over and over again without thinking about and addressing the points I've given, lets go for it but if not then I give up, you win, I've never read such insightful arguments in my life. ;-) It is 'old stuff' to you and you still evade rather than try to explore the issue. If you would reply to my comments I would happily move on. Your idea of insightful arguments seems to be to issue quotes from the Bible. Instead you adopt a pose of transparently phony superiority. Pathetic. [:-] See what I mean I ask you one thing are you going to be civil and this is what I get. Thanks but no thanks. If you want to read my discussions with others to see my answers fine but if you can't be civil then I'm done with you. Like I said; "I give up, you win, I've never read such insightful arguments in my life." ;-) Hmmmm. . . your feathers are ruffled rather easily it seems. Truth is I asked you to account for the loving god in the face of innocent children suffering illness and death in nature and your response was to blame people who live in zones of danger. As if there is anywhere we can all gather to avoid tumultuous weather events. So, no attempt by you to explore the goodness or potency of god. You give me a cockamamie answer about personal responsibility that I have seen appear on these boards zillions of times in discussing politics. And you call me uncivil because I will not accept such an inane and irrelevant reply to my question. In addition you posture that it is all so beneath you. Do you not see your own responsibility in dodging the issue? Do not blame me for your feeble response. If you asked me if I am going to be civil it was in your dreams not in this thread. You add insult by making shit up. Vincent- What you are talking about is theodicity, why bad things happen with a loving God..it has been a question religion has danced around, you get "God works in mysterious ways", you get "we can't question God, there is a reason"......and the reality to me is the problem with that is the omnipotent and omniscient God, that literally controls everything, which has been a very dominant view, and not surprisingly.....it is comforting, it is safety because after all God is always there, etc...the problem is as you point out, what kind of living God would see little kids starve to death, or see their parents hacked to death in front of them, etc....and if you say "But God had nothing to do with it", then it shakes their faith, because then that means that maybe there are things God does not control, make happen....there was a wonderful program on PBS Frontline called "Faith and Doubt after 9/11" that I think did a great job exploring this. The best commentary was from this grizzled old priest, who sounded a lot like the actor Joss Ackland, who said that God had nothing to do with 9/11, that the hate and the acts were not God, but God was seen in the response to it, people who tried to help, the firemen who perished trying to save people, the doomed people who in their last act reached out to grab someone else's hand before they jumped.....that is God, not the hateful act itself. God doesn't will a Tornado or a flash flood, God wills those who help in the aftermath. May not be comforting as much, but to me God is a lot more real in that sense.

dcnovice -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/9/2014 7:04:52 PM)
quote: Either you believe the Judeo/Christian dogma or you do not call yourself of that faith, imo. This made me chuckle a bit. For as long as I can remember, a key complaint about us church folk was that we took our faith hook, line, and sinker with no critical thought. Here the complaint seems to be that we don't. [:)]

Milesnmiles -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/9/2014 7:04:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: I have to decide if it is worthwhile to discuss this with you. This is not the first time I've had this discussion, not my first rodeo. It seems this subject upsets you and you maybe even have a "dog in this fight". I do not, I just enjoy discussing it and have no vested interest in the subject and could argue either side but usually defend God and the Bible because there always seems to be more on the other side. Most of what you say is new to you but it is "old stuff" to me. So if you feel willing to stretch the discussion and not just keep repeating the same things over and over again without thinking about and addressing the points I've given, lets go for it but if not then I give up, you win, I've never read such insightful arguments in my life. ;-) It is 'old stuff' to you and you still evade rather than try to explore the issue. If you would reply to my comments I would happily move on. Your idea of insightful arguments seems to be to issue quotes from the Bible. Instead you adopt a pose of transparently phony superiority. Pathetic. [:-] See what I mean I ask you one thing are you going to be civil and this is what I get. Thanks but no thanks. If you want to read my discussions with others to see my answers fine but if you can't be civil then I'm done with you. Like I said; "I give up, you win, I've never read such insightful arguments in my life." ;-) Hmmmm. . . your feathers are ruffled rather easily it seems. Truth is I asked you to account for the loving god in the face of innocent children suffering illness and death in nature and your response was to blame people who live in zones of danger. As if there is anywhere we can all gather to avoid tumultuous weather events. So, no attempt by you to explore the goodness or potency of god. You give me a cockamamie answer about personal responsibility that I have seen appear on these boards zillions of times in discussing politics. And you call me uncivil because I will not accept such an inane and irrelevant reply to my question. In addition you posture that it is all so beneath you. Do you not see your own responsibility in dodging the issue? Do not blame me for your feeble response. If you asked me if I am going to be civil it was in your dreams not in this thread. You add insult by making shit up. I've tried to be nice, I've asked if we could have a reasonable discussion, I've asked you to be civil, I've even tried forfeit to your your insightful arguments and you still keep up with this harassment. Should we ask the moderators to check and see if I've treated you as badly as you say I have? ;-)

njlauren -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/9/2014 7:08:45 PM)
Getting back to the original question, Religion wasn't created to control knowledge, religion was created to try and explain the world around us and man's place in it all and what that meant. I disagree that ancient religions were about explaining the unexplainable, the beliefs of ancient religions were not 'nature worshipping' per se, they had complex underlying beliefs to what they believed, systems that helped explain a world, true, but also had a lot more depth to it...among other things, the ancient faiths were no dogmatic, they were very local and personal, in Greek and Roman belief, Gods were local and personal, and beliefs varied. What happened was that religion became the basis to control knowledge. It is funny people mention the Garden of Eden, but miss the obvious, that the whole tree of knowledge is about the consequences of being self aware. Adam and Eve live in the garden, won't get sick, old, etc, eat of the tree, God says "get the F out of my house"...and they get old, sick, etc......what it leaves out is without self awareness, you don't know you will die, you don't know you can get sick, you don't know there are vicious animals ready to eat you...when you become self aware, 'paradise' is no more.....(one note to those who object....according to the account, women suffer the curse of eve when giving childbirth in pain..guess what, the human baby head is the largest head in the animal kingdom, because of its brain...which, ta da is why we are self aware.....)...but ironicaly, Genesis is used by fundamentalists as actual truth, and want to limit knowledge about anything that contradicts that.. The reality is that those who came to lead the religions used them to control knowledge, as an excuse, but it was not religion itself that did it, it was the men. The whole crap over the earth centered solar system that the church tortured Galileo primarily because he challenged the power of the vatican, because they had (in their eyes) invested their power in the ptolemaic system, and couldn't have anyone challenge that, lest it take away from their power (to tell you how strong it was, the RC didn't drop the ptolemaic silliness until 1922...... That doesn't mean that religion doesn't have controls in it, almost all religions have rules about how you treat one another, about how we are supposed to act and so forth, to modify human behavior at its worst, but controlling knowledge isn't about that, it is about protecting the power of those ruling the roost.

MsMJAY -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/9/2014 7:32:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: njlauren One of the things about the Hebrew Scripture/OT is what that book is about, and more importantly, how much of it is truth and how much of it is myth or allegory. The thing that makes the Hebrew Scripture compelling is that the people in it are flawed, there are all kinds of horrible things, they are quite human...yet the OT is also full of a lot of the things that would be recognizable in the NT, the duty to treat others kindly, the ideas of hospitality and mitzvah. The NT is basically a book of the perfect, of Jesus, the OT acknowledges the reality of man, what they can do and how even someone who is very flawed (David) can be also a hero...... Women weren't treated well in the NT, either, while it doesn't have the proscriptions the OT does, it is not exactly affirming of women in many ways. Even ignoring Timothy (which I doubt was written by Paul), the NT doesn't exalt women either (and what the disciples and Bishops did after Christ died was as bad as anything in the OT towards women). Both books have their flaws and the things you have to read through. What is ironic is that Christians, at least the evangelicals, read Genesis as literal fact whereas most Jews see it for what it is, a creation myth. The OT, while not perfect, has something the NT doesn't have, historical lineage. Jewish Scripture can be traced back, there is one set of Jewish Holy scriptures and they were kept under control of religious scribes, that continues to this day; whereas the Christian texts have no original documents, from their writing in the mid to late 1st century, the documents were copied by hand, often by illiterate slaves, they were edited, changed, and by the time Jerome got around to writing the vulgate bible, there were already a plethora of NT texts.....(these days, there are about 1500 texts of the NT, oldest from the 4th century, and among them, there are 350,000 discrepencies). In the end, both are very human books and have to be read that way, they are not perfect, and need to be discerned. I always thought that the common thread is pretty plain in both books; When Christ says "love others as you love yourself and God", that is the underlying idea of the OT, when you wade through all the tribal BS; the golden rule is in both books , and the rabbinic judaism that Christ came from holds that as the highest ideal. One thing I have always appreciated regarding the OT and the Jewish faith is that they do not take every part of scripture as the literal Word of God nor do they give all scripture equal authority. That is a much healthier and realistic way of reading and interpreting scripture. I recognize the Bible to be a book filled with human failings. That is what makes it interesting and life applicable. This part of the discussion started when I made the statements that the Old Testament contained a harsh, brutal and unforgiving law and that Christianity had a violent, bloody history. This knowledge does not detract from my faith. Nor was it a rejection of the Old Testament. I see the good in the OT. I just think it is disingenuous to pretend that ugly parts did not happen. They are part of the story and we should accept that. I totally agree that the golden rule and the command to love is in the OT (buried under mountains of legalism and selfish behavior.) It was the righteousness of the law that Jesus pulled out, stripped of dogma and man's selfishness and presented as The Way. It is the righteousness of the law that we still seek to keep when we strive to love.

njlauren -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/9/2014 7:42:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MsMJAY quote: ORIGINAL: njlauren One of the things about the Hebrew Scripture/OT is what that book is about, and more importantly, how much of it is truth and how much of it is myth or allegory. The thing that makes the Hebrew Scripture compelling is that the people in it are flawed, there are all kinds of horrible things, they are quite human...yet the OT is also full of a lot of the things that would be recognizable in the NT, the duty to treat others kindly, the ideas of hospitality and mitzvah. The NT is basically a book of the perfect, of Jesus, the OT acknowledges the reality of man, what they can do and how even someone who is very flawed (David) can be also a hero...... Women weren't treated well in the NT, either, while it doesn't have the proscriptions the OT does, it is not exactly affirming of women in many ways. Even ignoring Timothy (which I doubt was written by Paul), the NT doesn't exalt women either (and what the disciples and Bishops did after Christ died was as bad as anything in the OT towards women). Both books have their flaws and the things you have to read through. What is ironic is that Christians, at least the evangelicals, read Genesis as literal fact whereas most Jews see it for what it is, a creation myth. The OT, while not perfect, has something the NT doesn't have, historical lineage. Jewish Scripture can be traced back, there is one set of Jewish Holy scriptures and they were kept under control of religious scribes, that continues to this day; whereas the Christian texts have no original documents, from their writing in the mid to late 1st century, the documents were copied by hand, often by illiterate slaves, they were edited, changed, and by the time Jerome got around to writing the vulgate bible, there were already a plethora of NT texts.....(these days, there are about 1500 texts of the NT, oldest from the 4th century, and among them, there are 350,000 discrepencies). In the end, both are very human books and have to be read that way, they are not perfect, and need to be discerned. I always thought that the common thread is pretty plain in both books; When Christ says "love others as you love yourself and God", that is the underlying idea of the OT, when you wade through all the tribal BS; the golden rule is in both books , and the rabbinic judaism that Christ came from holds that as the highest ideal. One thing I have always appreciated regarding the OT and the Jewish faith is that they do not take every part of scripture as the literal Word of God nor do they give all scripture equal authority. That is a much healthier and realistic way of reading and interpreting scripture. I recognize the Bible to be a book filled with human failings. That is what makes it interesting and life applicable. This part of the discussion started when I made the statements that the Old Testament contained a harsh, brutal and unforgiving law and that Christianity had a violent, bloody history. This knowledge does not detract from my faith. Nor was it a rejection of the Old Testament. I see the good in the OT. I just think it is disingenuous to pretend that ugly parts did not happen. They are part of the story and we should accept that. I totally agree that the golden rule and the command to love is in the OT (buried under mountains of legalism and selfish behavior.) It was the righteousness of the law that Jesus pulled out, stripped of dogma and man's selfishness and presented as The Way. It is the righteousness of the law that we still seek to keep when we strive to love. One of the things with both faiths or any faith is to recognize that it can be used in bad ways. Christianity, the ultimate reputed religion of peace, used it as justification for horrible acts, including killing each other. One of the things about Judaism is that a lot of what was written in it could represent ancient tribal beefs written as religion. The famous elements of the leviticine law, that talks about putting people to death for various acts, apparently never happened in reality, that the penalty was there to show the severity of it. I agree we have to acknowledge it, because otherwise it is way to easy to get into the same behavior that drove that. We have so called Christians in this country who think we should enact biblical penalties for things like adultery or being gay ie death, who think the bible should be the ultimate law (Christian Dominionism, ~25 million or so people). I always liked the idea of following Jesus, not believing because he was son of God or the trinity, but rather in how he lived his life and taught. As someone once said, Christians are often so caught up in him being the Son of God they ignore what he taught; it is why so many so called Born again Christians seem to be such meanspirited people, they are so caught up in their faith being the right one they seem to forget how to act....

EdBowie -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/9/2014 9:47:07 PM)
They couldn't put it in the Good Book if it wasn't true, could they? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oC-fsFT7ZKs quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: MsMJAY quote: The question is not whether the the Bible contains accounts that are very bloody, violent and brutal because it does, because all of human history is very bloody, violent and brutal and the Bible is a truthful slice of that history and so the real question is what God's role in the history of mankind is and the Bible points out that God has never stopped working to try and save at least a portion of mankind from self-destruction while he worked out man's salvation. That was my point. That bloody history exists and we should not try to pretend it doesn't. I will not get into a debate about all of the apologetics Christianity use to justify what happened under the law because that would take way too long. I was only showing that the things I mentioned, violence, genocide, racism, sexism did indeed occur under the law. What God's role was in it? Undetermined because people threw around "thus saith the Lord" a little too loosely in the Bible. I do always find it interesting that most Christians try to justify the genocide by saying "God okayed/condoned it." Is it really easier to believe that God ordered them to kill of entire races of people than it is to believe that maybe they were misled? Either the books were the word of god or they were not. Who is to pick and choose today? It is not a smorgasbord. Either you believe the Judeo/Christian dogma or you do not call yourself of that faith, imo. Why are we to believe that the Creator is loving? Why are we to believe that with all the hundreds of billions of galaxies he has to play with he has special concerns about one species on one tiny planet, especially concerns about what we do when we are naked? (credit to Sam Harris)

Phydeaux -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/10/2014 2:34:51 AM)
quote: Keep in mind that the idea of Jesus as God was not really established in scripture, Thats just not true. When Christ is brought before the sanhedrin, the pharisees and saducees solicit false witness. But the testimony is contradictory. Finally, they ask him are you the son of God. Jesus answers - I am Who am. Which is, point blank, him using the hebrew tetragramatan. YHWH, saying, I am God. (The same name that Jews would never pronounce). At this, the Jews tore their cloaks (prescribed for a blasphemer) and says - what need we of further testimony, and it goes from there. There is Mark 2:8-10. 8 And immediately Jesus, perceiving in his spirit that they thus questioned within themselves, said to them, “Why do you question these things in your hearts? 9 Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Rise, take up your bed and walk’? 10 But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins”—he said to the paralytic— Jews of the time would say that only god has the power to forgive sins. Christ is claiming that right - and once again, the jews take it as blaspheming. A third instance. Jesus uses the words "son of man" to refer to himself. However, this title comes from Dan 7:13-14 7:13 I was watching in the night visions, “And with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man was approaching. He went up to the Ancient of Days and was escorted before him. 14 To him was given ruling authority, honor, and sovereignty. All peoples, nations, and language groups were serving him. His authority is eternal and will not pass away. His kingdom will not be destroyed.

Phydeaux -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/10/2014 2:38:51 AM)
quote: One thing I have always appreciated regarding the OT and the Jewish faith is that they do not take every part of scripture as the literal Word of God..... Says who? While that is true of certain sects of Judaism, the converse is equally applicable.

MsMJAY -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/10/2014 5:00:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: One thing I have always appreciated regarding the OT and the Jewish faith is that they do not take every part of scripture as the literal Word of God..... Says who? While that is true of certain sects of Judaism, the converse is equally applicable. The only Jewish sect that I know of that takes every part of scripture as the literal Word of God is possibly Messianic Jews who are Jewish by birth but basically Evangelical Christians by faith. Can you name another one? There are some sects that give all scripture less authority and believe none of it is the literal Word of God but I know of no others (Not Orthodox, Hasidic, Kabbalah, Conservative or Reform) who believe all scripture is the literal word of God and should be taken as such. The Jewish Faith divides the Old Testament or the TaNaKh into 3 categories. The Torah, Nevi'im, Ketuvim, The Torah is the first 5 books of the OT. It is considered the Jewish Written Law. It is actually given the highest authority and considered the most important Holy Scripture in Judaism. Nevi'im- Or the Prophets- is considered Historical books from the death of Moses until they were taken over by Babylon. It is considered to have less scriptural authority than the Torah. Ketuvim - Writings- are books of truth, poetry, wisdom and history. It is given less scriptural authority than the Nevi’im. The Torah is the only scripture Judaism recognizes as containing words that came directly from God’s lips. That is the reason it is given a higher authority. It stands to reason that if you believe that God spoke certain words directly then they are more authoritative than poetry that David was inspired to write. One is THE word of God. The other is “inspired” by God but not His direct Word.

vincentML -> RE: is religion a tool created to control knowledge (1/10/2014 11:55:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: I have to decide if it is worthwhile to discuss this with you. This is not the first time I've had this discussion, not my first rodeo. It seems this subject upsets you and you maybe even have a "dog in this fight". I do not, I just enjoy discussing it and have no vested interest in the subject and could argue either side but usually defend God and the Bible because there always seems to be more on the other side. Most of what you say is new to you but it is "old stuff" to me. So if you feel willing to stretch the discussion and not just keep repeating the same things over and over again without thinking about and addressing the points I've given, lets go for it but if not then I give up, you win, I've never read such insightful arguments in my life. ;-) It is 'old stuff' to you and you still evade rather than try to explore the issue. If you would reply to my comments I would happily move on. Your idea of insightful arguments seems to be to issue quotes from the Bible. Instead you adopt a pose of transparently phony superiority. Pathetic. [:-] See what I mean I ask you one thing are you going to be civil and this is what I get. Thanks but no thanks. If you want to read my discussions with others to see my answers fine but if you can't be civil then I'm done with you. Like I said; "I give up, you win, I've never read such insightful arguments in my life." ;-) Hmmmm. . . your feathers are ruffled rather easily it seems. Truth is I asked you to account for the loving god in the face of innocent children suffering illness and death in nature and your response was to blame people who live in zones of danger. As if there is anywhere we can all gather to avoid tumultuous weather events. So, no attempt by you to explore the goodness or potency of god. You give me a cockamamie answer about personal responsibility that I have seen appear on these boards zillions of times in discussing politics. And you call me uncivil because I will not accept such an inane and irrelevant reply to my question. In addition you posture that it is all so beneath you. Do you not see your own responsibility in dodging the issue? Do not blame me for your feeble response. If you asked me if I am going to be civil it was in your dreams not in this thread. You add insult by making shit up. I've tried to be nice, I've asked if we could have a reasonable discussion, I've asked you to be civil, I've even tried forfeit to your your insightful arguments and you still keep up with this harassment. Should we ask the moderators to check and see if I've treated you as badly as you say I have? ;-) I am not the one who complained about being treated badly. Don't slide that on to me, Slick. I complained about your absurd answers. So, please stop whining about how you are treated on this board. It ill becomes a grown man.

Page: << < prev 8 9 [10] 11 12 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625