886
Religion rule
(lemmy.blahaj.zone)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Jan 2024
886 points (100.0% liked)
196
16419 readers
1967 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Imagine a nascent nomadic cult of a fictional kingdom called Canaan, grown and composed of the downtrodden of its society, that when the kingdom begins to encounter problems beyond its control because it does not know how to or cannot treat them, like plagues and disease, the cult begins blaming the rest of society for not worshiping their god, El, enough nor in the right way by their real name, and begin eulogizing killing the rest of society off in extremely violent ways after they manage to survive the plague and disease due to their seclusion.
Imagine then how no one would ever want to admit to being a Canaan because of the risk of getting persecuted when the cult begins to conquer territory, and imagine this happening to such an extent that even the members of the cult, now a full-fledged religion due to its conquests and expansion, denies any relation to said society, making up a story instead about coming from some far off kingdom like Egypt that most people in the region would know of but would not really know the specifics about. It would sound similar enough to already preexisting mythos.
Imagine if this sort of attitude didn't just persist into the "modern" world, but involved offsprings of that very same cult holding power and influence in governments throughout the world. It would be a testament to a cultural unwillingness to overcome its own collective ego and overextended fictional narratives to recognize its flawed conception.
"el" literally just means "god" lmao
So does Allah. Your point?
Yeah. Arabic Christians literally call their God "Allah" too.
It's all the same invisible sky daddy anyway, just interpreted through different hallucinations 🤷
That you've been doing something ridiculous for a long time doesn't make it any less stupid. Quite the opposite.
Also, this is Lemmy, not Reddit.
Holy strawman, Batman!
I'm very far from being a nihilist. I believe in things that can actually be verified. I believe in some people and some ideals.
I just don't base my beliefs on self-contradictory and often batshit insane orders from long dead idiots and wielders of unearned authority pretending to represent a fictional being that's its own dad.
In another comment you kept linking Christianity with paedophilia, which is a big strawman. And trying to ask me why I didn't drown nonce priests like I am in charge of a completely different denomination which I am not even a member of.
No. There is a shitload of evidence of widespread child rape committed by Christian churches. There's no evidence of me being a nihilist and there wouldn't be since I'm not.
That was obviously a facetious rhetorical question.
Yes, but there's evidence of athiests being nihilists and claiming that 'nothing matters' and believing in subjective morality, which has led to atrocities. So suddenly Christianity represents the actions of all Christians but Athiesm doesn't represent the actions of all Athiests?
So if you're using various Christian institutions as arguments against Christianity, then I could easily point to large Athiest countries like Maoist China and Soviet Russia who murdered millions. Or Nazi Germany (Don't try and claim Hitler was a Christian; he most certainly was not and was only using the label to get votes) who tried to dehumanise humans into being less than animals.
Nope. Not believing in religion is not the same thing as not believing in anything. Far from it.
Another ridiculous strawman 🙄
Nope. If any beliefs have led to atrocities, it's religious ones. In fact, religion is probably the number two cause of murder after greed.
No, I specifically said the church, not all Christians. Unlike you, I'm not a bigot who thinks all members of a group are the same.
Correct.
You could, but you'd be stupid to do so. Those millions died because of politics, not a lack of religion.
He was and then he wasn't. He was never an atheist, though:
Source for more details
Which the worst Christian bigots do to this day. It's debatable whether or not Donald Trump is a Christian himself, but he's referred to groups of people he doesn't like as vermin and his Christian bigot followers cheered.
Okay. What Church? The Roman Catholic church? That has nothing to do with me and little to do with the teachings of Christianity as a whole, there are many Christian churches.
And Ironically, how come I am a bigot all of a sudden? Is it because I am Christian? Why do you think that? Do you think that we're all the same?
And yeah, Trump has said abhorrent things. He is an abhorrent person. But he hasn't followed the teachings of Jesus, such as the rich man and lazarus.
Not every single local chapel or whatever, but all of the denominations. Catholic, Orthodox, Southern Baptist, First Baptist, Episcopalian, Lutheran, Methodist etc. You name one and there's been clergy raping children. Including whichever sect you belong to.
No, it's because of your bigoted statements, such as your automatic assumption that all atheists are nihilists and that atheism leads to evil.
The vast majority of the people who worship him call themselves Christians, though. Are they all lying?
You said including whatever sect I belong to, yet I don't belong to any of them. The church I regularly attend has no known cases of child abuse. If there was and it wasn't handled appropriately, I would be among the first to leave.
Athiesm is inherently evil by the Christian definition because it leads people away from God.
I specifically said sect and denomination, not church as in the building. Don't try to play even more dumb than you are. Name your denomination and I'll be able to find at least one child abuse scandal.
An environment where they'll be an unquestioned authority figure with the power of heaven and hell as far as the children know and lots of time alone with said miniature slaves is the perfect opportunity for a child molester. Especially in the completely inhumane sects where they expect them to be celibate for life as soon as they enter the priesthood.
Fun fact: the vast majority of atheists started out religious and then decided for themselves to leave your cult. Some people not sharing your delusions isn't some grand conspiracy to corrupt you and other "righteous" zealots.
I'm not going to doxx myself by telling you the name of that church, but it's low-church. Meaning that it has nothing to do with other churches in the denomination (unlike high Church like Roman Catholic or the Church of England where it's one big institution)
And? Athiesm is a new concept, since most of the world is religious, people emerge with athiesm. And a lot of athiests grow up in a lukewarm religious environment anyway.
Ah, so you're in a Christianity-derived cult. The unhinged zealotry makes more sense now.
No, atheism is the default condition of human beings before anyone indoctrinates them.
Other way around. Literally every single human on earth is born an atheist and then 99.99% of the people who become religious do so because others told them they had to.
Maybe because it's easier to escape a cult that's less intense about the threats of eternal hellfire and shunning from society? Just a thought.
That doesn't answer the "your point?" part lol
Ah, but see, if you don't call him by his real name, wackytoodlerpops, you are committing blasphemy by worshipping a false idol. Ergo, free grounds for some chop chop in my cult, at least until we get to the religious stage and actually have to establish a stable society which has to consider things like trade from and mingling with the outside world. That's sort of why Scientology has had to tone down on its fair game policy.
Do Muslims think that?
I would say its a testament to the fact that humanity isn't so stupid they will opress the followers of a peaceful religion for crimes their ancestors supposedly commited.
That's a lot of pseudo-intellectual nonsense to mask your obvious antisemitism. The way you snake around your point and avoid naming the religion you are condemning would almost be impressive were it not so awful.
I feel like I'm the only person who actually bothered to read that and didn't just mindlessly upvote it.
I think it's pretty clear not only what religion I'm referring to, but what branched off sects and eventually separate religions I'm referring to. I think it pretty much has a lot to do with being an atheist, although I guess you consider those the ultimate antisemites as well for seeing the world outside of a fictional religious shell.
Which peaceful religion are you referring to? I'm having trouble seeing through all the blood.
Not only are you not the only person, you are the norm of this sad trend.
If you think Jews should not be allowed in positions of power, you are an antisemite. I literally could not give less of a shit what you believe in. I've been an atheist for most of my life, and I'm not an antisemite.
The peaceful religion I'm referring to is Judaism, the religion thats entire point is to spread good. Before you point out instances of Jews doing terrible things, I am aware that they are capable of wrongdoing like every other group of people.
So are you referring to all abrahamic religions? If so, you should have maybe just said that instead of writing almost exclusively about the Israelites. Regardless, I still disagree with everything you said regardless of how many religions you drag into it.
If all of the normal people think you're a lunatic, you may want to consider the idea that you simply are a lunatic. But you aren't mentally capable of comprehending the fact you're just an asshole, so you say every normal person is just a braindead sheep following a sad trend.
You definitely like your strawmans, but I suppose it should be expected.
You can say that to any argument regardless of how accurate it is. To prove I have misrepresented your point, you have to show how I did that. Simply saying I did does not add anything of value to this conversation.
it is possible I misunderstood what you were saying, or you wrote something unintentionally misleading. If this is the case, please elaborate and explain where the misunderstanding occurred. Until then, I'm going to assume your accusation is simply a method of making yourself look correct without actually having to come up with an argument.