Its amazing people think they know about god

Originally posted by sonhouse
So the preacher up on the pulpit spouting dogma or the imam (sp?) giving religious prognotsications is not an intermediary, someone who needs to be there to administer to the sheep who can't decide what to do? Sounds like an intermediary to me. When I say that I am referring to what was around before organized religion, you found your personal totem, like ...[text shortened]... Did you ever stop to really think about what is going on there? Wake up and smell the coffee.

So the preacher up on the pulpit spouting dogma or the imam (sp?) giving religious prognotsications is not an intermediary, someone who needs to be there to administer to the sheep who can't decide what to do?

Mainstream Islam does not recognise the Imam as an intermediary. Generally, preachers have some scholastic credentials to interpret the scriptures, and are appointed by the national Islamic council. Their words are not dogmatic, nor are listeners bound to agree. In fact, the same applies roughly to Christian ministers.

not like now, where you do good works because you are promised a seat in some heaven or other.

Most Christians on this site believe that good works is not a way into heaven, rather it is faith and grace. If you had actually read the tenets of Lutheranism, you should have realised this as one of the distinctive features of Protestantism.

You will lose your soul and live in constant agony of fire FOREVER if you don't get baptized and believe.

You are contradicting yourself.

Originally posted by Conrau K
[b]So the preacher up on the pulpit spouting dogma or the imam (sp?) giving religious prognotsications is not an intermediary, someone who needs to be there to administer to the sheep who can't decide what to do?

Mainstream Islam does not recognise the Imam as an intermediary. Generally, preachers have some scholastic credentials to interpret the sc ...[text shortened]... of fire FOREVER if you don't get baptized and believe.[/b]

You are contradicting yourself.[/b]

You talk about the tenents of lutheranism, the problem is each so-called religion has its own set of dogma, something I have always said proves there is no single omnipotent god, for it makes such a god by any definition of the word, insane. Ok, I am god, I decree, you people on the north side of this river to be christians, on the south side, to be muslims, and I want you to fight to the finish. It makes perfect sense no religion comes from any godly inspiration but simply from men who, charasmatic as they may seem, are out to create a power base, even if you don't want to put it in those terms. You are lutheran?
Tell me, why do lutherans look down on pentacostals, or other 'holy rollers'? You figure they are not the 'REAL' faith? So what is the 'Real' faith? Faith that it's ok to kill muslims? Faith that its ok for muslims to kill jews? faith that muslims beat women whose hair shows? Kill women as an adultress but put a slap on the wrist of the male lover?
Convincing women in the so-called morman faith its ok for a man to have 4 wives but don't EVEN ask to have 4 husbands?
In 2.000 years, how many popes have been women? So god thinks anyone with a vagina cannot be a bishop, cardinal, immam, or even a canter? Why hasn't god stepped in and just made a decree by some intermediary prophet, this is wrong, come to MY true faith, women will be equal to men. Why hasn't that happened?

Originally posted by sonhouse
You talk about the tenents of lutheranism, the problem is each so-called religion has its own set of dogma, something I have always said proves there is no single omnipotent god, for it makes such a god by any definition of the word, insane. Ok, I am god, I decree, you people on the north side of this river to be christians, on the south side, to be muslims ...[text shortened]... s wrong, come to MY true faith, women will be equal to men. Why hasn't that happened?

You talk about the tenents of lutheranism, the problem is each so-called religion has its own set of dogma, something I have always said proves there is no single omnipotent god, for it makes such a god by any definition of the word, insane.

Yes; people disagree. They even disagree about religion. How does that invalidate the idea of God?

It makes perfect sense no religion comes from any godly inspiration but simply from men who, charasmatic as they may seem, are out to create a power base, even if you don't want to put it in those terms.

People can be violent and brutal, religion aside. Sometimes people manipulate religion to enact their own agenda. So what?

You are lutheran?

No. But you claim to have attended a Lutheran school. I must wonder, then, why you fail to recognise the nuances between different Christian denominations.

Faith that it's ok to kill muslims? Faith that its ok for muslims to kill jews? faith that muslims beat women whose hair shows? Kill women as an adultress but put a slap on the wrist of the male lover?

These are some manifestations of perverse faith. Most theists do not identify with them. Grow up.

So god thinks anyone with a vagina cannot be a bishop, cardinal, immam, or even a canter?

A woman can be a cardinal. There is just no precedent.

Originally posted by sonhouse
It makes perfect sense no religion comes from any godly inspiration but simply from men who, charasmatic as they may seem, are out to create a power base, even if you don't want to put it in those terms.

It may make sense to you but it simply doesn't fit the facts. I fully agree that some religions started that way and that many religions owe a lot of their success to mans use of them for controlling purposes, but as I have repeatedly pointed out to you - yet you blindly ignore my statements just like a fundamentalist Christian would - the whole story is far more complex than that, and people perpetuate and spread religion for a whole variety of reasons, the desire for power being only one of them. In fact your claim that controlling women is a primary aspect is easily refuted by pointing out that religion is often spread by women - in fact I think that since religion is most commonly spread from parent to child, women have a very significant role.

Originally posted by twhitehead
It may make sense to you but it simply doesn't fit the facts. I fully agree that some religions started that way and that many religions owe a lot of their success to mans use of them for controlling purposes, but as I have repeatedly pointed out to you - yet you blindly ignore my statements just like a fundamentalist Christian would - the whole story is ...[text shortened]... ince religion is most commonly spread from parent to child, women have a very significant role.

Sure women spread religion, but they are not in the top eschelon of any organized religion. The only argument that holds water about religion is those societies have more longevity, just having a common set of beliefs handed down from generation to generation but you ignore the fact that women are downtrodden in many religions right now and almost ALL religions 1000 years ago. I still say, regardless of how complex the issue it, religion does not come from a god, it's totally made up by men who want a power base. Sure later, the followers set up camp elsewhere but they are already part of the originators power base. Why can't you admit a god would never make religions that are diametrically opposed to one another. So one group says, a REAL god is ultimately responsible for OUR religion, it says so right in this book, therfore your religion is from a false god and we can therefore kill you. Tell me I'm wrong about that.

Originally posted by sonhouse
The only argument that holds water about religion is those societies have more longevity,

Sorry but that argument does not hold water.

... but you ignore the fact that women are downtrodden in many religions right now and almost ALL religions 1000 years ago.
When did I ignore that fact? Almost all societies throughout history have downtrodden women. It is a typical feature of society whether the people are religious or not. What I am objecting to is your conclusion that religions must have been started to subdue women. You might as well argue that societies were started to subdue women, or politics or science or any one of countless organizations in which women do not have an upper hand.

I still say, regardless of how complex the issue it, religion does not come from a god, it's totally made up by men who want a power base.
I don't think religion comes from God either, but I your conclusion is not a direct logical result.

Why can't you admit a god would never make religions that are diametrically opposed to one another.
I don't believe in God, so I honestly don't know what he would or wouldn't do. I do agree however that it would make no sense for a God that fits any of the countless definitions I have heard to do what you say. So yes, I fully admit it and have not objected to that part of your argument.

So one group says, a REAL god is ultimately responsible for OUR religion, it says so right in this book, therfore your religion is from a false god and we can therefore kill you. Tell me I'm wrong about that.
No you are not wrong. Though not all religious people take it to the extreme of thinking they can kill non-believers. It must be noted too that people often kill other people from other societies whether or not religion is involved.

But you are confusing two separate arguments. You are claiming:
1. God didn't start religions.
2. Religions were started by man for the purpose of creating a power base, conning everyone, and subjugating women.
I do not dispute 1. even though you keep acting like I do.
I do dispute 2. and you are yet to provide any reasoning or argument to back it up. You seem to think that 1 implies 2. It does not.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Sorry but that argument does not hold water.

[b]... but you ignore the fact that women are downtrodden in many religions right now and almost ALL religions 1000 years ago.
When did I ignore that fact? Almost all societies throughout history have downtrodden women. It is a typical feature of society whether the people are religious or not. What I a ny reasoning or argument to back it up. You seem to think that 1 implies 2. It does not.[/b]

If you go back before civilizations like Egypt, there were many female led religions, men would sometimes cut their balls or some such to mimic menistration, doesn't look spelled right, anyway there were religions like that and hordes of barbarians came and killed of those civilizations and literally subjugated women. So it became a fact of life, where women no longer had the power they did thousands of years ago, tens of thousands of years ago I think. Since then, whenever men can subjugate women they do, sometimes using religion as an exuse, sometimes not.

There actually was a recent study about religious vs secular societies and it seems the religious ones survive something like 5 times longer than secular based ones. I will have to google for the link, I heard it discussed on NPR a few weks ago. Think about it, look at the Jewish civilization. How many secular societies have come even one tenth as close to the length of time they have been around? They are still surviving as Jews today much because of Judaism. I'm not saying I like it but that seems to be the *shudder* fact.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Do you go to church? If so, why do you have to commune with 'god' there and not while changing the babies diapers or mowing the lawn?
Are you a member of a congregation? If so, why do feel the need to do that? Comraderie with like minds? 'God' does not enter into it?

That's my point--i DO commune with God while changing the baby, driving to the gas station, watching "My Name is Earl", etc. i don't HAVE an intermediary. And why would you automatically think I (or anyone) goes to a church for some kind of intermediary seance? I happen to like the people there and go to catch up on the weekly happenings in their lives. I play on the softball team. I take a class in ancient Greek there on Mondays.
You sir, have made an ill-conceived judgement of me--i do NOT have nor need an intermediary to speak with God; I do it all by myself, wherever and WHENever I choose!
So BACK off.

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
That's my point--i DO commune with God while changing the baby, driving to the gas station, watching "My Name is Earl", etc. i don't HAVE an intermediary. And why would you automatically think I (or anyone) goes to a church for some kind of intermediary seance? I happen to like the people there and go to catch up on the weekly happenings in their lives. ...[text shortened]... ry to speak with God; I do it all by myself, wherever and WHENever I choose!
So BACK off.

I wish you well. It's just too bad you are having a one sided communion.

Originally posted by sonhouse
I wish you well. It's just too bad you are having a one sided communion.

Likewise, tho you still didn't answer the question as to what on earth would have made you ASSume that I, as a Christian, needed an intermediary to speak with the Almighty?

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
Likewise, tho you still didn't answer the question as to what on earth would have made you ASSume that I, as a Christian, needed an intermediary to speak with the Almighty?

The thing is you only THINK you are speaking to 'the almighty'.
The sum total of the results of religion is 1) longevity,
and 2) the effect on the societies of the earth as a whole is constant war using religion as an excuse. If there was a real 'almighty' it seems to me it would put a stop to that hypocracy. Religion, stripping away all the clap trap, boils down to emotions and not much else. I rail against the hypocricy in those who run on a god platform and gather people, we take your Visa, we take your Mastercard, keep those donations going so you can bask in the grace of the Lord. Amen. Later: Judy, have we got enough donations to buy that beachfront house I have been lusting over? Personally, I think we live in a totally uncaring universe, look what happened to the dinosaures, a vagrant asteroid randomly coming in destroyed them. The same thing can happen to us at any time and your 'almighty one' could care less because there is no 'almighty one' we talk to on the big internet in the sky. A real 'almighty one' could easily talk back to every person on earth simultaneously as easily as we scratch our ear but the worlds' religions make it seem as if you have to be in the one true church so each person can feel the grace of god when in fact what they are feeling is an internal emotion built in to the human race with no conection to anything other than its own internal life. Granted, it makes people feel like they can function better knowing they have this connection so to an individual person, the buggie men can be kept away. Unfortunately, that doesn't keep away the REAL buggie men, absolute religious enemies.

Originally posted by sonhouse
For instance, in the bible it says 'god made man in his own image'. Well isn't that cute. I rather think it the other way round. Men invented gods to control people and build a power base and to be able to subjugate women and thats about it. Considering all the diabolically opposed religions on earth that sanction killing, do you seriously think that kind o ...[text shortened]... w THATS a godly thing to do, eh. What exactly is it about your god that makes it so insane?

I'm amazed at your knowledge of God.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
I'm amazed at your knowledge of God.
Kelly

So you think its ok if some tin god sets things up so there are opposing tribes killing one another all in the name of THEIR true god. Of course, you are blinded by the dogma of the last 2000 years, you bought it hook line and sinker. I feel sorry for your mind. That is the terrible waste here.

Originally posted by sonhouse
The thing is you only THINK you are speaking to 'the almighty'.
The sum total of the results of religion is 1) longevity,
and 2) the effect on the societies of the earth as a whole is constant war using religion as an excuse. If there was a real 'almighty' it seems to me it would put a stop to that hypocracy. Religion, stripping away all the clap trap, b ...[text shortened]... fortunately, that doesn't keep away the REAL buggie men, absolute religious enemies.

I think something happened to you in life to turn you against religion. I don't know what it was, but it has caused you to make assumptions about Christians that simply aren't true. I've belonged to 3 churches in my life and NEVER have I had an intermediary to God. I get it: you think speaking to God is a one-way conversation. What I don't get is the intermediary thing. Did you belong to a church where you couldn't talk directly to Christ? Or God? Or whatever entity you worshipped?

Originally posted by sonhouse
For instance, in the bible it says 'god made man in his own image'. Well isn't that cute. I rather think it the other way round. Men invented gods to control people and build a power base and to be able to subjugate women and thats about it. Considering all the diabolically opposed religions on earth that sanction killing, do you seriously think that kind o ...[text shortened]... w THATS a godly thing to do, eh. What exactly is it about your god that makes it so insane?

Here is a thing about the women part:
Libby Manhater: “Christianity oppresses women by making them submit to their husbands!”

Christian: “The Bible does say, ‘Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands, as to the Lord. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the Church, and gave himself for it.’”

Libby Manhater: “See, I am right, you chauvinistic, Bible-thumping, nar-row-minded fundamentalist! People like you should be locked up.”

Christian: “You missed what I was saying.”

Libby Manhater: “What are you saying?”

Christian: “A man who understands that Jesus gave His life for the Church will likewise love his wife sacrificially and passionately. He will honor, respect, protect, love, and cherish her as much as he does his own body. He will never say or do anything to harm or demean her. It is in this atmosphere of love and security that a godly wife willingly submits to the protective arms of her husband. She does this not because he is better than she is, but simply because this is God’s order for His creation.

“A lion rests while his mate prepares his food. He lies in the shade and now and then roars to let everyone know he is king of the jungle. The world stands in awe at this order in nature, but refuses to acknowledge that the same One who ordered nature orders mankind. A godless world rejects the God-given formula to make marriage work. It thinks it knows best, and suffers the heartbreaking consequences of destroyed marriages and ruined lives. The Christian ideal of marriage is not one of an authoritarian and chauvinist male holding his cringing wife in submission like an obedient dog. It’s the very opposite. While most of the great religions treat women as inferior to men, the Bible gives them a place of dignity, honor, and unspeakable worth. Do you believe in women’s liberation?”

Libby Manhater: “Absolutely.”

Christian: “Have you found liberation from death?”

Libby Manhater: “Are you serious?”

Christian: “I am deadly serious. If you will repent and trust Jesus Christ, God will free you from your greatest oppressor. Do you ever think about death?”

Libby Manhater: “Yes.”
Christian: “Are you afraid of dying?”
Libby Manhater: “No.”

Christian: “Are you telling me that you have no will to live?”
Libby Manhater: “Yes. I love life.”
Christian: “So you don’t want to die.”
Libby Manhater: “No, I don’t.”
Christian: “Well, why don’t you set aside your grievances against men, and
listen for a few minutes to the claims of the Bible. Would you do that?”
Libby Manhater: “Sure.”
Christian: “Do you consider yourself to be a good person?” Etc.