|
Soup du Journey posted:there's certainly a correlation between religion & culture (and development level, for that matter), but i question your categorization of the era. christianity came into being among a people under foreign occupation, subject to a rule that was often shaky, where both terrorism and violent reprisals were endemic. theology aside, christ's gospel was a model for resistance of a radical sort, not complaisance and anodyne positivity. Oh it most certainly is a generalization of the time period. I just didnt feel like getting too deep in the weeds on the subject while at work haha. While it is true that the Romans were known for brutal reprisals (the story of Corinth is bonechilling). They still added a level of stability that the ancient wotld hadnt really seen on such a broad scale. I liken the advent of Christianity to the Egyptian theology. Egypt was geographically insulated from the wartorn uncertainty of Mesopotamia and it is reflected in their theology. Sumerian, Assyrian, and other civilizations of that period had religions that...were so loving depression. The afterlife was a realm of "whispers and shadows". In contrast Egypt has a theology where the evil god was dead and most of the gods had more peaceful portfolios. I think this is largely because life in Egypt was much more stable and allowed for a more peaceful theology. There was violence yes, but not nearly as much as would have been experienced had they not had environmental insulation. The Roman Empire had a similar effect to transform a god of war to a god of nonviolence. The shakiness of Roman cultural rule allowed for it to take place and the strength and stability of the Roman military created the groundwork for a peaceful religion. There are so many facets to the birth of christianity and it is quite fascinating. My personal head canon is that all the religions are true and were put in place as a population control method. I view God as a Game Reserve Warden. Impartial and not afraid to cull the herd when it becomes out of hand. The asteroid is a reset button for when things need to change lol
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 12:47 |
|
|
# ? Jun 6, 2024 01:53 |
|
friendbot2000 posted:My personal head canon is that all the religions are true and were put in place as a population control method. I view God as a Game Reserve Warden. Impartial and not afraid to cull the herd when it becomes out of hand. The asteroid is a reset button for when things need to change lol but every successful religion encourages people to breed as much as possible
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 12:53 |
|
Jesus was actually a black man named Cheeses and he lived on a raft in the middle of the sea
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 13:00 |
|
Rutibex posted:but every successful religion encourages people to breed as much as possible Well, yeah. But they also tell them that theirs is the right religion and to convert the heathen so it balances out.
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 13:01 |
|
Isn't Jesus basically one of the Egyptian Gods (idk the one with the eagle head) with a bunch of Buddhist and Zoroastrian stuff thrown in? Just a bunch of short stories with a theme. Christianity is the "America's funniest home movies" of religion
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 13:30 |
|
Even as an atheist, it is interesting to read the different theories on mistranslations and differing canonicity between groups. It helps make a book that for the most part is a bit slapdash more fun to read as you can imagine how it has inspired doctrine over the years. Except in the case of the Koran because holy hell is that boring. Even compared to the Bible.
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 13:38 |
The koran took the issue of scriptural purity and addressed it head on at the expense of everything else.
|
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 17:46 |
|
basic hitler posted:The koran took the issue of scriptural purity and addressed it head on at the expense of everything else. "If our book is too boring to read, people won't be able to find a fault with it"?
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 19:25 |
evilmiera posted:"If our book is too boring to read, people won't be able to find a fault with it"? The evolution of the arabic language is centered on that book. Every vowel diacritic is marked, and every point put bluntly and as unambiguously as an AD600 arabic warlord could muster. This contrasts with the new testament, four gospels that contradict, and a set of letters we only get to see one side of the conversation, or the jewish texts, which i can't seriously criticize because the OT is a god drat snooze and i haven't read it.
|
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 19:30 |
|
The OT is sort of cool in that it describes conditions in multiple localities, military campaigns and the formation of a united monarchy. Lol about the inherent contradictions but what’re ya gonna do they didn’t have word processors or someone hired just to look into continuity issues. There should be a gritty OT reboot with more consistency on kickstarter haha
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 19:50 |
|
I get the story (sort of) behind it, though of course a lot can be explained by the political situation directly after that warlord's death as well. Just saying, I'd like something to happen every once in a while when reading a book other than that one time someone was resurrected via cow-meat-pummeling. In fact, let me be perfectly serious on this comedy forum: The Koran is so boring you'll want to be inebriated when you read it. Failing that, you should only read it if the only two pieces of literature you have are the Koran and an out-of-date phonebook. And even then make sure there aren't any funny ads in the other one.
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 19:54 |
|
Pick posted:this will blow your loving miiiind but I'm a practicing catholic and i go to church FOR REALS and so I think it is mostly allegory still applicable to modern times consider my mind blown that people still think this poo poo.
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 20:18 |
|
Motherfucker posted:consider my mind blown that people still think this poo poo. Calling it "allegory" means it can mean anything you want it to, up to and especially including the opposite of the obvious intentions.
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 20:21 |
|
Pick posted:this will blow your loving miiiind but I'm a practicing catholic and i go to church FOR REALS and so I think it is mostly allegory still applicable to modern times god i suspected you were messed up but i never knew to what extent
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 20:21 |
|
"Look, I know the Bible says it explicitly condones slavery and human sacrifice, but those were really just allegories for *mumble mumble*"
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 20:26 |
|
Motherfucker posted:consider my mind blown that people still think this poo poo. i didn't expect any fundamentalists to be posting, but here we are. so the bible must be interpreted according to a strict literal reading? how old do you think the earth is?
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 20:33 |
|
Rutibex posted:i didn't expect any fundamentalists to be posting, but here we are. so the bible must be interpreted according to a strict literal reading? I think its full of poo poo and only idiots pay attention too it. Although in my headcanon jesus is Kenshiro
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 20:38 |
Who What Now posted:"Look, I know the Bible says it explicitly condones slavery and human sacrifice, but those were really just allegories for *mumble mumble*" Consider the time and place that poo poo was written. Philosophy hadn't quite risen to writing a charter on the essential rights of man yet.
|
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 20:44 |
|
Motherfucker posted:I think its full of poo poo and only idiots pay attention too it. "You are already saved." *gang of musclebound leather daddies suddenly convert*
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 21:09 |
|
basic hitler posted:Consider the time and place that poo poo was written. Philosophy hadn't quite risen to writing a charter on the essential rights of man yet. um, the dawn of time by god?? If you try and say it was by some mortal tool I'll cut your hands off you loving heretic.
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 21:32 |
|
basic hitler posted:Consider the time and place that poo poo was written. Philosophy hadn't quite risen to writing a charter on the essential rights of man yet. Duh. Which is why those obviously weren't allegories, and they obviously didn't come from an omniscient and/or omnibenevolent being and it's dumb to pretend it did.
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 21:57 |
|
Percelus posted:god i suspected you were messed up but i never knew to what extent it means she’s probably more “normal” than most of us
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 23:21 |
|
Caufman posted:This isn't Augustine's thinking, but I've thought of original sin and the karmic knot as trying to explain a similar concept: that actions today are the consequences of actions yesterday, whether we can tell or not. One is a linear model and the other is infinite with no beginning or end. But they each have an overlapping message: wrongdoing begets wrongdoing. It's not a mindblowing, esoteric interpretation, but it's important to morality, east or west. If you believe god answers prayers and produces miracles, what does god have against amputees?
|
# ? Nov 2, 2017 23:39 |
Who What Now posted:Duh. Which is why those obviously weren't allegories, and they obviously didn't come from an omniscient and/or omnibenevolent being and it's dumb to pretend it did. That poo poo was written by dudes and primarily subject to edit by byzantine and jewish priesthood politics but contains the revelation of God all the same. Motherfucker posted:um, the dawn of time by god?? suck ittt
|
|
# ? Nov 3, 2017 00:12 |
|
|
# ? Nov 3, 2017 00:24 |
|
basic hitler posted:That poo poo was written by dudes and primarily subject to edit by byzantine and jewish priesthood politics but contains the revelation of God all the same. Weird how God's revelations arent the least bit more advanced than the culture that made him up.
|
# ? Nov 3, 2017 00:25 |
Who What Now posted:Weird how God's revelations arent the least bit more advanced than the culture that made him up. The gospels and acts taken alone are near marxist.
|
|
# ? Nov 3, 2017 00:47 |
|
Joseph Smith could have stood to hear some of this tbh
|
# ? Nov 3, 2017 00:50 |
|
Nathilus posted:I like the Vampire book of nod version of the story. You're leaving out the best part. God was so impressed with Cain that he rewarded him with eternal life.
|
# ? Nov 3, 2017 00:51 |
|
Nathilus posted:This one time god was like "kill ur son" to this dude. Immediately after this god said "Okay, now cut the end of your son's dick off instead. Psyche! Oh poo poo, you did it already? Uh... good job, that's exactly what I wanted."
|
# ? Nov 3, 2017 00:53 |
|
The Christian God is only the One True God in the sense that all of the other enemy gods have since been slain. The Old Testament supports the existence of other rival Gods as separate entities, not merely tricks of the devil.
|
# ? Nov 3, 2017 01:20 |
|
basic hitler posted:The gospels and acts taken alone are near marxist. And?
|
# ? Nov 3, 2017 01:24 |
|
Soup du Journey posted:well okay, but what are the consequences of eating the fruit? it's not just expulsion. women now feel pain during childbirth This is a little mindblowing if we go with the theory that the fruit is an allegory/folk memory of the rise of modern human consciousness/sentience. The development of our big brains at the same time as our obligate bipedal pelvises meant that childbirth went from relatively straightforward (as it is among apes and most other mammals) to super dangerous. Like, intense childbirth pain is literally the price for human intelligence. Imagine how many hundreds of generations of grandmothers would have had to pass on the story of the time when "it was so much easier than this." What other stories might have roots in the Lower Palaeolithic? We Know Catheters posted:Jesus hosed Judas I wrote a paper on this in high school. I did not write the following story, although I'm amused to have found it in a sermon from The Pleasant Grove United Methodist Church, as it originated on Fanfiction.net as "Bible slash": quote:At the Gates of Heaven Notable for use of the verbs "whoop" and "scamper," not traditionally associated with eschatology. Edit: upon further investigation it seems the Methodists took out the part in the first paragraph where Jesus and Judas make out. Still a pretty sound theology, imo. hate hoot fucked around with this message at 03:52 on Nov 3, 2017 |
# ? Nov 3, 2017 03:09 |
Who What Now posted:And? and it's good reading and worth living by
|
|
# ? Nov 3, 2017 03:13 |
|
basic hitler posted:and it's good reading and worth living by Not really, no. There's a fuckton of truly awful lessons and advice in the NT that you can do without.
|
# ? Nov 3, 2017 03:59 |
Who What Now posted:Not really, no. There's a fuckton of truly awful lessons and advice in the NT that you can do without. in the epistles yeah. I'm one of those "epistles are poo poo" people. It's a good place to be
|
|
# ? Nov 3, 2017 04:11 |
|
Jesus himself says plenty of dumb poo poo too.
|
# ? Nov 3, 2017 04:13 |
Cite some verse, i'm thinking of an instance where he's a jerk to a gentile woman and coming up with nothing else.
|
|
# ? Nov 3, 2017 04:15 |
|
Well in Matthew 5:21-30 Jesus puts forward the idea of thought crime; that hatred is no different than murder and that lust is no different than adultery (presumably even if you aren't married), and that's just asinine. Immediately after he says "And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. 30And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell." which is (probably) not meant to be taken literally, but is still poor advice because you should work to understand your thoughts and feelings and not simply try to remove them entirely. That's how you get people living with repressed emotions, which has never in human history worked out well for anyone. Jesus is against divorce [Mat. 5:32] and likens it to committing adultery again, which is regressive and harmful to anyone in an abusive marriage. Matthew 5:38-42 just sets you up to be a victim to be taken advantage of and victimized, which Jesus says is a good thing. I hope I don't have to explain why being a victim is bad. Matthew 6:25-34 Jesus tells you "Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on." which is some truly godawful advice which I, again, hopefully don't have to explain. And that's just reading the skimming the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus also tells slaves to obey their earthly masters, rather than to rise up and bash their master's brains in with rocks. But it's not surprising a bronze age middle eastern man doesn't see anything wrong with slavery, even if a supposedly omnibenevolent god absolutely should.
|
# ? Nov 3, 2017 04:34 |
|
|
# ? Jun 6, 2024 01:53 |
Who What Now posted:Well in Matthew 5:21-30 Jesus puts forward the idea of thought crime; that hatred is no different than murder and that lust is no different than adultery (presumably even if you aren't married), and that's just asinine. So you take issue with his insistence that people reflect on their own demons and work pro-actively to remove the scourge? The idea that lust is as bad as adultery is a way to convey the notion that adultery starts with nothing more than a lustful thought, and to combat the problem when it's merely a thought and "cut it off" is akin to cutting off a gangrenous limb. It's not thought-crime at all. An allegory using the popular medical technique of classical antiquity, amputate and pray. A religious marriage is more than a legal binding and public affirmation of love my man. You're applying a fairly recent, merely cultural expectation to something that defies it and is above it. Divorce exists and it happens, whatever, it shouldn't be normalized at all, as it is a pretty harmful destructive act to a family, as is adultery. You then deliberately whine about the rejection of retributive violence, something that perpetuates mass suffering and death when carried out on a human scale, i can't see your wisdom here. It's not about being a victim, it's about breaking a destructive cycle. matthew 6:25-34 is referencing ecclesiastes and is pure wisdom if you believe in an afterlife, or if you find any meaning in life beyond what is purely material.
|
|
# ? Nov 3, 2017 04:55 |