Discussion in 'Comparative Religion' started by river, Jul 2, 2016.
To help me be clear about what you mean... give an example of a theist superstition.!!!
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Well, that coveting they neighbor's wife will land you in hell.
That's a superstition that some theists hold. It is a belief in a cause-effect relationship that has no evidential or observational basis.
Theism itself is - by definition - superstition.
Sure, why not - we are talking about an all-powerful being that can do, quite literally, whatever He wants. Putting mortal limits on God makes, well, very little sense (much the same, all these claims that "my God is the only true God" is silly... what stops God appearing to different people in different forms? I mean, fer Christs sake... God appeared as a BURNING BUSH to someone...)
To further the original point; from Matthew 25, verse 34 - 40:
34“Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the creation of the world.35For I was hungry, and you fed me. I was thirsty, and you gave me a drink. I was a stranger, and you invited me into your home. 36I was naked, and you gave me clothing. I was sick, and you cared for me. I was in prison, and you visited me.’
37“Then these righteous ones will reply, ‘Lord, when did we ever see you hungry and feed you? Or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38Or a stranger and show you hospitality? Or naked and give you clothing? 39When did we ever see you sick or in prison and visit you?’
40“And the King will say, ‘I tell you the truth, when you did it to one of the least of these my brothers and sisters,f you were doing it to me!’
It is, essentially, impossible to put humans above God or God above humans... because to truly love God, you have to love your brothers and sisters as well.
It's an interesting conundrum for humanity, given our natural inclination to bowing to our superiors and lording over our subordinates.
Question: In this context, why are you using the term "natural inclination" instead of "God given inclination". Think about it.
I need no answer, I've heard most of it before.
The idea being that we (mortals) have free will - are not simply puppets on a string. Thus, we are free to develop our own proclivities and desires and other such psychological systems; in other words , we are free to choose to disobey and disbelieve . It is, in ironic terms, our God given right.
Now, the reasons for this are something I have aren't time wondering . . . and the best I can come up with is that God wasn't looking to make a simple servant, but something more. Could you call someone who is utterly bound and bent to your will a friend? Would their praise and adoration mean anything if they are, write literally , designed to think only that way and never question it?
I think He was looking to create something capable of so much more than that. . . the problem being that we get in our own way. To what extent is that "more" ? Well. . . I haven't the foggiest. I hope that makes sense?
PS -typing on my phone keyboard. . . please forgive any particularly weird spelling mistakes ir formatting
Not really a friend, but a slave. A friend is someone who will remind you of your trespasses, a slave can't. This is the reason to blame all bad things on natural inclinations and all good things are from God given inclinations. Doesn't quite work that way for other living things, does it?
But what happened during the Crusades, the Inquisition, Jihads, Slavery, Prejudice? Some of these crimes against humanity were/are being committed in the name of God and with God's blessing.
Why don't we drop all the religious hoopla and just teach to respect every individual as an equal human being and remind them, with respect, of their misguided actions and motives when they trespass. We have system for that in the US, it's called secular laws, it's called the Department of Justice. Oddly, we have to swear on the bible to tell the truth.
Allow me to refer to George Carlin's humorous skit on "swearing on the Bible". (no offense intended, though he does use offensive language)
The problem with such things as the Crusades, holy wars, et al is the human perception that "their God is the only real God". We are, after all, talking about an all-powerful being... what prevents Him from appearing to different people in different forms? What says that Yaweh (Christian), Allah (Muslim), et al aren't the same God as seen by different people/cultures?
Once you add the human element, things become much, much more complicated and convoluted.
I absolutely agree with that. And that would be God's fault, no?[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure I understand - why would He appear differently to different people? Or why could he?
Insomuch as he didn't want mindless slaves, yes. As we already determined - unconditional and unquestioned obedience is, essentially, slavery. The risk of giving someone the ability to go "Uhm... thanks but no thanks" is that they may decide to do so.
An omnipotent God could, so why would he not?
But *mindful* slaves do not have any choices either. Well they can choose to risk being hanged. Was that part of God's plan?
I would say that the real problem is that this being is appearing to these people and, seemingly, telling them to kill, torture, and enslave each other. Then he leaves them to be raised in a religious tradition overwhelmingly dependent on where they were born.
I don't have much time tonight (loooong weekend at work and I don't get a break for a few days yet) -I think that the whole 'telling them to kill/torture /et Al others' is the misunderstanding of humanity . After all, this is, in theory , the same God preaching to "love thy neighbor as thyself", "turn the other cheek", forgive not seven or seventy times but seventy times seven, etc. My thought is that , when bits of the whole message ate lost (or otherwise omitted for the sake of controlling the masses) , very bad things can be extrapolated from what remains and be used to "justify" horrible actions .
It seems that it would be best to ignore the entire thing then and move on with trying to figure out how to be best without it.
Which people are (and should be) free to do - likewise, people who believe it should be free to do so without attack or mockery.
The problem is, both sides seem to think the other side retarded simply for their belief... and seem determined to avoid finding a way to co-exist Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Sure. Until they use their religion to attempt to oppress and kill other people.
Part of the problem is that there are people who admit, as you do, that there are significant problems with the central text of their religion but that are unwilling to actually take it upon themselves to do an evaluation of this text and their own behavior.
Which is, IMHO, the problem - yeah, the OT of the bible was all blood and fire and brimstone... but the New Covenant in Christ (and NT by extension) fulfills the old laws, rending them done. His last words at death, even... "It is done". We don't have to fight one another over religion anymore, and if someone really doesn't want to be a Christian, well, that's their prerogative.
More than that - people forget that the book was written by mortals; people who could easily have had their own agendas. Then, it was translated and controlled by a church during a period where the church held almost all of the power AND were the only ones able to read and write... anyone who says they didn't abuse that power even a little is, I think, naive.
Yeah, that's right... oh, wait, the New Testament likes slavery, too... and we have over two thousand years of Christians killing and oppressing people because they aren't Christians. Heck, a lot of Christians who want to oppress non-Christians may be winning the White House today.
Please spread that gospel.
Aye... it is a sad state of affairs Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Hence the OP.
Separate names with a comma.