Forums > Social Discussion > would you?
Login/Join to Participategoddess of all things slimey and an interchangeable insect!
2,443 posts
Location: nottingham - the land of opportunity lol!
2,443 posts
Location: nottingham - the land of opportunity lol!
Posted:
after along discussion with my friend last night we started talking about how we disagreed with religion because of what it does to people.
i dont know how many of you on this board are religious but my question stands as, if you had been told by a higher authority in your religion, say a prophet for example, to kill an innocent man would you do it?
i know i wouldnt, and i personally think that anyone who does/would is incredibly sick in the head. i suppose after all the suicide bombings this ideal crept up into my head but i would like to know how everyone else views it.
would you kill an innocent for your beliefs?
do you agree some one has the right too?
what do you think of people who would?
and at not such an extreme point but would you let your beleifs completely rule your life and the decisions you make?
after along discussion with my friend last night we started talking about how we disagreed with religion because of what it does to people.
i dont know how many of you on this board are religious but my question stands as, if you had been told by a higher authority in your religion, say a prophet for example, to kill an innocent man would you do it?
i know i wouldnt, and i personally think that anyone who does/would is incredibly sick in the head. i suppose after all the suicide bombings this ideal crept up into my head but i would like to know how everyone else views it.
would you kill an innocent for your beliefs?
do you agree some one has the right too?
what do you think of people who would?
and at not such an extreme point but would you let your beleifs completely rule your life and the decisions you make?
Shhhhhh! the boobies are trying to sleep.
owner and the property of noddy.
*i was a caterpilla last night 
* - libby_tuesday
BRONZE Member
member
72 posts
Location: On the far left of sane, Ireland
member
72 posts
Location: On the far left of sane, Ireland
Posted:
Cool.
Welcome back.
Im away from work finally, but i'll get back to you tomorrow.
*grins and runs*
Cool.
Welcome back.
Im away from work finally, but i'll get back to you tomorrow.
*grins and runs*
I am not a bitch.
I am THE bitch.
And Im Miss Bitch to you.
addict
663 posts
Location: Glasgow
663 posts
Location: Glasgow
Posted:
I think the 'newest' religion is Islam or Hinduism but I'm not sure. Does anyone actually know?
Edit: I tried searching on google but couldn't find anything
EDITED_BY: onefinalstep (1124812140)
I think the 'newest' religion is Islam or Hinduism but I'm not sure. Does anyone actually know?
Edit: I tried searching on google but couldn't find anything
EDITED_BY: onefinalstep (1124812140)
Have faith in what you can do and respect for what you can't
BRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
it's Sikhism. brought about to harmonise islam and hinduism, followed by islam as the next youngest approx 1400 years ago. then christianity 2005 years ago (funny that) then roman 2006 years ago (bit of a non starter) oldest of these is judaism approx 3675 years old.
Dunno about buddism, taoism, but many religions were either absorbed or destroyed about 2000 years ago....(egyptian god faith etc)
EDITED_BY: Mynci (1124813485)
it's Sikhism. brought about to harmonise islam and hinduism, followed by islam as the next youngest approx 1400 years ago. then christianity 2005 years ago (funny that) then roman 2006 years ago (bit of a non starter) oldest of these is judaism approx 3675 years old.
Dunno about buddism, taoism, but many religions were either absorbed or destroyed about 2000 years ago....(egyptian god faith etc)
EDITED_BY: Mynci (1124813485)
A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
member
64 posts
Location: Near to Yeovil, In Somerset
64 posts
Location: Near to Yeovil, In Somerset
Posted:
Before i start, whatever i say is of my own opinion and such are the posts expressed by other people. They will be argued upon because that is human nature and as humans we will voice our opinions because we can and we feel an emotional response to other peoples opinions sometimes.
However before i begin i shall not be arguing my point. It is what i believe an noone else has to so i shall not say anymore unless i need to. Please, noone take offense to the following.
There is a simple end to all of this. And that is simply: Choices.
The fact is, whoever someone is, they have choices. They make the choices and the choice is only theirs. And to avoid any arguments of "Some religions or groups or individuals make people do things", these choices don't necessarily have to have been made by the people at the time that they act out what ever it is they made a choice about. They could have been pre-ordained. This is of course a belief of fate and that life is already laid out for you. However to quickly set the record straight, I feel as though one has many choices to make in a lifetime so a set path is never made at any point.
If you understood any of my ramblings, congratulations, i didn't.
But what i'm basically saying is that, religion or groups or individuals can't make anybody do anything and that wars and violent acts haven't strated for the sake of a religion but as the choice of one or the similar choice of many.
And finally,to completely contradict myslef, the only way religion can create "death" or whatever, is by giving someone a belief that influences a choice that they make, the religion is not the thing that makes the choice and starts the war...
drat, that really didn't help did it?
Before i start, whatever i say is of my own opinion and such are the posts expressed by other people. They will be argued upon because that is human nature and as humans we will voice our opinions because we can and we feel an emotional response to other peoples opinions sometimes.
However before i begin i shall not be arguing my point. It is what i believe an noone else has to so i shall not say anymore unless i need to. Please, noone take offense to the following.
There is a simple end to all of this. And that is simply: Choices.
The fact is, whoever someone is, they have choices. They make the choices and the choice is only theirs. And to avoid any arguments of "Some religions or groups or individuals make people do things", these choices don't necessarily have to have been made by the people at the time that they act out what ever it is they made a choice about. They could have been pre-ordained. This is of course a belief of fate and that life is already laid out for you. However to quickly set the record straight, I feel as though one has many choices to make in a lifetime so a set path is never made at any point.
If you understood any of my ramblings, congratulations, i didn't.
But what i'm basically saying is that, religion or groups or individuals can't make anybody do anything and that wars and violent acts haven't strated for the sake of a religion but as the choice of one or the similar choice of many.
And finally,to completely contradict myslef, the only way religion can create "death" or whatever, is by giving someone a belief that influences a choice that they make, the religion is not the thing that makes the choice and starts the war...
drat, that really didn't help did it?
So what your saying is, if I take just ONE more pill...
BRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
Nope. but I also have to add. I may have been a bit rash at the start by laying into religion. I should have had a go at the church style organisations as they are ones who abuse the hope of an afterlife for gain (in my eyes,... it is only opinion)
Nope. but I also have to add. I may have been a bit rash at the start by laying into religion. I should have had a go at the church style organisations as they are ones who abuse the hope of an afterlife for gain (in my eyes,... it is only opinion)
A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
BRONZE Member
member
72 posts
Location: On the far left of sane, Ireland
member
72 posts
Location: On the far left of sane, Ireland
Posted:
I cant answer a question like that. It leads to who is god, or what is god and eventually to why is god and i dont have nearly enough psychadellics in my system to answer, and there is no right answer anyway. It will just get out of hand.
What i can do is clarify my original point. All deity worshipping religions worship a somewhat unspecific source of power. It is possible to argue that from an outside perspective, untempered my religious beliefs, all godheads are the same power source.
Not so much with their funds. They were famous for their poverty, and were in stark contrast to those that lived within the corrupt and opulent church of the time. As for peasants, they taught them that oaths were sins, so to swear oath to a fife was then wrong, threatining perhaps, the powers that were. But then, the cathars thought the world was evil, and once given their last rites, stopped eating so that they would die faster, and be less tainted by the world. They also thought procreation was wrong. It was not an ideal religion. It was just a peaceful one. Its association with the knights templar is again one of conjecture, based on sangreal legends and the like.
I had two problems with this statement.
"nuns have never killed anyone i know of "
The most recent news story i heard concerning nuns was one where four nuns and a priest hung a schizophrenic woman from a cross, stuffed a towel in her mouth and left her unfed and and unwatered in an attempt to exorcise the devil. This is a prime example of religion and a lack of education combining to produce horific results. My mother also had the misfortune to be born in a Magdalen Asylum in ireland in the fifties, which were sickening, and i do not reccommend researching at all if you are easily affected by human suffering. Needless to say, those assylums were enforced by nuns. But the actions of a few people should not allow you to judge all similar people. Its not right, its not fair, its ignorant.
"but they still follow a religion that has"
So do thousands of people, and they have done for thousands of years. Does this make everyone equally responsible? Of course not. How can you possibly blame some followers of a religion for something some other follower has done? Might as well say that some people kill other people, well that makes me a murderer, why dont you lock me up? Insane, right? But thats just an extension of your statement.
But wait.
You agree with my point. In your earlier post you state that
which is basically identical to to the situation i am outlining. Judging many for the actions of a few is a basic human error.
I was referring to the point about nuns, but the point is moot with the further clarifications.
I stand by the fact that the Cathars were non-violent. I do not group them under the umbrella of catholicism. If you still wish to, then we agree to disagree on this point.
As previously mentioned by Quiet, Jainism is also non-violent.
As far as i can make out so is the Bahaì Faith.
Buddhism may have some funky monks but they are a non-violent religion. As are the other spiritual philosophical religions that i know of, although there is some dispute that Confucianism may lead to violence due to its avoidance of laws.
The Wiccan religion, and in particular the Gardnerian Wiccans also practise non-violence, but are widely misunderstood due to the incorrect interchangability of Wiccan and witch.
Obviously, this depends on how you define cults and sects.
The newest one i can think of is The Church Of Satan which was founded by Alistair Crowely in 1966.
Others more recent than sikhism (1499):
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) founded in the 1840s
The Methodists were founded in the early 1700s.
Hare Krishnas were founded in 1960's.
For your own information, Buddism was founded in approximately 528 BCE or 589BCE depending on which dates you use, and Taoism was founded in 440 BCE approximately.
Tag.
You're it.
Written by: Mynci
Ok. it's not that. i don't want to be picky but WHO is the cathars god?
I cant answer a question like that. It leads to who is god, or what is god and eventually to why is god and i dont have nearly enough psychadellics in my system to answer, and there is no right answer anyway. It will just get out of hand.
What i can do is clarify my original point. All deity worshipping religions worship a somewhat unspecific source of power. It is possible to argue that from an outside perspective, untempered my religious beliefs, all godheads are the same power source.
Written by: Mynci
...they threatened the power of the roman catholic church with the funds... ...fleeced from local peasants... ...association with the knights templar
Not so much with their funds. They were famous for their poverty, and were in stark contrast to those that lived within the corrupt and opulent church of the time. As for peasants, they taught them that oaths were sins, so to swear oath to a fife was then wrong, threatining perhaps, the powers that were. But then, the cathars thought the world was evil, and once given their last rites, stopped eating so that they would die faster, and be less tainted by the world. They also thought procreation was wrong. It was not an ideal religion. It was just a peaceful one. Its association with the knights templar is again one of conjecture, based on sangreal legends and the like.
Written by: Mynci
what was wrong about the nun statement
I had two problems with this statement.
"nuns have never killed anyone i know of "
The most recent news story i heard concerning nuns was one where four nuns and a priest hung a schizophrenic woman from a cross, stuffed a towel in her mouth and left her unfed and and unwatered in an attempt to exorcise the devil. This is a prime example of religion and a lack of education combining to produce horific results. My mother also had the misfortune to be born in a Magdalen Asylum in ireland in the fifties, which were sickening, and i do not reccommend researching at all if you are easily affected by human suffering. Needless to say, those assylums were enforced by nuns. But the actions of a few people should not allow you to judge all similar people. Its not right, its not fair, its ignorant.
"but they still follow a religion that has"
So do thousands of people, and they have done for thousands of years. Does this make everyone equally responsible? Of course not. How can you possibly blame some followers of a religion for something some other follower has done? Might as well say that some people kill other people, well that makes me a murderer, why dont you lock me up? Insane, right? But thats just an extension of your statement.
But wait.
You agree with my point. In your earlier post you state that
Written by: Mynci
Muslims are not terrorists.... but because of a few nutters we have race hate.
which is basically identical to to the situation i am outlining. Judging many for the actions of a few is a basic human error.
Written by: Mynci
what was complete fallacy?
I was referring to the point about nuns, but the point is moot with the further clarifications.
Written by: Mynci
who are these religions with no violence?
I stand by the fact that the Cathars were non-violent. I do not group them under the umbrella of catholicism. If you still wish to, then we agree to disagree on this point.
As previously mentioned by Quiet, Jainism is also non-violent.
As far as i can make out so is the Bahaì Faith.
Buddhism may have some funky monks but they are a non-violent religion. As are the other spiritual philosophical religions that i know of, although there is some dispute that Confucianism may lead to violence due to its avoidance of laws.
The Wiccan religion, and in particular the Gardnerian Wiccans also practise non-violence, but are widely misunderstood due to the incorrect interchangability of Wiccan and witch.
Written by: Mynci
What is the newest "recognised" religion?
Obviously, this depends on how you define cults and sects.
The newest one i can think of is The Church Of Satan which was founded by Alistair Crowely in 1966.
Others more recent than sikhism (1499):
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) founded in the 1840s
The Methodists were founded in the early 1700s.
Hare Krishnas were founded in 1960's.
For your own information, Buddism was founded in approximately 528 BCE or 589BCE depending on which dates you use, and Taoism was founded in 440 BCE approximately.
Tag.
You're it.
I am not a bitch.
I am THE bitch.
And Im Miss Bitch to you.
BRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
So do you agree that most "well known" / large religions were all founded a lond time ago (100 years+)? Hare Krishnas are still considered a cult more than an established religion.
the cathars may have llived in a semblance of poverty but used funds "donated" by farmers and nobles for a place in heaven to buy huge tracts of land. This power, income and influence was the main reason they were put to the inquisition. because the main body of the catholic church was worried about their rise in power and wanted the riches for their own "opulence".
(if you know another reason would be glad to hear why the catholic church destroyed a catholic order other than the "reason" that they were guardians of the holy grail (please don't belive than da vinci code cobblers))
Didn't know about the nuns, but then those habits must drive you nuts.
as I said a couple of posts ago, really shouldn't have used the word religion. My beef is really with "church" based religious organisations.
The wiccan religion is I believe the oldest known religion...according to google
SO why do old religions hold respect whilst new ones are ridiculed?
So do you agree that most "well known" / large religions were all founded a lond time ago (100 years+)? Hare Krishnas are still considered a cult more than an established religion.
Written by: Akashla
They were famous for their poverty, and were in stark contrast to those that lived within the corrupt and opulent church of the time
the cathars may have llived in a semblance of poverty but used funds "donated" by farmers and nobles for a place in heaven to buy huge tracts of land. This power, income and influence was the main reason they were put to the inquisition. because the main body of the catholic church was worried about their rise in power and wanted the riches for their own "opulence".
(if you know another reason would be glad to hear why the catholic church destroyed a catholic order other than the "reason" that they were guardians of the holy grail (please don't belive than da vinci code cobblers))
Didn't know about the nuns, but then those habits must drive you nuts.
as I said a couple of posts ago, really shouldn't have used the word religion. My beef is really with "church" based religious organisations.
The wiccan religion is I believe the oldest known religion...according to google
SO why do old religions hold respect whilst new ones are ridiculed?
A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
Is that actually a religion? Jeez, I thought Pratchett and Gaimen were joking with that... (in "Good Omens")
Written by: Akashla
The newest one i can think of is The Church Of Satan which was founded by Alistair Crowely in 1966.
Is that actually a religion? Jeez, I thought Pratchett and Gaimen were joking with that... (in "Good Omens")
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
BRONZE Member
member
72 posts
Location: On the far left of sane, Ireland
member
72 posts
Location: On the far left of sane, Ireland
Posted:
I do agree, definitely. Some of the most well known religions were founded a long time ago. Still older ones have diminished so much that now all that remains is a tiny cult.
Its the way of religion though, to rise and fall.
The sixties saw a rise in poltheistic influences, and devil worship, for some reason. Both Crowley's Church of Satan and Aquino's Church of Set enjoyed popularity for a while.
As for the Cathars I take a lot of my information from the wiki collective which has good links and an unbiased point of view, which is generally reliable, and entirely changeable if you discover something new.
I wonder if perhaps you are confusing them with the Knights Templar who did supposedly amass a large ammount of wealth and were similarly excommunicated by the Church?
And i am insulted and will give you a spanking for thinking that i could possibly believe the da vinci code bullsh!t.
That was just american TV in literary form...
I have problems with religious organisations also. The Church sucks monkeyballs. But then i have problems with most organisations, religious or otherwise.
I get Hinduism when i google oldest religion. And Jainism. And Zaroastrianism. And the Kemetic religion. And Witchcraft, not to be confused with modern Wicca. But who knows? They've all mutated and incorporated new beliefs. So i couldnt say. I'd guess paganism, as i imagine early people worshipped the earth and the sky and fire and probably everything they didnt understand, which was pretty much everything.
As for your last question, its all cyclic. Pagans are ridiculed in this country, now at least, but they used to be the most respected and widely followed. Who knows, maybe their time will come again.
I do agree, definitely. Some of the most well known religions were founded a long time ago. Still older ones have diminished so much that now all that remains is a tiny cult.
Its the way of religion though, to rise and fall.
The sixties saw a rise in poltheistic influences, and devil worship, for some reason. Both Crowley's Church of Satan and Aquino's Church of Set enjoyed popularity for a while.
As for the Cathars I take a lot of my information from the wiki collective which has good links and an unbiased point of view, which is generally reliable, and entirely changeable if you discover something new.
I wonder if perhaps you are confusing them with the Knights Templar who did supposedly amass a large ammount of wealth and were similarly excommunicated by the Church?
And i am insulted and will give you a spanking for thinking that i could possibly believe the da vinci code bullsh!t.
That was just american TV in literary form... I have problems with religious organisations also. The Church sucks monkeyballs. But then i have problems with most organisations, religious or otherwise.
I get Hinduism when i google oldest religion. And Jainism. And Zaroastrianism. And the Kemetic religion. And Witchcraft, not to be confused with modern Wicca. But who knows? They've all mutated and incorporated new beliefs. So i couldnt say. I'd guess paganism, as i imagine early people worshipped the earth and the sky and fire and probably everything they didnt understand, which was pretty much everything.
As for your last question, its all cyclic. Pagans are ridiculed in this country, now at least, but they used to be the most respected and widely followed. Who knows, maybe their time will come again.
I am not a bitch.
I am THE bitch.
And Im Miss Bitch to you.
goddess of all things slimey and an interchangeable insect!
2,443 posts
Location: nottingham - the land of opportunity lol!
2,443 posts
Location: nottingham - the land of opportunity lol!
Posted:
*bump for skittish*
*bump for skittish*
Shhhhhh! the boobies are trying to sleep.
owner and the property of noddy.
*i was a caterpilla last night * - libby_tuesday
BRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
to quote from the wiki collective: (suppression, paragraph 4)
"This war threw the whole of the nobility of the north of France against that of the south, possibly instigated by a papal decree stating that all land owned by Cathars could be confiscated at will. As the area was full of Cathar sympathisers, this made the entire area a target for northern nobles looking to gain new lands. It is thus hardly surprising that the barons of the north flocked south to do battle for the Church."
The land owned by the cathars was extensive and back then land meant money... the nobels would wage war for the church claim land and pay a hansom tithe in funds and land.
The templars had the same happen to them as the cathars, the church wanted their money (this time it was mostly cash).
Glad you don't believe the holy blood cobblers, but a guy has to ask 
(especially a lady, or get in BIG trouble )
But I do find it interesting that many faiths always seems to be given an iconic head (god / master of the universe) It seems many religious types seemed scared by chaos and need an organiser to focus their hopes and dreams towards. What do you think of this theory?
Overall I'm enjoying this
to quote from the wiki collective: (suppression, paragraph 4)
"This war threw the whole of the nobility of the north of France against that of the south, possibly instigated by a papal decree stating that all land owned by Cathars could be confiscated at will. As the area was full of Cathar sympathisers, this made the entire area a target for northern nobles looking to gain new lands. It is thus hardly surprising that the barons of the north flocked south to do battle for the Church."
The land owned by the cathars was extensive and back then land meant money... the nobels would wage war for the church claim land and pay a hansom tithe in funds and land.
The templars had the same happen to them as the cathars, the church wanted their money (this time it was mostly cash).
Glad you don't believe the holy blood cobblers, but a guy has to ask
(especially a lady, or get in BIG trouble )But I do find it interesting that many faiths always seems to be given an iconic head (god / master of the universe) It seems many religious types seemed scared by chaos and need an organiser to focus their hopes and dreams towards. What do you think of this theory?
Overall I'm enjoying this
A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
BRONZE Member
member
72 posts
Location: On the far left of sane, Ireland
member
72 posts
Location: On the far left of sane, Ireland
Posted:
Land did mean money, but the Cathars themselves had very little. Their sympathisers, quite often rich nobles in their own right, had lots, and were persecuted along with the Cathars. But they themselves were not Cathars.
Lady? Me? *blushes* Why, thank you, kind sir.
Karl Marx said that religion is the opiate of the masses.
(Personally, im with Bill Hicks, that opiates are the opiates of the masses. Maybe it was Bill Bailey. I cant remember. A beardy, funny person.)
Back to the topic.
I think that religion caters for the general public. Most people are either too lazy or too dumb to question anything they are told. Most wont want to. Most are happy to have someone else do all the hard work, and to just go with the flow.
Religious beliefs, if investigated to any significant depth, hit serious problems. Eventually you have to reach something which you dont understand. And people fear what they do not understand. So, if someone is willing to do all the difficicult understandy bits for you, and write it all down, so that you can say, im with that guy, i agree with him, then they will. They no longer have to walk the roads plagued with doubts and questions. They have the fuzzy big picture, and dont notice the cracks underneath.
To give a religion an iconic head gives it a focus. Again, most people need a focal point because that gives them something they can understand. It gives them someone to blame, someone to thank, someone to fear or revere.
Funnily enough, some religious types actually worship gods of chaos, which seems contradictory in itself...
Yeah, me too. Although normally i'd have a spliff in front of me, instead of a keyboard...
Written by: Mynci
"...As the area was full of Cathar sympathisers..."
The land owned by the cathars was extensive and back then land meant money...
Land did mean money, but the Cathars themselves had very little. Their sympathisers, quite often rich nobles in their own right, had lots, and were persecuted along with the Cathars. But they themselves were not Cathars.
Written by: Mynci
Glad you don't believe the holy blood cobblers, but a guy has to ask
Lady? Me? *blushes* Why, thank you, kind sir.
Written by: Mynci
It seems many religious types seemed scared by chaos and need an organiser to focus their hopes and dreams towards. What do you think of this theory?
Karl Marx said that religion is the opiate of the masses.
(Personally, im with Bill Hicks, that opiates are the opiates of the masses. Maybe it was Bill Bailey. I cant remember. A beardy, funny person.)
Back to the topic.
I think that religion caters for the general public. Most people are either too lazy or too dumb to question anything they are told. Most wont want to. Most are happy to have someone else do all the hard work, and to just go with the flow.
Religious beliefs, if investigated to any significant depth, hit serious problems. Eventually you have to reach something which you dont understand. And people fear what they do not understand. So, if someone is willing to do all the difficicult understandy bits for you, and write it all down, so that you can say, im with that guy, i agree with him, then they will. They no longer have to walk the roads plagued with doubts and questions. They have the fuzzy big picture, and dont notice the cracks underneath.
To give a religion an iconic head gives it a focus. Again, most people need a focal point because that gives them something they can understand. It gives them someone to blame, someone to thank, someone to fear or revere.
Funnily enough, some religious types actually worship gods of chaos, which seems contradictory in itself...
Written by: Mynci
Overall I'm enjoying this
Yeah, me too. Although normally i'd have a spliff in front of me, instead of a keyboard...
I am not a bitch.
I am THE bitch.
And Im Miss Bitch to you.
BRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
just a spliff....
I normally need what whatever i can get hold of.... it's a bitch doing this at work....
Pretty sure the opiates quote is my ol' friend bill hicks (don't you dare have a wino tell me not to do drugs)
I still find that the jewish / christian issue amazing. (i'm not sure if the name here is correct) but the story of jacob and his amazement of the world around him and how it couldn't have come from chaos. The story goes.. he believed there was a force that organised the imensity of the heavens and earth and named the force jehova.... at the time there was no great beardy man in the sky just a name he gave this "force" (sorry how i'm writting this my boss keeps walking passed and i lose my thread) From this "name" personification arose ... a person, an image of man,
this personification happens so much in "old" religions it makes you think of the vanity of man (ok the egyptians had some freaky gods and hindu's have some that aren't totally human in form, but nearly all these personifications seem to be bipedal like "humans". we seem to have an overblown sense of our own importance in the universe.
I wonder about religious "purists" who beleve we are alone in the universe (no aliens) but worship a non-human "god"
just a spliff....
I normally need what whatever i can get hold of.... it's a bitch doing this at work....
Pretty sure the opiates quote is my ol' friend bill hicks (don't you dare have a wino tell me not to do drugs)
I still find that the jewish / christian issue amazing. (i'm not sure if the name here is correct) but the story of jacob and his amazement of the world around him and how it couldn't have come from chaos. The story goes.. he believed there was a force that organised the imensity of the heavens and earth and named the force jehova.... at the time there was no great beardy man in the sky just a name he gave this "force" (sorry how i'm writting this my boss keeps walking passed and i lose my thread) From this "name" personification arose ... a person, an image of man,
this personification happens so much in "old" religions it makes you think of the vanity of man (ok the egyptians had some freaky gods and hindu's have some that aren't totally human in form, but nearly all these personifications seem to be bipedal like "humans". we seem to have an overblown sense of our own importance in the universe.
I wonder about religious "purists" who beleve we are alone in the universe (no aliens) but worship a non-human "god"
A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
BRONZE Member
member
72 posts
Location: On the far left of sane, Ireland
member
72 posts
Location: On the far left of sane, Ireland
Posted:
Perhaps because a lot of old religions are based on the teaching of one person, they may quite often become synonomous with the godhead.
Personification of an entity makes it easier for the plebs to identify with it. Its like, all childrens stories have little children in them, so that kids have someone to identify with. Someone to teach them the moral. And most religions go with some human based entity, with whom everyone has something in common.
The egyptians took it a little further and incorporated things other than human based gods, but as you said, most of their gods incorporated animal heads onto human bodies. At least it shows a little more imagination
Perhaps. Or maybe we're right to feel as important as we do.
Im pretty sure my cat thinks he's the greatest thing since tin openers, but then he'd never question it. Only humans question their position in the world. Every other living thing accepts it. Sure, some animals have a pack mentality, and their position in the pack may change, but its a cut and dry situation, if they win, they advance, and if they dont, they back off. Humans, on the other hand, are constantly comparing themselves to each other, even to their own ideals.
We are the most successful species. It is said that we are the only species capable of altering our environs to suit ourselves, rather than adapting to out envronment. Some of us notice that our success may be detrimental to our environment, but many do not pay any heed. This is identical to other species behaviour, they will use all available resources until there is no longer enough to support them, and then they are culled by nature. The same thing will probably happen to us, but we are the first species to have the capability of ensuring our own survival, and possibly the continuing survival of our entire planet. We definitely have the capability of destoying it, which no other species has ever had. I'd say that that would make us pretty important.
I think religious purists, the ones who cant even entertain the thoughts of an alternative, are ignoramii. And I think i just made that word up.
On a semi-related note, there are theories that aliens are our gods. If you examine ancient religions, such as egyptian, or early christianity or judaeism(sp?) a lot of the religious icons are shown with halos, or 'sun disks', basically shining orbs surrounding the head area. There have been theories that these signify helmets, for breathing apparatus, which may have been worn by aliens visiting earth.
Religion is a weird and wacky subject.
Perhaps because a lot of old religions are based on the teaching of one person, they may quite often become synonomous with the godhead.
Personification of an entity makes it easier for the plebs to identify with it. Its like, all childrens stories have little children in them, so that kids have someone to identify with. Someone to teach them the moral. And most religions go with some human based entity, with whom everyone has something in common.
The egyptians took it a little further and incorporated things other than human based gods, but as you said, most of their gods incorporated animal heads onto human bodies. At least it shows a little more imagination
Written by:
we seem to have an overblown sense of our own importance in the universe
Perhaps. Or maybe we're right to feel as important as we do.
Im pretty sure my cat thinks he's the greatest thing since tin openers, but then he'd never question it. Only humans question their position in the world. Every other living thing accepts it. Sure, some animals have a pack mentality, and their position in the pack may change, but its a cut and dry situation, if they win, they advance, and if they dont, they back off. Humans, on the other hand, are constantly comparing themselves to each other, even to their own ideals.
We are the most successful species. It is said that we are the only species capable of altering our environs to suit ourselves, rather than adapting to out envronment. Some of us notice that our success may be detrimental to our environment, but many do not pay any heed. This is identical to other species behaviour, they will use all available resources until there is no longer enough to support them, and then they are culled by nature. The same thing will probably happen to us, but we are the first species to have the capability of ensuring our own survival, and possibly the continuing survival of our entire planet. We definitely have the capability of destoying it, which no other species has ever had. I'd say that that would make us pretty important.
I think religious purists, the ones who cant even entertain the thoughts of an alternative, are ignoramii. And I think i just made that word up.
On a semi-related note, there are theories that aliens are our gods. If you examine ancient religions, such as egyptian, or early christianity or judaeism(sp?) a lot of the religious icons are shown with halos, or 'sun disks', basically shining orbs surrounding the head area. There have been theories that these signify helmets, for breathing apparatus, which may have been worn by aliens visiting earth.
Religion is a weird and wacky subject.
I am not a bitch.
I am THE bitch.
And Im Miss Bitch to you.
BRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
indeed it is. as read in science of the discworld, we are not "homo sapiens" we are "pans narrans" the story telling ape that uses story to aid learning in a form of "extelligence" a form of information available to everybody,
I feel religion should be considered a great story, a history of how humans learned to learn things, like the differences between "right" and "wrong" I suppose I'm too scientifically minded to believe in an ultimate being but aliens would be so cool, It may explain the lack of new religions as if they are watching then... well... would you come to earth and expose yourself if YOU were a super intelligent race of space travelling creatures. But unfortunately I think any aliens are too far away to visit us.
Those sun disks could also be represented by the fact the sun and moon used to be considered HOLY as they were associated with life and death and magically appeared in the sky and occasionally dissapeared (eclipses). this almost petulance of the sky I feel, gave rise to the thoughts of "heavens ABOVE"
You could argue that humans are the LEAST successful species for exactly the same reason. Beetles (scarabs famously worshiped by the Egyptians) have grown in numbers are probably more tenacious propogating than humans and they have not had to change the environment, they have adapted to a level that means they are perfectly suited to wherever the abide.
Overall I think religion has many many bad points but even I won't disregard the sense of hope and good feeling it seems to give so many. (i'd rather go down the pub or spark up) but for those who need order, I suppose it keeps them out of my way on a sunday.
indeed it is. as read in science of the discworld, we are not "homo sapiens" we are "pans narrans" the story telling ape that uses story to aid learning in a form of "extelligence" a form of information available to everybody,
I feel religion should be considered a great story, a history of how humans learned to learn things, like the differences between "right" and "wrong" I suppose I'm too scientifically minded to believe in an ultimate being but aliens would be so cool, It may explain the lack of new religions as if they are watching then... well... would you come to earth and expose yourself if YOU were a super intelligent race of space travelling creatures. But unfortunately I think any aliens are too far away to visit us.
Those sun disks could also be represented by the fact the sun and moon used to be considered HOLY as they were associated with life and death and magically appeared in the sky and occasionally dissapeared (eclipses). this almost petulance of the sky I feel, gave rise to the thoughts of "heavens ABOVE"
You could argue that humans are the LEAST successful species for exactly the same reason. Beetles (scarabs famously worshiped by the Egyptians) have grown in numbers are probably more tenacious propogating than humans and they have not had to change the environment, they have adapted to a level that means they are perfectly suited to wherever the abide.
Overall I think religion has many many bad points but even I won't disregard the sense of hope and good feeling it seems to give so many. (i'd rather go down the pub or spark up) but for those who need order, I suppose it keeps them out of my way on a sunday.
A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
BRONZE Member
member
72 posts
Location: On the far left of sane, Ireland
member
72 posts
Location: On the far left of sane, Ireland
Posted:
Science Of Discworld? I loved that book.
I have to say this was one of the more interesting discussions i have had on this topic so thanks.
See you in Intelligence Men vs Women?
Science Of Discworld? I loved that book.
I have to say this was one of the more interesting discussions i have had on this topic so thanks.
See you in Intelligence Men vs Women?
I am not a bitch.
I am THE bitch.
And Im Miss Bitch to you.
BRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
ok no probs.
ok no probs.
A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
SILVER Member
veteran
1,286 posts
Location: My House, United Kingdom
veteran
1,286 posts
Location: My House, United Kingdom
Posted:
no, i believe what i believe, and that is that no person is better than anyone else, so unless there was a lot of money involved and i got to plan and execute in my own way upon recieveing loads and loads of cash, i wouldnt do it....(im not scary really.... love me
no, i believe what i believe, and that is that no person is better than anyone else, so unless there was a lot of money involved and i got to plan and execute in my own way upon recieveing loads and loads of cash, i wouldnt do it....(im not scary really.... love me
Proudly Owned By The BMVC
Are You Sniffing My Mitten?
goddess of all things slimey and an interchangeable insect!
2,443 posts
Location: nottingham - the land of opportunity lol!
2,443 posts
Location: nottingham - the land of opportunity lol!
Posted:
well you disappear for two minutes and find a massive debate. oh and i just found out that i am actually good at religious studies
even though i disagree with religion. i have another question. so i know a few of other hoppers have been brought up with religion but has anyone ever believed in it?
i did. and then as i got older i thought more and had questions and for having questions that the teachers couldnt answer i was called arrogant and complaisant. how the hell they called me complaisant i dont know but hey has anyone else ever experienced something similar?
well you disappear for two minutes and find a massive debate. oh and i just found out that i am actually good at religious studies
even though i disagree with religion. i have another question. so i know a few of other hoppers have been brought up with religion but has anyone ever believed in it?
i did. and then as i got older i thought more and had questions and for having questions that the teachers couldnt answer i was called arrogant and complaisant. how the hell they called me complaisant i dont know but hey has anyone else ever experienced something similar?
Shhhhhh! the boobies are trying to sleep.
owner and the property of noddy.
*i was a caterpilla last night * - libby_tuesday
member
80 posts
80 posts
Posted:
ive bin a christian for three years, and i just wouldn't be able to kill an innocent person, i think id rather kill myself
ive bin a christian for three years, and i just wouldn't be able to kill an innocent person, i think id rather kill myself
goddess of all things slimey and an interchangeable insect!
2,443 posts
Location: nottingham - the land of opportunity lol!
2,443 posts
Location: nottingham - the land of opportunity lol!
Posted:
thats great to hear. but please dont kill yourself
i would let you kill me instead of the innocent person
thats great to hear. but please dont kill yourself
i would let you kill me instead of the innocent person
Shhhhhh! the boobies are trying to sleep.
owner and the property of noddy.
*i was a caterpilla last night * - libby_tuesday
BRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
Sorry to jump back in but.... under christian belief isn't killing yourself a sin? So what would be a greater sin ... smiting the unbeliever, or destroying your own gift of life? I'm not necessarily asking your opinion but the opinion of the church? I'm a real pain in the ass on religious debates, but hey I enjoy it and don't have a problem with personal beliefs.
Sorry to jump back in but.... under christian belief isn't killing yourself a sin? So what would be a greater sin ... smiting the unbeliever, or destroying your own gift of life? I'm not necessarily asking your opinion but the opinion of the church? I'm a real pain in the ass on religious debates, but hey I enjoy it and don't have a problem with personal beliefs.
A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
member
80 posts
80 posts
Posted:
it would be a sin yes, but taking your own life so that another person can live would be seen as a sacrifice, so therefore wouldn't be a sin, but it doesn't make it right
it would be a sin yes, but taking your own life so that another person can live would be seen as a sacrifice, so therefore wouldn't be a sin, but it doesn't make it right
goddess of all things slimey and an interchangeable insect!
2,443 posts
Location: nottingham - the land of opportunity lol!
2,443 posts
Location: nottingham - the land of opportunity lol!
Posted:
cool. i actually never thought about that before mynci. you had a good point there and rqc had a good answer
cool. i actually never thought about that before mynci. you had a good point there and rqc had a good answer
Shhhhhh! the boobies are trying to sleep.
owner and the property of noddy.
*i was a caterpilla last night * - libby_tuesday
BRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
is that not martyrdom?
is that not martyrdom?
A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
member
80 posts
80 posts
Posted:
yes it is martyrdom but i could think of the at the time my brain needed coffee.
EDITED_BY: aka rita queen of cheese (1125652794)
yes it is martyrdom but i could think of the at the time my brain needed coffee.
EDITED_BY: aka rita queen of cheese (1125652794)
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
But Martyrdom is being killed for your beliefs, not killing yourself for your beliefs. Does that still work?
But Martyrdom is being killed for your beliefs, not killing yourself for your beliefs. Does that still work?
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
member
80 posts
80 posts
Posted:
mmmmmmmm.... im not sure really
mmmmmmmm.... im not sure really
goddess of all things slimey and an interchangeable insect!
2,443 posts
Location: nottingham - the land of opportunity lol!
2,443 posts
Location: nottingham - the land of opportunity lol!
Posted:
i think sethis is right actually. i think you have to be killed to be a martyr.
can anyone answer this for definate please?
i think sethis is right actually. i think you have to be killed to be a martyr.
can anyone answer this for definate please?
Shhhhhh! the boobies are trying to sleep.
owner and the property of noddy.
*i was a caterpilla last night * - libby_tuesday
BRONZE Member
member
72 posts
Location: On the far left of sane, Ireland
member
72 posts
Location: On the far left of sane, Ireland
Posted:
Maybe the pope?
Killing yourself for your beliefs is pretty pointless. Ten minutes later, people will be arguing about what you believed in.
In respons to the suicide vs murder debate:
Ecclesiastes 7:17b: "Do not be a fool--why die before your time?" And the fifth (or sixth, depending on your version) commandment states THOU SHALT NOT KILL. Almost every major religion states that it is wrong to murder.
So, by my own interpretation of a christian point of view, that rules out suicide and murder. As far as i can remember, suicide is pretty much ignored by the rest of the bible.
If you do commit either, then you have sinned. But the bible also states that sins will be forgiven, apart from a few specifics, which are neither murder nor suicide.
Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation. (Mark 3:28-29 KJV)
Historically, a martyr is a person who dies for his or her religious beliefs. It also widely encompasses people who die for their (non religious) beliefs in just causes. But one mans martyr is another mans fool.
In response to Sethis
Like all religion, its all down to your perspective.
Maybe the pope?
Killing yourself for your beliefs is pretty pointless. Ten minutes later, people will be arguing about what you believed in.
In respons to the suicide vs murder debate:
Ecclesiastes 7:17b: "Do not be a fool--why die before your time?" And the fifth (or sixth, depending on your version) commandment states THOU SHALT NOT KILL. Almost every major religion states that it is wrong to murder.
So, by my own interpretation of a christian point of view, that rules out suicide and murder. As far as i can remember, suicide is pretty much ignored by the rest of the bible.
If you do commit either, then you have sinned. But the bible also states that sins will be forgiven, apart from a few specifics, which are neither murder nor suicide.
Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation. (Mark 3:28-29 KJV)
Historically, a martyr is a person who dies for his or her religious beliefs. It also widely encompasses people who die for their (non religious) beliefs in just causes. But one mans martyr is another mans fool.
In response to Sethis
Written by:as usual it depends. Islamic pop-culture currently view suicide bombers as martyrs, as they see no other alternative. Perhaps martyrdom should be bestowed upon those who die for their beliefs, not those that kill or are killed.
But Martyrdom is being killed for your beliefs, not killing yourself for your beliefs. Does that still work?
Like all religion, its all down to your perspective.
I am not a bitch.
I am THE bitch.
And Im Miss Bitch to you.
© 1998 - 2025 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com