Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

MushroomMan Mycology
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |  [ show all ]
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: Arghhhh]
    #10220862 -

Self preservation and the pursuit of power are the only moral systems that come naturally to mankind without an outside influence.


Oh really? How interesting. Yet people who have extensively studied other primates found empathy, compassion and other traits besides dominance and aggression. If true how do you explain this?

Every nation that enforces atheist belief has to have an enormous police and security establishment.

This Christian nation puts more people behind bars then any nation on earth. We have on fourth of the worlds prison population. 

I don't see any basis for your claims.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: deCypher]
    #10220996 -

Quote:
They claim to, but as far as I'm aware all authority in religion ultimately rests from man-written doctrine.  And what's prevent a group of immoral, persuasive people from banding together and forming a religion based on evil?  All religion provides is a codified system that uses tradition to mandate an arbitrary morality; this is hardly a logical justification.


Your right (Shocked!?)
Anyone can write anything, and they may be evil and they may create a bunch of rules in order to benefit themselves.

That's why considering the source is important. I don't think all religions are equal, that all religion benefits society or even that all members or advocates of an otherwise healthy religion are themselves beneficial to society. Most atheists I've met are atheists primarily because of experiences with fraudulent or simply insensitive religious folks, who didn't practice what they preached.  Any rationalizing to justify that choice usually came afterwards.

If someone creates a religion to expand their own wealth, power or popularity then you should avoid them. If they don't live up to their own rules, and don't try to correct their errors, avoid. If a faith doesn't alter the way their adherents behave in a positive way, then avoid, or if they never faced any adversity or temptation at all and wrote from some ivory tower somewhere safe, avoid.

If however the authors lived up to the values they taught, even when confronted with death and personal suffering, then maybe there's something of value there.  If they relied on their example and reason to spread their message rather than force it upon others at the point of a sword, then maybe there's value.  If they willingly sacrificed themselves in order to spread their message, rather than deny it, then they clearly weren't motivated by self preservation or the acquisition of power, so maybe there's something of value there.  If there is something about their lives to admire, then maybe there's value there.

Just cause you meet one fraud or a whole bunch of frauds, doesn't mean everyone of that religion is.  You should look for the best examples rather than the worst.

There is usually some logical basis for the morals taught by religions.  They're not irrational but sometimes depend on concepts unique to that faith for their rational, or met a specific need or requirement, which may no longer exist. Old Testament Food Laws are the big example I can think of. At the time they were created they undoubtedly saved lives by preventing people from eating food that wasn't nice, processed and as thoroughly guaranteed to not kill you as they are now.  I cant think of an example that at no point had some social benefit, but perhaps some exist.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: Icelander]
    #10221144 -

Quote:
Oh really? How interesting. Yet people who have extensively studied other primates found empathy, compassion and other traits besides dominance and aggression. If true how do you explain this?

This Christian nation puts more people behind bars then any nation on earth. We have on fourth of the worlds prison population. 

I don't see any basis for your claims.


Empathy, Compassion and being able to identify with others can allow you to show kindness, within your group of friends or protective sphere. Those are skills that benefit your survival and are easy if you don't perceive a threat and don't need something someone else has. It might encourage you to show kindness to someone that you hope to make part of your group of friends. But would you show those same traits to someone you don't like so much?  Would a primate ever show compassion for someone that attacked them? I don't know.

Were the richest nation on earth and even our poorest live better than people in many nations, who don't commit crimes. So I don't accept poverty as the reason for so many prisoners.  We are however the most free nation and the government is less intrusive (still) than in almost any other stable nation. In the U.S. religion as an influence in peoples everyday moral choices is declining (Many focus on one or two specific sins they oppose politically because those are not temptations they face, and to make them feel better about ignoring others).  So far, we have not replaced that decline with the corresponding growth in Government intrusion and controls you see in other countries. 

If you are willing to have CCTV on every corner, fewer privacy laws an intrusive Government which pretty much prevents crime cause its constantly there in your lives, then you might have less crime.  Other nations, even democracies in Europe, have replaced peoples ability to self regulate their behavior with greater government controls and essentially bribe people into submissive with giant government programs which take away all concerns for self preservation without requiring anything of the individual. Might as well smoke weed and play computer games all day if the Government will pay you to. Even I find it tempting, though I don't think that produces a strong society.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: Arghhhh]
    #10221177 -

The majority of Americans claim to have a belief in god. How do you account for this if religion is our saving grace?


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: Icelander]
    #10223174 -

Religion offers the basis for a higher morality but that doesn't mean everyone claiming to believe in that religion actually guide their life's decisions by it.

Many supposedly religious people in America are so secularized that Sunday is the only time they demonstrate anything that indicates that they actually belong to a religion.  I often hear people say they are religious but its private.  People think any expression of religious belief in their daily lives is intolerant of others, and so act throughout their normal day in the same manner as everyone else to blend in and not offend anyone.

They usually end up adopting the same values, consciously or unconsciously as a secular society that denies God. They sacrifice other moral beliefs so they can be accepted by the crowd and achieve that primary goal of acceptance and self preservation. So even for many people claiming a belief in God, their value system is in practice, no more enlightened than the seeking of power and self preservation that atheism offers. 

When some try to act as they preach, sometimes often over compensate, and come of as weird and pushy, which isn't great.  Religion should affect the way you operate in daily life however. If it doesn't then its a pointless exercise. I think pushing Religion out of public life in the name of tolerance has actually prevented people from learning how to be truly tolerant of each other and discuss religion rationally, with civility, actually think about why they believe what they believe and think about how they should apply those beliefs in everyday life, not just in church. A tolerance which forces people to hide their personal beliefs and act the same as each other is no tolerance at all. It forces people to abandon any practical application or expression of their faith, or become defiant in the face of perceived intolerance, which I'm sure turns some folks off.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: Arghhhh]
    #10224026 -

Quote:
Throughout history when a nations religious beliefs faded, and people became more cynical and self serving in their behavior, the nations didn't survive long either


This may be true, but I would suggest that the fading of religious belief is an effect and not a cause. 

Quote:
Remember your grandparents stories of how people used to be polite to each other, and how you could leave your doors unlocked and not worry about people trying to rob you?



Yes, one of my grandfathers told me how his father would keep a cane at the dinner table. If someone spoke out of turn he would hit them with the cane. One of my grandfathers didn't seem to have such a rigid family, though he grew up around them. They were both from religious families. Robbers used to get shot, lynched, driven out of town, etc. There's a law on the county books where I live, not used since the early 1900's, which states that if you want to beat your wife, you may do so only on the court house lawn. People's actions and attitudes are less consequential now, and this is the reason there is less morality in society.

Quote:
I'm convinced that this is because of the decline of religious belief as the basis of morality.  That decline exists amongst "religious" people too, many of whom no longer base their moral beliefs on the religions they claim to belong to. 


A poor man may have dreams of "making it", surrounded by a community of trusted people, have a woman and the prosperity to afford healthy children, maybe have some sense of finality in their purpose, in meaning and existence. It will benefit him to be virtuous, and hard working. There is no need for the existence of religion, only the idea of peace. Words and meaning spring from our being.

And there is the rich man. Even if his heart isn't pure, it will be of great benefit for him to be at least visibly virtuous. No amount of money can provide the protection good will does.

What is one mark of a highly successful civilization? Lots of poor people. So there is a situation where a population can thrive, even as the number of poor swell, and there is the idea that everyone can prosper. And while technically it seems possible, it just doesn't seem to play out that way. What would happen if survival was no longer an issue? Once a population is so successful that there is no need to strive, unless they're particularly inclined to, there is no necessity of belief in the virtue of the rich man. Priests, preachers, and religions no longer shine. Eventually, even the rich men no longer shine so brightly.

Not that they, as a whole, ever deserved it.

If you consider that wars of conquest, and some of the worst civil impositions, come from highly successful, religious societies, you can see how "moral" these dogmatic code followers really are in the end. A bloody mess if you ask me. Rampaging across the countryside and rampaging at home. A halo, perched on a bloody set of horns. Human, with or without religion.

Getting a fresh start on an island, might not be a bad idea, all things considered.:)


--------------------
rahz

comfort pleasure power love     truth awareness peace I am      I feel      I do     I love  I speak    I see    I know

why there is reality and patterned, law-like consistency at all, rather than noise or non-reality is not a question physics answers. It's a question physics presupposes an answer to in order to provide other answers.

Edited by Rahz (04/24/09 01:21 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: Rahz]
    #10228836 -

Quote:
I would suggest that the fading of religious belief is an effect and not a cause.


Generally speaking the cause comes before the effect. I think there are some cases where a nations defeat came before and caused a subsequent lack of faith which would support your point.  Japan is one example I can think of, and I think some African and South American civilizations lost faith in their religions due to defeat. So yes what you said can be true, though in those cases it was raw military power that lead to their defeat and not a social weakening which made it easy. 

Generally speaking however the decline in religious belief comes first, and leads to the subsequent social decline and collapse.  Rome is a great example, though it is true with most historical empires that were eaten from within before they collapsed.

Quote:
People's actions and attitudes are less consequential now, and this is the reason there is less morality in society.


I'm not quite sure what you mean here.

Quote:
A poor man may have dreams of "making it", surrounded by a community of trusted people, have a woman and the prosperity to afford healthy children, maybe have some sense of finality in their purpose, in meaning and existence. It will benefit him to be virtuous, and hard working. There is no need for the existence of religion, only the idea of peace. Words and meaning spring from our being.




Its a very idyllic picture that ignores human nature and human history.  Many Communist Nations tried this specifically.  Each one of them at some point truly held this as their goal, but found that it didn't work out that way, they each tried to then force it, and it still didn't work.

The only purpose or meaning of existence they could logically find would be doing better than the Jones', being more popular than your neighbor, richer than your neighbor, safer that your neighbor.

Even if everyone else was trustworthy, it would still be easier to profit and succeed by faking it to look trustworthy, while screwing everybody else over to get on top of those gullible trustworthy folks.  After all, if its secret who will ever know? There can still be peace.  Of course it doesn't work out that way, people find out, and fights start. You actually point this behavior out yourself.

Quote:
Even if his heart isn't pure, it will be of great benefit for him to be at least visibly virtuous. No amount of money can provide the protection good will does.



Religion and the values that originally stemmed from religion gives someone the motivation to be truly virtuous. If your beliefs are based only on power and self preservation, than its just as beneficial, if not more so, to fake good behavior.

Quote:
What would happen if survival was no longer an issue? Once a population is so successful that there is no need to strive, unless they're particularly inclined to,


It didn't prosper people to be virtuous or hard working.  Even the motivations to seek power or profit or personal protection offered by atheism are removed under the Communist system because advancement isn't based on hard work. Why work harder when you don't reap the benefits? Why work at all if your going to be taken care of regardless. People don't, that's why there were always food shortages and why Lada was the best civilian vehicle the Soviet Super Power could come up with.

Quote:
What is one mark of a highly successful civilization? Lots of poor people.


I disagree with this, because unsuccessful civilizations have even more poor people. A society that does not strive is never successful.  Society shouldn't try to guarantee everyone equal success regardless of their effort or talent, only that they have equal opportunity. Society shouldn't try to remove a persons responsibility for themselves.  Its ironic that atheist who so often criticize religious people for not thinking for themselves, always seek forms of government that eliminate the individuals need to think or do anything else for themselves.

Quote:
Not that they, as a whole, ever deserved it.


People who worked hard to prosper financially generally sacrificed something else, whether it was time spent with their family, or simply by skipping opportunities to pass the bong. They may not be moral people, but I don't begrudge them their money, unless they got it through fraud, theft, or by destroying others. I certainly don't think I deserve their money.

Quote:
If you consider that wars of conquest, and some of the worst civil impositions, come from highly successful, religious societies, you can see how "moral" these dogmatic code followers really are in the end.


You see this conquest and repressive behavior in all societies, and it has been even worse in atheist societies. I would argue that though the leaders in both cases were dogmatic, it was for the purposes of maintaining power. They were rarely dogmatic to the "code" they claimed to believe. If the leaders were not following the code or religious principles, then those codes or principles cant be blamed for their bad behavior. Most of them are pretty specific about faith not being something that can be forced. 

When leaders tried to force it, it was as a measure of control, not because they were concerned for the souls of others or even that they truly believed, just that they shut up and conformed.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: Arghhhh]
    #10231501 -

Jesus was a rebel and I don't think he had any problem with the use of violence as long as it was to fight evil and tyranny.
Quote:
13When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14In the temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. 15So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. 16To those who sold doves he said, "Get these out of here! How dare you turn my Father's house into a market!"

Gospel of John


I'm praying he will come back and sort out the Federal Reserve for us.
MONEY CHANGERS...ARRRRRGH  :whip2:


--------------------
How to add a picture to a post

Sample ID request - READ BEFORE POSTING AN ID REQUEST!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: Arghhhh]
    #10233892 -

Quote:
Generally speaking however the decline in religious belief comes first, and leads to the subsequent social decline and collapse.  Rome is a great example, though it is true with most historical empires that were eaten from within before they collapsed.


Rome is a great example, but if we're talking about the fall, it was not because of a loss in belief. Both the fall, and the loss of beliefs would be effects. What's the cause? Get fat and lazy, loose your beliefs -and- get conquered.

Quote:
People's actions and attitudes are less consequential now, and this is the reason there is less morality in society.
Quote:
I'm not quite sure what you mean here


.

"I'm a proud parent of a wonderful child!" Not so long ago, you say the wrong thing, you get you ass tanned by the teacher. Then you get to deal with the parents. Lucky if you don't get the belt, or go looking for a switch. Steal something? Then your name is dirt, if you weren't shot after beaten to a pulp. Get run out of town. There's still a law on the county books where I live, obviously not in use, hasn't been used since the early 1900's, it just hasn't been stricken from the books. If you wish to beat your wife you may do so, but only on the court house lawn. Of course, beating your children was a non-issue because it was so accepted. Beat a wife and you're criminal #1, beating kids is against the law these days.

So, the less you beat people and threaten them with death, the less "moral" they will be perhaps, according to the reasons you were beating them.

And let's not forget about slaves. I like to think of slavery as a logical advantage, race factor being a separate issue. What's really going on is that the criminals and the neighbors (race) are logically used to advantage. Up until a relatively short time ago, slavery was apparently a very moral thing by some standard.

Quote:
Its a very idyllic picture that ignores human nature and human history.  Many Communist Nations tried this specifically

.

I'd rather not get into the Political arena because it's sidestepping the issue IMO. The Communist track record isn't that great, but it's not a dull stone among diamonds. The Inquisition raged for hundreds and hundreds of years. Genocide is generally a religious/ethnical phenomena. Raging across the country side, raging at home. Religious or not... but usually religious.

Quote:
Religion and the values that originally stemmed from religion gives someone the motivation to be truly virtuous. If your beliefs are based only on power and self preservation, than its just as beneficial, if not more so, to fake good behavior.


Here is my basic disagreement. I would say that religion (the good parts) stems from the values. Religion could be considered a type of organized structure, reflective of those who made it, the interpretation of which is up for grabs. Some Grandfathers may remember keeping their doors unlocked, some Grandfathers may remember raging across the country side, or beating the wife, or lynching those niggers.

Quote:
It didn't prosper people to be virtuous or hard working.  Even the motivations to seek power or profit or personal protection offered by atheism are removed under the Communist system because advancement isn't based on hard work. Why work harder when you don't reap the benefits? Why work at all if your going to be taken care of regardless. People don't, that's why there were always food shortages and why Lada was the best civilian vehicle the Soviet Super Power could come up with.


Well, I'm not a fan, but whether or not a system allows hard work to pay off, and whether or not they are religious, are two different issues. You could provide the example of America to show that the two exist together. By using the rifle, Europeans were able to set the stage for the US by committing genocide for land, creating a virtually unlimited supply of raw goods. That hard work payed off. And the use of slavery? Slaves could hardly expect their work to pay off. How moral of a system do you think the average slave though it was? The time frame for a "moral" America is very small, and it coincides with the same time frame that morals are supposedly in decline.

Quote:
You see this conquest and repressive behavior in all societies, and it has been even worse in atheist societies.


That's right, all societies. And the victors write the history books. I could argue that there were many Deists who took part in the creation of the United States. I could argue that America's modern track record isn't idealistic either. I do think, that the spiritual aspect of care and compassion are good things... just don't expect society at large, or the rich and powerful to care, unless it's to their advantage. That's religion.

Quote:
If the leaders were not following the code or religious principles, then those codes or principles cant be blamed for their bad behavior.



Right, just because a nation is religious, doesn't mean it will conduct itself in a moral fashion. Just because some people are moral, doesn't mean it's because they are surrounded by a nation of moral people, due to everyone being religious.


--------------------
rahz

comfort pleasure power love     truth awareness peace I am      I feel      I do     I love  I speak    I see    I know

why there is reality and patterned, law-like consistency at all, rather than noise or non-reality is not a question physics answers. It's a question physics presupposes an answer to in order to provide other answers.

Edited by Rahz (04/26/09 12:34 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: daytripper23]
    #10253311 -

For those that doubt the jewish/christian god commands, genocide, infanticide, fratricide... please just read the old testament.


--------------------
[quote]skalthren said:
It's nice of you to imply that I've been brainwashed by the government, but the truth is that I'm simply intelligent enough to recognize the subtleties of these issues instead of going "durr hurr, weed should totally be legal!"[/quote]

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: monkeywrench]
    #10253340 -

To be fair, in that book, God had his reasons. :shrug:


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: Lancaster]
    #10253570 -

Nice topic. That's exactly the problem with the Bible. Nobody listens to Jesus, not even hardcore christians who go to church daily and worship Jesus as God. To them, that is exactly what Jesus is, a God, and not an example. Very few people actually understand the purpose of turning the other cheek. Most people think it's crazy, even christians.


Funny isn't it, how a fictional figure has dictated the flow of history for the past 2000 years? How a mere story can change the entire world? I've always wondered how this was possible in a time where books and TV didn't exist, how could people be so easily convinced by mere gossip?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: Diaboleros]
    #10253597 -

Diaboleros said:
I've always wondered how this was possible in a time where books and TV didn't exist, how could people be so easily convinced by mere gossip?


Many people were put to the sword if they didn't convert.


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: Poid]
    #10253676 -

Poid said:
To be fair, in that book, God had his reasons. :shrug:


That's what they always say. :shrug:


--------------------
rahz

comfort pleasure power love     truth awareness peace I am      I feel      I do     I love  I speak    I see    I know

why there is reality and patterned, law-like consistency at all, rather than noise or non-reality is not a question physics answers. It's a question physics presupposes an answer to in order to provide other answers.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: Rahz]
    #10253688 -

That's because some of them actually read the Bible. :shrug:


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: Poid]
    #10254571 -

Well, when would God do something and say "Oops, my bad."?

Of course God's actions in the Bible are justified. He's the hero of the book. But because it "says so in the Bible", is not grounds for claiming righteousness in any philosophical sense.


--------------------
rahz

comfort pleasure power love     truth awareness peace I am      I feel      I do     I love  I speak    I see    I know

why there is reality and patterned, law-like consistency at all, rather than noise or non-reality is not a question physics answers. It's a question physics presupposes an answer to in order to provide other answers.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: Rahz]
    #10254678 -

So, let's be honest.  Who do you like more?  Jesus or his daddy?
God or Jesus?
You may choose only one


Votes accepted from 04/29/09 09:16 AM until the end of time
You must vote before you can view the results of this poll



--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: Rahz]
    #10254810 -

Rahz said:
Well, when would God do something and say "Oops, my bad."?

Of course God's actions in the Bible are justified. He's the hero of the book. But because it "says so in the Bible", is not grounds for claiming righteousness in any philosophical sense.


I never meant it like that, I just thought I'd make clear what is said in the book called 'The Holy Bible'. In that book, God had his reasons for doing all the things that he did. He saved the Israelites from the Egyptians, and in return, he asked for unconditional obedience. When people didn't follow his rules, they paid the price.

:onfire:


--------------------
Well I try my best to be just like I am, but everybody wants you to be just like them. --  Bob Dylan
fireworks_god said:
It's one thing to simply enjoy a style of life that one enjoys, but it's another thing altogether to refer to another person's choice as "wrong" or to rationalize their behavior as being pathological or resulting from some sort of inadequacy or failing so as to create a sense of superiority or separation as yet another projection of a personal fear or control issue.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: Poid]
    #10266616 -

Quote:
Rome is a great example, but if we're talking about the fall, it was not because of a loss in belief. Both the fall, and the loss of beliefs would be effects. What's the cause? Get fat and lazy, loose your beliefs -and- get conquered.


I want to make sure I understand. People lose their faith because they're lazy. By that reasoning all atheists must be inherently lazy? and fat?  Interesting concept.  I don't think I can go along with that.  I think a decline in faith, causing a decline in purpose, which led to laziness and fatness is both more logical and would be less offensive to all the non fat atheists out there.

Quote:
If you wish to beat your wife you may do so, but only on the court house lawn.


I don't think there are any examples of wife beating being approved in the bible. Though it may have been approved by some in the past it was a measure of control and motivated by a desire to exert and demonstrate power over someone else.  As I discussed before, those are the motivations that come naturally to man, and not motivated by the bible.

Quote:
beating your children was a non-issue because it was so accepted.


beatings and spankings aren't the same.  Even in the old days, an adult who truly beat a child would be very harshly criticized. 

As people lose the rational and basis for the values they teach their kids, which religion provided, they'll often try to enforce it through brute force alone, and don't really teach their kids. Parents often resort to spankings out of frustration and anger too, rather than being consistent with their rules and parenting, which also isn't productive, When those kids grow up, and have no understanding of why their parents believed the way they did, they reject those beliefs and resent the discipline.  I don't think corporal punishment alone explains why people in the past behaved better.  I'm sure smaller communities, the ability for a community to ostracize someone, also played a role.  But in the end Having a moral standard, an example to follow and the belief that you will be rewarded or punished for your actions, whether anyone else ever finds out or not, were the chief reason.

Quote:
Up until a relatively short time ago, slavery was apparently a very moral thing by some standard.


Examples of slavery in the Bible, of which the bible approved were all people working off a debt, or captured in war, and never exceeded 7 years in length, then they were freed, unless the slave chose to stay after that, which some did.  It did not conform to are present day of slavery either, indentured servitude may even be too strong.

Later on christian slaves were encouraged to be a good example to their non christian masters, rather than murder them in their sleep or become ninja warriors or something. But even under the harsher example of Roman slavery, it was not necessarily a life sentence, and slaves and their families were often freed, especially if their masters became Christians.  Though slavery was still heinous. The idea that all men were created equal existed, but also that your actions were not determined by your situation.

Later slavery, became worse, and you are right, some tried to use the Bible as justification for racial bias.  Though the goal of their reading of the bible was based in a desire to exert power, which was not a biblical principle.  They took passages out of context, and twisted their meaning.  And as someone pointed out the Money Changer incident, false religious people who twisted religion to advance personal goals such as greed or power, was the thing that angered Jesus most.  From the Beginning of U.S. history there were a large amount of people who opposed slavery, and considered it evil, and their justifications were religious ones.  It just took awhile before they were willing to fight a civil war over it.

Even in a religious society, the tendency to fall back on a desire for power or self preservation exists because they are in mans nature.  Values based in the religion can provide a check against those tendencies however.  Even the most craven individual would pause before acting on those base motivations openly.  Now days many people glory in the fact that there are no limits on their behavior and they can get away with anything they want.
Quote:
Funny isn't it, how a fictional figure has dictated the flow of history for the past 2000 years? How a mere story can change the entire world? I've always wondered how this was possible in a time where books and TV didn't exist, how could people be so easily convinced by mere gossip?


The Bible isn't the only place Jesus life is recorded, Josephus recorded him.  In fact the historical documentation covering his life, is both more broad in sources, consistent in account, and its writing can be traced closer the events that the written accounts of any other historical figure.  So if your going to dismiss him as a historical figure then you have to dismiss Julius Caesar and everyone else too.  Back in the sixties and seventies I think there was a big push for this idea that Jesus wasn't a historical figure.  Its pretty accepted now though, not even hard core atheists deny that.

As for why it changed the world if it wasn't true, that's a good question.  Maybe you should re-evaluate your premise.  A big part of it was that the early Christians practiced what they believed though, whether they were slaves, legionaries or being burnt at the stake, they lived up to their values. Also, its not like their message was a secret, people who hated Christians and who lived at the time of Jesus, and knew him growing up, didn't contradict anything they said about him.  Don't you think they would have if they could? Likewise the authors didn't profit of their writing, almost all of them died for their belief.  In the old testament the punishment for being a false prophet was death, yet some of those old testament prophets were quite willing to stand up and tell kings they were wrong, and that everyone in the country sucked.  You've got to know your right before you do something like that, knowing everyone's going to be looking to stone you if your prophecy doesn't come true.  So look at the sources.  They weren't just story tellers.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Does the Bible promote violence or non-violence? [Re: Arghhhh]
    #10268608 -

Quote:
I want to make sure I understand. People lose their faith because they're lazy. By that reasoning all atheists must be inherently lazy? and fat?  Interesting concept.  I don't think I can go along with that.  I think a decline in faith, causing a decline in purpose, which led to laziness and fatness is both more logical and would be less offensive to all the non fat atheists out there.


By "fat and lazy", I mean, "got it made", livin' the good life, high on the hog. They don't have all the survival concerns, and don't "need" God to validate their social life.

Quote:
I don't think there are any examples of wife beating being approved in the bible.



Maybe not, but there are plenty of examples of people, in a "religious" society, beating their wife. Your claim that religious people experience less forceful obedience, falls flat in practice. There was maybe one instance where killing witches was recommended, which perhaps is refuted by the message of the NT, yet witch burning was a common practice for many years in Christian society. You didn't even have to be a witch. You could be slaughtered for simply not keeping the "faith".

Quote:
beatings and spankings aren't the same.  Even in the old days, an adult who truly beat a child would be very harshly criticized.


It depends on what they did. In some instances, it was recommended that the child be slaughtered.

Quote:
Examples of slavery in the Bible, of which the bible approved were all people working off a debt, or captured in war, and never exceeded 7 years in length, then they were freed, unless the slave chose to stay after that, which some did.  It did not conform to are present day of slavery either, indentured servitude may even be too strong.


Again, you're referring to a specific period of time by a specific culture, and are omitting the practices observed by other religious societies which used the same set of texts.

Quote:
Now days many people glory in the fact that there are no limits on their behavior and they can get away with anything they want.


Which brings me back to the original point, fat and lazy. It happens to all empires eventually, religious or not.


--------------------
rahz

comfort pleasure power love     truth awareness peace I am      I feel      I do     I love  I speak    I see    I know

why there is reality and patterned, law-like consistency at all, rather than noise or non-reality is not a question physics answers. It's a question physics presupposes an answer to in order to provide other answers.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* 1 in 4 women U.S. women suffer domestic violence
( 1 2 all )		 MushmanTheManic 4,097 38 02/08/08 07:23 PM
by Boots
* The Holy Bible...
( 1 2 all )		 psilo25 4,010 27 09/04/02 10:21 AM
by psilo25
* The Truth About Christmas
( 1 2 all )		 chodamunky 5,770 24 12/26/19 07:19 AM
by Metaphysician
* nonviolence and its violent consequences NiamhNyx 1,925 9 08/08/04 11:59 PM
by Mushmonkey
* Changes in the bible
( 1 2 all )		 LearyfanS 3,731 29 10/28/03 12:02 PM
by Funguy
* One Glaring Problem With The Bible
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 all )		 DiploidM 13,930 132 04/30/05 09:25 AM
by MarkostheGnostic
* The Bible ... a trip? HB 1,539 6 09/14/01 12:27 AM
by Alowishaus
* The Bible : Bullshit
( 1 2 3 all )		 i_eat_planets 4,410 40 12/15/05 09:41 PM
by nakors_junk_bag

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
13,030 topic views. 0 members, 350 guests and 13 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.056 seconds spending 0.031 seconds on 21 queries.