Religions are mostly wrong

[BartenderElite]

If you really look at most of them, so many of the tenets & principles are from a "human" perspective, and tie into human emotions like fear & hate, and also human reactions to that, like worship & sacrifice.

It always begs the question: why do we put SO much on words that were written by ancient peoples, who had no understanding of the world or universe around them, and were largely ruled by fear & superstition? I mean, just looking at the Bible - it's a mess of contradictions. And God is sometimes portrayed as this immature, easy-to-anger being, who is all kinds of sensitive and needs to be adored & worshipped all the time.

It doesn't take a big leap of logic to realize that a timeless being wouldn't be like that. Even most who have lived long lives aren't like that.

There is a basic undercurrent through all of the religions that is probably the truth - and that is love. But the rest of it deserves more scrutiny. I believe that organized religion holds us back as a civilization, and often keeps us from realizing the truth about who we are, and why we are here.

[Doc Dutch]

If you really look at most of them, so many of the tenets & principles are from a "human" perspective, and tie into human emotions like fear & hate, and also human reactions to that, like worship & sacrifice.

It always begs the question: why do we put SO much on words that were written by ancient peoples, who had no understanding of the world or universe around them, and were largely ruled by fear & superstition? I mean, just looking at the Bible - it's a mess of contradictions. And God is sometimes portrayed as this immature, easy-to-anger being, who is all kinds of sensitive and needs to be adored & worshipped all the time.

It doesn't take a big leap of logic to realize that a timeless being wouldn't be like that. Even most who have lived long lives aren't like that.

There is a basic undercurrent through all of the religions that is probably the truth - and that is love. But the rest of it deserves more scrutiny. I believe that organized religion holds us back as a civilization, and often keeps us from realizing the truth about who we are, and why we are here.

"We" don't. Just some people take ancient words literally and that varies by degree.

[Cypress]

If you really look at most of them, so many of the tenets & principles are from a "human" perspective, and tie into human emotions like fear & hate, and also human reactions to that, like worship & sacrifice.

It always begs the question: why do we put SO much on words that were written by ancient peoples, who had no understanding of the world or universe around them, and were largely ruled by fear & superstition? I mean, just looking at the Bible - it's a mess of contradictions. And God is sometimes portrayed as this immature, easy-to-anger being, who is all kinds of sensitive and needs to be adored & worshipped all the time.

It doesn't take a big leap of logic to realize that a timeless being wouldn't be like that. Even most who have lived long lives aren't like that.

The wrathful God the Father basically doesn't show up in the New Testament.
In the Jewish scripture of the Old Testament, if we want to understand it we have to remove ourselves from the 21st century and put ourselves in their shoes. The Jewish scripture of the OT was largely compiled, edited, or written around the time of the Babylonian exile. It is perfectly understandable why Judeans would question why they had been oppressed, conquered, and made to suffer. They had questions about whether God was actually just, what they had done wrong to induce their fate, and whether the polytheism they had been practicing caused Yahweh to abandon them. In a real sense, the OT is an act of self reflection.

Religions evolve just like science, art, and technology evolve. I don't think Reform Jews and Conservative Jews of the modern era really read the scriptures literally, and outside of the Orthodox Jews I don't think they even follow the ritual food and purity laws of Torah

The Buddhist, Hindu, Confucian, and Daoist texts I've read have religious or ritual elements to them, but they are largely about how practice correct action and to dedicate oneself to the cultivation of knowledge, truth, and wisdom.

There is a basic undercurrent through all of the religions that is probably the truth - and that is love. But the rest of it deserves more scrutiny. I believe that organized religion holds us back as a civilization, and often keeps us from realizing the truth about who we are, and why we are here.

I agree that the reactionary factions in religions are a danger; Islamic fundamentalism, Militant Zionism, white Christian nationalism.

But it's worth noting that the great universities of Europe and North America were founded by Catholics and Protestants. And most of the private charitable causes in the world have historically mostly been run by religious organizations.

[Saint Guinefort]

The wrathful God the Father basically doesn't show up in the New Testament.

God definitely has EVOLOVED by the time of the N.T. from a fierce partisan for a small group of highland folks in the Levant to a more universal concept of a loving creator who cares about ALL people so long as they adhere to a small set of important rules (chiefly believing that Christ died for their sins).

But, as the Marcionite Heresy showed us, Christians really can't simply "dispose" of the OT God. That God is one and the same with the more "ecumenical" God of the NT.

Religions evolve just like science, art, and technology evolve

Indeed they do! As anything that is a pure human construct would be expected to.

I agree that the reactionary factions in religions are a danger; Islamic fundamentalism, Militant Zionism, white Christian nationalism.

But even non-literalist, non-fundamentalists provide a form of "cover" for the fundamentalists. They differ from the fundamentalists in terms of degree usually. A middle of the road Christian DOES believe there is an invisible being outside of space and time who LARGELY comports with the same being the Fundamentalists believe in. The only difference is that the middle-of-the-roaders have simply chosen to ignore part of the received wisdom about that same God. They choose to jettison those things about God which are inconvenient for them. Hence the "evolution" of the faith.

The way people were introduced to "God" in the Christian sense, for instance, is through the Bible. That God, as He is first introduced, has a LOT of really weird little rules. NONE of which Christ denied. But Christians have chosen to jettison those which they dislike. It's like going to a buffet. Made even easier when all the foods are imaginary.

It's also easy enough to toss out the talking snake allegories etc, but it gets harder to toss out the commands for genocide. Thankfully the religion has evolved to ignore the fact that the same God who so loved the world also commanded the slaughter of innocent women and children in 1Sam15:3.

But it's worth noting that the great universities of Europe and North America were founded by Catholics and Protestants.

Correct. But, apart from their divinity schools today, there is little role for the religion in the curricula. Apart from some aspects of the Medieval Church (eg the Scholastics) there is little about Christianity qua Christianity that leads one to dispassionate observation and analysis. It all still comes down to belief in "...the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

[Cypress]

God definitely has EVOLOVED by the time of the N.T. from a fierce partisan for a small group of highland folks in the Levant to a more universal concept of a loving creator who cares about ALL people so long as they adhere to a small set of important rules (chiefly believing that Christ died for their sins).

But, as the Marcionite Heresy showed us, Christians really can't simply "dispose" of the OT God. That God is one and the same with the more "ecumenical" God of the NT.



Indeed they do! As anything that is a pure human construct would be expected to.



But even non-literalist, non-fundamentalists provide a form of "cover" for the fundamentalists. They differ from the fundamentalists in terms of degree usually. A middle of the road Christian DOES believe there is an invisible being outside of space and time who LARGELY comports with the same being the Fundamentalists believe in. The only difference is that the middle-of-the-roaders have simply chosen to ignore part of the received wisdom about that same God. They choose to jettison those things about God which are inconvenient for them. Hence the "evolution" of the faith.

The way people were introduced to "God" in the Christian sense, for instance, is through the Bible. That God, as He is first introduced, has a LOT of really weird little rules. NONE of which Christ denied. But Christians have chosen to jettison those which they dislike. It's like going to a buffet. Made even easier when all the foods are imaginary.

It's also easy enough to toss out the talking snake allegories etc, but it gets harder to toss out the commands for genocide. Thankfully the religion has evolved to ignore the fact that the same God who so loved the world also commanded the slaughter of innocent women and children in 1Sam15:3.



Correct. But, apart from their divinity schools today, there is little role for the religion in the curricula. Apart from some aspects of the Medieval Church (eg the Scholastics) there is little about Christianity qua Christianity that leads one to dispassionate observation and analysis. It all still comes down to belief in "...the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

You might not like religious communities picking and choosing which religious canonical texts to make important, and which to disregard.

But it's really not up to you or me. I don't even see how it is any of our business

Reform Judaism basically ignores the ritual laws of the Torah, and tends to focus on the moral teachings of the Jewish prophets.

I would never demand that neighbors who adhere to the Reform Jewish tradition defend all of the ritual law in Leviticus, or the violence depicted in the the OT scripture

The Jewish scripture of the Old Testament is chock full of accounts of the history of the Israelites, ritual purity laws, sacrificial laws, kosher food laws, poetry. It's perfectly easy to understand how that's not relevant to a lot of Christians who tend to be oriented to the New Testament, and generally only consider the OT to be important in terms of prophecy about Jesus.

The Medieval and Renaissance Christian universities weren't just offering instruction on theology and prayer. An education in the Seven Liberal Arts was the goal of the Late Medieval and Renaissance universities as well as the early North American Protestant universities.
That's exactly where the concept of an education in the Seven Liberal Arts started. Obviouslyy higher education had diversified and modernized since 1600. But it's not like students were just being taught to pray and use rosary beads at the early European universities

[BidenPresident]

If you really look at most of them, so many of the tenets & principles are from a "human" perspective, and tie into human emotions like fear & hate, and also human reactions to that, like worship & sacrifice.

It always begs the question: why do we put SO much on words that were written by ancient peoples, who had no understanding of the world or universe around them, and were largely ruled by fear & superstition? I mean, just looking at the Bible - it's a mess of contradictions. And God is sometimes portrayed as this immature, easy-to-anger being, who is all kinds of sensitive and needs to be adored & worshipped all the time.

It doesn't take a big leap of logic to realize that a timeless being wouldn't be like that. Even most who have lived long lives aren't like that.

There is a basic undercurrent through all of the religions that is probably the truth - and that is love. But the rest of it deserves more scrutiny. I believe that organized religion holds us back as a civilization, and often keeps us from realizing the truth about who we are, and why we are here.

Agree. Religion is for dumb people.

[NiftyNiblick]

All the benign teachings of the New Testament can be appreciated and even adopted
without
having to believe in a god who purposely created a universe where big animals eat smaller ones
and some babies get malignant tumors.

[BidenPresident]

What I never understood is this. Why is an ancient Jewish religion in the Middle East supposed to determine what we in the US, in 2023, are supposed to believe?

[Doc Dutch]

What I never understood is this. Why is an ancient Jewish religion in the Middle East supposed to determine what we in the US, in 2023, are supposed to believe?

Have you ever asked that question of the Muslims?

[BidenPresident]

H

You are a stupid asshole.

[Cypress]

All the benign teachings of the New Testament can be appreciated and even adopted
without
having to believe in a god who purposely created a universe where big animals eat smaller ones
and some babies get malignant tumors.

As individuals we can voluntarily do whatever we want.

One of the only powers of a religious tradition imo is that it is supposed to in theory make a fixed ethical framework a sacred moral imperative, a sacred obligation, not something one just decides voluntarily to choose to act on.

[Cypress]

Have you ever asked that question of the Muslims?

The power I see in canonical texts like the Bhagavad-Gita and the Dhammapada is the way they articulate the price to be paid for one's choices in ethical action.

One could just say, treat people well because it's a nice thing to do. You wouldn't even have to write a book then.

It's much more compelling when ethical action or inaction is laid out in a way that speaks to the price to be paid in terms of our freedom, our emotional, psychological, and spiritual health, our duty, our obligation, our vision, our liberation, our happiness.

[Frank Apisa]

You might not like religious communities picking and choosing which religious canonical texts to make important, and which to disregard.

But it's really not up to you or me. I don't even see how it is any of our business

Reform Judaism basically ignores the ritual laws of the Torah, and tends to focus on the moral teachings of the Jewish prophets.

I would never demand that neighbors who adhere to the Reform Jewish tradition defend all of the ritual law in Leviticus, or the violence depicted in the the OT scripture

The Jewish scripture of the Old Testament is chock full of accounts of the history of the Israelites, ritual purity laws, sacrificial laws, kosher food laws, poetry. It's perfectly easy to understand how that's not relevant to a lot of Christians who tend to be oriented to the New Testament, and generally only consider the OT to be important in terms of prophecy about Jesus.

The Medieval and Renaissance Christian universities weren't just offering instruction on theology and prayer. An education in the Seven Liberal Arts was the goal of the Late Medieval and Renaissance universities as well as the early North American Protestant universities. Obviously higher education had diversified and modernized since 1600. But it's not like students were just being taught to pray and use rosary beads at the early European universities

I have no problem with anyone deciding to follow any religion...for whatever reason they want.

What does bother me...and bother me a lot...are the people who have decided various matters based on religious convictions...and then demand that those religious convictions be the basis for laws that will bind all of us.

We have laws against killing others not because of religion; we have laws against stealing not because of religion...but I sure as hell do not want laws against commercial activity on some special day, for instance...because of a religious conviction. Laws against drinking, dancing, smoking, doing pot, and so many other things that are derived from religious convictions...do bother me.

I do not begrudge an individual from doing it, but I will argue against those people from here to Hell and back.

[NiftyNiblick]

As individuals we can voluntarily do whatever we want.

One of the only powers of a religious tradition imo is that it is supposed to in theory make a fixed ethical framework a sacred moral imperative, a sacred obligation, not something one just decides voluntarily to choose to act on.

The impetus behind theocracy, it would seem.

[Saint Guinefort]

You might not like religious communities picking and choosing which religious canonical texts to make important, and which to disregard.

But it's really not up to you or me. I don't even see how it is any of our business

Sorry for my attempt to discuss a point you made. I know that bothers you greatly.