The Flaw of Monotheism (2 Viewers)

[Lentern]

Well clearly not the only one. It is riddled with flaws, but this is one of the ones that would stand even if one did believe blindly in the circular logic of the Bible.

So just one itty bitty little drop in an ocean of like arguments didn't fit in the "does god exist thread" or one of the dozens others that say much the same thing because?

And even so your little lecture is one of the few that can be refuted without stating the sheer bloody obvious point that if we thought it was rationale and testable than we'd call it science not divinity.

God is omni-benevolent? Some church doctrines might claim such a thing I wouldn't know but certainly the masses who believe God condemns millions to an eternity of suffering in hell for not believing don't think he is without reproach.

You also use a wonderful word in your description of the nasty old days. Comparatively. Really sums it up doesn't. I suppose your successor will one day puzzle how cruel and nasty this God must have been to let people eat high fructose corn syrup knowing what it was doing to them. You've imposed your personal views of what's nice and what's important on to eternity and deemed anything short of that to be a failure of faith.

Certainly its very tragic and depressing when it happens but think honestly from a Christian perspective how horrific infant mortality is? Murder is forbidden yes but death is not evil, death is part of something much larger than life on earth.

Then you talk about how long he's allowed suffering to go on before doing something to end it all? Jesus wasn't sent down to put a stopper on suffering, he was crucified alongside two other men you goose and suffering is certainly alive and well today even if we are part of the fortunate free.

And what of judgement day? Do you think the masses believe the fabled garden of Eden myth is literal? No doubt many do but a lot more do not and as much can be said of the prospect of Michael leading an army against Satan and his dragon.

But your smart enough to know that the serious Christians do not read the bible as a dramatic history of everything and then some. So why drag out riff raff so depended on that wafer thin assumption.

 

[Fish Tank]

This is the very reason I decided against sourcing it: religious people would avoid discussing the actual problem raised and poison the well via its source.

NOT ALL UR OWN WURK OMG UR GONNA BURN IN DA HELLZ!!!!!111one


More serious note, if a 'wrong' religion keeps people happy, then let them be. If you tell them they're wrong all it's gonna do is piss people off and piss you off cos you're going to have to put up with them justifying their faith.

 

[nazfiz]

nazfiz is Muslim!! added to the list.

List for what?

 

[boganxcore]

i would love to see scorch be given a gideon's bible
hilarity would ensue

 

[Scorch]

@Lentern
You jump from point to point to point with little continuity and I am struggling to see what you're actually trying to say here, but I take issue with this:

But your smart enough to know that the serious Christians do not read the bible as a dramatic history of everything and then some. So why drag out riff raff so depended on that wafer thin assumption.

What does the serious Christian read it as? A background guide? A nice little history?

So you claim no 'serious' Christians take it seriously that God created the universe and man in his own image? Or that he apparently loves us?

That's quite a claim.

More serious note, if a 'wrong' religion keeps people happy, then let them be. If you tell them they're wrong all it's gonna do is piss people off and piss you off cos you're going to have to put up with them justifying their faith.

I will show no respect to false beliefs that keep people happy if they result in the undue oppression of others who don't hold such beliefs.

i would love to see scorch be given a gideon's bible
hilarity would ensue

... why? I'm more familiar with the Bible than most Christians.

 

[Davie1]

Isn't society great theses days? people can have a heated argument about the truth of the belief in the bible. The Monotheism view on the world can be challenged on an open forum. Can I make the point that throughout history smart people arguing against the belief of monotheism have often been accused of heresy? Which leads them to be labeled as evil, crazy and often ending with them being shot, hung or burnt to a crisp. I think Scorch can count himself lucky he lives in this day and age.

Another point if comparing the modern era to those past. We have all these sly, weasel and crazy people who make up fantastic lies around these days where were they back then. Could they have been the individuals through history who corrupted a once honest and belief of a Monotheism god?

Food for thought.

 

[ilikebeeef]

Another point if comparing the modern era to those past. We have all these sly, weasel and crazy people who make up fantastic lies around these days where were they back then. Could they have been the individuals through history who corrupted a once honest and belief of a Monotheism god?

Food for thought.

I reckon contradictions in the Bible comes from the fact that when you have too many people trying to share the same idea, you will inevitably get variations. It's like "too many cooks spoil the broth".

 

[dan2452]

This is something billions of people do not understand. Spirituality is real. Religion is made by man, and as are the rules. Even the stories in the bible are made by man. Religion shouldn't be about any rules or restrictions, instead about the messages they contain.

Most religions share similar messages deep between the changes made over the centuries, however these are covered up by all of the rules, alterations and rituals which make up 90% of the texts.

Who came up with the idea that people are only 4000 years old for the bible anyway? The world is also flat.

 

[Scorch]

Isn't society great theses days? people can have a heated argument about the truth of the belief in the bible. The Monotheism view on the world can be challenged on an open forum. Can I make the point that throughout history smart people arguing against the belief of monotheism have often been accused of heresy? Which leads them to be labeled as evil, crazy and often ending with them being shot, hung or burnt to a crisp. I think Scorch can count himself lucky he lives in this day and age.

I suppose I can. That being said, there are many homosexuals worldwide that cannot and I take issue with that fact, because it is made so by an almost exclusively religious influence.

Another point if comparing the modern era to those past. We have all these sly, weasel and crazy people who make up fantastic lies around these days where were they back then. Could they have been the individuals through history who corrupted a once honest and belief of a Monotheism god?

Well the first deities we see emerging in human history tend to be extremely rudimentary earth-mother sorts of deities. Monotheism took a while to come into the picture. The first major monotheistic deity is Ahura-Mazda of Zoroastrianism in the Achaemenid Persian Empire. This was a rather nice and harmless deity that was paid credence by the King, yet Persia was not a religious theocracy and was rather progressive and extremely religiously tolerant.

Judaism adapted a lot of the facets of Ahura-Mazda but with the Old Testament serving as it did as a piece of propaganda to justify the various violent and brutal conquests of the Israelites in this time (the Exodus story, for example, is a complete and utter fabrication: this never actually happened) probably marked the beginning of any such 'corruption', if it can be found.

But while there are many similarities, there are many, many differences. The Judeo-Christian God is far more interventionist than we have seen before, really, and far more politically involved.

So if there is any supposed 'corruption', then essentially it is done by the Judeo-Christian tradition as a whole. But if you read the Bible, you'll see an belief that is extremely corrupted already, and I would question that it really took people to do anything but read it to draw justification for evil deeds.

"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things it takes religion."
~Steven Weinberg

 

[Davie1]

Back to the point of this forum....

Why is it, then, that such a nonsensical ideology currently holds an inordinate amount of control over the legislative and executive governmental arms of many apparently secular nations, such as ours and the USA?

Well i think the answer that this forum was originally about can be answered simply. The control held by those parties that you mention are only as strong as they are because of the sheep that follow them. The sheep give the leaders the power to control and the leaders look after their own flock, not anyone else. If some one does not fit the criteria as what is "right" well they are overlooked and ignored (maybe even persecuted).

While the sheep have no better understanding they will conform and stick with what they see as "their version of the truth". And you know it’s true that when someone accuses you of being wrong, you get angry and defensive because the belief has become part of who you see yourself as. You can't pull the rug out from under their feet until you can show them a more appealing rug to go to.

the point where politics and spiritual understanding is always blurred. but they both effect each other.

Now Dan, I think you understand the concept and the true essence of what religion should be but this argument is about the politics of Main stream religions which rob themselves of their essence and true purpose.

 

[mirakon]

Um, I don't actually think it states anywhere in the bible that God is omnibenevolent? If there is, quote please.

 

[mcflystargirl]

Whilst most people in this country identify as a Christian there is always room for Christians in politics.

 

[Scorch]

Whilst most people in this country identify as a Christian there is always room for Christians in politics.

Not when it results in the oppression of others, there isn't, and not when this is a secular nation.

 

[trickx]

Hitchens is a great writer, I recently finished his book, although it's been overshadowed by The Great Gatsby (had to read for English).

But in reply to to trickx, religion has much power over certain Western governments, namely America, and to a lesser degree, Australia.

A few clear examples are:

- Why aren't homosexuals allowed to marry each other?
- Why isn't euthanasia legal?
- Why is there a debate in America and Britain about the teaching of Intelligent Design as a viable alternative to evolution? Furthermore, why did George W. Bush say that there was no problem in this, and that it is a viable alternative?

While religion does not have an absolute grasp on the state, its influence is undeniably strong and powerful.

Again .. there is a difference between historical background and justifications for making laws. Don't confuse them. The constitution is strictly secular. If you don't know that, you don't know anything.

Examples are poor, they're ethical issues not religious. Many secularists are pro-life, doesn't make them religious. And ID isn't science, it's pseudo-science. Bush didn't condone ID, he just said "to teach the controversies."

 

[0bs3n3]

Mainly pointing out the flaw of a nonsensical ideology that currently holds an inordinate amount of control over the legislative and executive governmental arms of many apparently secular nations, such as ours and America.

I did edit the original post to pose the question more directly, thank you. Perhaps I was a bit vague in asking people to make the link.

Ok...but I don't get what this has to do with monotheism in particular.

I mean, all those countries with multiple deities are doing real swell. India looks delightful.

 

[0bs3n3]

This point, originally made by Christopher Hitchens, is the primary argument by which makes monotheism in the highest degree, extremely improbable in respect to its truth claims.

But to Scorch, I think the premise to your question is wrong. Religion has no control on most Western governments - executive or legislative. Particularly America, where Christianity is tied up greatly with their history, but their constitution is strictly secular. The Founding Fathers were undoubtedly atheist (a few maybe deists) but they wrote the constitution to say religion can have no say in political affairs.

More than a few deists if irc. Most of them were Freemasons, which requires a sort of religious belief.

 

[morning storm]

there is no god

 

[ilikebeeef]

Ok...but I don't get what this has to do with monotheism in particular.

I mean, all those countries with multiple deities are doing real swell. India looks delightful.

Um, you do realise that India has a multitude of slums right?

 

[MR ORANGE]

I'm pretty certain that there was religion about ever since the dawn of man. Most monotheistic religions believe that Adam was the first man created by god and did meet him, so he therefore would have preached to his children that there is a god, the things god likes, the things he doesn't like us doing hence religion.

 

[Venetiad]

I'm pretty certain that there was religion about ever since the dawn of man. Most monotheistic religions believe that Adam was the first man created by god and did meet him, so he therefore would have preached to his children that there is a god, the things god likes, the things he doesn't like us doing hence religion.

Best be trollin'.