Do you think it's wrong for people to create a religion?

Argue for and against religions and philosophies which are not Christian

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
HansKecht
Newbie
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat May 02, 2015 3:58 pm

Do you think it's wrong for people to create a religion?

Post #1

Post by HansKecht »

I can't find a religion that makes sense to me, or that has enough proof to get me into it. Would it be wrong of me to make my own?

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18080
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: Do you think it's wrong for people to create a religion?

Post #71

Post by Divine Insight »

Hector Barbosa wrote: Whats wrong with believing in God?
Absolutely nothing. And people should be free to believe that there exists gods.

So far, no problem. :D
Hector Barbosa wrote: How can prejudice and injustice against theists be justified when it can not be proved that they are wrong?
Where is there any prejudiced or injustice against theists? They are more than welcome to believe that a God exists if they so chose.

Where the problem comes into play is when they hold up a "Holy Book" and proclaim, "This is the WORD OF GOD!"

Now, we've got a serious problem.
Hector Barbosa wrote: Such line of thinking is downright dangerous, and quite in opposition to the creative, free-spirited open mind we just defended with Wicca.

Can you not see that?
I don't know of any Wiccan who hold up a large Holy Book of Dogma proclaiming that it is the "Word of God" and demanding that everyone has to obey it whether they believe in Wicca or not.

So you see any Wiccan's doing that? :-k
Hector Barbosa wrote: What will be next then?

Lynching gifted children, kids who are more sensitive or intelligent than the norm?
What then would be of the handicapped or those with mental illnesses?
You've lost me entirely now. Has anyone held up their gifted or handicapped child proclaiming that their child represents the "Word of God" and that we must obey their child and adopt the moral values of their child as our concrete objective moral values?

I don't see where atheism leads to having gifted or handicapped children "lynched".

You'll need to explain how you arrived at that conclusion.
Hector Barbosa wrote: The entire US constitution, freedom, justice and human rights would fall if we allowed such thinking to win.
What thinking? That we shouldn't worship ancient myths as the "Word of God" until they can be verified to be such?

Would you accept the Mulsims shoving their Qur'an down your throat as the "Word of God"? If not, then I don't see why you should have a problem with living in a society that uses Atheism as their foundational principle.

Remember Atheism does not proclaim, "There is not God", it simply says that unles you can PROVE that your favorite god myth actually came from some actual God then we aren't interested in hearing about it.

You seem to be taking this to extremes that it doesn't even remotely imply.
Hector Barbosa wrote: You can never justify any prejudice against anyone without proof of Malicious intent no matter how much you dislike or disagree with what they believe in.

The beliefs has to be proved to be wrong for there to be a justification, and that has not happened.
Exactly the opposite is true. Theists can never justify their prejudice against those who don't believe in their favorite God myths until they can prove that their God myths actually came from some actual God.

How can a Christian Theists, or a Muslim Theist demand that an atheist must live under their religious dogma because the Christian or Muslim merely believes that those myths might be true?

Not only that but surely we can see how the Christian Theists and Muslim Theists would quickly end up in a "Holy War" over their disagreements on what they belief "God" demands of mankind.

I honestly don't see how you cannot see that atheism is the only rational solution.

The Christians and Muslims can still "believe" whatever they like. They can try to follow the moral principles in their respective dogmas to their heart's content. As long as they don't harm others in the process they are free to be as religious as they like.

But they can't be trying to rule the world with their favorite theocracy.

How can you not see how that could never work?
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

shnarkle
Guru
Posts: 2056
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2013 10:56 am

Re: Do you think it's wrong for people to create a religion?

Post #72

Post by shnarkle »

Hector Barbosa wrote: [Replying to post 52 by shnarkle]
Did I say that? Call me a liar.
Where did I say that? You are the first to use the word in out debate. Are you calling ME a liar?
No, I'm calling myself a liar. I may have taken some liberties in assuming that you knew what I was talking about. As the saying goes, "those who know say nothing, those who talk know nothing." or. "those who speak can only lie" etc. What I was saying is that if I said that then I was probably typing too fast and not paying attention to what I was typing. My purpose is not to offend, it just happens sometimes.

Look I am not going to debate like a primitive kinder-gardener.

I do not appreciate you trying to bait me like that, it actually does more to suggest that you have dishonest motives than anything else either of us have said, so please refrain from arguing like that in the future or I will ignore you and debate with someone with more self-discipline, self-control and love of truth than someone who takes debates personal.
Sorry you feel that way, but if you must move on then I bid you well. There's no point in being ticked off by your own misunderstanding. I'm used to being misunderstood so I don't take any offence at it. You owe me no apology.

shnarkle
Guru
Posts: 2056
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2013 10:56 am

Re: Do you think it's wrong for people to create a religion?

Post #73

Post by shnarkle »

Divine Insight wrote:
shnarkle wrote: The empty tomb is simply a metaphor.
Yes, but keep in mind the empty tomb wasn't a metaphor that Jesus taught. The rumors of an empty tomb came into play after Jesus had been crucified.
Jesus taught that one must empty themselves; e.g. "deny yourself". The author illustrated this point splendidly with an empty tomb. Jesus had his illustrations as well(or do I need to attribute them to the gospel writer as well? It really doesn't make any difference to me one way or another.), I was simply pointing out how it all fits together. I'm not trying to steal Mark's thunder by attributing this empty tomb to some idea Jesus had for the ending of his life story. I'm simply looking at the story the gospel writers have presented us with. When I refer to Jesus I'm not attempting to extricate him from the written narratives. It doesn't matter to me if these people are writing about someone they once knew or simply conveying a message in this fictional narrative form. The essential message doesn't change regardless of who you attribute it to. Ultimately, there are no attributes, no rumors either, none that matter. That's for those who want to focus their attentions on set design, production value, choreography, still photos, autographs, wardrobe, craft services, historical context, key grip placement, editing, etc.

User avatar
Hector Barbosa
Apprentice
Posts: 238
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2017 11:19 am
Location: Scandinavia/UK

Re: Do you think it's wrong for people to create a religion?

Post #74

Post by Hector Barbosa »

[Replying to post 71 by shnarkle]
No, I'm calling myself a liar. I may have taken some liberties in assuming

Sorry you feel that way, but if you must move on then I bid you well. There's no point in being ticked off by your own misunderstanding. I'm used to being misunderstood so I don't take any offence at it. You owe me no apology.
Ok! fair enough. It likely was a misunderstanding as you say, likely spurned by you taking liberties in assuming a understanding I have no way of having if you have not explained yourself very well.

I am not you and I have not experienced what you have.

I am also not a usual atheist and theists, so the position you might assume most have may not apply to me, for I don't hold this position.

I do NOT assume that the Bible is true or that the evolution theory is correct.
So to assume that I have concluded this would do me great injustice and can only lead to misunderstanding.

I almost hate the idea of being labelled a theists or atheists, for from my position it is a very dishonest to be convinced by either position, for I have no way of knowing despite I have studied science for more than 20 years.

Is this because I am a stupid slow learner? Well if that is so then you have to assume that theists and atheists can prove themselves right, and since the opposing argument exist it would seem fairly evident that they have not managed to provide the evidence.

So I think all evidence points to that I am slow to be convinced because I am more thorough in my investigation than most theists and atheists are.

But you can believe conclude or think what you want.
But if you conclude I am insincere in my search for truth, then you ARE calling me a liar and then we have nothing to discuss.

If you are willing to give me the benefit of a doubt, then you have to show me the respect of allowing me the space "not to be labelled a theist or atheist" until I have been PROVED wrong or proved commitment to either of these positions.
For I do believe I have proved my case for not being either over and over now.

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18080
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: Do you think it's wrong for people to create a religion?

Post #75

Post by Divine Insight »

shnarkle wrote:
Divine Insight wrote:
shnarkle wrote: The empty tomb is simply a metaphor.
Yes, but keep in mind the empty tomb wasn't a metaphor that Jesus taught. The rumors of an empty tomb came into play after Jesus had been crucified.
Jesus taught that one must empty themselves; e.g. "deny yourself". The author illustrated this point splendidly with an empty tomb. Jesus had his illustrations as well(or do I need to attribute them to the gospel writer as well? It really doesn't make any difference to me one way or another.), I was simply pointing out how it all fits together. I'm not trying to steal Mark's thunder by attributing this empty tomb to some idea Jesus had for the ending of his life story. I'm simply looking at the story the gospel writers have presented us with. When I refer to Jesus I'm not attempting to extricate him from the written narratives. It doesn't matter to me if these people are writing about someone they once knew or simply conveying a message in this fictional narrative form. The essential message doesn't change regardless of who you attribute it to. Ultimately, there are no attributes, no rumors either, none that matter. That's for those who want to focus their attentions on set design, production value, choreography, still photos, autographs, wardrobe, craft services, historical context, key grip placement, editing, etc.
You seem to be ignoring the fact that the Gospel rumors don't merely suggest the tomb of Jesus was empty, but they go on to suggest that he rose from the dead, walked among them physically to where they could even poke their fingers in his wounds thus proving that he's not just a "ghost". And then ultimately ascending to heaven to sit at the right-hand of God.

Your views of Christianity seem to be ignoring large parts of the story.
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

shnarkle
Guru
Posts: 2056
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2013 10:56 am

Re: Do you think it's wrong for people to create a religion?

Post #76

Post by shnarkle »

Hector Barbosa wrote: [Replying to post 71 by shnarkle]
No, I'm calling myself a liar. I may have taken some liberties in assuming

Sorry you feel that way, but if you must move on then I bid you well. There's no point in being ticked off by your own misunderstanding. I'm used to being misunderstood so I don't take any offence at it. You owe me no apology.
Ok! fair enough. It likely was a misunderstanding as you say, likely spurned by you taking liberties in assuming a understanding I have no way of having if you have not explained yourself very well.
I only assumed you had a rudimentary familiarity with the texts under consideration. You had mentioned more than a passing exposure to Buddhism, the bible, etc. My statement was an allusion to a concept that they all refer to, e.g. "let God be true and all men liars"; "the Tao that is spoken is not the Tao"; "he that knows says nothing, he that speaks knows nothing:, etc. I was quite literally saying that I misspoke, therefore what I said was a lie.

Having said this, I do think that when people take offence to statements that literally have nothing to do with them, but everything to do with my own mistakes, then it is time to move on. I'm not labelling you in any way. I have never made any assumptions as to anything in your background. I point of fact, I have no interest in your background. My only interest is in the validity of your arguments.

shnarkle
Guru
Posts: 2056
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2013 10:56 am

Re: Do you think it's wrong for people to create a religion?

Post #77

Post by shnarkle »

Divine Insight wrote:
shnarkle wrote:
Divine Insight wrote:
shnarkle wrote: The empty tomb is simply a metaphor.
Yes, but keep in mind the empty tomb wasn't a metaphor that Jesus taught. The rumors of an empty tomb came into play after Jesus had been crucified.
Jesus taught that one must empty themselves; e.g. "deny yourself". The author illustrated this point splendidly with an empty tomb. Jesus had his illustrations as well(or do I need to attribute them to the gospel writer as well? It really doesn't make any difference to me one way or another.), I was simply pointing out how it all fits together. I'm not trying to steal Mark's thunder by attributing this empty tomb to some idea Jesus had for the ending of his life story. I'm simply looking at the story the gospel writers have presented us with. When I refer to Jesus I'm not attempting to extricate him from the written narratives. It doesn't matter to me if these people are writing about someone they once knew or simply conveying a message in this fictional narrative form. The essential message doesn't change regardless of who you attribute it to. Ultimately, there are no attributes, no rumors either, none that matter. That's for those who want to focus their attentions on set design, production value, choreography, still photos, autographs, wardrobe, craft services, historical context, key grip placement, editing, etc.
You seem to be ignoring the fact that the Gospel rumors don't merely suggest the tomb of Jesus was empty, but they go on to suggest that he rose from the dead, walked among them physically to where they could even poke their fingers in his wounds thus proving that he's not just a "ghost". And then ultimately ascending to heaven to sit at the right-hand of God.

Your views of Christianity seem to be ignoring large parts of the story.

Mark's gospel originally ended with just an empty tomb. The other examples you give aren't conclusively pointing to a physical resurrection. The texts themselves indicate something else to me. No one poked their fingers into wounds. Mary claims to have seen the risen Jesus, but she can't touch him either. Jesus walks with his disciples and they don't recognize him with their eyes; but their hearts are burning with recognition. Jesus says to love others as he loved them, and they are beginning to do this without knowing it. They see someone break bread and they see Christ.

These texts were all part of the early church's liturgy and seem to point to the reality of Christ living in their lives. He is truly alive in and through everyone, or rather everyone is alive in and through Christ.

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18080
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: Do you think it's wrong for people to create a religion?

Post #78

Post by Divine Insight »

shnarkle wrote: No one poked their fingers into wounds.
Have you not read the story of the doubting Thomas?

John 20:
[24] But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.
[25] The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.
[26] And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
[27] Then saith he to Thomas, reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
[28] And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.


A lot of Christian apologists point to this specific story when they argue that Jesus was actually physically resurrected and wasn't just appearing as a ghost, or worse yet, just as a hallucination. They often used John 20 as confirmation that the Bible proclaims that Jesus was indeed physically resurrected in a physical body.

In fact, I have often counter-argued that it seems ridiculous me that an omnipotent God would not heal his Son into pristine health upon resurrection. I always ask, "What would have happened if Jesus would have been beheaded?" Would he then have needed to carry his head around in his hands when he was resurrected?

So I am very familiar with debating the story of the doubting Thomas.

Yet here you are trying to tell me that no one poked their fingers into Jesus' wounds.

Sorry, but you are clearly wrong on that point,. John says otherwise.

If you're going to debate the Bible you need to become familiar with what's actually in it first.
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

shnarkle
Guru
Posts: 2056
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2013 10:56 am

Re: Do you think it's wrong for people to create a religion?

Post #79

Post by shnarkle »

Divine Insight wrote:
shnarkle wrote: No one poked their fingers into wounds.
Have you not read the story of the doubting Thomas?

John 20:
[24] But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.
[25] The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.
[26] And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
[27] Then saith he to Thomas, reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
[28] And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.


A lot of Christian apologists point to this specific story when they argue that Jesus was actually physically resurrected and wasn't just appearing as a ghost, or worse yet, just as a hallucination. They often used John 20 as confirmation that the Bible proclaims that Jesus was indeed physically resurrected in a physical body.

In fact, I have often counter-argued that it seems ridiculous me that an omnipotent God would not heal his Son into pristine health upon resurrection. I always ask, "What would have happened if Jesus would have been beheaded?" Would he then have needed to carry his head around in his hands when he was resurrected?

So I am very familiar with debating the story of the doubting Thomas.

Yet here you are trying to tell me that no one poked their fingers into Jesus' wounds.

Sorry, but you are clearly wrong on that point,. John says otherwise.

If you're going to debate the Bible you need to become familiar with what's actually in it first.
Perhaps you might want to study this passage in more depth as nowhere does it state that Thomas thrust, poked, or even peered into the wounds of Jesus. Jesus simply tells Thomas to do this. I can say the same thing, it doesn't mean somebody is actually going to do this. Nowhere in the text does it state that Thomas actually thrust his fingers into the wounds. In fact, what it actually states is that Thomas is no longer remaining in unbelief. It doesn't state how he came to believe. One can just as easily assume that he came to believe, not by sight, or plunging fingers into wounds, but by faith.

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18080
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: Do you think it's wrong for people to create a religion?

Post #80

Post by Divine Insight »

shnarkle wrote: Perhaps you might want to study this passage in more depth as nowhere does it state that Thomas thrust, poked, or even peered into the wounds of Jesus. Jesus simply tells Thomas to do this. I can say the same thing, it doesn't mean somebody is actually going to do this. Nowhere in the text does it state that Thomas actually thrust his fingers into the wounds. In fact, what it actually states is that Thomas is no longer remaining in unbelief. It doesn't state how he came to believe. One can just as easily assume that he came to believe, not by sight, or plunging fingers into wounds, but by faith.
[25] The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

Well, the story certainly suggests that Thomas would not believe until he actually did this.

We only have these stories to go by.

What you are suggesting is that we ignore what the stories actually have to say.

Buy how is that a valid argument for these stories? :-k

And besides, if Jesus was resurrected as a "Ghost" then why would there need to be a missing physical body in the first place?

You seem to be willing to ignore the endless self-contradictions of these fables.

And you seem to be ignoring verse 27 as well.

[27] Then saith he to Thomas, reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.

This strongly suggests that Jesus is standing right in front of Thomas holding out his hands for Thomas to exam and feel.

Also, as I have already stated I always argue how utterly silly this story is. I would expect Jesus to say to Thomas, "Why would you expect me to have those old wounds, the Heavenly Father has raised me from the dead and has made me whole again".

I mean seriously. What sense does it even make that a God would magically raise his Son from a grave and not even bother to physical heal his body in the process?

The whole story is clearly an absurd superstitious tale. The author was so concerned with trying to get his readers to believe that there is no doubt that Jesus has been resurrected that he writes up this silly story of the doubting Thomas without realizing how silly the story truly is.

This is a dead give-away that the story is nothing more than a fabricated tale.

Like I say, what if Jesus would have been beheaded? Would he then have had to carry his head around in his hands after being resurrected? Or do you think in that case the Father God would have at been kind enough to at least reattach the head?

I mean seriously. What sense does it make that an omnipotent God would resurrect his Son from a grave and not heal his wounds?

Whether the doubting Thomas actually placed his fingers in the wounds is irrelevant. The scriptures clearly have Jesus OFFERING for Thomas to do just that.

So whether Thomas actually did it or not is irrelevant.
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

Post Reply