it's a pretty mediocre religion. buddhism & co are much better (relatively speaking of course, buddhism has problems of its own)
give me one good moral ideal we wouldn't have if christianity hadn't come about
it's a pretty mediocre religion. buddhism & co are much better (relatively speaking of course, buddhism has problems of its own)
give me one good moral ideal we wouldn't have if christianity hadn't come about
I was just coming up with my own idea why christianity and islam were created.
Because in both the quran and the bible it tells us to Kill the Gays and before christ (BC) I know alexander the Great had conquered most of the middle east or the persian empire (such as israel which contained jerusalem) during 300ish BC (I dont know the exact date). And I hear that the Greeks accepted Homosexuality strongly in their ancient civilisation so I thought that the people who made the bible or the quran felt that the greeks were enemys and everything they did or were was an enemy so homosexuality was linked with being bad. Although it may have not been greeks and just the local pagans in the area as some people say that Gay sex was practiced as a pagan ritual in some cases, I did read up on the celts and even they had homosexual sex as part of some ritual.
But I base that on nothing and im just really guessing. I know the bible and quran couldnt possible have been written by the same person as it is argued that both of them are just a collection of more common well told stories at the time which came from many people, hence why theres so many contradictions in them which tell you not to kill people but then in another section it tells you killing is right in some cases.
But why religion in general was created? To gain Enlightenment, To unite people under one cause, To guide them in their lifes.
the bible rarely mentions homosexuality and I believe the same is true of the quran
your entire history is just wrong, i'm sorry
Depends on what you take 'most Chistians' and 'after Christianity got started' for. I would say that Christianity did last some time as a pro-equality religion while it was absorbed (and corrupted by) the Roman empire.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying some forms of Christianity shouldn't be totally abolished. In fact, I would eradicate all forms of hierarchic religion, what I wanted to express is that Christianity itself (the religion that most of you seem to dislike) didn't have the form of a hierarchic authoritarian system when it started.
nor did they for several hundred years afterwards
lol christianity was a populist cult movement against roman imperialism and was nothing new at the time. the romans didn't give a shit initially because they had seen the archetype a thousand times before, and mostly they fizzled out. christianity happened to be the one that stuck and you have just never heard of the ones that didn't, history being written by the victors and all. have you ever heard of zoroastrianism or arianism? the story of a messiah coming to free oppressed people against aggression from above and deliver them to a promised land is an enduring template that is in countless cultures and existed in one form or another throughout history, from jesus (assuming he existed at all, which is dubious) through to the prophet muhamed spreading islam by the sword, all the way to marxism and the workers revolt leading to a socialist paradise, national socialism and the holy cause of obtaining lebensraum after killing the filthy people already there, and of course zionism which kinda brings it full circle.Matthew 10:34 posted:
any pretense at caring for the poor was a bit of cynical realpolitik
where did we have our moral values before organized religions? did you know that hunter gather tribes, despite their tremendous brutality, were among the most egalitarian societies in human history, and the surviving few still are.
anatomically modern humans have been around for a lot longer than organized religions, and we self-evidently did not wipe each other out. we clearly had morals, and they were not from religion, they were from a complex interplay of evolutionary psychology and the cultures specific to the environments in which this or that tribe lived.
Galatians 3:28 posted:Yeah, right.Romans 2:11-16 posted:
I posted:Okay, are you fucking serious? I really hope you're not, because if you are actually serious, you don't know how wrong you are. How on earth can ancient Christianity be considered a 'cult' movement if it had the least amount of rituals possible? The whole reason I (and others) consider the New Testament as being 'special' among other religious books is the lack of rituals, those rituals who would be indicative of a 'cult', or some other form of mystic religiosity.you posted:
I know that there were many movements in the same time and that most of them just ended shortly after they started. If any of those religious movements would've stuck, we would know of completely different values than we do. What does that has to do with anything I said? And, of course most movements promise some kind of 'paradise', but that also has nothing to do with their values and what I said about releasing from oppression in the specific context.
Technically speaking, the societies and the very concept of 'society' didn't emerge until XVI century. And I know those tribes were organized in the very egalitarian manner, but it was because of the limited roles there were in the tribes themselves. Egalitarianism didn't work and wasn't an ideal anymore when those tribes began growing into civilizations.
I'm not saying we didn't have morals. Are you even reading what I wrote? Of course we would have morals without the influence of Christianity, only they would have been completely different without that phenomenon that ultimately set the foundation for modern European moral conception.
before the renaissance, humans considered themselves servants of god and believed everything they did was to please divine entities. it wasn't until the renaissance when humanism (the belief that our own feelings matter, and the emphasis on doing things because they make US happy, not god) became prevalent.
And no, I'm not confusing the end of the middle ages with the begging of civilization. Never said that. I'm relating the 'end of the middle ages' (the Renaissance) with the origin of the concept of society.
then your concept of "society" is just as inaccurate as your concept of what the word "cult" defines. i'm genuinely curious - how do you define society if ancient egyptian and mesopotamian civilizations - and possibly ancient greece and rome, depending on whether you were referring to bc or ad - are excluded from your definition?
the italicized part of my post was in relation to christianity. bringing up greek philosophers isn't applicable to humanism because paganism functions completely differently from christianity. pagan religions revolve around performing ritual acts to appease the gods. the individual feelings of the worshippers are completely irrelevant. however, christianity is based on an individual's beliefs and how they truly feel about their god rather than how they choose to worship him. christianity also emphasizes the concept of sinning and repenting for one's sins, whereas pagan religions don't have any such concept.
see also: http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Death...Cult_Attractor
besides christianity had plenty of rituals, what the hell do you think the last supper was? look at Mass, look at the Eucharist, look at the Sabbath, look at confession (making people confess things they're ashamed of is a textbook cult technique too), look at easter, not to mention all the pagan shit they added like christmas
I think people are just desperate for an answer to the question "Why are we here?". Religion pretty much gives you an answer to that question, at least, most religions do.
Way back in those ancient old times, the world was still very underdeveloped and we didn't have any real proper systems of laws. People were killing each other left and right, people got raped a whole bunch, and there was nothing around to stop them. So then some guys were like "Hey, how do we fix this shit?" and some other guys were like "Let's tell them that there's a man in the sky who'll take you to this excellent sky place is you don't kill your friends." Of course, there was a lot of groups who decided that at roughly the same time, just with different forms of the man in the sky. Since most people were a lot less caught up in the "don't kill people" part and were a lot more into the "This one specific sky-man built the everything" part, they started going to all kinds of war. Then people with different moral values wound up gaining a lot of influence and caused the religions to change their beliefs, and it eventually changed it to what it is today, which is essentially the same religion but really mixed up in the syntax.
^That's the most general I can make it for you guys.
Then there's Buddhism, which I think everyone can agree has always just been pretty chill. I've never met anyone who doesn't agree with the values of Buddhism, because it's just so damn chill. Generally speaking.
This post isn't just in response to you, just thought I should share with the entire thread.
Way back in those old ancient times, things weren't actually as bad as you were making it out to be. Things were balanced. The (various tribes of) Native Americans, Incas, Celtics, and many others were actually very happy with the way they were living. They lived wholly and balanced their lives in the spiritual and physical word. Religiously, believe it or not they all believed the same exact thing. They just had different stories and interpretations of how the same exact thing reacted with the physical world.
They all believed this: The universe was once nothing but a void of energy, that energy was concentrated and single. When the universe began, the energy spread out and created a physical universe. The "spiritual universe" was also created (possibly in another dimension?), which also includes our collective consciousness. The universe then began developing. The stars and planets were created, etc. They believed that the energy from creation also existed in all of us ("The Kingdom of God is within ourselves"). So did the spiritual energy. Now, take a look at this real quick. Doesn't this sound similar to a lot of science's explanations for the beginning of the universe with the exception of the spiritual shit? Sure it does. Also read up on what some philosophers have to say. But this is where it begins to differ. The ancient people used meditation, ceremonies, prayer, even tobacco, and other things they used to channel their collective consciousness, which in they were able to learn more about the "spiritual world." They were able to connect with nature, with themselves (and each other), and find their relationship within the physical world. By doing this and becoming balanced, they also connected with the spiritual world. They believed that if you could live your life balanced and wholly, when you die, your energy will recollect with the stars. At the end of the universe, all of the energy will be recollected and back into a singularity. If you could not live in balance, when you died your energy will be recycled and given to a new life - reincarnation. Even if you believe in all of this, a God doesn't have to exist.
I'm not saying you should believe this or that I'm right. I'm actually a very considering person and I'm open to what anyone has to say. Every ancient tribe and civilization wondered where we came from, and they looked to the stars. They knew we were connected. Every ancient tribe and civilization also shared beliefs that were very similar, even when they were on the other side of the globe. Celtics, American Indians, Buddhism, and even some things in Islam and Christianity. So what I'm saying is that religion and spirituality was not a bad thing. But you're right, it did become a bad thing when people began to use religion to their own benefit. Even if you think, "Bullshit there's still no reason to believe you're connected to the universe, maybe all of this just happened and that's how it is," remember - we are in fact connected to the universe. The atoms that created the stars are in us. The ancient people had a knowledge and understanding of the universe that we, humanity, has lost.
Lol personally sometimes I think it'd be best if the whole world became lesser developed Native Americans or something. Don't get me wrong though, I'm not a weird hippy or anything. I have my computer, job, smartphone, etc...
Edit: If for any reason you guys are more interested, read up on Carl Jung and maybe even consider the book Mitakuye Oyasin by Dr. A.C. Ross.
carl jung is intellectually worthless and i'd advise you to actually research what life in ancient tribes was like because it's nothing like the romantic-nostalgic view you seem to have. hobbes was right when he said the life of humans without civilization is "nasty, brutish, and short"
Remember that we're talking about early Christianity. All those rituals were added later. If you read the actual scriptures you won't find explicit indications of what rituals had to be made of it they had to be made at all.
what about baptism
I believe that there is a God, but not the kind of God that most mainstream religions talk about. I don't think of God as a big dude up in the sky judging everyone simultaneously, in fact, I think that it couldn't care less about what we do. I think that this "God" is more or less a metaphysical consciousness that exists everywhere. In my head I imagine it physically to be a ball of plasma or fire, but really I don't believe it to have any physical presence at all. The easiest thing to compare it to is a force. God is a force that exists in no actual form, but still has its influence on everything there is.
Sorry if this doesn't make sense, it's hard for me to put this belief into words.
So is life today. It's not that much different. I mean sure there was war, disease, and "nastiness." But there were happy civilizations and there were not-so-happy civilizations. Of course if you were in Egypt and on the lesser scale of the social class, you're pretty much shit out of luck. But the Native Americans were content with the way they lived. The Celts were also a very proud and content people, as well. It just depends. You must have taken what I said too close to your heart or something, I wasn't saying life was perfect. But saying, "People were killing each other left and right, people got raped a whole bunch, and there was nothing around to stop them," is not accurate of every single tribe or civilization. There was such thing as calm organization back then, ya know. I wasn't talking necessarily just about tribes, but early civilization as well. Also, did you even notice that only three sentence in my entire post was directed towards what BigJoey said?
Explain to me why Carl Jung is intellectually worthless. That's a dumb thing to say. He was an amazing philosopher and a master of psychology. He can teach us a lot about human behavior, our thoughts, our motivations, hidden aspects of our own personality, and a bunch of other things. There's a lot to learn from him, and for some people this can actually help them.
The Aztecs slaughtered people on an industrial scale to appease their gods.
No, his ideas are complete trash and he has been effectively disowned by modern psychology. His "theories" were unfalsifiable pseudoscience.
If you're talking about the brain biologically, you cannot bring consciousness into the argument because the fields are entirely seperate. Consciousness will never be explained scientifically.
It doesn't matter if I wear a labcoat or a clown suit, I will still be a scientist as long as I use the scientific method.
nonsense on stilts.
Happiness/sadness for instance, you can talk about it's biological function but that completely skips the part where humans created both concepts.
We created the idea of 'happiness' and by merely creating it, we created the opposite. Basically, any time anything was given a word or label by humans, the mere lack of that alone was always there to act as the opposite duality to it's existence.
This is why animals don't care if they're depressed nor commit suicide, because neither the concept of happiness being a desirable state, nor the idea of depression as an opposite ever occur to them. They just ride the wave of existing and don't waste a single second caught in delusion. Yet because they don't have our 'great knowledge' nor suffer from all the problems that humans do, we label them as inferior.
This applies to pretty much anything, and that is all there is to really know about consciousness. We perceive things and think about them in terms of words and labels, which are all false because we created them.
It doesn't mean you have to become a drooling potato sitting in a cave thinking about nothing all the time, it just means you should really chill out with all the serious scientific/psychological theoretical hooah because we created it all.
Now you're just struggling to find any rituals done there. Baptism might have been a ritual of initiation, that's right, but not even baptism was explicitly indicated as a ritual to be made for the future generations of Christians. I was only indicated back then, as something to be done there, in the context.
You must accept that in the New Testament they do not give that much importance to rituals and don't take them to be as fundamental as other religions do. I wouldn't consider ancient Christianity a 'cult' because it lacked that mysticism that characterized most of the religions I would call 'cults' at their time.
zacht_180 posted:You can't accuse Jung of making 'pseudoscience'. Remember that psychology was kinda merger with philosophy back then. Psychological inquiry was closer to philosophical knowledge than to scientific knowledge. And, of course, if it is like that, your labeling of Jung's work as 'unfalsifiable' is meaningless and na´ve.DainBramageStudios posted:
Why are we in a dark space, residing on a chunk of mass, that is older than you could imagine, where people do weird shit every minute of the day, driving cars, writing media and seeking for entertainment? Why?
I wasn't struggling to find a ritual, it was one that slipped my mind from the first post. The absence or presence of rituals doesn't determine whether or not something is a cult, I said that before. UFO cults don't have rituals. It's the fanatical devotion to an idea or person that matters, along with vilification of outsiders.
christianity lacking mysticism lmao
it simply doesn't matter what category his ideas are gerrymandered into. what matters is the content, and the content was garbage. if it's science then it's bad science, if it's philosophy then it's bad philosophy.
It's for people who are afraid of dealing with the fact that there is nothing after death, that's why they invent God and believe in an afterlife
I posted:Do you compulsively answer to anyone without further reading of their posts? Next time I expect that you organize one, and only ONE answer.
Anyway, you have to read my entire post, not rip it into pieces, genius. I said that IF IT IS LIKE THAT (if Jung's psychology was closer to philosophy than to science) your criticism is meaningless in the sense that you can't criticize him for that. It's like saying a song is bad because "it has no graphics". Philosophy doesn't have to be 'falsifiable' because it precisely works beyond what can be considered as a 'fact'.
Anyway, I feel this is getting offtopic. We can discuss about Jung in another thread, I guess. Now, about Christianity...
[...]before your post, I posted:
Plus, if only that suffices to call something a cult, I'd say "New Atheism" is also a cult because of the fanatical devotion of some of its members to science, extending its role beyond that of ontical inquiry and also because of their hatred towards any kind of religious or even transcendent thinking.I posted:
PD: If you're actually going to disagree with anything I said, then disagree with it, don't just post 'lmao', because that proves nothing.
I don't even know what there is to disagree with.
God is made up by humans so it doesn't exist in any real, tangible sense, much like Bigfoot/Loch Ness, Spider-man, etc.
As for why religiousness exists, it exists for many reasons, and that doesn't even interest you people. "Hmm, I wonder what kinda people go to churches in like Africa, and why?"
well yeah, i would say that some of the excesses of new atheism (r/atheism, etc) are pretty cultish. at least we agree on that. other cults include most political parties (both mainstream and fringe), most ideologies, identity politics