Audie wrote:I dont think there is any reasonable discussion as to whether some isms or ologies promote violence. All probably are as you suggest, open to misuse.
Actually, I wanted to go further than saying that -isms
are open to misuse. I want to say that they are all guaranteed
to be used immorally. From a Christian perspective, the reason for this is man's innate sin nature. In secular terms, it is just human nature. You don't have to teach a child to lie...
Audie wrote:To me btw, all war is basically armed robbery on a grand scale. Armed robbery is seriously uncool, and it seems to me that to get everyone on board with it, there is a need for a narrative. "God" said to do it, is a good one. That is where I see the self-serving nature of it, along with that all people's seem to think they are The People. Self serving that God chose US, you know? I dont see the Bible as being self serving, it was self serving for people to write in their excuse for killing their neighbours.That is my perspective.
''All war is basically armed robbery''? I guess it is your
turn to make grand generalizations now!
I agree that a narrative is necessary for war, even a defensive war...but we need to make sense of the world around us, so the need for a narrative is part of our nature.
As for the ''Chosen People'', that term applies only to the Jews and to no one else. The Koran doesn't speak of Allah's worshippers as ''chosen''; actually, Muhammad calls Jews and Christians ''People of the Book''* over and over. I've read - and fallen asleep over - vedic literature and nowhere did I come across the idea of being chosen. However, this isn't to say that individuals who practice these religions don't think of themselves as special
in some way (thinking of ourselves as ''special'' is just our pride expressing itself...). Only in the Bible does God specifically call out a people and pronounce them Chosen.
To the point that ''it was self serving for people to write in their excuse for killing their neighbors,'' that is an reasonable conclusion for an atheist to make.
Audie wrote:As for inspiration, that is of course what "they" all say.
I'm not sure...actually, I doubt it. Muhammad wasn't inspired, he was just holed up in a cave and wrote down what an apparition told him. Vedic litterature is so tedious... it has only the inspiration of boredom. Raël wasn't inspired, he was brought to another planet where he met Jesus, Muhammad, Buddha and all the starry host. The Bible writers claim inspiration over and over, and produced prophecies to justify their claim. Prophecies which come true: therein lies the difference between the true & the false writers in God's service.
Audie wrote:The Book of Mormon may have been inspired, but a fishy aspect is that there is no archaeological trace of the extensive civilization that the book speaks of.That is an example of the "outside corroboration' that I spoke of Looked at with only itself for reference, the BoM may be as unassailable as the Bible.
The BoM is a load of Junk. As you said, there is no archaeological trace to corroborate it. The Bible is different! Archaeology and secular historians such as Josephus and Hereodotus offer the skeptic outside references. The following site has a list of 50 Bible people confirmed archaeologically:
Audie wrote:One feels at times called on to fight against the zeal of some religious groups who withto extend their reach into areas where they do not properly belong.
Mao tse tung?
*The Book being the Bible.
Hold everything lightly. If you don't, it will hurt when God pries your fingers loose as He takes it from you. -Corrie Ten Boom
+ + +
If they had a social gospel in the days of the prodigal son, somebody would have given him a bed and a sandwich and he never would have gone home.
+ + +