Religious Responses Part 2: Disney Duster
@
Linden: I'll reply to you in a separate post later tonight.
Disney Duster wrote:You misread what I was saying. I was saying what might be the reason there is still evil in this world, jerk. >: (
No. I didn't misread it, you miswrote it.
Sorry for calling you 'loony', however.
Disney Duster wrote:But many religions, especially the Christian ones, actually try to help and solve those problems you just posted pictures of. Also, if there were no religion, that would be very oppresive. Freedom of religion is freedom of being aloud to not just believe but share your believes with others and have a community in it.
In the past few decades, admittedly religions have helped set up and support many charities, and I cannot deny that they have helped those in suffering. But then again, religion has caused the Crusades, 9/11, countless cases of infant mutilation, stifled scientific progress, and promoted prejudice.
Maybe religion being disallowed would be oppressive, but considering what it's caused, I think it can be very dangerous, and it is a delusion; why are some mental illnesses and delusions treated and stopped by psychiatrists, yet religious delusions are not?
Furthermore, religion is not the oppressed thing, it is often the oppressor, and I don't think child indoctrination should be allowed. If you want to believe that there's an invisible man in the sky who gave a random species that amount to less than bacteria in comparison to him with souls that would go to either a paradise or a spiritual torture chamber, depending on how each of them behaved, then go ahead, but don't brainwash your children into doing the same.
Disney Duster wrote:I thought you were saying you hate your life so much you want to be in Heaven now. If you do not hate your life so much wouldn't you rather continue this journey in the world learning things and proving yourself against challenges before you enter a world where everything's perfect and happy?
I don't 'hate my life so much', but in comparison to the fictitious realm of Heaven it would be like, well, Hell. Even though life offers education and challenges, it can be frequently frustrating, upsetting and harrowing for everyone; besides, plenty of people don't enjoy life in the slightest, like those in poverty and third world countries.
Disney Duster wrote:For crying out loud some of the things you love are based on challenges and conflicts, like the movies you to talk about at length. But for very reasons like that, that we must go through challenges and prove ourselves worthy of heaven is why we can't have heaven now. Your parents love you but they only give you certain extra things when you earn them yet you think God is unloving for doing that as well.
I know movies I love are about challenges and conflict, but that is completely irrelevant. There are war and horror movies that I like, but I wouldn't like to be in the situations shown in those films!
And WHY must we prove ourselves worthy of Heaven? Who dictates these ethics? What sane person would believe that countless humans going through decades of suffering and sadness is okay, simply to earn God's love?
Disney Duster wrote:And maybe some or all of them went to a place of eternal bliss. But I must point out, praying to other gods is actually a sin and not the kind of thing that would make God want to spare them of their deaths, not that I'm saying that's exactly what happened but it is a thought.
Well if they had to go through intense pain and suffering before going to a place of eternal bliss, I don't think that's very 'loving' of God. As for the fact that it may have been a sin to pray to other gods...if God does exist and showed these Jews no mercy because of the other deities they prayed to, then God is a sick, twisted, evil monster.
Disney Duster wrote:No I meant that if there was really more bad than good, than the majority of people wouldn't make movies that showed good being most important and winning just to escape, because if most people were really bad than they would like to make movies that showed bad winning or that bad was good.
I have to say Duster, I think this argument is rather irrelevant; besides, who's to say that the things we consider to be 'good' aren't actually 'bad'? Maybe movies are mostly about 'bad' winning after all, if you looked at it from an alternative viewpoint. I'm not saying that things like murder are good, I'm just open-minded when it comes to ethics. You get your morals from thousand year-old desert scrolls; I try and live by morals that are well thought out, and based upon, well,
intelligent design.
Disney Duster wrote:But I must say wow if you really think generally that Christians aren't good people and that they want to murder each other, you have an extremely negative and rather wicked view. It makes you sound more like a monster than the way you thought of God. I do not think you are one but I'm telling you what you sound like. I hope that something happens to make you happier and not think so badly. I have no idea what to do. I mean, how is your life dude?
In general, I think most Christians don't really think about their religions (various censuses have proven that on average atheists know more about religious holy books than the followers of said holy books themselves) and are therefore not all of them are bad people. However, the Christian extremists and literalists are usually bad people, and when considering how many Christians tell people like Richard Dawkins that they can't wait for them to burn in Hell, I think a lot of Christians and followers of other religions are genuinely bad people. Furthermore, if there weren't any laws and nobody believed in God, I think many people would murder others all the time.
Secondly...I have a wicked view? You think I sound like a monster? Coming from a delusional Christian like you, I take that as a compliment. Thank you.
Disney Duster wrote:No I think if you don't believe you will get some retribution, but perhaps even non-believers will get into Heaven. All I know is that you should believe. There's no reason it would be bad for you not to believe, it could only help.
Tell that to women, gypsies and homosexuals persecuted by religion. Tell that to the victims of 9/11. Tell that to the victims of the Crusades...
Disney Duster wrote:The fact you have such a vendetta against it shows it's not that you really don't believe. You are purposely choosing not to and don't want to listen to anyone who can explain why your reasons for not believing don't fly since there is no reason. You can some up with excuses but there's really no specific reason. Believing isn't supposed to be based on evidence yet you say that's what you need. That leads into a nonsensical circle because you are supposed to believe without evidence, other than existence itself and the Bible.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="
http://www.youtube.com/embed/Xsj1UWol7l8" frameborder="0"></iframe>
(specific part from 0:52 onwards)
Duster, I AM open-minded, but the probability of God's existence (his existence cannot yet be scientifically proved or disproved) is highly unlikely to me, and as there is no real, concrete, factual, undoubtable evidence suggesting that he exists, I ignore the possibility of his existence. I have a sort-of vendetta against religion because I think it's dangerous and, at the very least, child indoctrination/brainwashing should be stopped.
Disney Duster wrote:And if you are really thinking of all the pain in the world why are you spending so much time just thinking about it instead of spending more of that time trying to help people like that, because a lot of those problems are caused at least in part by people, with their own wills, which God doesn't control, and it is people's wills that can also try to solve those problems and maybe you should join them because maybe that's what God wants you to do and a lot of Christians are doing it.
A lot of non-Christians are doing it too, but I see your point. I want to help end the pain in the world and intend on doing a lot of charity work in the future.
Disney Duster wrote:But how I currently view it as that either the men of the Bible meant that you shouldn't rape a man to have pleasure because most men of that time were really only interested in woman but sometimes raped men for pleasure, or that the men put it in their when God didn't want them to and people need to figure out that's their word and not God's just like I may be doing now.
The first possibility is a ridiculous inference from the blatant homophobia in the Old Testament; as for the second possibility...well, what could possibly make you think that one part of the Bible isn't God's word or not?
The Bible is the only source of information a Christian can turn to, but when Christians notice contradictions, they usually think "Hey, the Old Testament was just a misinterpretation of God's word and full of dated stuff that people wanted you to believe back then, but the New Testament is the real word of God!" The only fucking reason Christians favour the New over the Old is because the New is ethically closer to the popular and modern beliefs of what's right and wrong.
Imagine a parallel universe, where slavery, sexism and homophobia was not abolished in the developed world, but flourished, and hierarchies formed. In that universe, Christians would think "Hey, the New Testament was just a misinterpretation of God's word and full of dated stuff people wanted you to believe back then, but the Old Testament is the real word of God!"
Why do you doubt that homophobia was being promoted by 'God', but you have no doubt that equality and peace weren't? It's because, separately from the Bible, humans have used rational and empathetic thought to work out, wait a minute, slavery is bad! Racism is bad! Homophobia is bad!
And as a result, religion is struggling to stay relevant, and the people who want to keep religion intact (probably due to fear of death and/or brainwashing from early childhood) try and hide the parts of their Holy Books which are now seen as evil, and pick out the handful of parts which would now be seen as good, like some of the things Jesus allegedly said and 'the Golden Rule', etc.
Disney Duster wrote:And I think enigmawing's response covers anything else I want to.
I think that my response to enigmawing (which I can't wait for her to respond to) covers anything else
I want to.