The joys of religious retardation...

Discussion in 'Every Day Debating' started by darkfox, Apr 26, 2009.

  1. darkfox

    darkfox New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0
    Alright. I got an email from someone today and I’m sure it was sent with some sort of kind message in mind, but it pissed me off. It pissed me off for several reasons, but I’ll get to those in a moment. Here’s the email.


    Now, being alive and somewhat in tune with the world around me. I’m a fan of the Beatles and of course Lennon’s poems have touched all of us if we know it or not. I was fairly sure that he died in my lifetime, so I did some investigations into his death, and into the other deaths attributed to the “Wrath of God” implied in this email.

    First. Lennon made those statements in 1966….and then was shot 14 years later. So, my question in turn is….what the **** was God waiting for? Because at that point Lennon didn’t have the fame or exposure he had when he was in the Beatles (arguably). So if his statement was reputed by God’s wrath, one needs to ask two things. First; Was the assassin on a first name basis with the Lord? Second. How long did it take the assassin to talk God into allowing him to blow Lennon’s head off? Just wondering.

    Second. Tancredo Neves was 75 years old. Is it really so incredible that he died of complications? Old people die of complications from a displaced hip…and at younger ages. Really? The religious retards are going to chalk that one up to God too? Aces.

    Third. Cazuza died of AIDS. Not Lung Cancer. Though I’m sure it was quite painful, maybe the ****ing religious ****tards should at least get the cause of death right. It would have been more right wing compliant of them to say that God smote him down for being bi-sexual. Either way. He died just two years before Freddie Mercury passed of AIDS. It took many young and talented people, still does as a matter of fact. Though perhaps at the time of the incident Cazuza was angry with God because he was dying. Many of us have railed against God for injustices done to us through our lives. Better be careful though. God’ll give you AIDS to show his wrath. Please.

    Fourth. The man who built the Titanic. Really? All on his own huh? Alright, terrible choice of words aside, yes…the designer of the Titanic did say that God couldn’t sink his ship. Titanic wasn’t the first ship this was said about, wasn’t the last either. Many sunk, many didn’t. Let’s assume for a moment that it was a challenge, and God decided to put an iceberg in the way, cloak the night in fog, forced the skipper to increase speed and designed the ship to have less than 10% of the rescue boats required on board. Sure.

    Fifth. Marilyn Monroe. It couldn’t be the copious amounts of drugs and alcohol she was ingesting daily. It was Billy Graham, an anti-semetic (Jesus was a jew you ****tard) tele-Evangelist who supported three corrupt Presidents and then later claimed that AIDS was God’s punishment for straying from His message. I don’t know anyone who needs Graham’s Jesus either.

    Sixth. Bon Scott. They guy overdoses on sleeping pills after a night of hard drinking with the lads of AC/DC. The lyrics of ‘Highway to Hell’ are also sung currently by Brian Johnson. Guy is still kicking. Amazing constitution for a guy with a hit out on him by God. Astonishing. Wait….maybe Brian Johnson IS God. Certainly would explain a lot.

    Seventh. The drunken Brazilian party girl. Couldn’t have been drinking and driving that killed her. You know, impaired judgment and all. Hey religious retards, today’s cars are designed with “crumple zones”. On direct impact, the car literally slows down as little waffle spots in the body give way as the car slows down. If the thing the car hits is large enough, you know…like a semi that this bimbo hit, air bags or not…the trunk would probably be the only thing left. But let’s chalk that kill up to God in all of his wrath.

    You know. This is the biggest gripe I have with religious morons. God loves you. Jesus love you. In the New Testament Jesus preached that you turn the other cheek. But you challenge him like a third grader and He’ll lose it, snap, over-react and kill you for mocking Him? Really? You know…I’m starting to sound like a broken record here, but “God” or people acting in His name, have been responsible for more deaths than ANYTHING ELSE IN HISTORY.

    I really hope that God takes the time to kill everyone who misrepresents Him on a daily basis. But make sure to toss that shit up on Pay Per View, I’ll make some wings and watch that all night.
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2009
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Nienor

    Nienor Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    9,608
    Likes Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Northern Joisey
    Ratings:
    +91 / 0 / -0
    Thread moved.


    Please tell me that text didn't also have cutesy pictures of kittens in it. :eek:
     
  3. Raff the Sweetling

    Raff the Sweetling Threadkiller

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2008
    Messages:
    1,419
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    My own personal hell
    Ratings:
    +46 / 0 / -0
    My very existence mocks god, and I continue to thrive. "HEY GOD, YOU SUCK. SMITE ME ALMIGHTY SMITER!!" See, Im still here. If Im not tommorow....well I gues I was wrong.
     
  4. Jorick

    Jorick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Messages:
    1,407
    Likes Received:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Oregon
    Ratings:
    +55 / 0 / -0
    Where there's religion, there will be zealotry and extremism. And when you have zealots and extremists by the hundreds, odds are some of them are idiots. And idiots spout off nonsense like that email.

    What I find most amusing about these types of people is how literally they take the Old Testament, and yet not so the New. Their view on it seems to be the opposite of the truth: they take the stories of smiting and wrath to be true, but take specific things Jesus said as vague suggestions rather than guiding tenets.

    Surely it must occur to them that the first half of the Bible is allegorical, intending just to set down morals and guidelines? But no, they take it as literal. And Jesus said to turn the other cheek, and to get rid of worldly possessions. Amazing how many "good Christians" take such joy in revenge and their property.

    I myself am not a religious person. I consider myself an agnostic. But even I see the ideas the Bible is trying to push; I even agree with most of them. So it's endlessly amusing for me to see when the faithful turn out to be idiots who can't even comprehend their own religion. Like the person who wrote that email.

    I'd dig up some anti-religion quotes for emphasis, but I think the rant was enough. :)
     
  5. darkfox

    darkfox New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0
    i've always held to the notion that the Bible is an excellent moral foundation. Beyond that, it's completely useless. (waiting on thunderbolt.....nothing...moving on)

    the biggest problem we as a human species run into with religious texts is that we try and put our own spin on the message. even with a clear cut and dry set of rules like the 10 commandments we seem compelled to f it all up and add our own interpretations to it.

    i dunno though. i got that email and it got me more and more pissed off as i read every example of "god's wrath"....especially since NONE of them even remotely demonstrate ANY intervention by ANY higher power other than the stupidity of the human race.
     
  6. azuren82

    azuren82 Berserk got banned...

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    Messages:
    2,795
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Ratings:
    +26 / 0 / -0
    Humans by nature are stupid. As a Christian and a Reformist at that, I truly think that when we're talking about divine wrath, it can be a really sticky subject. One can say God struck some random guy who spoke against him, but then again, what if that person felt bad about his words and took them back even though he never really make a show of it? Can one still say God smite him? Honestly speaking, there are some things by all standards have been proven very wrong in the moral code like the Catholic Church corruption before the Counter Reformation actually cleaned that up for good. But what about the grey area called the human mind? Can one truly condemn another person saying he's doomed for hell? Now that's one question worthy of objective exploration although imo it can only be done if the person has a certain theological background and can truly see things beyond a rational mind blinded by some form of bias, be it pro or anti God.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Dreamscaper

    Dreamscaper Royal Hamster Wrangler

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2009
    Messages:
    1,962
    Likes Received:
    134
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Florida
    Ratings:
    +249 / 3 / -0
    It's called mercy. ;)

    No, humans cannot condemn one another. The decision is in God alone. We can warn, scold, and do a lot of other things but the final judgement is for God and God alone. Theological background is irrelevant, the Pope himself could come up to me and try to condemn me, but even the pope is unworthy to judge.
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2009
  8. Jorick

    Jorick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Messages:
    1,407
    Likes Received:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Oregon
    Ratings:
    +55 / 0 / -0
    You are my favorite person right now.
     
  9. kartaron

    kartaron Hunter / Gatherer

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2003
    Messages:
    2,287
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    USA
    Ratings:
    +20 / 0 / -0
    You clearly have not read a word of the Bible or a thought about it with anything other than a dismissive, contemptuous focus. The first half is an allegory eh? What exactly about it is an allegory? An allegory for what exactly? For instance, the story of Moses, which begins in Genesis (the first book) is a nearly day to day recitation of the life of Moses and the Exodus which continues up to Joshua. Before long you get into the life of David, a known King of Israel. Then you get to Solomon another historically known King. Later the prophets take over carrying on a repeating message to Israel leading up to only a few centuries before BC. This of course ignoring the poetic writings of Solomon, David and others which while they contain metaphors, are hardly decipherable as allegory... and the History points which at worst are nitpicked on dates and focus.

    I love how agnostics think they can read critical opinions of books theyve never read, books dedicated to communicating a relationship with a God they doubt exists, and discern the true intent. I especially love the ones that interpret Christ's love for humanity and forgiveness as a bizarro hippie convent insistence on the lack of consequences.

    One question. Taking the New Testament literally, what exactly did Christ get crucified for?

    I am not defending the above chain email which is its own form of bizarro legalistic fantasy wish fulfillment.
     
  10. darkfox

    darkfox New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0
    Agnostics believe in God. They typically don't think He's well represented by organised religion. Or at least that's my interpretation of it.

    Atheists don't believe in God at all. Generally.

    It might be beneficial to make sure you've got your definitions straight before you leap down someone's throat for their interpretation of a book that everyone has their own spin on.

    Incidentally, Jesus died so that we can have our sins forgiven and get into heaven. The Old Testiment had us all going to hell for one sin, though not all Christian religions subscribe to that belief.

    I love how fiercely religious people just leap all over anyone who questions the religious status quo.
     
  11. Mububban

    Mububban Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2003
    Messages:
    4,714
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    West Australia
    Ratings:
    +199 / 1 / -0
    Considering we already have several threads on religious topics, I'm not sure this one is necessary. Express your opinions but please don't be deliberately insulting to other forum members, whatever their views are.
     
  12. clouded_perception

    clouded_perception clouded_perception

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,871
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    Ratings:
    +49 / 0 / -0
    Agnostics don't believe in gods -- they reserve judgement. On the traditional scale, you have atheists (conclude that there is no god, most likely no god or something functionally equivalent), agnostics (refuse to conclude either way) and theists (conclude that there is a god or is most likely a god).

    Nowadays a more descriptive scale is coming into use -- "strong" (or gnostic) atheists, who believe that there is no god and consider themselves to have evidence against the existence of gods; "weak" (or agnostic) atheists, who conclude no god largely due to lack of evidence (this is the majority of atheists, especially freethinkers); agnostic theists, who see no real evidence either way but default to belief or at least act out belief for various reasons; and gnostic theists, who consider themselves to have evidence (whether objective evidence, personal revelation, whatever), or use strong faith and positively believe in their gods. When people describe themselves as agnostics, though, they usually mean the first, traditional definition -- people who fit the second definition are more likely to use atheist or theist with the word because it's far less confusing that way.
     
  13. Jorick

    Jorick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Messages:
    1,407
    Likes Received:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Oregon
    Ratings:
    +55 / 0 / -0
    First of all, you're almost right about my never having read a word of the Bible. I read the first couple pages of Genesis, decided it wasn't worth the time and effort, and put it down.

    But you did get something correct: I probably used the wrong word in choosing to call it allegory. What I meant was that the bulk of the Old Testament cannot be proven to factually happened. Sure, some of the people may be undoubtedly real, but the exact events? Not so much. I intended to say that they're basically stories intended to impart a moral or piece of wisdom upon the reader. And thinking about it, yes, allegory was definitely the wrong word.

    And I have never read a "critical opinion" of the Bible. I went to church as a child, and as an adult have had discussions with religious friends on the particulars of it. I've come to my conclusions based not on the opinions of others, but my own. Seeing as how it is quite easy to change stories, or add in complete lies (such as the "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" story, which was an addition of a scribe hundreds of years after the creation of the Bible), I don't take anything in the Old Testament to be hard, set in stone fact. And with the relatively recent discoveries of new gospels, I'm suspicious of the New one as well. Therefore, I don't put much stock in it.

    As for the whole agnostic thing, I love your hipocrisy. You don't like me making generalizing remarks about your faith, and yet you make one about agnostics. Amusing, to say the least. And I never said Jesus was some kind of hippie, I think he had some great ideas. At the very least, he had strong morals and shared them with others. As for why he was crucified, I believe darkfox gave a succinct answer.


    I think this new descriptive scale is lacking one position, specifically the one I'm on. I don't have a conclusion on whether or not there is a god. I see no evidence proving either side, therefore I take my own. Kind of a seeing is believing position; you show me proof, and I'm prepared to look at it objectively and decide whether or not it proves something. It's the rationalist in me, I'm sure. :p
     
  14. darkfox

    darkfox New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0
    I don't think many people fit into conveniant labels...rather they tend to run the gammat of beliefs.

    I stand by my belief that the Bible is a really long and overly detailed morality tale, and as such would prove to be an excellent moral foundation...assuming of course that you can convince the fundamentalists to shut up for a milli-second so someone could read what's there and not what they 'feel' that it means. Sadly, this never happens. Which is the foundation for my annoyance and general disgust with organized religion.

    Organized religions follow the "Roman Mob" mentality. The most intellectually devoid people are usually the loudest ones and tend to control which way a religion evolves. Which is really quite depressing when you stop to think about the good intentions these things are USUALLY started with.

    All of these opinions of mine lead me to my signature. Which spells out my religious beliefs rather plainly for rational people...the religious nuts tend to see something else, but then again, religion and rationality rarely walk hand in hand.
     
  15. Lord Yuan

    Lord Yuan Hell Woman

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2009
    Messages:
    4,080
    Likes Received:
    128
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Gender Gaol (space crime)
    Ratings:
    +168 / 0 / -0
    I wish I could believe in god just to forget the world. The funny thing about religion is that though it most often speaks of peace and kindness towards others many people ignore that and take up things violently. I think religious texts such as the Bible should not be taken literally. I am a very doubtful Roman Catholic. Religion does not make people stupid, it just helps pre-stupided people to lie to themselves. I know many religious people that are fine and sane, with every opinion motivated thing such as religion there will always be the people who do it right and the people who take it too far. The god that I hold my little remaining faith too is a dick, one who thinks so very high of himself. He has such and ego that he just smites all he can. Yet when he is kind and caring and open to others he does it as much as he can. I think god has some type of personality disorder...
     
  16. Jorick

    Jorick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Messages:
    1,407
    Likes Received:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Oregon
    Ratings:
    +55 / 0 / -0
    That's what I've kind of been saying in all my posts: that the Bible is a morality tale. You summed it up a hell of a lot better than me, though. And believe it or not, even the intellectually devoid people you mentioned feel like they're following this moral foundation. The problem, of course, is that they're devoid of intellect and thus can do all sorts of mental gymnastics to make any action okay by their religion.

    I know plenty of religious people who aren't idiots. The common trait among them all? They agree that the Bible is a guide of morals, not facts of how everything should be. I also know three idiots who are equally religious. Their common trait? They take most of the Bible literally. Oddly enough, that doesn't include any of the parts that would be detrimental to their pleasure or wealth in some fashion. Amazing how that works, eh?
     
  17. clouded_perception

    clouded_perception clouded_perception

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,871
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    Ratings:
    +49 / 0 / -0
    It is. Most agnostic atheists favour it (we're sick of people insinuating we believe in no god or have "faith in atheism"), but it totally ignores "pure" agnostics. Some people put them in the middle and others don't; it's not a debate I've been interested enough in to pay real attention to.
     
  18. kartaron

    kartaron Hunter / Gatherer

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2003
    Messages:
    2,287
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    USA
    Ratings:
    +20 / 0 / -0
    Fundamentally correct. The OT sets up the rules which no one can keep (which require constant blood sacrifice for temporary forgiveness). Christ in the NT tells everyone yes, the rules are impossible, and becomes the final sacrifice. Several times Christ references the fact that the rules still stand however, and there is still punishment reserved for those who refuse Christ and those who represent Christ falsely.
     
  19. darkfox

    darkfox New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0
    Which includes 99% of the clergy I've ever seen, met or talked to, so that's setting the bar awfully high in my opinion.

    Hell, even the Roman Catholic Pope has invented rules that fly in the face of stories from The Bible. It's not just the Catholics either, many Christian faiths now embrace evolution for example, which is specifically refuted in The Bible. Even though there's mountains of proof that evolution exists in nature, hardcore religious nuts are now "representing Christ falsely" by claiming that after 2000 years, yes...evolution is possible. You know, as long as it's guided by the "Hand of God".

    Awesome.

    Incidentally, it was confirmed last night by a couple of people I know that I'm officially agnostic. I believe there's a higher power out there, but we're just too retarded to comprehend it's purpose. My over-simplification of some deeper truth I'm either too lazy or unable to fully define.
     
  20. Jorick

    Jorick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Messages:
    1,407
    Likes Received:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Oregon
    Ratings:
    +55 / 0 / -0
    I think you're a bit off on the misrepresentation of Christ example. I don't believe he ever said "okay everyone, God made everything exactly as it is today, there's no such thing as evolution." So, really, they're representing the Bible falsely, specifically Genesis. And there's actually a large group of Christians out there who say that God certainly did create everything, but there was evolution too.

    But I have to agree about the clergy. Every single member of the clergy I've met has either been a secret atheist/agnostic or completely went against what Jesus said (like turning the other cheek, for example).
     
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2009