tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2940570413170689012.post3925672782910605526..comments2024-03-04T10:43:03.201+00:00Comments on The Reason Stick: Why I Keep Banging on About Paedophile Priests and Papal Propaganda.Crispian Jagohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16834942943012382473noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2940570413170689012.post-23870534955705902542010-11-12T00:02:51.234+00:002010-11-12T00:02:51.234+00:00It's not just the Universal Church; the Protes...It's not just the Universal Church; the Protestant churches have the same problem, especially the Fundamentalists. The difference is that the Catholics have a hierarchy and a buracracy; the Fundies each have independent churches, and sometimes it takes years for these preachers to be caught.Strelnikovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12660962615198939441noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2940570413170689012.post-10736860418718982962010-11-03T22:34:03.913+00:002010-11-03T22:34:03.913+00:00Dawkins has said similar things about 'attacki...Dawkins has said similar things about 'attacking' religion, though I don't think he actually means any kind of literal bloodshed, I'm sure in 2000 years someone will interpret it as such.Free Documentarieshttp://www.humanrestore.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2940570413170689012.post-42885295649984047342010-10-05T06:28:08.294+01:002010-10-05T06:28:08.294+01:00It only takes a minute to establish to a religious...It only takes a minute to establish to a religious nutter that they do not, in fact, obtain their morality from their babble.<br />As me how!Michael Kingsford Grayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15610344772081162910noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2940570413170689012.post-57468972173103380782010-10-04T16:37:21.798+01:002010-10-04T16:37:21.798+01:00@PaulJ
Indeed, so texts this ambiguous are more l...@PaulJ<br /><br />Indeed, so texts this ambiguous are more like a rorschach test, how you interpret them says more about you than the text itself.<br /><br />...which points to human nature as the problem and not religion per se.Johnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2940570413170689012.post-40097984660984423932010-10-04T10:49:52.431+01:002010-10-04T10:49:52.431+01:00Whilst the general point is well made, I think the...Whilst the general point is well made, I think there may be a mistranslation issue in the specific case of Exodus c20 vv20-21. Different translations of the bible have v21 quite differently.<br />The New International Version, which is generally considered a much more reliable translation (in the sense that they went back to primary sources in Hebrew and Aramaic, and created a new translation ab initio, as opposed to many translations which are just based on the Latin Vulgate), has "but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property". Which is a bit more reasonable.<br />When you look at the wording of the King James "Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money." you can see how this reversal in meaning could have arisen.ivannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2940570413170689012.post-28963970152208093732010-10-03T00:16:33.231+01:002010-10-03T00:16:33.231+01:00@John:
"The quote from Matthew 10 is almost ...@John:<br /><br /><i>"The quote from Matthew 10 is almost certainly a metaphor."</i><br /><br />I think that's the point. Some will say it's "almost certainly a metaphor" while others will say it's intended literally. How do we judge, other than by basing our judgement on something other than the thing we are judging?Paul S. Jenkinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15580170289410948764noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2940570413170689012.post-11192370071793458832010-10-02T22:59:31.253+01:002010-10-02T22:59:31.253+01:00The quote from Matthew 10 is almost certainly a me...The quote from Matthew 10 is almost certainly a metaphor.<br /><br />Dawkins has said similar things about 'attacking' religion, though I don't think he actually means any kind of literal bloodshed, I'm sure in 2000 years someone will interpret it as such.Johnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2940570413170689012.post-26589507399250157482010-10-02T21:54:34.503+01:002010-10-02T21:54:34.503+01:00@Mike Hypercube
You make a good point, but also d...@Mike Hypercube<br /><br />You make a good point, but also don't forget that Jesus himself quite clearly said that the old laws are applicable:<br /><br />“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV)<br /><br />So Christians who don't live like Jews are essentially saying: "Fuckit, I'll tell people Jesus is my god but that rule about cheese and meat is too much for me. I'll just do exactly what my deity told me not to do and he'll forgive me."<br /><br />I love Christians.Shawnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11047208822007974686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2940570413170689012.post-78172420582861938832010-10-02T20:17:26.898+01:002010-10-02T20:17:26.898+01:00Keep chipping away.
The accusation by religionist...Keep chipping away.<br /><br />The accusation by religionists that atheists have no moral foundation is one of the most prevalent misunderstandings about the source of morality. It's true that Britain, as a historically Christian culture, based its moral laws on the teachings of Jesus as related in the New Testament, which is in turn based on the Old Testament. The mistake Christians make, however, is in thinking that the chain stops there, when in fact the Bible took its morals from what people in history instinctively knew as "right and wrong".<br /><br />Unfortunately our evolved moral conscience has been hijacked by religion, which has contaminated it with much that is morally repugnant if not downright evil.Paul S. Jenkinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15580170289410948764noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2940570413170689012.post-1438447117433151362010-10-02T17:22:57.456+01:002010-10-02T17:22:57.456+01:00Graham, I like your logic.Graham, I like your logic.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2940570413170689012.post-79496656831931432732010-10-02T17:12:45.842+01:002010-10-02T17:12:45.842+01:00There's also this:
"The book" is su...There's also this:<br /><br />"The book" is supposed to be the source of moral guidance, yet the mere act of picking and choosing implies that there is a moral imperative _external_ to the book that the reader uses to make the decisions.<br /><br />If you want to claim that your holy book is the source of morality, then accept everything it says. If you can't accept everything, then it can't be the source of morality. Simples.An old grey doghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03148244402256257356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2940570413170689012.post-62015393283454849752010-10-02T16:31:01.433+01:002010-10-02T16:31:01.433+01:00Well said. This has needed saying for a long time....Well said. This has needed saying for a long time. <br /><br />However you are too kind to the New Testament, and since it's a tenet of Christian doctrine that the OT no longer holds, these scriptures can easily be dismissed. For New Testament moral failings there's the extra-judicial killing of Ananias and Saphira (sp?) in Acts, the overt racism of Paul in Titus 1:12-13 and of course the entire Letter ro Philemon in which Paul sends back a runaway slave who came to him. That's for starters. Jesus had racist moments too, and Paul has some nasty sounding and thankfully now lost theological idea of "binding people over to Satan" which might raise moral issues today.Mike Hypercubehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09984145404921017393noreply@blogger.com