Jesus Christ

[Crimson Dynamo]

What do you know and think about this man and or myth?



https://expiredreligionblog.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/maxresdefault.jpg?w=863&h=0&crop=1

[Nicky91]

i don't know what to believe to be honest

[Crimson Dynamo]

i don't know what to believe to be honest

what does the evidence suggest to you?

[arista]

Old Fable Story
LT

[Amy Jade]

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/79/62/01/796201154f2d1cfe7add03f739fab948.jpg

[Nicky91]

what does the evidence suggest to you?

that Jesus could walk on water, so that he was a bit of a god

[Northern Monkey]

I think he was one of many preachers who were around back then but his ideology cut through with people and he got such a large following that he got the attention of the Jews and the Romans who saw his teachings as a threat so they made an example of him.

[Crimson Dynamo]

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/79/62/01/796201154f2d1cfe7add03f739fab948.jpg

id certainly like to take her up the transept to feel her holy spirit

:hehe:

[arista]

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/79/62/01/796201154f2d1cfe7add03f739fab948.jpg


Nice art Work

But there is no God
Fact.

[JerseyWins]

As real as the things on my chest

[Crimson Dynamo]

I think he was one of many preachers who were around back then but his ideology cut through with people and he got such a large following that he got the attention of the Jews and the Romans who saw his teachings as a threat so they made an example of him.

The whole resurrection myth was all over the middle east and they hung it on him hundreds of years later like a good editor would make an author add a chapter to a book to make it commercial

[hijaxers]

What do you know and think about this man and or myth?



https://expiredreligionblog.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/maxresdefault.jpg?w=863&h=0&crop=1

I think he was a homosexual politician, going out collecting men and voters.

[The Slim Reaper]

Old Fable Story
LT

Correct

https://brocastnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/hulk_cool_01.gif?w=410&h=274

[Calderyon]

Pretty decent guy, I would say. I like him.

[Withano]

Obviously existed. He was an excellent liar. First or the best ever fraud.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Obviously existed. He was an excellent liar. First or the best ever fraud.

Well his mum taught him well..

"i am pregnant, its not yours but I didnt cheat, i was shagged by God"

[smudgie]

Superstar.:dance:

[Withano]

Well his mum taught him well..

"i am pregnant, its not yours but I didnt cheat, i was shagged by God"

Oh I think she was the brains behind it for sure. Just an affair gone too far. No backing out now, might as well give him superpowers.

[Alf]

Wasn't it Saul of Tarsus (Paul the apostle) who spread the message of Christ?

[Greg!]

Mary was a cheating slag who lied about God making her preggers so that Joseph wouldn't dump ha. Jesus was just a man.

[Greg!]

Well his mum taught him well..

"i am pregnant, its not yours but I didnt cheat, i was shagged by God"

omg I didn't copy your post I promise!

[Alf]

He made a good table by all accounts.

[Crimson Dynamo]

omg I didn't copy your post I promise!

Its a miracle :o

[bots]

Its a miracle :o

god moves in mysterious ways

[Maru]

What do you know and think about this man and or myth?



https://expiredreligionblog.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/maxresdefault.jpg?w=863&h=0&crop=1

I think if he is/was real, he would have looked better than an NPC from Oblivion... thems my thoughts.

[thesheriff443]

The bible is a story book before television, some went of and chose cats as gods.

[Brillopad]

Mary was a cheating slag who lied about God making her preggers so that Joseph wouldn't dump ha. Jesus was just a man.

As was every other perceived god ever. The more religious people are and the more they allow it dictate their lives- the more gullible they are and the less successful their economies - it holds people back.

[Brillopad]

The bible is a story book before television, some went of and chose cats as gods.

As is the Koran and look at the trouble that is still causing in this day and age!

[Toy Soldier]

Me and my daughter came up with a theory on this earlier.

We were wondering, WHY would there be critically ill / crippled humans in the world of Harry Potter, if wizards could easily just go around hospitals helping? At the very least - we mused - they'd be able to heal something like a broken spine / paralysis no problem. Why would they let so many suffer? Surely at least one would say "screw the secret!" and help?

And then it hit us.

Jesus was a wizard. Thousands of years ago, he was the one who broke ranks and wanted to help humans. But then not only did they crucify him for it - but a huge cult built up around him, worshipping him, and thousand of years later billions of muggles STILL worship him, and there have been countless wars fought in his name with untold devastation.

And that is why wizards made a sacred pact to never meddle in the Muggle world. That's why no wizard will cure a dying human child, even though they could. The price was just too high :worry:.

[Twosugars]

Me and my daughter came up with a theory on this earlier.

We were wondering, WHY would there be critically ill / crippled humans in the world of Harry Potter, if wizards could easily just go around hospitals helping? At the very least - we mused - they'd be able to heal something like a broken spine / paralysis no problem. Why would they let so many suffer? Surely at least one would say "screw the secret!" and help?

And then it hit us.

Jesus was a wizard. Thousands of years ago, he was the one who broke ranks and wanted to help humans. But then not only did they crucify him for it - but a huge cult built up around him, worshipping him, and thousand of years later billions of muggles STILL worship him, and there have been countless wars fought in his name with untold devastation.

And that is why wizards made a sacred pact to never meddle in the Muggle world. That's why no wizard will cure a dying human child, even though they could. The price was just too high :worry:.

Good theory

[GoldHeart]

As is the Koran and look at the trouble that is still causing in this day and age!

Anyone who abuses religion with their own twisted ideas will always cause trouble , it's the people that are the problem not the religion itself :nono:

I also think it's disrespectful when people rip Religion to pieces and mock it ,fair enough everyone has different views and a laugh and a giggle is one thing . But it's not nice to be rude about others beliefs even if you don't understand it :idc: .

[Brillopad]

Anyone who abuses religion with their own twisted ideas will always cause trouble , it's the people that are the problem not the religion itself :nono:

I also think it's disrespectful when people rip Religion to pieces and mock it ,fair enough everyone has different views and a laugh and a giggle is one thing . But it's not nice to be rude about others beliefs even if you don't understand it :idc: .

Have you read the comments about Jesus and Christianity and you pass no comments but as soon as there is a negative comment on the Koran you object - rather one-dided don’t you think! You can’t object to criticism of one religion and not the rest and expect it to be relevant.

Fact is one particular religion is causing more problems in the world today than any other! It may be some people’s interpretation of the words to suit in some cases but in others the words speak for themselves.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Anyone who abuses religion with their own twisted ideas will always cause trouble , it's the people that are the problem not the religion itself :nono:

I also think it's disrespectful when people rip Religion to pieces and mock it ,fair enough everyone has different views and a laugh and a giggle is one thing . But it's not nice to be rude about others beliefs even if you don't understand it :idc: .

"fair enough everyone has different views"

this is a problematic line

Its not up for debate that gods exist and people can walk on water and heal sick people by mind power

People believe stuff like that because their parents brainwashed them as they were brainwashed. Its not based on evidence or fact its nothing more than superstition

just as people dont walk under ladders, dont break mirrors, dont put shoes on a table, touch wood etc

and indeed all of that is fine if its personal but not in schools, not in government.

[Brillopad]

"fair enough everyone has different views"

this is a problematic line

Its not up for debate that gods exist and people can walk on water and heal sick people by mind power

People believe stuff like that because their parents brainwashed them as they were brainwashed. Its not based on evidence or fact its nothing more than superstition

just as people dont walk under ladders, dont break mirrors, dont put shoes on a table, touch wood etc

and indeed all of that is fine if its personal but not in schools, not in government.

I agree LT. People can believe in what they want but it should never be via indoctrination or force. Unfortunately it often is. Religion and superstition are pretty much the same thing with people relying on some unknown force to protect them if they do/don’t do certain things. And one thing is for sure it holds back people and economies.

[Twosugars]

As is the Koran and look at the trouble that is still causing in this day and age!

It's easy for the West to feel superior, but we shouldn't really.
Islam is roughly 500 years younger than Christianity. Christianity went persecuting and killing others for ages (Inquisition, crusades, converting whole nations by sword in Eastern Europe, Africa and in the New World, etc etc).
We grew out of that and religious wars and so will Islam one day.

[Alf]

It's easy for the West to feel superior, but we shouldn't really.
Islam is roughly 500 years younger than Christianity. Christianity went persecuting and killing others for ages (Inquisition, crusades, converting whole nations by sword in Eastern Europe, Africa and in the New World, etc etc).
We grew out of that and religious wars and so will Islam one day.Which fool taught you that?

[Brillopad]

It's easy for the West to feel superior, but we shouldn't really.
Islam is roughly 500 years younger than Christianity. Christianity went persecuting and killing others for ages (Inquisition, crusades, converting whole nations by sword in Eastern Europe, Africa and in the New World, etc etc).
We grew out of that and religious wars and so will Islam one day.

That may be twosugars but the world in general has moved on. People are more educated than ever before and certain practices can’t be tolerated for the next 500 years to allow people to ‘catch up’. People know better now and anyone living in the West or any country that has communication with the rest of the world is exposed to that.

[Twosugars]

That may be twosugars but the world in general has moved on. People are more educated than ever before and certain practices can’t be tolerated for the next 500 years to allow people to ‘catch up’. People know better now and anyone living in the West or any country that has communication with the rest of the world is exposed to that.

You have a point. But I wonder if that makes much difference. As we see it probably doesn't, so something else could be at play. Maybe some religions (those who take a dim view of non-believers in at least some of their scriptures) have to go through a violent period? We know demagogues will use religious justification wherever then can find it. Christianity has largely gone through that already, although some pockets of that intolerance still remain even if largely not violent. Maybe Islam simply has to go through that all the way too. I.e every interpretation that lends itself to violence used up and rendered futile? Just a thought.

[Twosugars]

Which fool taught you that?
Nobody, it's my own observation. So thank you for the compliment, Alf!

[Brillopad]

You have a point. But I wonder if that makes much difference. As we see it probably doesn't, so something else could be at play. Maybe some religions (those who take a dim view of non-believers in at least some of their scriptures) have to go through a violent period? We know demagogues will use religious justification wherever then can find it. Christianity has largely gone through that already, although some pockets of that intolerance still remain even if largely not violent. Maybe Islam simply has to go through that all the way too. I.e every interpretation that lends itself to violence used up and rendered futile? Just a thought.

A scary thought and one we can’t just justify/excuse/tolerate on that basis - or any basis. Enough lives have already been lost/ruined through the centuries and now is the time to stop especially when based on religion alone.

[Toy Soldier]

The main problem I have with religion is the expectation that we should all "play along". I mean if someone is saying... Just be polite / respectful and say nothing at all, that's totally fine in most situations. During the course of open debate, however, what I simply cannot do is sit there pretending that religious belief is in ANY way based in logic, reason or evidence. I can't pretend that it's actually feasible that one of these hundreds of religions - which, yes, ALL are cults that rely entirely on indoctrination and emotional manipulation - has actually stumbled upon universal truth through sheer coincidence. No. The chances that any religion is "correct" or even anywhere in the ballpark of being correct are so infinitesimally small that they are effectively zero.

Anyone who finds that "offensive", should steer well clear of religious debate, and stick with those who will happily coddle or reinforce fanciful beliefs on the basis that "it's OK if it keeps people happy".

[Twosugars]

A scary thought and one we can’t just justify/excuse/tolerate on that basis - or any basis. Enough lives have already been lost/ruined through the centuries and now is the time to stop especially when based on religion alone.
Absolutely.
The trouble with Islam though, seems to me, is not purely religious. The West has played a rather negative role in that region. Starting all the way back with colonisation and drawing arbitrary borders through constant meddling, propping up unpopular leaders and economic exploitation. So you have various "patriotic" justifications weaved into religious arguments for fighting the West.

[Brillopad]

Absolutely.
The trouble with Islam though, seems to me, is not purely religious. The West has played a rather negative role in that region. Starting all the way back with colonisation and drawing arbitrary borders through constant meddling, propping up unpopular leaders and economic exploitation. So you have various "patriotic" justifications weaved into religious arguments for fighting the West.

When people shout words such as Allahu Akbar when committing mass murder they make it about religion. When they post videos on line making threats to the West based on Islam they make it about religion. When Western countries start to want to protect themselves by protecting their borders they can’t then complain. Such actions have consequences.

[Toy Soldier]

When people shout words such as Allahu Akbar when committing mass murder they make it about religion. When they post videos on line making threats to the West based on Islam they make it about religion. When Western countries start to want to protect themselves by protecting their borders they can’t then complain. Such actions have consequences.To be fair though it's mostly the other way round. The political motivations came first, Islam was then used to "weaponise" fanatics to use as an army, because that sort of hardcore belief is the easiest way to create a committed fighting force.

[Twosugars]

When people shout words such as Allahu Akbar when committing mass murder they make it about religion. When they post videos on line making threats to the West based on Islam they make it about religion. When Western countries start to want to protect themselves by protecting their borders they can’t then complain. Such actions have consequences.

I have no doubt their main justification is religious, but politics play a role too, especially in recruitment. They play on grievances against the west, they call us crusaders etc
I'm not saying the west shouldn't defend themselves. But can't help thinking we helped to create that mess. Look at mass migration. Europe existed for decades alongside a poorer Africa and Middle East. There was no problem with mass migration until we destabilised the status quo in response to Osama. More terror groups emerged and people started moving, fleeing all over the place.
From the terrorists point of view, I'd imagine such chaos is perfect. It helps to foster conflict at home and it helps to smuggle their people into the West.
It is what it is. I have no problem with Europe closing borders. Such mass migration is not good for anybody, even those fleeing.
In the long run it may be cheaper and better for Europe to throw funds and resources to set up refugee camps in the region rather than accept them at home.
But we moving off-topic...

[Brillopad]

To be fair though it's mostly the other way round. The political motivations came first, Islam was then used to "weaponise" fanatics to use as an army, because that sort of hardcore belief is the easiest way to create a committed fighting force.

For many the motivations, religious or political, don’t really change anything as they are so closely intertwined. The outcome and risk is still the same hence the response.

[Twosugars]

To be fair though it's mostly the other way round. The political motivations came first, Islam was then used to "weaponise" fanatics to use as an army, because that sort of hardcore belief is the easiest way to create a committed fighting force.

But they're so intermingled. Doesn't Koran call for a creation of a caliphate, like Isis tried to do?

[chuff me dizzy]

A fairy story for people who need a crutch in life and a lot of people have made big money from their gullibility

[Toy Soldier]

But they're so intermingled. Doesn't Koran call for a creation of a caliphate, like Isis tried to do?Yes but that's why it's been ripe for manipulation. Religious texts are all full of rhetoric that's easy to frame in the context of War.

The tidal political forces in the middle east have frequently been western, right back to the middle ages, with Islam being used as a tool in that (just as Christianity has been used in the west, many times).

Whether or not there's still anyone at the wheel is another debate. ISIS was basically the result of deliberately created militant Islamic groups, funded, armed and promoted by the West and Russia throughout the 20th century. They then were "cut loose" and reformed as something different that DOES have religious motivation. But it's not a group that formed naturally.

[Nicky91]

Yes but that's why it's been ripe for manipulation. Religious texts are all full of rhetoric that's easy to frame in the context of War.

The tidal political forces in the middle east have frequently been western, right back to the middle ages, with Islam being used as a tool in that (just as Christianity has been used in the west, many times).

Whether or not there's still anyone at the wheel is another debate. ISIS was basically the result of deliberately created militant Islamic groups, funded, armed and promoted by the West and Russia throughout the 20th century. They then were "cut loose" and reformed as something different that DOES have religious motivation. But it's not a group that formed naturally.

ISIS was even a disgrace for the islam tbh, because it is stated in the Koran that terrorism is against their religion

what they did was paint all muslims as evil, and cause lots of destruction and terror throughout the world

[Brillopad]

Yes but that's why it's been ripe for manipulation. Religious texts are all full of rhetoric that's easy to frame in the context of War.

The tidal political forces in the middle east have frequently been western, right back to the middle ages, with Islam being used as a tool in that (just as Christianity has been used in the west, many times).

Whether or not there's still anyone at the wheel is another debate. ISIS was basically the result of deliberately created militant Islamic groups, funded, armed and promoted by the West and Russia throughout the 20th century. They then were "cut loose" and reformed as something different that DOES have religious motivation. But it's not a group that formed naturally.

To be honest with the risk involved, I don’t think the history, whatever it is, is as relevant as the here and now. It is the threat they pose to the West now that counts and people don’t need a history lesson to know that.

These people from certain minority groups - which are only a minority in the West, they are the majority in many other parts of the world, identify with this particular religion and group, whatever their motives, and there lies the problem. They may or may not be using religion as an excuse for their crimes but the threat is still the same. People naturally want to minimise the risk not increase it.

[GoldHeart]

Have you read the comments about Jesus and Christianity and you pass no comments but as soon as there is a negative comment on the Koran you object - rather one-dided don’t you think! You can’t object to criticism of one religion and not the rest and expect it to be relevant.

Fact is one particular religion is causing more problems in the world today than any other! It may be some people’s interpretation of the words to suit in some cases but in others the words speak for themselves.

What the hell are you talking about ??? :conf: :facepalm: , I'm talking about Religion in general it's not because of the Quran you mentioned .

And you obviously have no idea on my previous posts , I've made comments on Christianity/ Catholism .

All I'm saying is it's people who abuse religion , the average person with faith & religion is peaceful and they don't push any beliefs on people .

I don't believe in reincarnation but I don't mock Buddhism .

[Crimson Dynamo]

What the hell are you talking about ??? :conf: :facepalm: , I'm talking about Religion in general it's not because of the Quran you mentioned .

And you obviously have no idea on my previous posts , I've made comments on Christianity/ Catholism .

All I'm saying is it's people who abuse religion , the average person with faith & religion is peaceful and they don't push any beliefs on people .

I don't believe in reincarnation but I don't mock Buddhism .

they push beliefs on to their children

sadly

[GoldHeart]

they push beliefs on to their children

sadly

Obviously everyone is different .

There will always be strict conservative families , and yes some people are fanatics who force their agendas on other people like it's their way or the high way and that's wrong to do .

But you can't tar these people with the same brush :bored: :facepalm:

There's arrogance and brainwashing in some Athieism as well , some of them are very forceful with their beliefs or rather not beliefs .

I don't like anyone who tries to push anything on anyone :nono:

[Twosugars]

they push beliefs on to their children

sadly

Don't all parents do that to an extend? Push their worldview on their children?
Once they grow up, children have free will to reject that baggage.

[Brillopad]

What the hell are you talking about ??? :conf: :facepalm: , I'm talking about Religion in general it's not because of the Quran you mentioned .

And you obviously have no idea on my previous posts , I've made comments on Christianity/ Catholism .

All I'm saying is it's people who abuse religion , the average person with faith & religion is peaceful and they don't push any beliefs on people .

I don't believe in reincarnation but I don't mock Buddhism .

I am not religious and not a fan of religion in general. But I only have a problem with it when it significantly infringes on the rights and values of others. One in particular is doing so, in my opinion, big time and posing a threat to many.

My comment to you was based on the fact that you didn’t pass comment on other far more negative comments on Jesus and Christianity but I made one criticism of of the Koran/Quran and you jumped all over it. It made no sense and sounded biased.

I read through the thread and saw no previous posts of yours criticising others who had made stronger anti Christianity threads - only mine which found fault with The Koran. If you have done so in other threads how on earth am I supposed to know that - I was talking about this thread.

[Twosugars]

What the hell are you talking about ??? :conf: :facepalm: , I'm talking about Religion in general it's not because of the Quran you mentioned .

And you obviously have no idea on my previous posts , I've made comments on Christianity/ Catholism .

All I'm saying is it's people who abuse religion , the average person with faith & religion is peaceful and they don't push any beliefs on people .

I don't believe in reincarnation but I don't mock Buddhism .

must agree, majority of religious people are sensible about these things

[Crimson Dynamo]

Don't all parents do that to an extend? Push their worldview on their children?
Once they grow up, children have free will to reject that baggage.

yes just like happens with virtually all muslims and say jews....

oh wait

[Twosugars]

I was brought up Catholic, didn't do me any harm. Still have fondness for it. Best religion when it comes to rituals and mysticism. And the churches, all the old churches...

[Crimson Dynamo]

I was brought up Catholic, didn't do me any harm. Still have fondness for it. Best religion when it comes to rituals and mysticism. And the churches, all the old churches...

you were one of the lucky ones who were not horribly sexually abused

its not a great thing to celebrate

[Twosugars]

you were one of the lucky ones who were not horribly sexually abused

its not a great thing to celebrate

ehm, I was as it happens. But no lasting harm was done and rather not talk about the details.

[Crimson Dynamo]

ehm, I was as it happens. But no lasting harm was done and rather not talk about the details.

welcome to religion

[GoldHeart]

Don't all parents do that to an extend? Push their worldview on their children?
Once they grow up, children have free will to reject that baggage.

Exactly

As a parent obviously you're views and beliefs will be taught to your children, at a young age the child is introduced to it and then as they grow up it's their choice to decide.

[Withano]

This thread took a turn from interesting to SD&N-ey real fast

[Twosugars]

welcome to religion

could have happened in other places

need to distinquish between religion and the church as an institution

[Twosugars]

This thread took a turn from interesting to SD&N-ey real fast
it's not that bad

[Crimson Dynamo]

Exactly

As a parent obviously you're views and beliefs will be taught to your children, at a young age the child is introduced to it and then as they grow up it's their choice to decide.

yes just look at all the muslim children in the middle east and asia rejecting religion

oh wait no they dont

thye just grow up to do the same thing to their children

[Withano]

it's not that bad

I mean, it is. The OP raises an interesting question, and nobody has been close to discussing that for 50-odd posts. Shame really.

[GoldHeart]

I am not religious and not a fan of religion in general. But I only have a problem with it when it significantly infringes on the rights and values of others. One in particular is doing so, in my opinion, big time and posing a threat to many.

My comment to you was based on the fact that you didn’t pass comment on other far more negative comments on Jesus and Christianity but I made one criticism of of the Koran/Quran and you jumped all over it. It made no sense and sounded biased.

I read through the thread and saw no previous posts of yours criticising others who had made stronger anti Christianity threads - only mine which found fault with The Koran. If you have done so in other threads how on earth am I supposed to know that - I was talking about this thread.

Don't think yourself special ,I just decided to reply to yours as it was just luck of the draw . I read through all comments. You're the one taking it the wrong way ,I was talking Religion in general . Let's be sensible.

I'm not biased atall . I'm talking about other topics (not every thread on the forum) as I don't partake in every discussion on this forum :facepalm: .

[Twosugars]

I mean, it is. The OP raises an interesting question, and nobody has been close to discussing that for 50-odd posts. Shame really.
yes, it's gone off topic but it's still recoverable and people are still willing to discuss without dramz

[Kazanne]

I don't find religion a problem per-se , it's how people respond and act upon it that is the problem imo, I was brought up as a Christian , and do believe in something else ,something higher as in God , I do get ridiculed for it sometimes,but I really don't care ,it's my choice, I don't care what others believe in either ,that is also their choice, but when people take religion and use it to oppress and hurt others then ,they are a problem.

[AnnieK]

Religion and religious beliefs bring great peace and comfort to some. I really dont understand the need for some people to ridicule and mock people of faith.

Some people use religion to excuse and explain atrocities as though they were carrying out some greater orders.

I don't agree with pushing religion onto children, my parent's (neither of whom ever attend church) were really pissed off that I didn't have.my some christened but I said he should choose as and when he wants to get christened. He may want to follow another religion, he may want to become a jedi and when he decides that he can do it.

I believe Jesus was a very religious man of his time. Son of god, born if a virgin....Not so much but I remain open minded and respect people's wishes to believe that.

[Brillopad]

Don't think yourself special ,I just decided to reply to yours as it was just luck of the draw . I read through all comments. You're the one taking it the wrong way ,I was talking Religion in general . Let's be sensible.

I'm not biased atall . I'm talking about other topics (not every thread on the forum) as I don't partake in every discussion on this forum :facepalm: .

I said it came across that way not that you did. You are the one who got arsy with your facepalm emojis and now saying I think I am special - where did I say that? It just sounded that you were criticising me for criticising Islam in particular. Ok you weren’t - but surely you can see how I may have thought that. There was no need for above comment or facepalm.

[GoldHeart]

welcome to religion

Corruption & abuse happens in all types of places ,once again you're mixing up religion with the people that are the problem :bored:

If you read a news article about a teacher abusing his pupil , are you going to bad-mouth all schools & education and say it no good and that we should scrap it all ?? .

[Crimson Dynamo]

Corruption & abuse happens in all types of places ,once again you're mixing up religion with the people that are the problem :bored:

If you read a news article about a teacher abusing his pupil , are you going to bad-mouth all schools & education and say it no good and that we should scrap it all ?? .

lol

religion is people, it was invented by people and is maintained by people

i have no clue what you think it is?

if you have a an example where similar systematic child abuse happened like the catholic church then lets compare?

[Twosugars]

LT, abuse in Catholic Church was more than anywhere else because there's celibacy. Celibacy was not invented by Jesus or Old Testament. It was added later, by people.
I don't see why Jesus should be blamed for that and Jesus is the topic of your thread.

[GoldHeart]

Religion and religious beliefs bring great peace and comfort to some. I really dont understand the need for some people to ridicule and mock people of faith.

Some people use religion to excuse and explain atrocities as though they were carrying out some greater orders.

I don't agree with pushing religion onto children, my parent's (neither of whom ever attend church) were really pissed off that I didn't have.my some christened but I said he should choose as and when he wants to get christened. He may want to follow another religion, he may want to become a jedi and when he decides that he can do it.

I believe Jesus was a very religious man of his time. Son of god, born if a virgin....Not so much but I remain open minded and respect people's wishes to believe that.

I think because people see so many bad examples of religion or what they "think" is religion it makes them ignorant .

Of course there's always wolves in sheep clothing ,and dishonest corruption but it's ridiculous to put everyone in the same box .

The crazy fanatics are always the ones who get air time as well .

But yeah as I was saying the normal average person in religion is just minding their own business getting on with things ,and are peaceful .

Nothing wrong with a healthy debate,but I don't understand why people mock take the p is s out of religion .

As I've said I don't believe in reincarnation but I don't make fun of it :shrug:

[Crimson Dynamo]

LT, abuse in Catholic Church was more than anywhere else because there's celibacy. Celibacy was not invented by Jesus or Old Testament. It was added later, by people.
I don't see why Jesus should be blamed for that and Jesus is the topic of your thread.

I dont think anyone is blaming Jesus, why do you say that?

The fault lies in a cult that is based on hideous lies and abuse of power

[Twosugars]

I dont think anyone is blaming Jesus, why do you say that?

The fault lies in a cult that is based on hideous lies and abuse of power

I get confused. We're moving all over the place with this convo: Jesus, later doctrinal additions, Islam, church as institution, geopolitics...

[Crimson Dynamo]

I get confused. We're moving all over the place with this convo: Jesus, later doctrinal additions, Islam, church as institution, geopolitics...

its the insidious nature of religion. the whole thing is based on lies so its no surprise

[GoldHeart]

I dont think anyone is blaming Jesus, why do you say that?

The fault lies in a cult that is based on hideous lies and abuse of power

All kinds of people abuse their power that's pretty evident . Which is what I've been saying.

[Crimson Dynamo]

All kinds of people abuse their power that's pretty evident . Which is what I've been saying.

and?

[Twosugars]

You're simplifying too much, LT. I'm with GoldHeart on this

[GoldHeart]

You're simplifying too much, LT. I'm with GoldHeart on this

LT isn't making sense

Like I said if a teacher is doing illegal stuff ,are we going to tar every school and teacher with the same brush ?.

And some Athiests force their opinions on other and they are argumentative , just because others have religion .

[Crimson Dynamo]

LT isn't making sense

Like I said if a teacher is doing illegal stuff ,are we going to tar every school and teacher with the same brush ?.

And some Athiests force their opinions on other and they are argumentative , just because others have religion .

No one including myself has said that abuse is only in religion

I dont know what you are railing against

You seem to be saying that just because abuse of children occurs else where we should somehow dismiss it

[GoldHeart]

No one including myself has said that abuse is only in religion

I dont know what you are railing against

You seem to be saying that just because abuse of children occurs else where we should somehow dismiss it

Stop twisting things :nono:
I never said we should dismiss it . You were the one acting like Religion is abuse , which is not true .

[Twosugars]

LT isn't making sense

Like I said if a teacher is doing illegal stuff ,are we going to tar every school and teacher with the same brush ?.

And some Athiests force their opinions on other and they are argumentative , just because others have religion .

Agree.

It'd be better if we concentrated on Jesus and early Christianity as the OP suggests. Other issues should be discussed elsewhere.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Stop twisting things :nono:
I never said we should dismiss it . You were the one acting like Religion is abuse , which is not true .

Of course its abuse

Do you not consider lying to children to make them feel guilty abuse?

[montblanc]

we stan a king

[kirklancaster]

we stan a king

Christ? Or LT?

[montblanc]

Christ? Or LT?

if LT can walk on water then him too :hehe:

[kirklancaster]

if LT can walk on water then him too :hehe:

I love him but he's sinking fast on this thread. :laugh:

[GoldHeart]

Of course its abuse

Do you not consider lying to children to make them feel guilty abuse?

Whether you're trolling or not that is a very warped ignorant statement , just think about what you just said :bored: .

You keep twisting things

[kirklancaster]

For LT in the cause of PEACE, HARMONY, and LOVE and TOLERANCE on TIBB

XlfcvUtUoOM
"How Great Thou Art"

Oh Lord my God when I in awesome wonder
Consider all the worlds thy hands have made.

I see the stars, I hear the rolling thunder
Thy power throughout the universe displayed.

When Christ shall come
With shout of acclamation
To take me home,
What joy shall fill my heart.

Then I shall bow in humble adoration
And there proclaim my God how great thou art.

Then sings my soul my saviour God to thee
How great thou art
How great thou art
Then sings my soul my saviour God to thee
How great thou art how great thou art.

[Toy Soldier]

I don't actually disagree with LT to be fair. Abuse is probably too strong a word but I am in total agreement that the indoctrination of children into any religion as "truth" is 100% wrong.

[Denver]

Mary is a slaggy slag Jesus was a laddy lad he should have just got with Betty

[MTVN]

Well been a while since we've had a thread like this, what's spurred the sudden need to belittle Christianity?

[Cherie]

How can you complain about cults when you play golf LT :facepalm: live and let live

[kirklancaster]

Well been a while since we've had a thread like this, what's spurred the sudden need to belittle Christianity?

I'm just waiting to let loose in defence of Christ and Faith and Belief, Mat, but hope that when I do, I receive mature and intelligent responses instead of the juvenile tosh and erroneous 'facts' which have littered this thread from SOME NOT ALL contributors thus far. :laugh:

[Marsh.]

Mary is a slaggy slag Jesus was a laddy lad he should have just got with Betty

Mary was his mother, not his wife.

[kirklancaster]

Mary was his mother, not his wife.

:laugh: Forgive him, Marsh, for he knows not what he sayeth. :hehe:

[GoldHeart]

Well been a while since we've had a thread like this, what's spurred the sudden need to belittle Christianity?

I never understand the point of mocking people's religion

[Twosugars]

II have no problems with religion as such because humans seem to need it. They seem to need to believe in something to help them make sense of this world and their existence. Not all humans, but significant numbers.
Besides, nobody really knows if such a thing as god exists. Dogmatic atheists are no different to religious dogmatics when they insist they know the truth. Some scientists, for example, have been suggesting a so-called simulation theory where we and our world are a sophisticated simulation run by a superior civilisation. Such civilisation would be de facto our gods - creators and masters. We cannot argue that science and god are mutually exclusive as science has no evidence either way. So since nobody really knows, isn't the best way to live and let live, as AnnieK or Cherie suggest?
If people want to believe in a particular interpretation or a story that's fine. It's true that the more detailed such stories (religions) are the less probable they seem, but hey, who am I to say they're definitely not true? Not to mention that most religions are surprisingly adaptable and open to interpretation.
As long as they respect others and their beliefs, let them be. All I'd expect is for the state to remain neutral, i.e secular and tolerant so that the public sphere is not dominated by one set of beliefs.
Hope it makes sense, I had a bit to drink. :shrug:

[kirklancaster]

II have no problems with religion as such because humans seem to need it. They seem to need to believe in something to help them make sense of this world and their existence. Not all humans, but significant numbers.
Besides, nobody really knows if such a thing as god exists. Dogmatic atheists are no different to religious dogmatics when they insist they know the truth. Some scientists, for example, have been suggesting a so-called simulation theory where we and our world are a sophisticated simulation run by a superior civilisation. Such civilisation would be de facto our gods - creators and masters. We cannot argue that science and god are mutually exclusive as science has no evidence either way. So since nobody really knows, isn't the best way to live and let live, as AnnieK or Cherie suggest?
If people want to believe in a particular interpretation or a story that's fine. It's true that the more detailed such stories (religions) are the less probable they seem, but hey, who am I to say they're definitely not true? Not to mention that most religions are surprisingly adaptable and open to interpretation.
As long as they respect others and their beliefs, let them be. All I'd expect is for the state to remain neutral, i.e secular and tolerant so that the public sphere is not dominated by one set of beliefs.
Sorry if this is poorly written, it's late and I'm drunk. :shrug:

Drunk or not, you make excellent sense and your post is as well written and valid as the rest of your posts in this thread, Twosugars.

I also applaud your moderation and qualities of not mocking or insulting.

[Twosugars]

Drunk or not, you make excellent sense and your post is as well written and valid as the rest of your posts in this thread, Twosugars.

I also applaud your moderation and qualities of not mocking or insulting.

You're too kind, sir :laugh:

I simply sit on the fence on this one. Enjoy the sensation iykwim :hee:

[thesheriff443]

I can walk on water if it's frozen.

If Jesus could turn water into wine he would have a chain of off licenses.

[GoldHeart]

II have no problems with religion as such because humans seem to need it. They seem to need to believe in something to help them make sense of this world and their existence. Not all humans, but significant numbers.
Besides, nobody really knows if such a thing as god exists. Dogmatic atheists are no different to religious dogmatics when they insist they know the truth. Some scientists, for example, have been suggesting a so-called simulation theory where we and our world are a sophisticated simulation run by a superior civilisation. Such civilisation would be de facto our gods - creators and masters. We cannot argue that science and god are mutually exclusive as science has no evidence either way. So since nobody really knows, isn't the best way to live and let live, as AnnieK or Cherie suggest?
If people want to believe in a particular interpretation or a story that's fine. It's true that the more detailed such stories (religions) are the less probable they seem, but hey, who am I to say they're definitely not true? Not to mention that most religions are surprisingly adaptable and open to interpretation.
As long as they respect others and their beliefs,for the state to remain neutral, i.e secular and tolerant so that the public sphere is not dominated by one set of beliefs.
Sorry if this is poorly written, it's late and I'm drunk. :shrug:


Well we all believe different things it's human nature , exactly it's about respecting people's beliefs. And obviously we're not all going to have the same views .

We all have different interpretations, we see things differently to others but it's the way we conduct ourselves.

Faith & religion gives some people hope & comfort and as long as they're not forcing it on anyone or hurting others, i don't see the problem :shrug: .

I also made a similar point about aggressive atheists (not all of them but some) , are very arrogant and argumentative and they think they're right no matter what :notimpressed:, it's honestly like talking to a brick wall with people be like that . They proceed to belittle religion all the while behaving obnoxiously .

[Maru]

Remember that time it was about "Living our truth?"... in the 90's I think is when this started?...

https://media.giphy.com/media/3o751URIlrafolK8Cc/giphy.gif

and yet...

https://media.giphy.com/media/3XurZd6aRArM4/giphy.gif

Unless we're living in a third world country or in some place in the middle of no where with no communications with the outside world, kind of hard to avoid clashes with faith... so I don't think religion can operate like a cult normally would even if it wanted to... it would have to essentially ensnare people by sheltering them or acting as a pyramid scheme in order to keep people "buying" in... a la Scientology and the FLDS...

I think the church does provide a real service to the community. It is not just a "mindless" scheme to study or get involved in the action of religion. I've walked into several churches as a guest, and I've never felt like it was "forced". It seemed like everyone was there for a similar purpose. It's also easier to walk into one than it would be to start the search on your own, so easier to start there I guess... but I think that it's understandable that individuals start the search in some way, whether looking for purpose or attempting answering the bigger questions. I don't even think anything has to even be "going wrong"... we all kind of participate in those exercises everyday, whether it's joining a corporate brand or maintaining a rigorous self-image in line with either our "role" in our family's lives or a task we may carry in our field, our line of work... all these things do in different ways draw us inward. That's what spirituality does in the long-run.

The church is just one way of that need to find and meet other folk who are in that life stage. Obviously, it's an example of a more traditional stop in that search... I think in 2018, spirituality has changed and we have more information to sift through than ever before (in some ways, far more distractions too...). We have more access to diverse views, are less reliant on those who serve in our community for information and support... and so people can kind of start the journey however they want. Sometimes it leads back to the church, other times it may lead somewhere else. Worst case scenario, it leads to drugs and gangs... I knew one guy who experimented with acid to trigger vision quests and he ended up permanently borked... :skull:

I think if we attempt to restrict that search, we will find that society doesn't hold together the way we hoped it might without... and some people would say we are already on the verge of ill effects as the "glue" of traditional religion slowly shrinks... obviously we'll need to adapt, and I think one of those "adaptations" is through politics... sad, but true... humans have a need to meet and gather, to connect and maybe even worship... I'd like to think of God/Jesus as the guide.. a teacher... the religion being the doctrine, but also a set rules that keeps it consistent, doesn't allow the group to behave outside certain bounds and revert to primal tendencies (i.e. too tribal)...

The double-edged sword of groups, is it tends to "embolden" the individual to act and behave ways they normally would not... even without the group actually present. We see this in politics too though... so I don't know that religion is the problem... I think that most conservatives, particularly religious conservatives, see human as ultimately fallible... and spirituality/religion is sort of the "moral guide" that we can use to keep the group relatively accountable... it doesn't mean that it works 100% of the time, but it's better than no guide at all... or unrestricted tribalism (i.e. primate-like behavior).

Obviously religion is flawed... the other question is then, what do we replace Him (Jesus)/religion with? Can we as people in society exist without a group narrative? America was at the peak of individualism in the years I grew up in... and now collectivism is rearing it's ugly head again... attempting to "smother" that sovereignty with it's own desires... some would say what else but religion can combat this? Anyway, my point is, these are a lot of things that I think are going on in the 'background' that people ignore... because they feel that "religion" is not longer an "authority"... it doesn't mean it can't still be powerful. I think be careful what you wish for when you dismiss it so easily... now I'm not saying we should all convert to Christianity, I'm just saying I could think of a worse guide...

[Denver]

Mary was his mother, not his wife.

Anyway some changed Joseph to Jesus

[Maru]

Aren't there technically two Marys? One is Virgin Mary... and then Mary Magdelene...

[Northern Monkey]

It took over 3000 years for the Egyptian religion and its various incarnations to die out.Some of the contemporary religions are still fairly young in comparison.They’ll all have had their day in another few hundred years.
I’m not against religion though.I find it fascinating as it tends to coincide with the history of the civilisations that created it.
When the religion dies out the civilisation tends to die out too.
I’m not one of these who just thinks ‘religion is bad because it’s only a tool to control the masses’.
Yes it obviously has been used for that specially later on but imo religion came about because there was no other way to explain the world around us than the use of gods and magic.
Imagine living in a world with no scientific understanding.What would your mind use to explain it.Religion is the obvious go too position for the human mind to take.
Trying to reconcile death and grief lead to ritual burial.
It’s a very interesting intrinsic part of humanity.

[Kazanne]

It's better to believe and find there is no God,than to not believe and find there is !! said tongue and cheek

[Beso]

II have no problems with religion as such because humans seem to need it. They seem to need to believe in something to help them make sense of this world and their existence. Not all humans, but significant numbers.
Besides, nobody really knows if such a thing as god exists. Dogmatic atheists are no different to religious dogmatics when they insist they know the truth. Some scientists, for example, have been suggesting a so-called simulation theory where we and our world are a sophisticated simulation run by a superior civilisation. Such civilisation would be de facto our gods - creators and masters. We cannot argue that science and god are mutually exclusive as science has no evidence either way. So since nobody really knows, isn't the best way to live and let live, as AnnieK or Cherie suggest?
If people want to believe in a particular interpretation or a story that's fine. It's true that the more detailed such stories (religions) are the less probable they seem, but hey, who am I to say they're definitely not true? Not to mention that most religions are surprisingly adaptable and open to interpretation.
As long as they respect others and their beliefs, let them be. All I'd expect is for the state to remain neutral, i.e secular and tolerant so that the public sphere is not dominated by one set of beliefs.
Hope it makes sense, I had a bit to drink. :shrug:

Fantastic stance.....:clap1:

[Toy Soldier]

On the question of the possibility of intelligent design / a "creator" the only sensible stance is to be agnostic. The mysteries of the universe are so vast and deep that it's very possible (probable) that no single human mind COULD even begin to comprehend it, even if it was laid out in the simplest possible terms... And it isn't, so we're very unlikely to ever figure it out on our own. Maybe some sort of advanced artificial intelligence could in a few hundred years? Who knows.

However

Being open to the possibility of *A* god or god-like entity of some description is completely different to being open to the possibility that any one human religion is accurate. Some seem to believe that the thinking of "no one knows the truth for definite... So it MIGHT be Evanglism / Islam / Buddhism!" is a sensible or logical stance. It isn't. The existence of multiple religions, and the fact that NO two separate groups of humans / civilisations have developed exactly the same religion without it spreading human-to-human, makes it almost infinitely unlikely that any of those religions came from on high or contain any sort of universal truth. The only logical conclusion is that they are simple human attempts to understand the mysteries of existence and nature, and to ground and humanise the terrifying vastness of the universe. A comfort blanket, or maybe you could say a "dome of explanations", to shelter from the infinite vacuum of the unknown that lies beyond.

Those unknown aspects of space and time might contain intelligent design. That's very possible. You could call that "designer" God. But it's not Abrahamic God, or any other human god.

Human religions and their rules are collections of fables, myths and legends... Stories we've used to get our heads around it all. No different to Greek gods or (pre-Christian) Roman gods or Norse gods. There is zero logic in believing any differently. Especially given that all of those ancient peoples believed in their gods just as strongly as modern believers do today :shrug:.

[thesheriff443]

It's better to believe and find there is no God,than to not believe and find there is !! said tongue and cheek

If you don't believe it's fine, because your earthly sins will be forgiven.

It's a very clever line that Jesus was supposed to say.

Forgive them father they know not what they do.

[bots]

i have no problem imagining that across space and time there could be beings that are vastly more intelligent than us. If those beings come to a point where they have the power of life and death over us then they are by definition gods. Even at that point it is up to individuals whether they choose to worship those gods or not, it's not an automatic given and it never will be.

[Kazanne]

If you don't believe it's fine, because your earthly sins will be forgiven.

It's a very clever line that Jesus was supposed to say.

Forgive them father they know not what they do.

Not always sheriff,if that was the case there would be no hell,but some people believe hell is here on earth,who really knows.

[Toy Soldier]

i have no problem imagining that across space and time there could be beings that are vastly more intelligent than us. If those beings come to a point where they have the power of life and death over us then they are by definition gods. Even at that point it is up to individuals whether they choose to worship those gods or not, it's not an automatic given and it never will be.https://78.media.tumblr.com/3395468dbd69f2d0096b8a25fbd85747/tumblr_oqr93dBBlw1r7ppmjo1_400.gif

[thesheriff443]

Not always sheriff,if that was the case there would be no hell,but some people believe hell is here on earth,who really knows.

If you believe in heaven than you have believe in hell,

Hell is a way of saying you will be punished for your sins which is rubbish, if you kill a person on earth intentionally than you should be put to death.

[Northern Monkey]

On the question of the possibility of intelligent design / a "creator" the only sensible stance is to be agnostic. The mysteries of the universe are so vast and deep that it's very possible (probable) that no single human mind COULD even begin to comprehend it, even if it was laid out in the simplest possible terms... And it isn't, so we're very unlikely to ever figure it out on our own. Maybe some sort of advanced artificial intelligence could in a few hundred years? Who knows.

However

Being open to the possibility of *A* god or god-like entity of some description is completely different to being open to the possibility that any one human religion is accurate. Some seem to believe that the thinking of "no one knows the truth for definite... So it MIGHT be Evanglism / Islam / Buddhism!" is a sensible or logical stance. It isn't. The existence of multiple religions, and the fact that NO two separate groups of humans / civilisations have developed exactly the same religion without it spreading human-to-human, makes it almost infinitely unlikely that any of those religions came from on high or contain any sort of universal truth. The only logical conclusion is that they are simple human attempts to understand the mysteries of existence and nature, and to ground and humanise the terrifying vastness of the universe. A comfort blanket, or maybe you could say a "dome of explanations", to shelter from the infinite vacuum of the unknown that lies beyond.

Those unknown aspects of space and time might contain intelligent design. That's very possible. You could call that "designer" God. But it's not Abrahamic God, or any other human god.

Human religions and their rules are collections of fables, myths and legends... Stories we've used to get our heads around it all. No different to Greek gods or (pre-Christian) Roman gods or Norse gods. There is zero logic in believing any differently. Especially given that all of those ancient peoples believed in their gods just as strongly as modern believers do today :shrug:.

Yeah this is how i see it too

[thesheriff443]

https://78.media.tumblr.com/3395468dbd69f2d0096b8a25fbd85747/tumblr_oqr93dBBlw1r7ppmjo1_400.gif

Humans are gods in a way, humans decide if a person lives or dies, thru a country's legal system/medical treatment, war/lack of food.

Then nature it self can kill, hurricanes/floods/ volcanoes.

[thesheriff443]

On the question of the possibility of intelligent design / a "creator" the only sensible stance is to be agnostic. The mysteries of the universe are so vast and deep that it's very possible (probable) that no single human mind COULD even begin to comprehend it, even if it was laid out in the simplest possible terms... And it isn't, so we're very unlikely to ever figure it out on our own. Maybe some sort of advanced artificial intelligence could in a few hundred years? Who knows.

However

Being open to the possibility of *A* god or god-like entity of some description is completely different to being open to the possibility that any one human religion is accurate. Some seem to believe that the thinking of "no one knows the truth for definite... So it MIGHT be Evanglism / Islam / Buddhism!" is a sensible or logical stance. It isn't. The existence of multiple religions, and the fact that NO two separate groups of humans / civilisations have developed exactly the same religion without it spreading human-to-human, makes it almost infinitely unlikely that any of those religions came from on high or contain any sort of universal truth. The only logical conclusion is that they are simple human attempts to understand the mysteries of existence and nature, and to ground and humanise the terrifying vastness of the universe. A comfort blanket, or maybe you could say a "dome of explanations", to shelter from the infinite vacuum of the unknown that lies beyond.

Those unknown aspects of space and time might contain intelligent design. That's very possible. You could call that "designer" God. But it's not Abrahamic God, or any other human god.

Human religions and their rules are collections of fables, myths and legends... Stories we've used to get our heads around it all. No different to Greek gods or (pre-Christian) Roman gods or Norse gods. There is zero logic in believing any differently. Especially given that all of those ancient peoples believed in their gods just as strongly as modern believers do today :shrug:.

I'm also with ts mind set.

[Marsh.]

Anyway some changed Joseph to JesusSome? What are you on about?

[Ashley.]

I don't actually disagree with LT to be fair. Abuse is probably too strong a word but I am in total agreement that the indoctrination of children into any religion as "truth" is 100% wrong.

Children can lose faith later on for a variety of reasons, as I eventually did.

The only problem I have is with those who use their religion to commit awful crimes - which happens. Otherwise I have no issue, and certainly wouldn't waste my time belittling something that doesn't concern me.

Edit: That last bit wasn't directed at you, TS

[Twosugars]

On the question of the possibility of intelligent design / a "creator" the only sensible stance is to be agnostic. The mysteries of the universe are so vast and deep that it's very possible (probable) that no single human mind COULD even begin to comprehend it, even if it was laid out in the simplest possible terms... And it isn't, so we're very unlikely to ever figure it out on our own. Maybe some sort of advanced artificial intelligence could in a few hundred years? Who knows.

However

Being open to the possibility of *A* god or god-like entity of some description is completely different to being open to the possibility that any one human religion is accurate. Some seem to believe that the thinking of "no one knows the truth for definite... So it MIGHT be Evanglism / Islam / Buddhism!" is a sensible or logical stance. It isn't. The existence of multiple religions, and the fact that NO two separate groups of humans / civilisations have developed exactly the same religion without it spreading human-to-human, makes it almost infinitely unlikely that any of those religions came from on high or contain any sort of universal truth. The only logical conclusion is that they are simple human attempts to understand the mysteries of existence and nature, and to ground and humanise the terrifying vastness of the universe. A comfort blanket, or maybe you could say a "dome of explanations", to shelter from the infinite vacuum of the unknown that lies beyond.

Those unknown aspects of space and time might contain intelligent design. That's very possible. You could call that "designer" God. But it's not Abrahamic God, or any other human god.

Human religions and their rules are collections of fables, myths and legends... Stories we've used to get our heads around it all. No different to Greek gods or (pre-Christian) Roman gods or Norse gods. There is zero logic in believing any differently. Especially given that all of those ancient peoples believed in their gods just as strongly as modern believers do today :shrug:.

I'd like to respond to the part in bold. I said earlier that the more detailed the doctrine the less likely it is. But don't see the point in rubbishing such doctrines. It doesn't help in maintaining dialogue and understanding between people. Besides, as I said before, those doctrines can be flexible and open to interpretation. Most Christian denominations don't insist that the world was actually created in a week, they see a lot of the original scriptures in more metaphorical way. Is it impossible to adopt the Jesus story into a history of a visitation by one of our alien masters, if it come to that? Not really. And Bible may contain more historical stuff that we think. The flood of Noah could have been the refilling of the Mediterranean after the last Ice Age.
I don't know about others but most main Christian denominations have come to accept scientific discoveries like Copernicus's heliocentric system or Darwin's evolution. And now they're open to the possibility of life on other planets. Vatican's Observatory is at the cutting edge of astronomical research.
It's far better to seek common ground and persuade than call the believers stupid or, as you implied, illogical and not sensible.

[Maru]

I like the way my AP world history teacher put it, 2S.. the Bible is one of the best books ever written on the nature of man... there is solid scholarly value in studying religions I think

[Beso]

I used to get a slap round the lug for taking the lords name in vain if i said jesus christ....got a lot worse for saying ****ing hell though.

[GoldHeart]

It took over 3000 years for the Egyptian religion and its various incarnations to die out.Some of the contemporary religions are still fairly young in comparison.They’ll all have had their day in another few hundred years.
I’m not against religion though.I find it fascinating as it tends to coincide with the history of the civilisations that created it.
When the religion dies out the civilisation tends to die out too.
I’m not one of these who just thinks ‘religion is bad because it’s only a tool to control the masses’.
Yes it obviously has been used for that specially later on but imo religion came about because there was no other way to explain the world around us than the use of gods and magic.
Imagine living in a world with no scientific understanding.What would your mind use to explain it.Religion is the obvious go too position for the human mind to take.
Trying to reconcile death and grief lead to ritual burial.
It’s a very interesting intrinsic part of humanity.


For a very long time people have been believing in something spiritual,
Yes people want to make sense of the world . I don't know why there's always this GOD vs Science thing though why can't both exist .

Yeah funerals are a good way to say goodbye to the person you've lost ,and prayers and religious services can help people cope and give them some comfort & support.

[GoldHeart]

Aren't there technically two Marys? One is Virgin Mary... and then Mary Magdelene...

Actually alot of women were called Mary in those times , it was a popular name.

The ones people tend to remember are Mother / virgin Mary & Mary Magdalene but there were other Mary's .

[Crimson Dynamo]

Well been a while since we've had a thread like this, what's spurred the sudden need to belittle Christianity?

I never understand the point of mocking people's religion

what on God's earth gave you the idea it should not be routinely mocked?

[Kizzy]

I think if those who proffer to be Christians actually acted like Christians...the world would be a more heavenly place.

I actually think he did exist... I hold on the the thought there is a force for good in the universe, even if sometimes doesn't feel like it.

[Brillopad]

For a very long time people have been believing in something spiritual,
Yes people want to make sense of the world . I don't know why there's always this GOD vs Science thing though why can't both exist .

Yeah funerals are a good way to say goodbye to the person you've lost ,and prayers and religious services can help people cope and give them some comfort & support.

Religion has also caused more war and death than just about anything else. So I see little to praise it for personally. People often get very tribal about religion and want theirs to be the only one with any real say.

[Marsh.]

Religion has also caused more war and death than just about anything else. So I see little to praise it for personally. People often get very tribal about religion and want theirs to be the only one with any real say.And without religion man would find other means and reason of bringing about death and destruction.

That's mankind, not necessarily religious only.

[Marsh.]

what on God's earth gave you the idea it should not be routinely mocked?Emphasis on the word "routine".

[Toy Soldier]

I think if those who proffer to be Christians actually acted like Christians...the world would be a more heavenly place.

I actually think he did exist... I hold on the the thought there is a force for good in the universe, even if sometimes doesn't feel like it.Yes, given all of the available evidence it's become increasingly likely that Jesus, the individual, did exist. And that he did good, and through his life gained devoted followers (as many mere mortals do). What's less clear is the account of his abilities... Which were most likely exaggerated again and again through "Chinese whispers" and folklore... E.g. Perhaps him and his followers charitably brought bread and fish to a starving village - and over time this became a story of him "magically" feeding thousands with a small amount of food. Perhaps he brought medicines / medical knowledge from his travels and healed people that others had assumed to be dying, and that story was passed on as "magic".

Its even unclear as to whether he himself ever declared himself the son of / an avatar of God... Or if this was something that came from his followers, possibly even as "rewritten history" after he was executed and became a martyr.

Theology is fascinating in itself and as has been said, its intricately interwoven into human history. But again, the same can be said of ancient Egyptian, Roman, Greek and Norse religions which are now only history - and yet no less valuable or fascinating from a sociological / anthropological viewpoint.

I personally believe that all religions are destined to go the same way over time. Although inevitably, others will spring up in their place from time to time.

[Twosugars]

And without religion man would find other means and reason of bringing about death and destruction.

That's mankind, not necessarily religious only.

That's right. Fascism and communism were not religious ideologies and caused record numbers of deaths last century.

[Beso]

I think if those who proffer to be Christians actually acted like Christians...the world would be a more heavenly place.

I actually think he did exist... I hold on the the thought there is a force for good in the universe, even if sometimes doesn't feel like it.

Nice thoughts kizzy..heres hoping.

[Kizzy]

Yes, given all of the available evidence it's become increasingly likely that Jesus, the individual, did exist. And that he did good, and through his life gained devoted followers (as many mere mortals do). What's less clear is the account of his abilities... Which were most likely exaggerated again and again through "Chinese whispers" and folklore... E.g. Perhaps him and his followers charitably brought bread and fish to a starving village - and over time this became a story of him "magically" feeding thousands with a small amount of food. Perhaps he brought medicines / medical knowledge from his travels and healed people that others had assumed to be dying, and that story was passed on as "magic".

Its even unclear as to whether he himself ever declared himself the son of / an avatar of God... Or if this was something that came from his followers, possibly even as "rewritten history" after he was executed and became a martyr.

Theology is fascinating in itself and as has been said, its intricately interwoven into human history. But again, the same can be said of ancient Egyptian, Roman, Greek and Norse religions which are now only history - and yet no less valuable or fascinating from a sociological / anthropological viewpoint.

I personally believe that all religions are destined to go the same way over time. Although inevitably, others will spring up in their place from time to time.

Who mentioned religion?.. I didn't.

[Beso]

Yes, given all of the available evidence it's become increasingly likely that Jesus, the individual, did exist. And that he did good, and through his life gained devoted followers (as many mere mortals do). What's less clear is the account of his abilities... Which were most likely exaggerated again and again through "Chinese whispers" and folklore... E.g. Perhaps him and his followers charitably brought bread and fish to a starving village - and over time this became a story of him "magically" feeding thousands with a small amount of food. Perhaps he brought medicines / medical knowledge from his travels and healed people that others had assumed to be dying, and that story was passed on as "magic".

Its even unclear as to whether he himself ever declared himself the son of / an avatar of God... Or if this was something that came from his followers, possibly even as "rewritten history" after he was executed and became a martyr.

Theology is fascinating in itself and as has been said, its intricately interwoven into human history. But again, the same can be said of ancient Egyptian, Roman, Greek and Norse religions which are now only history - and yet no less valuable or fascinating from a sociological / anthropological viewpoint.

I personally believe that all religions are destined to go the same way over time. Although inevitably, others will spring up in their place from time to time.

And perhaps his mum was just the local bike.:hehe:

[Marsh.]

Who mentioned religion?.. I didn't.You did. You mentioned Christians.

Christianity is a religion. :/

[Kizzy]

You did. You mentioned Christians.

Christianity is a religion. :/

Yes I did didn't I? and I'm sorry I did, it was just to highlight the hypocrisy of some who call themselves Christians but don't abide by anything that he specifically suggested was tantamount to his teachings.

That said there's the theory that Christianity was invented to assert patriarchy an circumvent female/moon/earth worship.... So who knows?

[Marsh.]

Yes I did didn't I? and I'm sorry I did, it was just to highlight the hypocrisy of some who call themselves Christians but don't abide by anything that he specifically suggested was tantamount to his teachings.

That said there's the theory that Christianity was invented to assert patriarchy an circumvent female/moon/earth worship.... So who knows?Who knows indeed. :shrug:

[Crimson Dynamo]

That's right. Fascism and communism were not religious ideologies and caused record numbers of deaths last century.

irrelevant

all it illustrates in the ignorance and cruelty of man

[Crimson Dynamo]

I think if those who proffer to be Christians actually acted like Christians...the world would be a more heavenly place.

I actually think he did exist... I hold on the the thought there is a force for good in the universe, even if sometimes doesn't feel like it.

just wishful thinking nonsense without sounding rude

[Twosugars]

irrelevant

all it illustrates in the ignorance and cruelty of man

It was relevant in response to Brillo.

You don't need supernatural for people to cause death and destruction

[GoldHeart]

It was relevant in response to Brillo.

You don't need supernatural for people to cause death and destruction

At the end of the day free will is here , so yeah regardless murders and wars will always happen that's the ugly side of the world it will never be perfect unfortunately.

And they'll always be killers , psycho's and mentally disturbed people wanting to harm others .

[Kizzy]

just wishful thinking nonsense without sounding rude

You do sound a bit rude but ok.

[Brillopad]

It was relevant in response to Brillo.

You don't need supernatural for people to cause death and destruction

Oh it helps. Religion has left a trail of D&D behind it for centuries and it is still going on. I would say more people have died in the name of religion than any other reason. To deny it is fruitless. People have used it to control for centuries.

[kirklancaster]

Just to redress a few misconceptions:

'Christianity' was NOT 'invented'. Christianity is a Religion which evolved from followers of the teachings of the historical Jesus.

Religion is NOT the cause of most Wars or bloodshed on this planet - Atheism and Secularity are:

1) Over the past 5,000 years and a total of 1,763 wars fought —only 123 (or about 7%) were religious in nature.

2) When the 66 wars which were waged in the name of Islam are removed, that number is cut down to a little more than 3%.

3) Atheism is responsible for a far greater degree of bloodshed than Christianity and all other religions combined with a body count of more than 100 million in the 20th century alone thanks to atheist regimes like Mao Zedong, Joseph Stalin, Adolph Hitler, Vladimir Lenin, and others.

Sources: ‘The Encyclopedia of War’ by Philip and Axelrod (Three Volumes), ‘Lethal Politics*and*Death by Government’ by R.J. Rummel, and the 2014 report from The Institute for Economics and Peace.

[Nicky91]

^ don't you forget Hirohito to that list of names, or what was Japan's religion during that regime, i thought he also was part of the Axis regime along with Germany and Italy at world war II, so my point is, isn't he also part of that atheist regime you mentioned Kirk

[kirklancaster]

^ don't you forget Hirohito to that list of names, or what was Japan's religion during that regime, i thought he also was part of the Axis regime along with Germany and Italy at world war II, so my point is, isn't he also part of that atheist regime you mentioned Kirk

Yes, of course, Nicky - Thank you.

[Nicky91]

Yes, of course, Nicky - Thank you.

no problem, world war II has been one of the subjects i had top marks for at school, one of the few subjects i had top marks for, unlike maths for example

[kirklancaster]

no problem, world war II has been one of the subjects i had top marks for at school, one of the few subjects i had top marks for, unlike maths for example

Don't worry, Nicky, Diane Abbott is crap at maths (in fact crap at EVERYTHING) and it has not done her any harm career-wise. :laugh:

[bots]

Jesus Christ, this threads gone on a bit :idc:

[Nicky91]

Jesus Christ, this threads gone on a bit :idc:

nah, it's still about religion, so not really offtopic

[Kizzy]

Don't worry, Nicky, Diane Abbott is crap at maths (in fact crap at EVERYTHING) and it has not done her any harm career-wise. :laugh:

And the minister for war is a fireplace salesman... Which links beautifully to my theory that tories are the antichrist. :D

[Nicky91]

And the minister for war is a fireplace salesman... Which links beautifully to my theory that tories are the antichrist. :D

i thought trump was the antichrist, i can seem to remember reading that on here

[Kizzy]

i thought trump was the antichrist, i can seem to remember reading that on here

Nope trump is just your common or garden megalomaniac.

[Nicky91]

Nope trump is just your common or garden megalomaniac.

lol, i can imagine having a sort of donald trump garden knome merchandise, i think they would look cute :hehe:

[Crimson Dynamo]

Jesus Christ, this threads gone on a bit :idc:

On the road to Damascus

[Kizzy]

lol, i can imagine having a sort of donald trump garden knome merchandise, i think they would look cute :hehe:

I spent thurs to sat in Whitby and in a gift shop there was a key ring, it was trump but with a hole in the bottom. It had some like brown goo in it and when you squeezed him it looked like he was having a large poo... it was very funny.

[Toy Soldier]

Just to redress a few misconceptions:

'Christianity' was NOT 'invented'. Christianity is a Religion which evolved from followers of the teachings of the historical Jesus.

Religion is NOT the cause of most Wars or bloodshed on this planet - Atheism and Secularity are:

1) Over the past 5,000 years and a total of 1,763 wars fought —only 123 (or about 7%) were religious in nature.

2) When the 66 wars which were waged in the name of Islam are removed, that number is cut down to a little more than 3%.

3) Atheism is responsible for a far greater degree of bloodshed than Christianity and all other religions combined with a body count of more than 100 million in the 20th century alone thanks to atheist regimes like Mao Zedong, Joseph Stalin, Adolph Hitler, Vladimir Lenin, and others.

Sources: ‘The Encyclopedia of War’ by Philip and Axelrod (Three Volumes), ‘Lethal Politics*and*Death by Government’ by R.J. Rummel, and the 2014 report from The Institute for Economics and Peace.The idea that any non-religious war was therefore "caused by" atheism or secularity is completely false logic Kirk. Just because its "not one thing" does not mean it "must be the other thing".

What you're actually pointing out is that there are more non-religious wars than religious wars. But that does not mean those wars were "caused by atheism". They are usually caused by political differences or territorial disputes. "Atheism" doesn't come into it at all.

[Crimson Dynamo]

and it very much was invented when the Romans thought it was a good idea that the rebellious Jews stanned a peaceful gu like baby jesus and not pine after a warrior saviour

so they put the money in and hey presto

[Twosugars]

so now Jesus was a Roman spy and saboteur?
LT, you're on fire today

[GoldHeart]

so now Jesus was a Roman spy and saboteur?
LT, you're on fire today

What has this thread become :facepalm:

[Crimson Dynamo]

so now Jesus was a Roman spy and saboteur?
LT, you're on fire today

No

That the Roman Authorities when they allowed Christianity to be practiced and
churches were quickly built not just in Rome but throughout the empire. Then they made worshiping other gods illegal.

Before the returning Messiahs always were portrayed as war like so the clever Romans did a PR number on the Jesus cult as it was peaceful and no threat to Rome and thuis quelled a rebellion from the jews.

[Toy Soldier]

so now Jesus was a Roman spy and saboteur?
LT, you're on fire today

No... the Romans backed and funded fledgling Christianity 300 years after the death (martyrdom) of Jesus because it was politically beneficial for them to do so, for various reasons. That doesn't mean Jesus was a "plant". Just that they manipulated the situation into something that they thought would be advantageous to their empire. Why else would they fund and promote Christianity?

[Crimson Dynamo]

No... the Romans backed and funded fledgling Christianity 300 years after the death (martyrdom) of Jesus because it was politically beneficial for them to do so, for various reasons. That doesn't mean Jesus was a "plant". Just that they manipulated the situation into something that they thought would be advantageous to their empire. Why else would they fund and promote Christianity?

that is what i am saying I am not saying he was anything to do with them.

unfortunately this credence from authority gave it traction and allowed for doctrine to be established and ultimately the bible to be cobbled together

[Marsh.]

The idea that any non-religious war was therefore "caused by" atheism or secularity is completely false logic Kirk. Just because its "not one thing" does not mean it "must be the other thing".

What you're actually pointing out is that there are more non-religious wars than religious wars. But that does not mean those wars were "caused by atheism". They are usually caused by political differences or territorial disputes. "Atheism" doesn't come into it at all.Tbh if a war is about atheism then that involves religion because that implies the war was started due to atheism and being against religion.

Unless he means a lack of religion and atheism causes disruption in the world. But that's a matter of opinion than fact.

[kirklancaster]

The idea that any non-religious war was therefore "caused by" atheism or secularity is completely false logic Kirk. Just because its "not one thing" does not mean it "must be the other thing".

What you're actually pointing out is that there are more non-religious wars than religious wars. But that does not mean those wars were "caused by atheism". They are usually caused by political differences or territorial disputes. "Atheism" doesn't come into it at all.

I'll settle for your opinion T.S because it is little more than pedantics to me and the point is that by far the hugest percentage of all wars are through non-religious causes.

Though you are arguing against the authors/compilers of the three sourcebooks given and not me. :laugh:

[Crimson Dynamo]

Thing is due to advances in weapons, recent wars will always have far more deaths so you cant start to compare historically

[GoldHeart]

Tbh if a war is about atheism then that involves religion because that implies the war was started due to atheism and being against religion.

Unless he means a lack of religion and atheism causes disruption in the world. But that's a matter of opinion than fact.

I think the point was there's non religious wars therefore "Atheist" wars . But I think some people are misunderstanding.

There's wars without any mention of religion .

[Twosugars]

No

That the Roman Authorities when they allowed Christianity to be practiced and
churches were quickly built not just in Rome but throughout the empire. Then they made worshiping other gods illegal.

Before the returning Messiahs always were portrayed as war like so the clever Romans did a PR number on the Jesus cult as it was peaceful and no threat to Rome and thuis quelled a rebellion from the jews.

No... the Romans backed and funded fledgling Christianity 300 years after the death (martyrdom) of Jesus because it was politically beneficial for them to do so, for various reasons. That doesn't mean Jesus was a "plant". Just that they manipulated the situation into something that they thought would be advantageous to their empire. Why else would they fund and promote Christianity?

Disagree. Have you both conveniently forgotten about bloody persecution of early Christianity? People were risking lives to practice their religion. 300 years is hardly quick for any religion to establish itself. Constantine stopped persecution of all cults, not just Christanity. The fact that he was the first emperor to convert gave Christanity the final impetus in becoming officially accepted.
It's true that adopting one official religion promoted stability in the empire. But Christianity was chosen because it was already relatively widespread and popular, a position it had achieved despite the state not because of it.
wikipedia:
Despite sometimes intense persecutions, the Christian religion continued its spread throughout the Mediterranean Basin.[68]

Various theories attempt to explain how Christianity managed to spread so successfully prior to the Edict of Milan (313). Some Christians saw the success as simply the natural consequence of the truth of the religion and of the direct intervention of God. However, similar explanations are claimed for the spread of, for instance, Islam and Buddhism. In The Rise of Christianity, Rodney Stark argues that Christianity triumphed over paganism chiefly because it improved the lives of its adherents in various ways.[69] Another factor, more recently pointed out, was the way in which Christianity combined its promise of a general resurrection of the dead with the traditional Greek belief that true immortality depended on the survival of the body, with Christianity adding practical explanations of how this was going to actually happen at the end of the world.[70] Mosheim (1693–1755) saw the rapid progression of Christianity as due to two factors: translations of the New Testament and the Apologies composed in defence of Christianity.[71] Edward Gibbon (1737–1794), in his classic The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (1776–1789), discusses the topic in considerable detail in his famous Chapter Fifteen, summarizing the historical causes of the early success of Christianity as follows: "(1) The inflexible, and, if we may use the expression, the intolerant zeal of the Christians, derived, it is true, from the Jewish religion, but purified from the narrow and unsocial spirit which, instead of inviting, had deterred the Gentiles from embracing the law of Moses. (2) The doctrine of a future life, improved by every additional circumstance which could give weight and efficacy to that important truth. (3) The miraculous powers ascribed to the primitive church. (4) The pure and austere morals of the Christians. (5) The union and discipline of the Christian republic, which gradually formed an independent and increasing state in the heart of the Roman empire
[For Edict of Milan read Constantine announcing toleration of Christianity. The Edict of Milan gave Christianity a legal status, but did not make Christianity the official religion of the Roman empire; this took place under Emperor Theodosius I in 380 AD.]

[Crimson Dynamo]

Disagree. Have you both conveniently forgotten about bloody persecution of early Christianity? People were risking lives to practice their religion. 300 years is hardly quick for any religion to establish itself. Constantine stopped persecution of all cults, not just Christanity. The fact that he was the first emperor to convert gave Christanity the final impetus in becoming officially accepted.
It's true that adopting one official religion promoted stability in the empire. But Christianity was chosen because it was already relatively widespread and popular, a position it had achieved despite the state not because of it.
wikipedia:

[For Edict of Milan read Constantine announcing toleration of Christianity. The Edict of Milan gave Christianity a legal status, but did not make Christianity the official religion of the Roman empire; this took place under Emperor Theodosius I in 380 AD.]

So you are agreeing it was given PR to quell rebellion?

Just like it was sprinkled with supernatural things to make it attractive and aspirational

[Twosugars]

The impression I got from yours and TS's posts was that Christianity was cooked-up by the Empire from the start. I disagree.
It was only adopted by the Empire after it had grown organically and became impossible to eradicate.

Anyways, what rebellion? Jewish rebellion? You know very well that from the start majority of Jews never accepted Jesus as messiah, they were happy to be rid of him.

[Crimson Dynamo]

The impression I got from yours and TS's posts was that Christianity was cooked-up by the Empire from the start. I disagree.
It was only adopted by the Empire after it had grown organically and became impossible to eradicate.

Anyways, what rebellion? Jewish rebellion? You know very well that from the start majority of Jews never accepted Jesus as messiah, they were happy to be rid of him.

No

Just that they promoted it as it was advantageous to them

the jews hankered after a warrior messiah who would return and kill the romans so they wanted to promote Jesus (a jew) as he posed no threat

older jews would probably have had none of it but younger ones may have

[kirklancaster]

Disagree. Have you both conveniently forgotten about bloody persecution of early Christianity? People were risking lives to practice their religion. 300 years is hardly quick for any religion to establish itself. Constantine stopped persecution of all cults, not just Christanity. The fact that he was the first emperor to convert gave Christanity the final impetus in becoming officially accepted.
It's true that adopting one official religion promoted stability in the empire. But Christianity was chosen because it was already relatively widespread and popular, a position it had achieved despite the state not because of it.
wikipedia:

[For Edict of Milan read Constantine announcing toleration of Christianity. The Edict of Milan gave Christianity a legal status, but did not make Christianity the official religion of the Roman empire; this took place under Emperor Theodosius I in 380 AD.]

Correct, Twosugars.

As for the emboldened text - I stated the same in a post on another thread and the response was that I was wrong. Thanks for the substantiation.

[Twosugars]

No

Just that they promoted it as it was advantageous to them

the jews hankered after a warrior messiah who would return and kill the romans so they wanted to promote Jesus (a jew) as he posed no threat

older jews would probably have had none of it but younger ones may have

I'd have to read up on details of the political situation around the time Christianity became official religion (end of 4th century). But I'd still disagree. The main reason it was adopted was that it was inevitable (its existing spread and influence). Other things like political advantages I'd see as additional bonuses. Judea was always a rowdy province, but I doubt the Empire would have made such a radical step for the sake of one province (relatively small and poor in resources). It would have been outweighed by disadvantages of converting vast sways of pagan provinces in the West and elsewhere.

[Twosugars]

Correct, Twosugars.

As for the emboldened text - I stated the same in a post on another thread and the response was that I was wrong. Thanks for the substantiation.

I'm sorry I didn't notice. The cheek of some people, huh. But then we've always known Trumpet is cheeky :hee:
btw, was it Trumpet? lol

[Crimson Dynamo]

I'd have to read up on details of the political situation around the time Christianity became official religion (end of 4th century). But I'd still disagree. The main reason it was adopted was that it was inevitable (its existing spread and influence). Other things like political advantages I'd see as additional bonuses. Judea was always a rowdy province, but I doubt the Empire would have made such a radical step for the sake of one province (relatively small and poor in resources). It would have been outweighed by disadvantages of converting vast sways of pagan provinces in the West and elsewhere.

this is a decent summary why it was popularised

https://www.quora.com/Why-did-the-pagan-Romans-convert-to-the-Jesus-sect

[Twosugars]

this is a decent summary why it was popularised

https://www.quora.com/Why-did-the-pagan-Romans-convert-to-the-Jesus-sect

As others here have noted, Christianity had a number of advantages over its rivals. Firstly, it was open to anyone. Slaves, freedmen, barbarians and even women were welcome, regardless of their rank or position. In a society where hierarchy was supremely dominant, a religion where everyone was equal (at least when gathered in worship anyway) was actually very appealing. This inclusiveness also meant Christianity had some strength in numbers. One of the reasons we know so little about cults like that of Mithras and Cybele is that they were not just secretive mystery sects, but they were also very small. They were highly exclusive clubs, open only to selected, respectable and usually higher ranking people and by invitation only. This made them hard to compete with a sect that literally let anyone at all join.

Secondly, Christianity's message was simple and very attractive to many people as well as openly shared and proclaimed. No secret rituals in dark temples or underground grottos were required and the teaching weren't closely guarded layers of esoteric ideas. And the key message was about fellowship and forgiveness in this life and salvation and paradise in the next - things anyone could understand and appreciate.

Thirdly, the Christian emphasis on charity, fellowship and unselfishness was also very appealing. Christians were not only renowned for their care for one another but they also took seriously the idea of looking after others, especially the poor, the widowed and the orphaned. This idea of selfless giving and charity for its own sake was foreign to Greco-Roman culture, but appealing to many nonetheless. When Julian tried to revive state paganism he recognised that it was this unselfish charity that gave Christianity an edge and he tried to incorporate it in his new form of pagan faith, though without much success.

So when we put these social and theological advantages together with Constantine's adoption of his mother's faith after seeing a vision that he attributed to the Christian god, it makes sense that Christianity won out in the end.


Thanks for confirming what my quote said. In short, Christianity was attractive and therefore became popular. Despite the state persecution for three centuries it slowly spread and became fait accompli for the state

[Livia]

Jesus Christ was a Jew and it is stated quite clearly in the New Testament that he "upholds the laws of Moses". So even though he preached love and forgiveness, he still observed the old laws including those from Leviticus. It makes me smile when Christians preach about peace and love and acceptance... it always makes me think they've not read the Torah.

[Twosugars]

You're right, Livia, and so were his followers. But I also seem to remember he said that his new teachings trump the Old Testament wherever both clashed so something to that effect. I'd have to have it confirmed tho as don't remember the circumstances when he said it...

[Livia]

You're right, Livia, and so were his followers. But I also seem to remember he said that his new teachings trump the Old Testament wherever both clashed so something to that effect. I'd have to have it confirmed tho as don't remember the circumstances when he said it...

Jesus trying to trump Moses? The cheek of the man...

[Crimson Dynamo]

Jesus Christ was a Jew and it is stated quite clearly in the New Testament that he "upholds the laws of Moses". So even though he preached love and forgiveness, he still observed the old laws including those from Leviticus. It makes me smile when Christians preach about peace and love and acceptance... it always makes me think they've not read the Torah.

lol, most have not even read the NT

[Livia]

lol, most have not even read the NT

It's a bit dry, to be honest. Not much of a plot... but a spectacular ending.

[Toy Soldier]

lol, most have not even read the NTThe WHOLE of the NT? Most of them have barely glanced at a bible first hand!

[Crimson Dynamo]

The WHOLE of the NT? Most of them have barely glanced at a bible first hand!

That is my experience, I have actually read the NT and good sections of that dirge the OT (well some chapters are quite good)

There are also quite a few who dont even know that it is a translation

[Toy Soldier]

That is my experience, I have actually read the NT and good sections of that dirge the OT (well some chapters are quite good)

There are also quite a few who dont even know that it is a translationI reckon we should translate it again for a new generation actually.

"Then God had a look at what he'd done, and he saw that it wasn't that bad tbh"

I read most of the NT as a teenager because I was a pretentious little c. Was.

...

Some of it is actually a decent high fantasy story but it could definitely do with the prose being updated, it doesn't flow very well, even the more recent translations. Needs to be a bit snappier for the Netflix generation.

[Toy Soldier]

For now I recommend the CW's "Supernatural" as its pretty much on the money.

[Twosugars]

I reckon we should translate it again for a new generation actually.

"Then God had a look at what he'd done, and he saw that it wasn't that bad tbh"

I read most of the NT as a teenager because I was a pretentious little c. Was.

...

Some of it is actually a decent high fantasy story but it could definitely do with the prose being updated, it doesn't flow very well, even the more recent translations. Needs to be a bit snappier for the Netflix generation.

:joker: sweet
relatable tho