Why would anyone say ‘religion’ is here…to ‘control’ people?, page 18

Pages: << 15 16 17 18 19 20 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 9 times

reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 02:42 PM by OldThinker

reply to post by Good Wolf

Yeah, got distracted from my visitor/friend at the house...I went back and put the source

OT

reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 02:45 PM by OldThinker

Originally posted by Good Wolf

My paradigm is pretty simple in this context. If it can't be measured and analysed then no one can be objective regarding it's nature.

Actually that's what I do as an occupation...ever heard of a Lean Six Sigma Master Black Belt? DMAIC?

reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 03:12 PM by sadisticwoman

1) Do you think faith/religion is here to control the masses?
Yes
2) Why?
Because controlling them makes them more fearful of you, giving you more power and therefore more money and more leverage in the global community. There are a crap ton of catholics- and who do many people revere? The pope, of course! And the more people fear you, the more crazy things they will do for you.
3) Your evidence?
The Spanish Inquisition. The Crusades. The French Wars of Religion. The Thirty Year War. The fighting between Muslim sects. The fighting between Christians and Muslims. The fact that the religious right are all talking heads for their political leader.

If religion didn't control you, you wouldn't be so upset about it being questioned.
4) Did you once believe?
Yep.
5) Did you change?
Many times.
6) Why are you an atheist?
I'm not.
7) Why are you an agnostic?
I'm not.
8) Why you are a christian?
I'm not.
9) What ‘SHOULD‘ God look like/act like/be like?
God is Eris. She is chaotic. Fnord.

reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 04:24 PM by OldThinker

reply to post by sadisticwoman

Thanks for your thoughts and posting here, although too much of the glass is half-empty for OT

reply posted on 9-2-2009 @ 06:42 PM by Lasheic

reply to post by OldThinker

Hypatia was not a young woman at the time, she was old.

Were the point able to be substantiated, this is still completely irrelevant information. What matter if she was 25 or 45? How does her age absolve her murderers or mitigate their crime in ANY fashion? The truth is, we don't know her exact age, because we don't know her exact date of birth. However, considering the position she held at the library, the body of works reputed to her by her students, and by what we know of her father Theon - it's generally estimated that she was between 30-45 years old.

45 is -not- old.

Monks did not kill Hypatia, nor did the clergy, the Alexadrians led by a lector named Peter did it. The mob of monks that Mangasar is talking about were around several years before this scene in 419 A.D. and they rescued Christians from death at the hands of the Alexandrian Jews.

Nitrian Monks are sometimes cited as the source of instigation, if not the comprising the actual mobs. It's true that no hard evidence still exists to pin her murder on them, however their fanatical adherence to their particular form of Christianity (which espoused isolated simple desert life as a path to god) was diametrically opposed to the metropolitan nature of Alexandria as a city, and for what the Library of Alexandria represented as a pagan affront to god. They were certainly an influence in the religious atmosphere of the time.

In any case, I can find nobody who denies that it was an organized group of Christians who committed the act to exact a political end. The cover up of Hypatia's murder after the fact by the Orthodox Christian church afterwards is certainly suspect that someone within the higher circles of the religion had a hand, whether as an accomplice or by coincidence, in this tragedy. Her story was, like many things deemed pagan, slurped into the Christian mythos when she was merged with the story of Cathrine of Alexandria and canonized as a saint. According to Brian Trent, Raphael's painting "The School of Athens" had to be "reworked" at the behest of Pope Julius II to remove Hypatia - although she was still snuck into the final work as an un-named student.

Also... the date he gives in that quote is 419, about four years after the death of the Hypatia. So the monks your quoted text refers to didn't come before that time, they came after. Considering the strained relationship between Christianity and Judaism for much of the last 2,000 years, especially in the first millenium, it seems to make sense to me that strife caused by the decay of Alexandria at the hands of the Christians lead to violence in the years after the burning of the Library and the death of Hypatia. The Jews would have been an excellent scapegoat for the violence.

Cyril did not instigate the mob nor was he there

Cyril did not need to be there in person to stir up emotions. His correspondence with Orestes and his position of power allowed his words and intents to travel far further than his own feet. As said, it's not been concretely proven that he ordered Hypatia's murder - but he was in such a position, and in such a position as to benefit greatly from her death. Nor do I recall any accounts of his public denouncement of the act, or condolences of sympathy to Orestes - despite the fact that Hypatia was well respected within the larger Christian community due to her virtue. (She is said to have remained a virgin her entire life, devoting her entire being to the pursuit of knowledge)

The main source of suspicion for Cyril comes from the historian Damascius, whom had uncovered a forged document in which Hypatia supposedly harshly criticized and ideologically attacked Christianity. He traced the source of this forgery to Cyril and, without collaborating evidence, published this as fact in the Suda - a sort of historical Encyclopedia of the time.

[edit on 9-2-2009 by Lasheic]

reply posted on 10-2-2009 @ 03:24 AM by funky monk

1) Do you think faith/religion is here to control the masses?

No

2) Why?

Simply because religion doesnt control people. People use faith/religion as a front for controling people. Those that use christianity to control people are obviously not from God or following the instructions from the bible.

3) Your evidence?

Look at the Catholics for example. There are many things they do/tell people that contradicts what is written in the bible. Praying to the saints, confessing to the preist, false idols (although most people have some sort of idol to some degree anyway).
Not to say that all catholics are bad people though. There are always good and bad people everywhere.

4) Did you once believe?

I still do.

5) Did you change?

For the better. More so in understanding of the word and what God wants from us.

6) Why are you an atheist?

n/a

7) Why are you an agnostic?

n/a

8) Why you are a christian?

Because it makes sense to me. I see God's hand everywhere and for me to brush him aside and ignore him would be a pretty big mistake.
The joy he fills me with is so indescribable and insane to such a degree that it makes me sad when I see people without the hope that he brings into my life.

9) What ‘SHOULD‘ God look like/act like/be like?

I think its a mistake to try and box him into human words becasue he is so much more then that. He is limitless in every aspect and it wouldnt do him justice in anyway.

reply posted on 10-2-2009 @ 11:13 AM by constantine70

reply to post by asmeone2

I could not have said it any better than myself. I hope you do not mind that I have added you as a friend. (not to mention it was exactly 11:11 am when I read this

)
you speak much truth asmeone2!
Peace and Harmony to you through Unconditional love!

reply posted on 10-2-2009 @ 06:47 PM by OldThinker

reply to post by Lasheic

Lasheic, thank you for clearing up the facts with this very sad story...

Have a great night!

OT

reply posted on 10-2-2009 @ 06:52 PM by OldThinker

Originally posted by funky monk
Those that use christianity to control people are obviously not from God or following the instructions from the bible.

Absolutely right!!!!

Thank you for the post!!!!

My hope is all others will EVENTALLY see it this way...

OT

Add: will run into/come across those that LIVE that way...

reply posted on 10-2-2009 @ 06:57 PM by OldThinker

Originally posted by constantine70
reply to post by asmeone2

I could not have said it any better than myself. I hope you do not mind that I have added you as a friend. (not to mention it was exactly 11:11 am when I read this )
you speak much truth asmeone2!
Peace and Harmony to you through Unconditional love!

C70, OT, too, echos your post on asmeone2, especially his quote on this thread...

7) Why are you an agnostic?

I beleive that "God" is too big to be defined by any of man's contrivances. I also beleive that subscribing to one religion limits my ability to actually understand him."

Very wise, I think!

Thanks for contributing here...

OT

reply posted on 10-2-2009 @ 06:59 PM by OldThinker

Originally posted by sadisticwoman
3) Your evidence?
The Spanish Inquisition. The Crusades. The French Wars of Religion. The Thirty Year War. The fighting between Muslim sects. The fighting between Christians and Muslims. The fact that the religious right are all talking heads for their political leader.

sw, were these tragedies done by true followers of Christ...or some political leaders, who took advantage of the time/culture?

OT

reply posted on 10-2-2009 @ 07:06 PM by sadisticwoman

reply to post by OldThinker

They were done by both. The were done by true followers of Christ, who were told to do it by the people in power for religious reasons. If the people in power had said "DO IT JUST BECAUSE I SAID SO" the people wouldn't have. Religion gave them the power they needed.

reply posted on 10-2-2009 @ 07:11 PM by Good Wolf

reply to post by OldThinker

sw, were these tragedies done by true followers of Christ...or some political leaders, who took advantage of the time/culture?

If you were to ask them what do you think they'd say?

"True followers." replete.

Everyone would define 'true followers' differently but many of these people would have been sure they were doing Gods work. It reminds me the danger that exists in the religious that individuals often times give up the ability to think for themselves. Often the few that refuse will be socially attacked by the mob mentality of the church. It's why I left.

reply posted on 10-2-2009 @ 07:13 PM by OldThinker

Originally posted by sadisticwoman
reply to post by OldThinker

They were done by both. The were done by true followers of Christ, who were told to do it by the people in power for religious reasons. If the people in power had said "DO IT JUST BECAUSE I SAID SO" the people wouldn't have. Religion gave them the power they needed.

OK...thank you for the quick response...

My 36 yrs of knowing people of faith, would rather die (voluntarily..sp?) when presented with that option...maybe OT was lucky? I dunno?

Wish you nothing but the best sw...

OT

reply posted on 10-2-2009 @ 07:15 PM by OldThinker

reply to post by Good Wolf

GW, yes...good point...

"TRUE" followers is a matter of vantage point...'theirs' and 'HIS'...

OT is speakin of HIS I hope..??

OT always challenged by you!

reply posted on 10-2-2009 @ 07:22 PM by Good Wolf

reply to post by OldThinker

OT is speakin of HIS I hope..??

Of course the problem is that only "HE" would know "HIS" definition of 'true follower'.

OT always challenged by you!

Good as that is what I try to do for people. Those unwilling to challenge themselves deserve the distress they get when they are.

[edit on 10/2/2009 by Good Wolf]

reply posted on 10-2-2009 @ 07:26 PM by OldThinker

Originally posted by Good Wolf
reply to post by OldThinker

OT is speakin of HIS I hope..??

Of course the problem is that only "HE" would know "HIS" definition of 'true follower'.

yes...IN THE SHORT TERM only...'their' present

Believe me ALL of them learned it DIRECTLY from HIM in time...

OT

See Romans 14:12 "So then each one of us will give an account of himself to God."

reply posted on 10-2-2009 @ 07:36 PM by sadisticwoman

reply to post by OldThinker

Someone else in this thread said that it wasn't religion, but the religious leaders. And that's what I believe as well. But they wouldn't be the leaders without the religion, and that's the sad fact. No matter how good the intent, religion can be spun into something evil. And that means every religion.

reply posted on 10-2-2009 @ 07:39 PM by OldThinker

Originally posted by sadisticwoman
reply to post by OldThinker

Someone else in this thread said that it wasn't religion, but the religious leaders. And that's what I believe as well. But they wouldn't be the leaders without the religion, and that's the sad fact. No matter how good the intent, religion can be spun into something evil. And that means every religion.