Religion, what's the point?

I really like the idea of interpreting your own vowels. It's like a Countdown approach to theology.
 
dumbo said:
I personally believe religion has helped us achieve great things, including scientific advances, great art and culture. Visit Cordoba in Spain and you'll be amazed at what religion has given the city.
Click to expand...

:lol:

Nonsense. Religion has held us back.
 
Religion has given us great art to be fair. Though whether those same artists (who were often simply commissioned by the church to create it) would've gone on to produce other great, different, non-religiously themed art without it is debatable, but pretty bloody likely.

Michelangelo may well have still created David. He just would've been called Steve, or Dan.
 
Mockney said:
Religion has given us great art to be fair. Though whether those same artists (who were often simply commissioned by the church to create it) would've gone on to produce other great, different, non-religiously themed art without it is debatable, but pretty bloody likely.

Michelangelo may well have still created David. He just would've been called Steve, or Dan.
Click to expand...

There might have been subtle differences. For instance, he might have had a bigger knob, possibly stuck up another bloke's arse.
 
Religious dickheads and non-religious dickheads share one thing, they are both dickheads.

Live and let live I say. If you believe, good for you, enjoy heaven. If you don't, good for you too, don't enjoy heaven, since you don't believe it exists.

All this aggression and the need to try and prove each other wrong baffles me. A non-believer isn't going to convince a believer they're wrong, and vice versa, so why bother?
 
Liam147 said:
Utterly baffling, right guys?
Click to expand...

Well yeah. I don't at all like the idea of a strict patriarch who'll send me to eternal torture 'cos a bird ate an apple once and I didn't acknowledge it.

I mean, my dad slapped me once for stealing a watch at school, but he at least cooked me a smashing roast dinner later.

My dad > Jehova.
 
Drainy said:
If the religious agreed to that you wouldn't hear anywhere near as much from atheists on the subject.
Click to expand...

Hmm, yeah. All goes in circles now though.
Mockney said:
Well yeah. I don't at all like the idea of a strict patriarch who'll send me to eternal torture 'cos a bird ate an apple once and I didn't acknowledge it.
Click to expand...

Be good then, Mockney.
 
Mockney said:
Well yeah. I don't at all like the idea of a strict patriarch who'll send me to eternal torture 'cos a bird ate an apple once and I didn't acknowledge it.

I mean, my dad slapped me once for stealing a watch at school, but he at least cooked me a smashing roast dinner later.

My dad > Jehova.
Click to expand...

If you had God in your heart you wouldn't have stolen that watch, wouldn't have gotten slapped by your dad, and still would have gotten the roast dinner.

God 1, Mockney 0
 
The Neviller said:
If you had God in your heart you wouldn't have stolen that watch, wouldn't have gotten slapped by your dad, and still would have gotten the roast dinner.

God 1, Mockney 0
Click to expand...

That's not necessarily true. Mockney's Dad, blessed be He, might have cooked the roast dinner because he felt a bit guilty about the slap.
 
Drainy said:
Yes, religion only impacts on non-believers because the non-believers dare to say they don't believe. Right.

Also Christianity teaches salvation through jesus, not through deeds.
Click to expand...

You do know I was agreeing with you don't you?

We're in a situation now where believers convert the non-believers (or try to), so strongly that the non-believers have to be very in-your-face about how absurd the notion of religion is, which prompts the believers to then argue about how good religion is, and there's your cycle.
 
Plechazunga said:
That's not necessarily true. Mockney's Dad, blessed be He, might have cooked the roast dinner because he felt a bit guilty about the slap.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that's not the way the parable of the stolen watch and the roast dinner went if I'm honest, but then it's been a while since I read the bible.
 
Liam147 said:
...because God's teachings made him realise what he did was wrong.
Click to expand...

My dad's an atheist. If anything made him realise, it was the teachings of Confucius.

Or the Code of Hammurabi. He fecking lives by that thing.

Plechazunga said:
That's not necessarily true. Mockney's Dad, blessed be He, might have cooked the roast dinner because he felt a bit guilty about the slap.
Click to expand...

You should've seen what he did when I pronounced PDF file wrong.
 
He killed all the first borns of Putney when I got in trouble for persistently failing to tuck in my shirt.

He was a hard task master, but it was for my own good.
 
I was subbing an R.E. class yesterday and we were doing parables. In the book there were pictures showing some of the parables with the title above them, so I was going through them and described each one and what it meant. That is until I got to the Parable of the Lost Coin, which I couldn't remember, so I said "and finally the Parable of the Lost Coin...see the man there with the coin?....he lost it."
 
Liam147 said:
You do know I was agreeing with you don't you?

We're in a situation now where believers convert the non-believers (or try to), so strongly that the non-believers have to be very in-your-face about how absurd the notion of religion is, which prompts the believers to then argue about how good religion is, and there's your cycle.
Click to expand...

You said you believe in live and let live, but you say you think we're in a cycle that can't be broken basically because 'enragingly arrogant atheists' won't just stfu and take it.

Even if Atheists as a group stopped replying to the religious, the religious would still try to convert them- it is in their doctrine. Civilised society is built on competing ideas and debate. If one side decides to unilaterally disarm because you are sick of hearing about it society will progress in the manner determined by the other side.

Atheists are the ones saying we shouldn't impose any religious belief system on other people, the religious try to convert. But yet it is atheists who are arrogantly trying to impose their beliefs on others.

If you actually believe in 'live and let live' you would agree with the secularists instead of calling them enragingly arrogant
 
Liam147 said:
...because God's teachings made him realise what he did was wrong.
Click to expand...

Btw, are you under the impression that goodness didn't exist until the dissemination of God's teachings? In the thousands of years humanity existed before any kind of idea of the Abrahamic God was introduced, there was no goodness? None at all? What about all the places that cultivated civilisation without the idea of the Abrahamic God? China, India etc? Did they just all learn to be good in the 16th century when we happened upon them and could let them know? How did they ever get anything done! What with all the rape and stuff.

Oh, I forgot, rape is bad wasn't one of God's teachings....Ok, what with all the...erm...carved images they were making.
 
The Neviller said:
I'm pretty sure that's not the way the parable of the stolen watch and the roast dinner went if I'm honest, but then it's been a while since I read the bible.
Click to expand...

Let us consult the text:

The Book of Mockney, IX, 14-30

And it came to pass that Mockers returned home from school. And Mockney's Dad, blessed be He, said unto him, "Son, I hear from the theme tune to Robot Wars that thou art come home from school; but I see thee not, for thou art invisible to me, as the lost turbot is hidden from its shoal." And Mockney did reply unto Him, saying, "Wha? I'm watching the telly." But Mockney's Dad, blessed be He, was unsatisfied, and He betook Himself into the living-room, and said unto him, "How was thy day? Didst thou strive to follow the words of thy teachers, or did their wisdom fall beside thee like the wasted seed of Onan?" And Mockney did reply unto Him with a sort of ambivalent grunt. And Mockney's Dad, blessed be He and all His progeny, was just about to reply unto him, warning him to stop speaking in the manner of a boar, when He noticed upon his wrist a timepiece of unknown provenance, and He said unto him, "Son, what is that timepiece of unknown provenance that I notice upon thy wrist? Whence did it come, whose is its owner, why dost thou wear it, and wherewithtofore canst thou explain its provenance?" And Mockney replied unto his father, saying, "Dunno I found it no-one's probly dad I'm watching this." And Mockney's Dad, blessed be He and all His progeny, including Mockney, even unto the nth generation, was much vexed by His son's words. And he said unto him, "Son, thou hast stolen this timepiece in defiance of thy Father's teachings. Thou art going to get such a hiding, and wait till thy mother hears of this thou little shit." And so saying, verily He did smite His son about the face and neck with moderate force. And Mockney did clutch his face and shriek unto Him, "feck's sake! It's like the Third fecking Reich round here!" And so saying he did run at haste to his bedroom weeping, though it was not clear even to him whether the salt tears were real or he was sort of making them come that his Father might feel worse. And Mockney's Dad, blessed be He etc. etc., did feel a great pity for his son, that he had but recently smitten. And in His shame, He took a lamb from His flock, which He kept pastured in a very cold box in the kitchen, and put it to fire. And when it was burnt through He did call unto Mockney, saying, "Son, set not thy heart against me, since I smote thee. For I have taken a lamb from my frozen flock and put it to fire, and lo, it doth smoulder pleasantly among potatoes. Come, eat with thy Father, and let us forget our quarrel." And Mockney heard his words, and though he still nursed anger in his heart, and was pretty sure his cheek was still red, verily he could smell the fumes of the lamb, and soon he felt a great hunger. And so he descended to his Father, saying unto him, "You could at least apologise." And they did sup together, and soon his Father began to speak of Leicester away and the injury to Henning Berg, and it became a great struggle for Mockney to stop himself joining in. And in this way they passed the evening.
Click to expand...
 
A friend said "this radio station i'm listening to has an advertisement for an investing group that only invests on christian principles..."

First joke: So, no usury, then?
Second joke: But really, I do like the idea of investing money based on Christ's teaching. My bible knowledge is a but rusty, but I'm sure there was something he did involving moneylenders in temples...
 
Drainy said:
You said you believe in live and let live, but you say you think we're in a cycle that can't be broken basically because 'enragingly arrogant atheists' won't just stfu and take it.

Even if Atheists as a group stopped replying to the religious, the religious would still try to convert them- it is in their doctrine. Civilised society is built on competing ideas and debate. If one side decides to unilaterally disarm because you are sick of hearing about it society will progress in the manner determined by the other side.

Atheists are the ones saying we shouldn't impose any religious belief system on other people, the religious try to convert. But yet it is atheists who are arrogantly trying to impose their beliefs on others.

If you actually believe in 'live and let live' you would agree with the secularists instead of calling them enragingly arrogant
Click to expand...

You're taking my posts out of proportion.

I'm talking about the people who find the notion of God utterly laughable, and continue to say so. If people hold that viewpoint, fine, but not everyone is as interested as you think they are in hearing it.

You say that 'if atheists stopped replying to believers', but that will never happen. It just won't. People try far too hard to convert people, both ways.

You also don't seem to recognise that there are many different types of people. It isn't just a black and white thing you know. There are the pious types who'll tell everyone their religion is the best and you must believe what they believe, there are people who will repeatedly tell everyone else there is no God, and that believing in one is stupid. They both annoy me.

There are also millions of people in between. For example, there are people who believe in God, and people who don't. These people don't feel the need to go around telling people what to believe and what not to believe.

But those who kill 'in the name of religion', for example the case in Oldham I think it was a few months ago. An "Honour killing" they called it, are the absolute bottom of the barrel.
Mockney said:
Btw, are you under the impression that goodness didn't exist until the dissemination of God's teachings?
Click to expand...

Not at all. I was continuing the joke with your post. Although I really don't know what people were like BC.

Plechazunga said:
Let us consult the text:
Click to expand...

:lol: Excellent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.