Are you religious?

[ColinJ]

Can you show me where in the New Testament there is encouragement for members of one tribe to be as beastly as possible (genocide being one form) to people in other tribes?

Genuine question: What is to be made of all the beastly stuff in the Old Testament?

I don't see how you can have a Holy Book and say that half of it is wonderful and live your life by it, but the other half is ... well, er, what is to be made of the beastly stuff in the OT?

 

[steve52]

beneath contempt imo,

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Genuine question: What is to be made of all the beastly stuff in the Old Testament?

I don't see how you can have a Holy Book and say that half of it is wonderful and live your life by it, but the other half is ... well, er, what is to be made of the beastly stuff in the OT?

A huge question ColinJ.

Back in the past, a bunch of Christian folk tried to reject the OT because of its contrast with the NT. They went so far as to suggest there were two Gods; angry ruthless wrathful smoting creator god and an ineffable loving merciful god revealed through Jesus. They were judged to be in serious error and we got the Apostles Creed and ultimately a definitive(ish) list of what writings were to be in the NT as a result.

The (Roman Catholic) Christian believes the OT and NT were written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The same person believes that Christianity is not simply a 'religion of the book' but rather a religion of the "Word" of God and that Word is an incarnate and living being. So we ask that Word, Christ, through the Holy Spirit, to open our minds to the meaning of the OT to us, today. We remember that some of it is a kind of history, some allegory, some poetry. Some of it is contradictory both in terms of its representation of how we should behave and in its presentation of facts. The OT contains a lot of different forms of literary expression. And the beastly parts, especially the genocidal tribe vs tribe pieces are only a very small fraction of the whole.

What's more a Christian you read the OT by the light of, and through the lens of, the New Testament. You know how the story in the OT ends. You interpret it by that same light and lens, and using things like biblical criticism, a knowledge of history, and you exercise your critical faculties and use your judgement, and are informed by the judgement and experience of the millions of other Christians who read it and studied it before you. You probably also read it under the guidance of some teaching authority be it a commentary you find helpful, your pastor or your teacher or your Pope or if you're an RC through Sacred Tradition. And you probably pray quite a lot about it. The stuff that makes sense, that you understand, in the context of the message of the NT, like say the 10 commandments, how to treat strangers, widows and orphans, you go off and try to put into practise. The stuff you don't understand, or that doesn't make sense through the lens of the NT, like smoting, dietary laws, et cetera, you don't. You put it to one side and either disregard it completely or come back to it later.

Does that help you or hinder you?

 

[ColinJ]

A huge question ColinJ.

...

Does that help you or hinder you?

Well, it certainly must have taken some typing!

It tends to confirm what I thought which is that most people know what they think and look for ways to support that, either as believers or as non-believers. If something clearly supports one's beliefs then it is easy to latch on to. If something doesn't, then it can be put to one side for now - it must be a simple lack of understanding.

I think it works both ways. I see a lot of sense in the idea of evolution, but certain things are so complex that it is hard to believe that they simply evolve.

I was going to use computer chips as an example - it is inconceivable that they would randomly appear out of piles of the constituent atoms. It isn't necessary to use such a complex example though. We have a 'busking sculptor' in Hebden Bridge. He wades down into the river and makes sculptures in the water out of stones that he finds lying around. You can instantly tell that he has been at work because there are elaborate pillars and arches rather than just random piles of stones and rock. I imagine that is how religious people feel when they look at the complexity of life!

But ... then you have the old 'who made God' argument!

I'll stick to being a non-believer until I see the direct proof, not something that I need 'faith' to interpret. Something that completely violates the laws of physics as I understand them would do the trick for me. (Levitating tea mugs, people walking through brick walls etc.)

In the meantime - can't we just be nice to each other, whether we believe in God or not!

 

[clarion]

McGrath? Seriously?

 

[MontyVeda]

...

No offence intended to any person wishing to take solace in religion, I just refuse to be blindly led into a brainwashing.

hmm... i think you did intend to offend... judging by your final statement.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

[QUOTE 2370177, member: 45"]I see it more as starting with Jesus which as a Christian is what it's all about. If you've decided that you believe what the NT says about him, then it's more a case of working it out from there than trying to find my own ways of coming to terms with the OT bits we're talking about; it's not my belief that I'm trying to justify but how the fundamental aspect of Christianity (Jesus) sits alongside what went before.[/quote]
Precisely.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

hmm... i think you did intend to offend... judging by your final statement.

Why do people say no offence intended just before saying something intentionally offensive?

 

[Peddlar]

It's not intended to be offensive, I have first hand experience of religious institutions brainwashing people. It's an opinion, not a hateful statement. The point of a debate if you can call it that, is people differ in their views and work around them.

There is a lot of finger wagging in this entire post, if you happen to say anything other than praise or agreement then you are offensive or aggressive. The whole point being you know nothing of me, my experiences, values or lifestyle, but you choose to highlight a sentence and pour scrutiny on it.

I was asked for an opinion, I gave it, take what you want from that.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

and then again, why do non-religious/irreligious people think that people want to take, or find, solace in religion, or find it a crutch, et cetera?

 

[GrumpyGregry]

It's not intended to be offensive, I have first hand experience of religious institutions brainwashing people. It's an opinion, not a hateful statement. The point of a debate if you can call it that, is people differ in their views and work around them.

There is a lot of finger wagging in this entire post, if you happen to say anything other than praise or agreement then you are offensive or aggressive. The whole point being you know nothing of me, my experiences, values or lifestyle, but you choose to highlight a sentence and pour scrutiny on it.

I was asked for an opinion, I gave it, take what you want from that.

You may have first hand experience of a religious institution's failed attempt at brainwashing certainly...

Is that a reason to suggest all religious people, seeking solace or not, are blind, are apparently easily led, and end up brainwashed?

 

[Rob3rt]

Am I religious? Nope.

Why not? Not really something that has resonated with me at any point in my life and I wasn't brought up in a religious family.

Do I mind what other people believe? Not at all, although my cousins constant Bible quoting and publicly thanking Jesus for the most inane of things on social media sites does grate on me a little bit but then again, I would find it equally as annoying if he kept quoting gangsta rap lyrics and thanking his home boy Snoop Dogg constantly. I also don't like people screaming down megaphones on the high street about Jesus, not because of what they are saying, but because I don't like people shouting down megaphones within a few yards of me full stop.

 

[ColinJ]

I refer the Honorable Member to Matthew 5:17...

Ha - only if you quote it!

 

[Peddlar]

You may have first hand experience of a religious institution's failed attempt at brainwashing certainly...

Is that a reason to suggest all religious people, seeking solace or not, are blind, are apparently easily led, and end up brainwashed?

Like I said, not interested in a whinge-off with you, I gave my opinion, make of it what you want.

 

[Davidc]

Quite why many religious people view any suggestion that religion is false as personal hatred of them I don't know. Rev may wish to note that I don't hate religious people and have never suggested that I do. I have many religious friends who know my views and I certainly don't hate them, even when they disagree with me. I do however loath religion and religious faith for the misery they have caused in the past and continue to cause today.

All I need to know about religion, religious holy writ and religious faith is that they are entirely a product of the human mind with no factual basis. While a world with no religion would be preferable to the present situation where there is religion, mainly left over from the stone age, I am aware that religion will be around longer than I will be, so I have to put up with it.

I do go into churches sometimes, mainly to listen to certain forms of music, and of course for weddings and funerals. Like a poster earlier on I do wonder how we retain these architecturally interesting and often wonderful landmark buildings with their amazing acoustic properties once their religious users diminish to the point where they can't maintain them any longer.

You seem to be proposing the idea that humanity must have been less beastly to one another before the point, presumably in pre-history, that organised religion came into being? On what basis?

Now not being a Jew I can't speak for Judaism nor its holy books nor of the understanding of contemporary Jews as to the meaning and applicability of these books to modern life. But I have a certain understanding of Christianity and the New Testament.

Can you show me where in the New Testament there is encouragement for members of one tribe to be as beastly as possible (genocide being one form) to people in other tribes?

I haven't commented on what life was like before organised religion so please don't suggest that I have. There is no evidence that I am aware of to inform us of the bestiality or otherwise of pre stone age life.

I'm not sure of the relevance of your reference to Judaism to what I've written in this thread, other than the Jewish origins of the Old Testament and the Abrahamic religions. FWIW I view all religions in the same way.

I responded to your earlier post using a specific reference to the Old Testament. Your question relating to the New Testament is not relevant to that response. I think others may however have answered you. If so I'll leave it there as I don't have time at the moment to start looking up examples of New Testament nastiness.