All-Purpose Religion Thread

[Mic09]

3 minutes ago, Sam-AVFC said:

That goes for the 'ethical' frameworks created by any religious text. I'm all for taking moral lessons from fiction, but only when it admits it's fiction.

I wouldn't call it 'fiction' - just like the Bible, it's a book rooted in ancient stories. Ancient scriptures can tell us a lot about history and the lives of the people who lived back then, but they have to be taken with a scientific eye. 

As an example, the great flood story and Noah's Ark is widely reported in many cultures, not just ours. It's clear it had great meaning to those people and they passed it in oral tradition before it was written down. Something likely happened ( Black Sea flood of 7th Century BC?* Persian Gulf Flooding?*) so many of those 'fictions' bring us a piece of history that can be looked into.

BUT, we have to be careful in taking moral lessons from these people, because, well, they are ancient. We have moved on and learn new things about the world. 

Star Trek is fiction. This is history wrapped in legend, myth, moral lessons and passed on through one mouth to another for thousands of years. 

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_hypothesis 
*http://emvc.geol.ucsb.edu/2_infopgs/IP2IceAge/ePersGulfFlood.html

Quote

The Black Sea deluge is the best known of three hypothetical flood scenarios proposed for the Late Quaternary history of the Black Sea. It is one of the two of these flood scenarios which propose a rapid, even catastrophic, rise in sea level of the Black Sea during the Late Quaternary

Quote

At the glacial maximum, the coastline lay near the edge of the continental shelf of the Indian Ocean. The Persian Gulf was a dry-land river valley. As sea level rose during the glacial meltdown, the ocean gradually flooded into the Gulf. By the time sea level stabilized, about 6000 years ago, the north end of the Gulf lay well to the north of its present position. The ancient walled city of Ur lay near that ancient shoreline. Since that time, debris from the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers has built a substantial delta, creating most of the land in Kuwait and establishing the present coastlines.

 

[mjmooney]

1 hour ago, regular_john said:

The majority view within the Muslim world is that Islam provides the answer to all of life's problems, that the Qur'an is the literal word of God (not 'inspired' ala The Bible), and that Muhammad was a perfect human whose example should be followed for all time. This is why there is such support for 'extreme' ideology within the Muslim world, despite only a relatively small percentage being significantly motivated enough to take violent action to enforce those beliefs on others. The Pew research data on support for Sharia, death penalties etc. across the Muslim world makes for some incredibly depressing reading. 

If this is the case, why are so many Afghan Muslims so opposed to rule by the Taliban? 

[Sam-AVFC]

38 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

I wouldn't call it 'fiction' - just like the Bible, it's a book rooted in ancient stories. Ancient scriptures can tell us a lot about history and the lives of the people who lived back then, but they have to be taken with a scientific eye. 

As an example, the great flood story and Noah's Ark is widely reported in many cultures, not just ours. It's clear it had great meaning to those people and they passed it in oral tradition before it was written down. Something likely happened ( Black Sea flood of 7th Century BC?* Persian Gulf Flooding?*) so many of those 'fictions' bring us a piece of history that can be looked into.

BUT, we have to be careful in taking moral lessons from these people, because, well, they are ancient. We have moved on and learn new things about the world. 

Star Trek is fiction. This is history wrapped in legend, myth, moral lessons and passed on through one mouth to another for thousands of years. 

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_hypothesis 
*http://emvc.geol.ucsb.edu/2_infopgs/IP2IceAge/ePersGulfFlood.html

 

I appreciate many stories would have been passed down in the oral tradition before making the final bible cut half a millennium after being written down. Unless you accept it's true, which I don't, it is still fiction.

It's like Game of Thrones. It may have been loosely based on the Wars of the Roses, but once they added the dragons it became harder to take seriously as a historical text.

If this is a semantic issue on the meanings of legend, tradition, myth, fables and fiction then I can help clarify my definition of fiction here as "not factual".

Edited August 17, 2021 by Sam-AVFC

[Mic09]

1 minute ago, Sam-AVFC said:

I appreciate many stories would have been passed down in the oral tradition before making the final bible cut half a millennium after being written down. Unless you accept it's true, which I don't,) it is still fiction.

What don't you accept in the story that I gave an example of? That there was a flood? Because that likely happened, and likely people believed it happened because 'God' made it so. I agree with you that this is where we can reach the 'looney' territory, but bear with me here. 

There probably wasn't a Noah and he didn't take all the animals with him. But the story of 'we better watch ourselves because the world can change around us quicker than we think' can be even more relevant now with rising sea levels and rapid climate change. I guess people of ancient middle east had similar problems as we did. 

I guess what I'm trying to say, you don't have to believe Noah took the animals on the Ark in order to believe that people of the middle east have been affected by a rapid environment/climate change.

You don't have to believe that Jesus was the son of god and died for our sins to believe that Roman's wanted to stop a Jewish revolt because of geopolitical tensions.

You don't have to believe that David killed Goliath in order to believe that a weaker state of Judea battled against major rivals for territory in 5/6th century BC.

You don't have to believe in the Adam and Eve in order to appreciate that evil and suffering in the world is caused by human greed and imperfection.

[bickster]

2 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

That there was a flood? Because that likely happened,

You'd need to prove that a particular flood happened in a specified location at a given time for this to be a fact, otherwise you have nothing better than a fire evacuation plan written in the form of a story. That isn't fact, it's fiction

Ditto for all the other points you raised really

[Mic09]

2 minutes ago, bickster said:

You'd need to prove that a particular flood happened in a specified location at a given time for this to be a fact, otherwise you have nothing better than a fire evacuation plan written in the form of a story. That isn't fact, it's fiction

Ditto for all the other points you raised really

Sure, and I appreciate it's a bit wishy washy but it's more than speculation considering the overwhelming geological evidence of flood impacts. Plus I am sure there are biblical scholars who can defend this argument better than I can. 

What we do know, there have been numerous great flood's in the past. It's only reasonable to assume people who lived through them would want to pass the story on and eventually, centuries later, write it down.

I'm sure there are bible buffs that could look at data known and say that this or that flood was the starting point of the story. But it's just as reasonable to assume that the story of the great flood could have been many different floods.

Here is a list of some of these from wikipedia:

Quote

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_flood_myths

Flood myths are common across a wide range of cultures, extending back into Bronze Age and Neolithic prehistory. These accounts depict a flood, sometimes global in scale, usually sent by a deity or deities to destroy civilization as an act of divine retribution.

You can then connect these stories to others, such as the Atlantis story, but let's not go down the rabbit hole and because that's not the point. The point is, there were historical events that have affected people's lives and they decided to pass the stories on and eventually write them down. So it's a bit more than 'fiction'. It's Chinese whispers over 10 thousand years.  

[bickster]

19 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

So it's a bit more than 'fiction'. It's Chinese whispers over 10 thousand years.  

There's no such thing as "a bit more than fiction" What you are talking about are allegorical tales, they are fiction.

I think it's your definition of fiction that is off

 

[Mic09]

2 minutes ago, bickster said:

There's no such thing as "a bit more than fiction" What you are talking about are allegorical tales, they are fiction.

I think it's your definition of fiction that is off

 

Star Trek is Fiction, and Lord of The Rings is fiction.

There was no Starship Enterprise or Minas Tirith.

But there were floods, crucifixions, ancient battles and kings, and that's what the bible tells us. I don't care about whether David was the descendent of Abraham or if Peter betrayed Jesus 3 times or whether we should only eat animals that chew their cud. 

In my opinion it's fiction, a made up belief, that we should or shouldn't eat animals that chew their cud. What is a historical lesson is that there once lived people who based their diet on these parameters and that is an important historical lesson. 

Eating pork won't send you to hell (if one exists). That's a 'myth', a 'fiction'. But it's a fact that those ancient people believed that you should not eat pigs and that tells us a bit about their history. 

I hope that makes sense. 

[mjmooney]

This is just arguing over semantics. As a pedant, I would define fiction as a made-up story, that is fully understood to have been made up, intended purely as entertainment. 

Then there is mythology, which may be interpreted by some readers as being factual, even if it is not. 

There is also plausible (but untrue) narrative, which may be knowingly created in order to deceive, or may be stated in good faith, but still incorrect. Fake news, if you will. 

I would categorise 'holy books' as being a mix of the latter two categories (with some element of actual truth, which is impossible to separate out from the rest). 

[TheAuthority]

On 17/08/2021 at 02:02, regular_john said:

I disagree. The majority view within the Muslim world is that Islam provides the answer to all of life's problems, that the Qur'an is the literal word of God (not 'inspired' ala The Bible), and that Muhammad was a perfect human whose example should be followed for all time.

I do want to know what qualifies you to speak for the majority of Muslims that this is how they feel and what they want? 

I'm not being facetious I really want to know. My Muslim friends (and I understand personal experience is an extremely thin slice and by no means a true  barometer) would argue until kingdom come that you are wrong - and their attitudes and behaviors would completely negate what you are saying.

Is it that you believe anyone that practices any religion wants that religion to be all dominant across the world? i.e. anyone who digs a bit of Jesus now and then believes that the whole world should be devout fundamental Christians?

[TheAuthority]

On 17/08/2021 at 04:04, Mic09 said:

What don't you accept in the story that I gave an example of? That there was a flood? Because that likely happened, and likely people believed it happened because 'God' made it so. I agree with you that this is where we can reach the 'looney' territory, but bear with me here. 

There probably wasn't a Noah and he didn't take all the animals with him. But the story of 'we better watch ourselves because the world can change around us quicker than we think' can be even more relevant now with rising sea levels and rapid climate change. I guess people of ancient middle east had similar problems as we did. 

I guess what I'm trying to say, you don't have to believe Noah took the animals on the Ark in order to believe that people of the middle east have been affected by a rapid environment/climate change.

You don't have to believe that Jesus was the son of god and died for our sins to believe that Roman's wanted to stop a Jewish revolt because of geopolitical tensions.

You don't have to believe that David killed Goliath in order to believe that a weaker state of Judea battled against major rivals for territory in 5/6th century BC.

You don't have to believe in the Adam and Eve in order to appreciate that evil and suffering in the world is caused by human greed and imperfection.

I think you've made a great argument for allegories that may still be prevalent. It's almost as if we're all one and have inhabited the same ecosystem for Millenia. Imagine that!

[regular_john]

7 hours ago, TheAuthority said:

I do want to know what qualifies you to speak for the majority of Muslims that this is how they feel and what they want? 

I'm not being facetious I really want to know. My Muslim friends (and I understand personal experience is an extremely thin slice and by no means a true  barometer) would argue until kingdom come that you are wrong - and their attitudes and behaviors would completely negate what you are saying.

Is it that you believe anyone that practices any religion wants that religion to be all dominant across the world? i.e. anyone who digs a bit of Jesus now and then believes that the whole world should be devout fundamental Christians?

I'm not speaking for anyone. It is a core belief in Islam that the Qur'an is the directly revealed word of God and that Muhammad was the most perfect human being to have ever lived. There's nothing controversial in those statements.

 

It is also a very widely held belief that Islam is a 'total' religion in that it provides not just spiritual guidance but advises on matters of education, marriage, business, diet, finances etc. Again, this isn't controversial, it is a widely held belief across the Muslim world (slightly less commonly held in Muslims raised in Western nations).

 

As for your last point, no I don't think that all members of all religions want their particular religions to dominate the world, although there will be minorities amongst each religion that do feel that way, or at least that the world would be better off if it adhered to their particular religion.

 

Islam is different though in that it divides the world in two - Dar Al Islam (the house of Islam) and Dar Al Harb (the house of war). It is by definition an expansionist faith that is modelled upon the actions and beliefs of a warlord. The Qur'an and Hadith contain multiple direct injunctions to conquer, suppress and kill non-believers, which may go some way to explaining why fundamentalism inexorably leads to violence and why a third of Muslim majority nations have the death penalty for apostasy. A religion of peace, it is not.

[mjmooney]

I've seen the taliban described (probably on here, now I come to think of it) as 'mediaevalist barbarians'. Well, there's a reason for that. Islam got started 600 or so years after Christianity, so it's that far behind in its lifecycle as a religion/social phemomenon. Christianity nowadays has (mostly) settled down into its easygoing pipe-and-slippers middle age. But where was it 600 years ago? In its angry teenager years, and bloodthirsty crusading, that's where. Give Islam another 600 years and it'll probably be equally settled. But no doubt there will be some new movement throwing its weight around in the name of... well who knows what? It seems to be what humans (read: men) do, unfortunately. 

[regular_john]

9 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

I've seen the taliban described (probably on here, now I come to think of it) as 'mediaevalist barbarians'. Well, there's a reason for that. Islam got started 600 or so years after Christianity, so it's that far behind in its lifecycle as a religion/social phemomenon. Christianity nowadays has (mostly) settled down into its easygoing pipe-and-slippers middle age. But where was it 600 years ago? In its angry teenager years, and bloodthirsty crusading, that's where. Give Islam another 600 years and it'll probably be equally settled. But no doubt there will be some new movement throwing its weight around in the name of... well who knows what? It seems to be what humans (read: men) do, unfortunately. 

Correct! In fact, according to Islam it is the year 1442 so they really are several hundred years behind.

Unfortunately, the medieval barbarians have access to modern weaponry and technology

[chrisp65]

I’ve never met a barbarian muslim intent on killing me or converting me and then killing me, and I’ve met a few.

Perhaps I’ve only met amateur starter pack Muslims.

 

 

[Rugeley Villa]

Banana cake , and that’s all I’ll say. 

[mjmooney]

40 minutes ago, Rugeley Villa said:

Banana cake , and that’s all I’ll say. 

Is that your religion? I wouldn't shout too loud about it, those carrot cake fundamentalists will have a fatwa on you before you can say buttercream frosting. 

[bickster]

9 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Is that your religion? I wouldn't shout too loud about it, those carrot cake fundamentalists will have a fatwa on you before you can say buttercream frosting. 

Its a lardwa with the baking fundamentalists

[Xela]

13 hours ago, Rugeley Villa said:

Banana cake , and that’s all I’ll say. 

The cake of the typical infidel. 

[SuperTed]

On 17/08/2021 at 10:15, Wainy316 said:

I think it stems from Jesus getting burned by Wonga.

Never been in this thread before. Saw this at the top of the page and . . .