Wootah wrote:I disagree it is just on faith. I think I am wiser than I was and I think I finally do start to see how corruption and petty crimes over time render an individual and a society apart. There is no reason in the bible for myself as a Christian today to believe that 'it is automatically right to kill someone because your god may or may not command it depending on whether he exists'.
So was it right for the people to stone to death the man who picked up sticks, or wasn't it? I'm sorry I don't understand your sentence above, it doesn't make your opinion clear. I'm sure it wasn't your intention to confuse the issue, so perhaps you would like to indulge me and tell me what you really think.
If corruption and petty crimes over time render a society and individual apart, what do you think would happen to a society where mobs are allowed to stone people to death for the most minor "crimes"? Can you imagine a model of society where this kind of violent mob rule actually works? This story depicts a mob of people who caught someone doing something minor that was against their religious rules, and killed him in a gruesome, horrible way. What kind of link between individual and society would that sort of widespread behaviour create, I wonder?
Wootah wrote:Islam is the religion with direct orders for Muslims to fight.
It is just your stubborn and deliberate confusion of religions that causes this. I don't mind you hating on Christianity what I do mind is that by confusing religions you simply confuse societies about what to be doing and so Islam grows. You also strengthen Muslims who believe that other religions are like theirs and so they believe it is OK to carry on as they do.
Who is hating? I'm just pointing out an area of your religion that is abhorrent, and which you Christians show a psychotic streak by refusing to disagree with.
It's not stubborn and deliberate confusion at all. Deep down, all monotheistic religions are hostile to freethinking and individuality. Deep down, all of these religions want to suppress anything that isn't specifically sanctioned by their god. Christians may have learned to smooth over the rough parts of their creed, but that doesn't mean it didn't have violent, primitive origins. It's not the instructions to fight that is the problem, fighting in some circumstances is the only sensible thing to do - it's the circumstances in which people are instructed to fight that is the problem, which often includes executing others in cold blood.
For example: Here we have a story about a man who was stoned to death because he picked up sticks on the wrong day. Instead of condemning the killing as barbaric, we have not one but two Christians who seem pretty cool with it, because apparently breaking god's rules about working on a particular day deserves death. Both of you seem to hold the opinion that the stick guy deserved what he got.
To me, this is exactly the same as a Muslim who refuses to condemn Mohammad - as a believer you are having the source of your morality challenged, and you cannot help but blindly agree to whatever your god is depicted to command, whether it be torture, mob lynching, incest, etc. It's either that, or admit that your god is not perfect, which is obviously unthinkable for you religious types.
Have you ever considered that your religion is closer to Islam than you thought it was? It definitely makes you more like a Muslim than an atheist.
The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent.
- Carl Sagan