The dichotomy of hate.

[prairiechickin]

You frighten me with your broad pronouncements, but titilate me with apocalypse. I'm Enjoying Kimmy Everyday!

[Jack Weber]

You frighten me with your broad pronouncements, but titilate me with apocalypse. I'm Enjoying Kimmy Everyday!

This needs to be on a T-Shirt...

[kimmy]

Well Christians believe he did show up and explain it to us in person. And he said things like love thine enemy and turn the other cheek. It's not necessarily that he needed to know what its like to be human, to make mistakes and sin and stuff like that, but to show humans that they too could be more like god, if they live the way Jesus tells them to.

But Christians also believe that he showed up in person and told the Israelites to massacre other tribes to the very last infant. So you can understand my confusion. What could be a better example of the "split personality" Peeves mentioned?

-k

[kimmy]

You frighten me with your broad pronouncements, but titilate me with apocalypse. I'm Enjoying Kimmy Everyday!

I'm not quite sure what that means, but thanks for tuning in.

-k

[Jack Weber]

But Christians also believe that he showed up in person and told the Israelites to massacre other tribes to the very last infant. So you can understand my confusion. What could be a better example of the "split personality" Peeves mentioned?

-k

Jesus embodied Himself as Herrod???

[kimmy]

Jesus embodied Himself as Herrod???

I'm thinking of the parts where Yahweh showed up in person and commanded his chosen people to massacre the Midianites or the Amalekites.

-k

[Jack Weber]

I'm thinking of the parts where Yahweh showed up in person and commanded his chosen people to massacre the Midianites or the Amalekites.

-k

And,as usual,I'm thinking you've conveniently forgotten we've been given a New Coveneant...

Edited December 29, 2011 by Jack Weber

[kimmy]

And,as usual,I'm thinking you've conveniently forgotten we've been given a New Coveneant...

New covenenant, same guy.

-k

[Jack Weber]

New covenenant, same guy.

-k

Epiphany...

[Moonlight Graham]

Excuse me but dissociative identity disorder has nothing to do with schizophrenia.

That's not mental illness, it's simple run-of-the-mill hypocrisy.

Agreed. It's also disrespectful to those who suffer from schizophrenia, one of the most horrible diseases known to man.

[Bonam]

There is no "word of god", no "covenant". The books of all religions are the creations of men, used for various purposes throughout the ages. Christianity became popular when the Roman emperors (Constantine) realized it could be a useful tool to pacify the populace, for example. Before then, it was just one of many different religions in the empire. And there is no question that people have killed, and continue to kill, each other based on slightly differing variations of interpretations of these old books, written by varying individual humans at differing times throughout history.

For proof, one need only look at the Bible, which has hundreds of different versions and editions, many varying staggeringly in content and context from one another. This is a result of translations to numerous languages, translations back, new editions by different scholars, etc. If one was to grant that some 2000 years ago an original existed that really was the "word of God", still, none of the bibles in circulation today convey the same meaning that that text would have contained. The difference in connotation between a single word and its synonym can change the entire meaning of a story, and yet there are a myriad of changes that are far more far-reaching between different versions of the bible. How are these supposed to be reconciled? How does a Christian suspend disbelief long enough to assume that despite all this, the modern bible that they hold in their hands is somehow the "word of God"?

It's all mindbogglingly silly really. Oh well, most people will believe anything if indoctrinated in it from youth. And that's all religion is: institutionalized indoctrination of people by both their parents and society at large.

[Guest American Woman]

Thanks to all of you who provided that "view from the other side." Jerry Falwell et al needs a balance, and ya'll do a great job of providing it.

[Guest Peeves]

No, whoever you quoted is out to lunch too.

I do enjoy attempts to make something out of a picayune issue of semantics or logomachy, with a rabid response.

"b : going to extreme lengths in expressing or pursuing a feeling, interest, or opinion <rabid editorials> <a rabid supporter>" Source, dictionary.

The referenced quote was also from the dictionary.

Terminology as thus is frequently used in context other than actual medical or physical conditions.

A diarrhea of words,

A insane act,

A brainless move,

A blind response,

A spineless attack,

No backbone,

Lacking of gonads

A Ball Breaker,

Gutless wonder,

No stomach for...

Treated as a leper,

A lame excuse,

An apoplectic reaction.

Or

A mindless response - to a post that was using a simile, a figure of speech apropos to the context used.

Now, do you wish to move on to metaphors?

[Guest Manny]

Now, do you wish to move on to metaphors?

There is great irony here

[eyeball]

I do enjoy attempts to make something out of a picayune issue of semantics or logomachy, with a rabid response.

That was obvious in the very first sentence in this thread.

Now, do you wish to move on to metaphors?

Sure. How do you like the metaphor I often use when I compare high ranking moral authorities, like a priest who diddles little kids, to a Shining Beacon of democracy that supports dictatorships in smaller weaker countries?

I mean, do you want to talk about a real dichotomy or just piss around with semantics?

Edited December 29, 2011 by eyeball

[cybercoma]

And,as usual,I'm thinking you've conveniently forgotten we've been given a New Coveneant...

Matthew 5:17-20

¹⁷

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

¹⁸

For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

¹⁹

Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

²⁰

For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Your New Covenant recognizes the old as part of itself.

[kimmy]

Thanks to all of you who provided that "view from the other side." Jerry Falwell et al needs a balance, and ya'll do a great job of providing it.

I guess me and Jerry Falwell have one thing in common, which is that we are both aware that the Bible predicts grave harm for those who disobey God.

Jerry is well known for claiming that gays, feminists, and the ACLU caused 9/11, and I'm well known for claiming that the Old Testament is full of evidence that god is a seriously violent dude. I can totally see the comparison.

And I do love how the standard changes for atheists compared to religious people. As someone once observed: a "militant Muslim" is somebody who straps a bomb to their chest... a "militant Christian" is somebody who shoots people at abortion clinics... and a "militant atheist" is somebody who criticizes religion in public.

I am literally worse than Hitler for pointing out what the Old Testament tells us about God's attitudes toward violence; this thread is literally worse than the Holocaust.

-k

[Guest Manny]

"Marxism–Leninism has consistently advocated the control, suppression, and eventual elimination of religion. Within about a year of the revolution, the state expropriated all church property, including the churches themselves, and in the period from 1922 to 1926, 28 Russian Orthodox bishops and more than 1,200 priests were killed. Many more were persecuted."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_Soviet_Union

Militant atheists.

[Guest Peeves]

"Marxism–Leninism has consistently advocated the control, suppression, and eventual elimination of religion. Within about a year of the revolution, the state expropriated all church property, including the churches themselves, and in the period from 1922 to 1926, 28 Russian Orthodox bishops and more than 1,200 priests were killed. Many more were persecuted."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_Soviet_Union

Militant atheists.

I sincerely believe religion to be a potential source for charity, (tzedaka, sadaqah et al) righteousness, fairness or justice, IF the tenets of religion are practiced.

As an atheist I don't believe religion has been consistent in history in practicing same. All too often we get religion-charity,tied to proselytizing,( Mother Teresa.)

I see differing faces of religion, of major Abrahamic religions,"Jews, Christians & Muslims are 3 Pillars of Love", and a hypocritical reality.

Hence my subject as The dichotomy of hate, (within religions.)

There are other than violence in my accusation.

Hypocrisy -

For example, religious evangelists taking money for the poor and living high on the hog themselves.

For example preaching of god yet acting in hate ..KKK, Phelps family.

And obviously praising the peace of the religion yet murdering for your god. Murdering a sect with differing opinions-beliefs..Sunni- Shia.

I do make the distinction between acts in history as the Inquisition and now of contemporary religions.Such as the persecution of one religion by another in burning their religious structure and murdering followers. That's quite simply something I'd call hate.

Edited December 30, 2011 by Peeves

[cybercoma]

"Marxism–Leninism has consistently advocated the control, suppression, and eventual elimination of religion. Within about a year of the revolution, the state expropriated all church property, including the churches themselves, and in the period from 1922 to 1926, 28 Russian Orthodox bishops and more than 1,200 priests were killed. Many more were persecuted."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_Soviet_Union

Militant atheists.

The problem is that atheists are not defined by any one uniting belief. Christians are atheists when it comes to all of the Gods that have ever been known, except for one. Those examples have more to do with politics than they do with atheism. There is no atheist "faith" or system that all atheists share.

[Guest Peeves]

The problem is that atheists are not defined by any one uniting belief. Christians are atheists when it comes to all of the Gods that have ever been known, except for one. Those examples have more to do with politics than they do with atheism. There is no atheist "faith" or system that all atheists share.

And that's to the good.

[Guest Peeves]

I guess me and Jerry Falwell have one thing in common, which is that we are both aware that the Bible predicts grave harm for those who disobey God.

Jerry is well known for claiming that gays, feminists, and the ACLU caused 9/11, and I'm well known for claiming that the Old Testament is full of evidence that god is a seriously violent dude. I can totally see the comparison.

And I do love how the standard changes for atheists compared to religious people. As someone once observed: a "militant Muslim" is somebody who straps a bomb to their chest... a "militant Christian" is somebody who shoots people at abortion clinics... and a "militant atheist" is somebody who criticizes religion in public.

I am literally worse than Hitler for pointing out what the Old Testament tells us about God's attitudes toward violence; this thread is literally worse than the Holocaust.

-k

I don't criticize religion or it's followers. I criticize those that use their religion, for justifying despicable deeds.

Schizophrenic religion is a very curious thing. That a god can at once endorse "the Christian concept of a loving and forgiving" in one breath then bring on a flood or tsunami, a plague or an inquisition.

promise both a paradise for martyrs committing suicide and murder..heaven and a hell..both apparently 'his' choice, strikes me as peculiar in the extreme.

Secular Humanism seems to be more balanced (that embraces human reason, ethics, justice, and the search for human fulfillment), than the hypocrisy and conflicting, perhaps baroque behavior of a (to me) quite schizoid god of the three major Abrahamic religions, or the practitioners of same.

"Humanism (often with a capital H to distinguish it from other forms of humanism), is a secular philosophy . It specifically rejects religious dogma, supernaturalism, pseudoscience or superstition as the basis of morality and decision-making."

The tree of religion often bears both sweet and bitter fruit often on the same branch.

Edited January 2, 2012 by Peeves

[cybercoma]

Secular humanism is not a religion.

[Guest Manny]

The problem is that atheists are not defined by any one uniting belief. Christians are atheists when it comes to all of the Gods that have ever been known, except for one. Those examples have more to do with politics than they do with atheism. There is no atheist "faith" or system that all atheists share.

Yes well the example shows that ideologies taken to the point of totalitarianism are what leads to group hate and large-scale, anonymous killing. It's interesting to see that one is a christian crusader, another a muslim jihadist and another a fervent communist. They removed god but replaced it with something else- worship of the state.

But in regards to atheism there is no organized system, no bible as such unless one looks at the reaction people had to some recent books. The fact that it is not organized into a single school of thought does not make it better or even different than religions like christianity, where there are many differing opinions and schools of thought. Even to the level of individuals, there are many who won't identify with any particular church. Jesus himself would most likely not have been a christian.

That is why I put to you, religion does not exclusively have this dichotomy. I can point to it in many forms in our society. Charitable aid as a tool for political influence, infiltration, even profiteering. Marketing, free trade economics as leverage of power. Democracy as opium for the masses. Tea parties, occupy movements, alternative music. An idea is manipulated, and it becomes its own opposite. It fails.

The dichotomy exists but stems from something deeper and simpler than religion. The hijacking of religion to serve some other purpose is just another of its many faces.

[Guest Manny]

... and I must add as afterthought, this manipulation does not invalidate the pure core of the idea, if one is able to distill out those original pure elements from the now corrupted interpretation. This is most necessary, to bring about the seeds of new ideas, reforms, and a new artistry. Then the cycle begins again. Creation, maintenance, decay, destruction.