-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
love your neighbour
- Thread starter syo
- Start date
Religious folks sometimes do their own dividing, their own sorting the world into us versus them. Instead of saying "We are all brothers and sisters", they say, "All of us who are of the faith are brothers and sisters, and those who are not are in error -- or worse."
Whether that was the intention of their founders is a matter of debate, but it is certainly too often the practice. I think human nature is essentially tribal, and that religious folk -- however much they might like to claim the credit for overcoming that tribalism -- often do too little to overcome it, and even sometimes do much to inflame it.
It's hard for even a religion to rise above human nature.
Whether that was the intention of their founders is a matter of debate, but it is certainly too often the practice. I think human nature is essentially tribal, and that religious folk -- however much they might like to claim the credit for overcoming that tribalism -- often do too little to overcome it, and even sometimes do much to inflame it.
It's hard for even a religion to rise above human nature.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
There is a major conflict, IMO, in Paul's claim that we are not even to eat with sinners.
1 Corinthians 5:11
But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one.
That doesn't sound like love your neighbor, and a huge contrast to the love and acceptance Jesus not only spoke but exemplified in his actions.
1 Corinthians 5:11
But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one.
That doesn't sound like love your neighbor, and a huge contrast to the love and acceptance Jesus not only spoke but exemplified in his actions.
Go on.....your saying?
I'm willing to believe you see only what you want to see, Lyndon.
That's why Paul was an antiCHrist, and should never have been included in the Bible, He constantly contradicts Jesus' teaching and put his own words over Jesus"
You really need to read some of your own posts critically, they constantly attack religious people over and over, religious people on the other hand waste much less of their time attacking atheists, maybe because they take Jesus' teaching to heart, perhaps more than I do LOL.
This forum is evidence to any intelligent observer that people who differ on a religious issue or two often enough agree on some other issue, such as a political or economic issue.
You see attacks where others see mere criticisms, Lyndon, and this is certainly not the first time you've trolled me in retaliation for your own fantasies of being attacked.
Well we do have a lot of agreement on political issues, I'll give you that, but I still see a lot more atheists criticizing religion, than I see religious people criticizing atheists, maybe that's just because there aren't that many religious people willing to stick around and take the abuse, like I do!!
The religion of erotic dancing girls most certainly does! Just for the record, mind you.
Or maybe - like most people - you're more attuned to criticism against yourself than you are to criticism of others. I guarantee that you're surrounded by criticism of atheists and atheism.
"Love thy neighbour... for $20 a song."
PureX
Veteran Member
Religions are as guilty of man's inhumanity to man as any other human institution is. Most religions provide a pathway to mutual love, respect, and cooperation, but few of their participants are capable to following them when challenged to do so, or when it becomes the least bit difficult.
Don't know what you're talking about, I don't have any friends that criticize atheists to my face, and a lot of my friends are atheists, just not like the ones on this forum.
I would word that instead as "that is why there is so much unnecessary suffering"
And not shunning religion but shunning the innermost message of religion which is beyond scripture. Most people no matter they be a member of a religion or an atheist all long for truth, justice, love, harmony, beauty, peace, understanding and so forth. It's hard, for me sometimes very hard, but the more we can all live these ideals the less suffering there will be in the world.
I know. That was my point.
Try something out: for the next while - however long suits you - pay careful attention to how often you hear statements in praise of religious faith and against lack of faith... whether they're part of grace before a public meal, on the news by someone arguing for a religious message being put up in a public building, or just someone bearing witness to their religion, or anything. Then, ask yourself this: "if this statement against lack of faith was reversed, so that it was as strongly against faith as it was against lack of faith, would I find it offensive?"
If you approach this exercise honestly and with an open mind, I'd bet good money that you'll find that even liberal Christians are often more virulently anti-atheist than Richard Dawkins is anti-faith.
Try it out.