Do you believe in God?
- Thread starter Patrik
- 24,489 comments
- 1,141,062 views
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
In the thread on Islam, I have said this:
"Islam is a lie.
All religions are lies.
Lies are of two basic kinds. One by deluded madmen secure in the belief they have spoken to God. Another by cynical charlatans out for profit.
Some lies are more beautiful and puissant than others. The best lies are those best tailored to the population targeted.
Religions and lies are necessary and useful because often the truth is just too brutal and ugly."
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/islam-whats-your-view-on-it.263208/page-19#post-9321789
So, to answer your (rhetorical?) question, Mormon differs from other religions only in the way it is "more aesthetically and powerfully tailored" to the tastes and needs of the targeted population.
Last edited:
- 24,016
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
- 13,909
- Adelaide
- Neomone
That's a reasonable difference though. I'm fairly sure there's some significant differences between the culture of the last hundred years or so, and the culture of a thousand years or so ago. Having a religion that is designed for a (relatively) modern audience is a bit different to one that was designed way back when that wheel thing was pretty hot tech.
Think of it like Shakespeare. Modern retakes are based on the same material, but adjusted for modern tastes. They're not quite the same, but on the whole they tend to appeal better to the general public who no longer really understands the "wherefore"s and "thou"s and "art"s.
- 24,016
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
That's a reasonable difference though. I'm fairly sure there's some significant differences between the culture of the last hundred years or so, and the culture of a thousand years or so ago. Having a religion that is designed for a (relatively) modern audience is a bit different to one that was designed way back when that wheel thing was pretty hot tech.
But 2000 years ago the Catholic church, as it's known now, was also tailored towards a contemporary audience.
Plenty of Shakespeare's plays were based on well-known greek tragedies. Modern Shakespearian retakes are really only greek tragedy retakes. Like the Mormon church, the Catholic church wasn't around at the very beginning of what we now know as 'christianity' - it was just a 'modern' take on it too.
- 13,909
- Adelaide
- Neomone
From an entirely objective viewpoint, certainly they could be considered the same. To an alien or a far future time traveller, there would be little to no distinction. If we were discussing the Catholic church and the Mormon church from the perspective of another two thousand years in the future, the difference would likely be negligible.
But to any modern person alive now to have this conversation, they're not the same, just as they would not be the same to someone from the time of the formation of the Catholic church. One is more relevant than the other, and while that will almost certainly change with time, and this particular point in history there is a significant difference between them.
I can understand where you're coming from, without taking any other factors into consideration they are ostensibly equivalent. But I think that one is particularly suited to the time in which we now live is a point that is worthy of notice. If you're going to study a time period, best to start with your own.
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
For a very detailed look into Mormonism, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormons
Mormons - the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS) - feel they are the only true and living church, original Christianity having been corrupted not long after the ascension of Christ. They proselytize heavily in the US and throughout the world, and may be the world's fastest growing religion.
Like Islam which feels it has a "new" prophet Mohammad who came along hundreds of years after Jesus, Mormons have their even newer, or latter day prophet Joseph Smith, who was contacted by angels and directed to a pile of gold plates with their special doctrine inscribed on them. Too bad they were lost and can't be produced for all to see. Mormons think Smith's visions were the most important event in history after Christ. Smith was killed by a mob, as Mormons had great difficulties with their neighbors for many long years.
Mormons practiced polygamy, and some still do. They think God is an actual being living on a nearby planet, and have unique views on the origin, purpose and destiny of man. They wear special underwear, practice the laying on of hands, and prohibit tobacco, alcohol, coffee, and many if not most forms of sex and pleasure.
Mormons have a canon consisting of the bible, the book of Mormon, and a pile of revelations and scribblings by Smith known as the "doctine and covenants", and "pearl of great price". I've read some of it.
The Mormons were a hardy bunch of misfit American pioneers, and their unique religion reflects their tastes and needs. Today, they are seen as hard working, industrious people, and are valued at many companies, including the Boeing Company where I had the pleasure of meeting many of them.
Mormons - the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS) - feel they are the only true and living church, original Christianity having been corrupted not long after the ascension of Christ. They proselytize heavily in the US and throughout the world, and may be the world's fastest growing religion.
Like Islam which feels it has a "new" prophet Mohammad who came along hundreds of years after Jesus, Mormons have their even newer, or latter day prophet Joseph Smith, who was contacted by angels and directed to a pile of gold plates with their special doctrine inscribed on them. Too bad they were lost and can't be produced for all to see. Mormons think Smith's visions were the most important event in history after Christ. Smith was killed by a mob, as Mormons had great difficulties with their neighbors for many long years.
Mormons practiced polygamy, and some still do. They think God is an actual being living on a nearby planet, and have unique views on the origin, purpose and destiny of man. They wear special underwear, practice the laying on of hands, and prohibit tobacco, alcohol, coffee, and many if not most forms of sex and pleasure.
Mormons have a canon consisting of the bible, the book of Mormon, and a pile of revelations and scribblings by Smith known as the "doctine and covenants", and "pearl of great price". I've read some of it.
The Mormons were a hardy bunch of misfit American pioneers, and their unique religion reflects their tastes and needs. Today, they are seen as hard working, industrious people, and are valued at many companies, including the Boeing Company where I had the pleasure of meeting many of them.
Last edited:
- 24,016
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
- 7,177
- Lisboa
- FLAT_TWELVE
That applies to every aspect of human societies. But values, principles and morality do show up long before they are fully observed. Even when they are written, be it in the Bible or in secular documents like the Magna Carta.
You just need to read how Fawkes' confession of the gunpowder plot was obtained to understand this. And this was 400 years after the Magna Carta.
And I'm not mentioning Fawkes because he was a Catholic. In today's language he would be considered a terrorist. And a fundamentalist of a particular religious allegiance. We - at least in the christian world - are long past that kind of lunacy.
However, the world has changed for the better since, and this is even more true in societies where christianity was prevalent. And if you atheists like to think Christian values were NOT the major force pushing forward the values of human liberty, dignity and equality, that's fine by me.
However, it is simply not right to say that because a text is from 2000 years ago what is written there is not relevant 2000 years later. The way I see it, 1000 years from now some of the things we do, make happen, or allow happening will be considered intolerable. Even if the texts we have now as political constitutions will still be considered valid.
You just need to read how Fawkes' confession of the gunpowder plot was obtained to understand this. And this was 400 years after the Magna Carta.
And I'm not mentioning Fawkes because he was a Catholic. In today's language he would be considered a terrorist. And a fundamentalist of a particular religious allegiance. We - at least in the christian world - are long past that kind of lunacy.
However, the world has changed for the better since, and this is even more true in societies where christianity was prevalent. And if you atheists like to think Christian values were NOT the major force pushing forward the values of human liberty, dignity and equality, that's fine by me.
However, it is simply not right to say that because a text is from 2000 years ago what is written there is not relevant 2000 years later. The way I see it, 1000 years from now some of the things we do, make happen, or allow happening will be considered intolerable. Even if the texts we have now as political constitutions will still be considered valid.
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,754
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
Personally I've never said that every part of the bible is irrelevant.
However a sizeable percentage of it is dangerous nonsense that allows the organised persecution of various groups and is actively used by many to try and hold back development, particularly scientific) and education.
Certain Christian values were a factor (and I do mean 'a' factor as opposed to your 'the' factor - quite a big difference) in pushing values forward, they have however also been 'a' factor is holding back those self same things. Keep in mind that both side in the first and second world wars were convinced that they were fighting on the side of God, both sides in the Civil Rights movement were doing the exact same thing.
Take equality as an example, Christianity can't even agree within itself on equality for homosexuals and women. So to say it's the major driving force in that area is clearly untrue, rather they are far behind the rest of society and actually a major factor holding back equality in these areas.
As for claims that Christianity is past 'that kind of thing', sorry but I would beg to differ. The Lord's Resistance Army and Breivik are both examples of violent Christian fundamentalism (and they are not alone), now you can argue all you like that they don't represent mainstream religion, but that self same thing applies to Guy Fawkes and the Taliban. When you have any part of any religion that is willing to kill to try and enforce its beliefs then that for me is a problem and a danger.
What is also true above can also be applied to pretty much every religion.
The key difference between secular constitutions and religious credo, is that the former are not 'divine' and as such change is generally far more accepted, the issue of the word of God being unquestionable is exactly why around seven countries in the world have the death penalty for homosexuality and many more will imprison people for it, and they are not all Islamic nations either.
Last edited:
- 13,909
- Adelaide
- Neomone
So what you're saying is that without Christianity, those values wouldn't have been adopted? Regardless of the obvious observation that there's a sizeable number of non-Christian societies around the world, and a decent amount of them seem to be doing all right as far as values go. I wouldn't say better necessarily, but I wouldn't say worse either.
Values in the way you're talking about them are a community thing. Any group of reasonable size develops them more or less naturally, because otherwise it turns into every-man-for-himself which is not a particularly stable situation.
That most groups tend to arrive at similar values is interesting, and can be explained either as that there's something about humans that tends towards those values, or that those are simply the best solutions encountered to certain social issues, and that good solutions propagate given enough time.
Christianity happened to be the dominant religion for a large part of the recent history of Western civilisation, but as far as values go I think it's tough to argue that they were a dominant force for instilling moral values. It's not like without a religion people naturally turn to rape, pillage, torture and murder, and while it's nice that Christianity pushed all it's positive aspects, for a long time it essentially considered non-Christians to be outside the rules and therefore fair game for all sorts of things that we would consider inhumane now, like the aforemention rape, pillage, torture and murder.
That Christianity took such a long time to be able to recognise non-Christians as basically deserving of the same rights as Christians is a pretty big blow for me, and a lot of Christians still don't recognise the rights of people they're religiously opposed to. I think there's a long way for Christianity on the whole to go, and I don't think it deserves much credit for any improvements in our societal values. There's as much reason to think that improvements in values happened DESPITE Christianity as because of it.
- 17,865
- 509
You have very lose and rough understanding of Mormonism, to be terse. I feel like you were handed some anti-Mormon propaganda and went with it a bit too much with that viewpoint.
Also, how does this differ from any other form on Christianity?
@Imari - the biggest points of contention, by other Christians, with Mormonism is its age and its refusal to acknowledge the Trinity. Which mostly comes from the Catholic Church hammering the holy Trinity for the last two millennium.
What works for Mormonism is they allow for modern prophets and interpretation (the Pope does this to some extent as well) and their views on salvation are far more inline with an all loving God.
- 743
- Los Angeles area, CA
zzz_pt
Premium
- 8,188
- Porto living in Hamburg
- zzz_pt
I want to change my vote to: no way.
I was an evangelical christian but in the last month I just realize how stupid and wrong my beliefs were. I started for studying the history of the bible, the bronze age miths and beliefs and of course reasoning aboubt my personal belive system and the contradictions inside it.
Once I realized everything is a fiction it was very easy for me to drop it. Maybe because I never really found the Bible very convincing.
I was an evangelical christian but in the last month I just realize how stupid and wrong my beliefs were. I started for studying the history of the bible, the bronze age miths and beliefs and of course reasoning aboubt my personal belive system and the contradictions inside it.
Once I realized everything is a fiction it was very easy for me to drop it. Maybe because I never really found the Bible very convincing.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
Yes and no.
I believe that the power which some think of as "God" is within us in the form of a tiny helix. That's the only thing common to life on the planet and I believe we are, very basically, simply the organism which it grows in order to survive and replicate.
The enormity of the societies and ecosystem that the helix has developed in order to facilitate the negotiation of power to replicate is the only divinity I see.
I believe that the power which some think of as "God" is within us in the form of a tiny helix. That's the only thing common to life on the planet and I believe we are, very basically, simply the organism which it grows in order to survive and replicate.
The enormity of the societies and ecosystem that the helix has developed in order to facilitate the negotiation of power to replicate is the only divinity I see.
- 29,978
- Bratvegas
- GTP_Liquid
Similar threads
Latest Posts
-
-
-
Aston Martin Confirms its Valkyrie Hypercar Will Race at Le Mans in 2025- Latest: ScottPuss20
-
