Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by Greatest I am, May 3, 2017.
Yep... permaban seems about right to me Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
you don't understand the contribution certain people play, even if it's irritating to others. there are people who question to help issues from backsliding, and promote more honesty and better ethics. even if it were true there are muslims who are good people or whatever etc, the questioning of the religious tenets must be ongoing to keep issues transparent and others honest.
OK. I'll just say this.
GIA was stupid and boring. He didn't offend me because I wouldn't grant him attention.
God forbid this thred gets locked so others cant continue to not grant GIA attenton Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
You can light a candle here now and again for him/her.
Was that a nuance at me? I'd like to hear it.
Took me a bit to figure out what you two were responding to... then I saw the "show ignored content" button and it all made sense XD
That's the key there - certain PEOPLE. There are people who are bigoted and intolerant. There are people who are open minded. Their religion is secondary.
Let me ask you this.
Let's say someone came here and claimed that, because of his personal experiences, he thought blacks were lazy, stupid and immoral. Would you value that contribution? Would you think that post was useful because it kept issues from backsliding, and because it promoted more honesty and better ethics? Do you think such statements would keep the issues transparent and honest?
(Note that in both cases - those who believe someone's religion determines their morality, and those who believe that someone's skin color determined their morality - I would support their right to say it, even if I disagreed with their premise.)
no because it's about the religion itself which deals with ethics. that is what religion is supposed to be about or so the proponents say. it's legitimate to question the tenets that one espouses to support because one chooses that religion.
the silence on the unethical and especially patriarchal/misognynistic texts seems to be a passive agreement that one just chooses not to practice for the sake of current societal ethical meme instead of denouncing it as wrong. this gives unspoken legitimacy and historical validity to such actions as if they were right or can be right depending on who has power to implement or exercise it. and i have known religious people who have that sentiment too. the koran and the bible are holy works of god to members. if those nice muslims disagree, then that would be a different case but have you asked them? what is their take on it?
right. you don't want to go there because it is their personal belief and they have no obligation to justify it but then again, others can criticize the religion for what it is. just because someone acts nice doesn't make a religion legitimate.
you do realize the deeper psychology behind it, don't you? the reason why there is silence on the unethical aspects of religious texts is because if one is marginalized themselves or even if they choose to do so, they would like to be able to exercise everything humanly possible under the sun legitimized by it's texts/beliefs. if they speak out at the root of the religion, it would be like giving up one's own bag of tools or tricks. this means that most likely, ethics is a matter of options. also, most fundamentalists tend to give credit or reverence to a sentiment of patriarchy because they see it as a base source of power.
Most Christians I know acknowledge and recognize the evils that have been committed in the name of God... up to and including the Crusades. It is this recognition of past failures that allows one to avoid repeating them.
Lightin candles is aganst my religion... a religion which has instilled in me beter morals than any body i know of... an especialy those wit religious beleifs which include eternal hell as bein fair an just.!!!
that's a subtle evasion but typical 'christian' retort. you know i was referring to the biblical texts itself.
what i noticed every sunday and wednesday night bible study was the unsavory verses of the bible were never picked for sermons or for study. there was this unspoken acceptance that even the bad was acceptable because it was the work or will of god as well as men of god or how god made man (misogyny) but especially that current ideas of ethics or behavior was more a matter of personal modern taste and any people that were enslaved, abused or killed in the bible somehow deserved it as in they were lesser of importance to god.
That put me in mind of this:
Sounds just like GIA, taking over where GIA left off are you? Good luck with that.
This wording strongly suggests you believe there are no good Muslims. I hope that's just a minor textual issue?
If that's the case, I'd recommend you find a different church - it sounds like the one you attended was rather narrow in their viewpoint.
The UMC I attend has, on several occasions, used the "less savory" verses as learning examples - I was particularly fond of learning about all the ways we (as a species) have tried to reinvent and reinterpret what was supposed to be a very simple message, in order to further our own political, power, or other materialistic goals.
Also, there is a sermon out there on "Jesus the Asshole" - it's quite a good read, and makes a rather succinct point.
That i know of... me an GIA dont share the same religious beleifs... an thanks for the luck coment even tho "luck" is just anuther beleif that i dont have -- i know you ment well.!!!
what's ironic and unfortunate about how the cookie crumbles is realistically posters like GIA and MR are no less valuable than posters like you. i'm not picking on you either because you aren't the only one. i'm not even as valuable a contributor/poster as they were overall. people found their threads interesting enough members like you and others would keep posting in them.
that's also typical not atypical. there are verses that are not reinvented or reinterpreted. to reinterpret or put a positive spin on an unethical text is what is typical for religious to do to continue to justify everything in the their hallowed books.
If that is what you get out of all of it, then it sounds like religion isn't for you...?
Separate names with a comma.