Why the biblical religions are dangerous?

I'm sure this has been posted already, but most of us here know that all religions are dangerous. They are all based on faith so everyone (or no one) is right.

They can justify any war, any genocide, any suicide. Religion is the source of all evil in this world.

reply to post by studythem1


Your findings are unfounded, I cant find anything backing up what you said, perhaps putting some more detail into how you found this would be nice? It sounds more like opinion or the piecing together of non connected info. You assume every single Christian is some stupid caveman who clings to a primitive book with absolutely no questioning or individual studying, of this your mostly correct, but not absolutely. I have dealt with your lot before so I will keep it short and sweet; Finding some pre-Christian or pre-God/Yahweh writings is as unfounded as you would accuse a belief in the Bible is itself.

To put it another way, your attempting to prove a set of ancient writings which cannot be proven right or wrong, with another set of ancient writings that cannot be proven right or wrong, assuming what you found is legitimate. So your using the very thing to assault the Bible, that most people assault the Bible with. Lets say even if your findings were legitimate, and everything you had was spot on, then according to the Bible you missed very important data, and that is 'Spiritual Warfare'. This means some other demonic or satanic religion tried to steal what God has established, this means there are forces and powers unseen, both of God, and of not, which are trying to deceive us. Without knowing all the details of your "findings" how easy is it for demonic forces to go back and "update" their religion, knowing someday someone will come to the same conclusion you have.

So my point; Just like I cannot prove that God/Yahweh is the beginning and the end, you also cannot prove your opinion is correct. Neither of us can prove or disprove one or the other, so were back at square one - Faith...

Originally posted by honested3
reply to post by studythem1

 

To put it another way, your attempting to prove a set of ancient writings which cannot be proven right or wrong, with another set of ancient writings that cannot be proven right or wrong, assuming what you found is legitimate. So your using the very thing to assault the Bible, that most people assault the Bible with.

actually no, im using the fact that there is an external text, which is a clay tablet, found... that predates any known scroll that contains the bible script, and using it as a comparison...that is a valid archaeological practice...

and since this tablet does exist, and is in a museum, and has been translated, and does contain the names of gods we find in the bible, it can prove that those names of gods were in existence before the bible was penned...or at least the surviving copy of the tablet is older than the oldest surviving scroll containing parts of the bible...but what it really does is shed the light on who was using these names for gods...it was the canaanites...this is proven in more ways than one...not just from assumption, but from the pottery, the stone statues, and the dating of the strata that these things came from...so it is much more comprehensive than you pretend it is...

i also look at patterns...theologians used to call it diabolical mimicry, but that argument was soon squashed because in order for its premise to be true, then the devil would have to be as omniscient and omnipresent, and omnipotent as god...so they had to get creative and call it something else to try and dodge that bullet, (cant remember what that is right this second) but they basically say people are trying too hard to draw comparison between this example and that example, ( as if critical thinking is bad, and we should just accept what they tell us...instead of looking at the evidence and doing the hard work of piecing this stuff all together...which cannot just be thrown together haphazardly...it has to be proven) but the comparisons are already there, its not hard to even find these comparisons...they already exist in detail...and to pretend that one culture was not influenced by another is ridiculous...especially since (and it has been tried) you cant keep people from mixing, whether intermarrying or exchanging ideas...it is impossible, and silly to pretend that they did not...that somehow the books of the bible developed in a vacuum and stayed in that vacuum untouched by the outside world...that argument itself defies logic...so there is a whole plethora of evidence (not just this logical fallacy crap that apologists use all the time) that proves bible apologists arguments are based on very badly concocted arguments...which leads one to wonder why? because the apparatus is already there psychologically to make people so blind that bad argument techniques actually work...

it is not the same old approach, however it is funny how bible defenders seem to use the same weak arguments to defend the bible...its funny how they ignore the plethora of evidence just found alone in their own bible...evidence they keep ignoring, or changing the subject about...but it doesn't surprise me a bit because these people have learned from the best to defer blame for their own ineptitude to another...just like the writers of the bible...they did not want to be responsible, so they made a "poor me" appeal...or even picked on other people and blamed them...its a simple thing to pick out...its called systematic abuse...

i understand, it is devastating to even think that ones belief system might turn out to be based on a lie, or that someone would realize they were manipulated...a lot of assumptions that have been learned. tend to make people hostile, such as their belief that they will go to hell if they are wrong, so they get mad at me for trying to send them to hell...or they get mad that im saying that they are wrong...as if they were the ones that wrote the bible...(how ridiculous)

however it is not an attack on a person who has believed their whole life, it is an attack on deception...so it was never directed at anyone, not even god, but at the misuse of gods name to justify evil...and i guess most people take that personally...

but thats not my aim...my aim is to get people to look...do your own research...dont just take my word for it, and dont just assume i have no basis for my argument because you dont like what im saying...

and also do not assume that im calling all christians and jews and muslims liars, no...they are the ones being fooled, but not by me, by those that have systematically abused people for centuries...

the call is to wake up, not despair and throw it all away cause nothing matters, but wake up and learn whats true and whats not...

Originally posted by studythem1
that may work for you and for many, but it does not work for me...i am not satisfied with sitting on an explanation handed to me, because usually those who hand them to us have ulterior motives...nor am i comfortable with accepting their definitions or theology in part or in whole because of the evil psychology behind them...whether the results or the aim was good or not, the ends do not justify the means...

just as it is folly to defeat tyranny with tyranny, as the FSA in syria is doing right now...so it was folly for the jews to try and overthrow tyranny by first enslaving their own people in hopes of unifying them and defeating their "oppressors"... when in truth they were enjoying a lot of peace and normalcy when there was religious diversity and open-ness...and they also did not get smacked around until they overreached their abilities in attacking the countries that were pretty much protecting them against invasion by others...that is tactical suicide...by biting the hand that fed them, or taxed them however you look at it, they brought death on many who would not have otherwise tasted it...that is selfish and unjust...

moses did likewise...he conned the people into the desert under the lure of freedom, and sure they were slaves, but many more of them would not have died as harshly in the desert by both the hand of moses and his henchmen, and god himself if they would have stayed in Egypt, and they realized this trap and some rebelled, and they were murdered because they were attempting to stop the tyranny...people dont like to look at these facts without the religious fluff so they ignore these things...so Egypt was wrong, but moses was equally and even more brutal because he murdered his own people in the name of an ideology...

i may be satisfied with enough food, or water, and stop before i go to far, but when it comes to knowing the truth, my hunger and thirst never gets satisfied...

i am not content to put "belief" in one corner with a "dont change me" sign on it, and everything else in another to be investigated...you cannot truly be a student of truth, if some things are off limits to the scrutiny of investigation...only those who are willing to change their definition of things based on new information that can be proven, are the real seekers of truth...

to keep something to the side that cannot be investigated because of a conditioned taboo, or an unwillingness to try, or even fear that what you believe may be wrong...that to me is a half truth and to be blunt a lie...

does that mean i will figure it all out? no, but i can find out enough to lend reason and sound judgment to the next generation so they do not have to do the work over...or so they can expand on it...

i am also not comfortable with the idea that i should hang on to pieces of the same mumbo jumbo that was handed to me and was discovered to be a lie, because as i said before, it is only an addiction trying to convince you that you still need the drug...and in this case it is religion...

this may be a shock to some, or seem rude, and uncaring, but i would rather be honest and let people know what kind of danger they are in, than lie to them...now can i make them change their minds? no, i can only present my opinion of the truth based on what information i have, and common sense, and leave it to them...if i try to force it on them that would make me just as guilty as those who use psychological tyranny to gain converts...

Who were you responding to here? Hopefully not to me.

If it was to me, you were waaaaaaay off from what I posted and took it another direction... like far away.

reply to post by studythem1


What you have done is mistaken justice for evil.

If you had a daughter and someone raped her, would you consider the judge evil for sentencing him to death?

You are entitled to your opinion, but your logic is flawed.

A god who is not just is not good.

God is just and good. If you see why God judged the nations, it was usually because they did not take care of the poor or needy.

In terms of what you said regarding YahWeh really being moloch - Leviticus 18:21.

Do you have proof that the Israelities merely wrote this scripture to distance themselves from the fact Moloch was their god are you merely speculating according to something you heard in a YouTube video that suited your worldview?

reply to post by Ephesians289

Do you have proof that the Israelities merely wrote this scripture to distance themselves from the fact Moloch was their god are you merely speculating according to something you heard in a YouTube video that suited your worldview?

Re-read his Original Post. He explained where his knowledge came from, and it wasn't a YouTube video.

Welcome to ATS.

Text so what did they do? they set out to force the cult on the rest of the people who identified themselves as israelites.

reply to post by studythem1


I respectfully disagree with your spiel of the Israelite God. You have not made one mention of the theological fact that the Hebrew people consisted of tribes of people who had a unified alliance with one another through ancestral breeding. The Hebrew tribes were all gathered at one time and in one gathering. They were given a vote to accept the God of Abraham and His offered covenant. They all agreed to accept the God that Abraham had accepted under the leadership of Moses. This was the first of a national covenant or collective covenant. Abraham had a personal covenant with the same God as well as his son Isaac and his son Jacob. Each time a covenant was offered it was offered by the terms of the Creator and approved by the recipient but never forced upon anyone. All people have the free will to accept and reject anything that is offered.

Jeremiah 31:31-33 31:Behold, the days come, saith Jehovah, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: 32:not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was a husband unto them, saith Jehovah. 33:But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith Jehovah: I will put my law in their inward parts, and in their heart will I write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people:

Heb 12:24 and to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaketh better than that of Abel.

As you can see, the same God offered two distinct covenants (agreements) and the first agreement was broken by the people and not by God. The second agreement is not a collective covenant but is a personal one on one agreement for any one who shall want to accept this agreement. This second covenant was offered to the Hebrews first and being rejected by the majority of Jews it was then offered to the Gentiles.

John 3:16-18 16:For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life. 17:For God sent not the Son into the world to judge the world; but that the world should be saved through him. 18:He that believeth on him is not judged: he that believeth not hath been judged already, because he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God.

As you can see the same God who had to educate the heathen by strict law is now educating the human race with love and grace. Even a warden will tell you that a bad person must have strict rules and even at times seemingly unreasonable punishment. Some will turn from their evil ways and some will not. That is their choice but in all fairness it has nothing to do with calling the Creator by a certain name. That is not really the issue in the covenant with your creator. As long as your intent is meant to be loving and deep respect for the Creator, the Creator loves you but it is still a personal agreement between you and God. No one can circumvent the covenant of Christ Jesus in your behalf. You are now responsible for your own behavior.

reply to post by studythem1


I'd say that your premise is flawed in that, if you look over history, the biblical religions are not any more or any less violent than other religions.

reply to post by studythem1


Thank you for the reply very well written and professional, nice to see people keep themselves composed when discussing such sensitive topics. I lack any real training in archaeology or ancient civilizations outside of my own study, so I may be behind you a ways, but my topic of conversation is centered around the faith aspect, the "assumption" aspect. When you mentioned this info was found on a clay tablet that predates any known Christian writing, I can believe that, as long as were keeping the key word 'known' in mind. Until we dig up every nook and grain of sand in the middle east [and beyond] we really do not know what clay tables or dead sea scroll like findings are out there.

Where I am going with this is that just because something predates "God" doesn't necessarily mean its true, or even that it matters. I am sure you know archaeology is a lot of piecing together of evidence, and who is to say that God didn't try to reach out to the Caananites, and they declined and eventually named their gods after the true living God? There could be scrolls or tablets predating the existing tablet and so on.

My point is even if it were absolutely true that the Bible copied every single thing from other religions [as I know it has copied some things already], it doesn't disprove the accuracy of the prophecies in the Bible, or the work of the Lord in the Bible. Think about it like this, if Jesus came to earth today rather than 2000 years ago, He might use references in mainstream culture, or copy different names or titles that would obviously predate His physical existence, but not His universal 'beginning and end' existence. Cheers.

I'd like to post something I've shared on a couple of other threads similar to this one.

I don't approve of any faith that encourages subjugation as an emotional coping mechanism. We fight all of our lives to be free, only to embrace dictatorship once we attain immortality? Give me a break. That's what I loathe about this reality. Every means we use to achieve an end violates the end itself. We kill to preserve life. We lie to defend truth. We steal to strive for honor. We are a walking paradox that can't even make a promise without breaking it in the same breath.

And a lot of these zealots are just more examples of that same gross contradiction that has come to define our species. It sickens me. Either you have the testicular fortitude to admit that you are a heartless cold-blooded predator only interested in preserving yourself, or you have the testicular fortitude to offer your services to your fellow man and stand behind that word. Not for a day. Not for a year. Always.

Who gives a crap about surviving? There's no point in adding years to life if you're not adding life to years. If you are not living every second of that life giving to those around you, then you have no reason to live. You are only consuming to desperately sustain your own existence. And for what? To consume more. Let the zealots cast away their wealth and belongings. Let every follower of Jesus live destitute on the streets. Let them demonstrate that this material life is not their purpose nor their interest. When they have done that, when every homeless person has sworn their life to Jesus, and when every devout Christian is wearing rags and chewing on stale bread, that is when their sincerity will become clear. That is when we'll know that their doctrine is genuine, and that their interest lies in others and not themselves.

That's when we can respect them. When they have chosen to forgo every possible comfort in favor of watching their fellow man smile. Because then we will look at them and know that they know compassion and hardship. They know where even the lowliest of men have been, they know what it is to go without and to have fear of your fellow man, and those hardened hearts that disdain the human condition and all of its flaws will finally melt in the face of true courage and family. There's love of money and connections...and then there's the bonds forged in the flames of trial and terror.

If there absolutely must be Christians, I think those are the kinds of Christians we can be proud of. If they must go to extremes, let them demonstrate extremes that help the people who need it most - the people who have no reason for faith, the people who have seen the worst of life and lost hope a few stops back. They're the ones who need it.

Let the politicians buy their own tickets to hell.

reply to post by Seede


do you have any sources outside of scripture to prove your point? have you even looked at the archaeological evidence from back then? do you even care? or would it only be beneficial to you if it supported the few verses you copied and pasted...

you cannot prove the truth by using just one source...it has to be from several...and if they dont agree, you find what does agree between all of them...not just one being the thing you try and force the others to match, but even more than that, if more outside sources disagree, then guess what...the single source you decided to base your argument on, becomes a very weak argument indeed...

do some homework and then support your verses with external contemporary proof ( that means from the same time period that theologians claim these verses were written) before trying to make me take it as the final word...but i bet you cant find any proof other than these verses to support themselves...

reply to post by honested3


once again another misses the point entirely...please read the whole thread (specifically my posts and those that are supporting this premise) and the links to the websites, and the books, and other things that were mentioned...and once you have read all of these things, then put them to the side, re-read what i said, as a whole, and then come back and see if you really got what i was trying to say...because you did not...

reply to post by NavyDoc


ok, another that misses the point...the focus was biblical religions, yes they are all harmful, yes they are all tainted, corrupted with built in tyranny,

wait for it...

guess what, the thread title means:

the focus of this thread was the abrahamic religions...but the same scrutiny can be applied to all of them...this is just a case study, not a "hate on just the bible" thread...

so...re-read, read the source material...and then see if my premise is still flawed...

What's dangerous is when people do not follow the words of Jesus and then call themselves Christian. Or people who do not follow the Koran and call themselves Moslems. Or people who do not follow their respective religions properly. All these "dangerous people" you're thinking of? Nearly all of them are heretics. Without them, dangerous events involving religious belief would.be very very rare.

reply to post by MamaJ


no it was not just directed at you, there was another person that i was talking to after the first part of the post...

im just tired of people letting their emotions cloud their judgment, and taking it personally like they are god, or they wrote the bible, cause that is what they are acting like...that im saying they are wrong, or that it is their fault...

im not even saying god is evil...even though i think god as a title has already been abused too much...what i am saying is there are impostors...all over...but specifically in a book (that i am choosing to focus on right now)...a book so many take offense to anyone scrutinizing...when it gives every reason to be scrutinized

all i am doing is pointing out some very problematic things...that should NOT be ignored...

i did not mean to sound like i was targeting you in any way...but i do think i have a valid argument as to why i cannot just rely on blind faith in a religion, or even its labels...my conscience will not let me use what has been tainted...

reply to post by 3n19m470


that is not true...the jihadists are following the koran, according to their interpretation based on the hadith...which is a book of comentaries and stories that "interpret" verses in the koran according to the writers insights...so they think they are right...but the religion has devolved into a forceful and tyrannical version of what it once was...so it is no longer pure...and wont ever be again...this is because human nature and tyrants always abuse everything, even spirituality...

likewise, christianity as we know it today, sprang from a good idea, but it was hijacked by constantine, who turned it into a state religion specifucally to force his will on the roman empire, and this tyranny lasted as long as 1200 years or more...many were killed under the heel of the pope and rome for not believeing what was forced on christianity...

and judaism from its inception, even as far back as abraham, (we cannot count Noah because they hijacked that character and tried to call him a jew, and probably said the same about adam and everyone in between)

i know what theologians say, but abraham almost sacrificed his son...now why would he think that he had to? the ugartic texts tell us why, because yahweh demanded the first born as a sacrifice...it was common practice in canaan even before abraham...wayyyy before...so even he was not who the jews said he was, and was in fear due to what he had been taught about god...later this same thinking was evident in the bloodshed that the israelites committed, not only on enemies, but on each other...and it was not becasue of justice...all we hear is that they were to take the land because the people they were killing were sinners...(but how do we know that is true? the archaeological record tells us not only were the jews sinners, which makes them hypocrites, but their version of god said it was ok to kill the inhabitants, but they got a get out of jail free card???) that is nonsense, that is tyranny...and this is the same thing muslims do to infidels today, and what jews are doing to Palestinians today also...and neither one is just...

yes religion is evil, and you may not like it, but it is true...

the old testament documents their god yahweh as being the most murderous and evil of gods in history if we take the bible as 100% truth, and that is counter to what modern day theologians have to say about the same god, who the basis of their religion is off of...they would have us believe that this god was always the same, and is all these good things, but the bible itself is telling on this, one only has to read it to find it out, and look objectively instead of through the rose colored glasses of doctrine and dogma...

Most evil? So I guess Moloch requiring all his servants and believer's to sacrifice there children in giant fiery bull statues is less evil? Huh who knew?

I had some witnesses stop by yesterday And I asked them why they pray to Jahove. They were like well he was the creator. I said "huh Jupiter created the universe?". And I gave them a little lesson on research. I tried to tell them the word god comes from gad who is jupiter/zues.

The bible speaks of Gad.

"But you who forsake the LORD, Who forget My holy mountain, Who set a table for Fortune, And who fill cups with mixed wine for Destiny,

Gad being fortune. Meni being destiny. Never heard of Zeus/Jupiter being the god of fortune. I heard Hades had that title but not Zeus.

Origami is the art of paperfolding...

The number of basic folds are limited, but can be combined in a number of ways to create different designs...beginning, of course with the same square piece of paper...any number of beautiful designs can be created...also, monsters can be created!

A99

Originally posted by studythem1

yes religion is evil, and you may not like it, but it is true...

Yes, it certainly appears so.

I doubt it's healthy to take imaginary friends so seriously, to the point of waving common sense goodbye altogether. They are all (mind) control cults to more or less degree, but has there been a more ignorant, bigoted, repressive, tyrannical, anti-knowledge, anti-intellectual cult that has had a more negative effect within the last couple of millennia, than Christianity?

I enjoyed your explanation of how such an anthropomorphic, doltish and vile version of a supreme creator came to be accepted. Though if the ignorant ancient peasants were easy pickings, surely in this day and age we have less excuse?

Could there be a more backward, superstition based and ignorant belief, than in a loving god who requires blood sacrifice? I wonder why the Christian myth isn't seen for the ridiculous remake of ancient death/ human sacrifice cults that it is. It praises torture, spinning it into a story for the credulous. The idea that an imaginary being showed his love through the means of such brutal (self?) torture...to save us from something or other...because we had the big problem of being flawed humans...the resulting threats/ emotional blackmail..... To this, we should be reverent, have gratitude? Yeah, sounds about right.....

I wish all countries would remove any funding to any educational organisation that mentions any version of god as being real. No tax cuts, no nothing. Then we might break the cycle of ignorance and forced indoctrination.

Religion and spirituality are obviously diametrically opposed IMO.

reply to post by studythem1


I know what the topic of the post was, but you cant bring up something about the Abrahamic religions without taking the religions themselves into context. Its like Making a discovery in physics but not using any physics books to make it mean anything. If I am understanding it correctly, its a completely unrelated clay tablet that supposedly predates "God", and your not going to bring up anything other than that? So what? Its just a piece of clay unrelated to anything, not proveable, its no more than finding some high school kids notebook about history thousands of years from now, means nothing. Is that what your point is? Sorry if I am being daft but you realize you cannot bring up anything religion wise without expecting to hear the whole of religion and all that comes with it. I see what your post is about but you cant expect people to just be like "jolly good find there." and then move on, no it just doesn't work like that, you have to be ready to stare down the barrel of a whole lot of guns when you bring up anything religion wise, and that is for both sides.

So if you see where I am coming from, what is the whole purpose of this piece of clay? Your not going to form a hypothesis or anything, just present something and hope people will click on to something? If you have a hypothesis I must have missed it, but I am in anticipation of it, which is where my posts are directed. Because its still just a piece of clay with no meaning to me, it has to be more than that, it has to come with a hypothesis, so lets hear it then.