Support NeoGAF

[Zaptruder]

The part were he calls me indoctrinated, the part where he said I like children being taught religion. When I have said I dont. The part where he assumes he knows everything about me. Basically everything tbh.

To be indoctrinated into something is basically for these things to be dictated to you uncritically.

Assuming you were brought into religion while young, it's fair to call this process indoctrination.

By extension, most people are indoctrinated into religion, because applying critical thought to the stuff dictated by religion would necessarily repel a person.

It's a rare occasion where a person isn't indoctrinated into a religion - where they stuff up the critical thinking portions so consistently and thoroughly that they feel like they've reached the religious belief system naturally on their own.

Of course this forum is large enough that there are a few such members like that, but they're few and far between.

 

[Amir0x]

Shit, I was indoctrinated as a child. Being indoctrinated is a sad state to be in. One must do what he can to help adults free themselves of the oppressive shackles placed on them by their parents fucked up religions.

 

[Gr1mLock]

FEEEELLINGGSSSS...nothing more than feeeelingss.

 

[Atramental]

I'm amazed I was able to break free from my indoctrinated state.

15 years of private Christian schooling + religious parents + church + BJU is a pretty potent combo to break.

 

[Amir0x]

I'm amazed I was able to break free from my indoctrinated state.

15 years of private Christian schooling + religious parents + church + BJU is a pretty potent combo to break.

I am so glad I at least got to avoid the catholic school scenario. That might have been disastrous.

I was able to start doubting seriously at age 9 and eventually abandon ship altogether at 12, which I consider a small victory considering how religious and strict my parents were. Of course, I went the whole opposite direction and immediately started rebelling ultra hard with drugs/girls/partying/etc, so for my whole high school career my parents kept saying that it was me "going back to my vomit" for abandoning God. I mean, I sort of understand why they thought that considering how far in the other direction I ran, but still... it never failed to piss me off.

They either used that quote from the Bible, threatened to throw me out or compared me to my evil fucking brother. Even though I fought my brother dozens of times to protect my sister and mom from his violence, somehow the second I was caught with some new drug I was "just like [my] brother."

Religion poisons everything. Nowadays, thankfully, I have a good relationship with my parents, even when we used to debate about religion. Nowadays I make sure to even avoid that type of discussion with them

 

[nib95]

I am so glad I at least got to avoid the catholic school scenario. That might have been disastrous.

I was able to start doubting seriously at age 9 and eventually abandon ship altogether at 12, which I consider a small victory considering how religious and strict my parents were. Of course, I went the whole opposite direction and immediately started rebelling ultra hard with drugs/girls/partying/etc, so for my whole high school career my parents kept saying that it was me "going back to my vomit" for abandoning God. I mean, I sort of understand why they thought that considering how far in the other direction I ran, but still... it never failed to piss me off.

They either used that quote from the Bible, threatened to throw me out or compared me to my evil fucking brother. Even though I fought my brother dozens of times to protect my sister and mom from his violence, somehow the second I was caught with some new drug I was "just like [my] brother."

Religion poisons everything. Nowadays, thankfully, I have a good relationship with my parents, even when we used to debate about religion. Nowadays I make sure to even avoid that type of discussion with them

Religion poisons everything? No. You just have a bad experience with it and as such carry a chip on your block about it. To me you sound like one of those women who claim all men are idiots, only you've replaced men with religion.

If you think even a non religious parent is going to be happy about their teenage son doing all manner of drugs, constantly partying, sleeping around etc, you're sorely mistaken. Just sounds to me like you were a disobedient and rebellious kid full stop. Religion doesn't really change a whole lot with regards to that side of things.

 

[njean777]

Maybe it was because I was raised by non serious religious parents, I basically was free my whole life, never told I was going to hell for doing drugs/partying/girls. Idk but I know my parents never forced religion on me and my sister.

See I am only going by what you've said. This is why I've "assumed" you have no problem with it, or at least have no problem making excuses for the problem:



This is a common type of practice for people who want to push responsibility for an issue onto someone else. They'll say something like "well if that's true about A, why are you okay with B going on? Would you be ok with B?" It's effective because it avoids answering what you really think about A, while simultaneously changing the subject back (in this case, to your belief that atheists are overreaching or being disrespectful).

One, in school reality should be taught. There is no God, so God should not be brought up. But indoctrination of children is child abuse, and is wrong. So do you agree with this point of view, or do you think we should allow these child abusers free reign to do what they want?

I'm asking you directly so now instead of allowing me to make "assumptions", you can answer it up front and truthfully.

I only have what you say to go by. So far throughout this topic you've not only showed no sign of doubt of God, you've labeled yourself a Christian, have defended against absolutely every truth about the horrible corrupting influence of religion and have made excuses (or passed responsibility) for everything from child indoctrination to political leaders being religiously motivated. And then you've gone one step further to attack atheists for being 'disrespectful' while simultaneously giving no legitimate reason why it deserves special protection from criticism versus any other hypothesis for creation. Any hypothesis for creation is within the realm of science, no matter how much one wants to claim otherwise, and so should get no special protection for proper analysis.

If you believe differently, then I'd think your words would reflect it. so far, up until the moment you threw out that you doubt God, there have been no words that reflect that point of view and a substantial amount of words that suggest the opposite.

No I do think religion and school should be separate. Straight up there should be no religion taught in school. I have believed this for years and always will.

The reason I brought up disrespect is the fact that you call people ignorant or stupid for believing. That is disrespectful, you are throwing abusive ad hominem's at me or at least from what I have read anybody that believes. I only called you out, because the way you structure your arguments you are directly attacking me and my beliefs.

 

[Amir0x]

Religion poisons everything? No. You just have a bad experience with it and as such carry a chip on your block about it. To me you sound like one of those women who claim all men are idiots, only you've replaced men with religion.

Religion poisons everything. And it has nothing to do with my experience with religion that informs it, but my experience and knowledge of history.

But my religious experience wasn't even particularly bad at all - my parents were strict, it's true, but not in an overlyzealous way unbecoming of parents in general. They were strict about making me go to meetings and making sure I followed the moral guidelines of the religion, and I was extremely devout when I was under 9. Went to all the meetings, was a publisher, met nothing but nice people. But they were loving people, never abused me physically, never drank or smoke, went with me on school trips as a boy, packed little notes in with my lunch box to tell me they loved me when I was in 1st grade, etc. The few really bad notes they struck re: religion was AFTER I had already given religion up, not before, and that was clearly because the fucked up things that these religions teach made them desperate to try to 'save me' at any cost. In fact, being Jehovah's Witnesses, they didn't even believe in hell, which I have to imagine would be FAR worse for a child.

My experience with leaving my christian religion was related purely to a logical rejection of the material being taught, re: The book of Job setting a light bulb in my head as to the outrageously abhorrent moral standards of God and the idea that paradise or heaven is absolutely terrible rewards for doing good on this planet and I'd rather not go there if possible. Later logic regarding science came as I grew older, as well as the near endless string of contradictions, textual problems and additional moral conundrums as presented by the various Abrahamic Religions.

 

[CrazyDude]

I am so glad I at least got to avoid the catholic school scenario. That might have been disastrous.

I was able to start doubting seriously at age 9 and eventually abandon ship altogether at 12, which I consider a small victory considering how religious and strict my parents were. Of course, I went the whole opposite direction and immediately started rebelling ultra hard with drugs/girls/partying/etc, so for my whole high school career my parents kept saying that it was me "going back to my vomit" for abandoning God. I mean, I sort of understand why they thought that considering how far in the other direction I ran, but still... it never failed to piss me off.

They either used that quote from the Bible, threatened to throw me out or compared me to my evil fucking brother. Even though I fought my brother dozens of times to protect my sister and mom from his violence, somehow the second I was caught with some new drug I was "just like [my] brother."

Religion poisons everything. Nowadays, thankfully, I have a good relationship with my parents, even when we used to debate about religion. Nowadays I make sure to even avoid that type of discussion with them

I went to a small Catholic school, and they taught pretty much everything from the big bang to evolution. They never mentioned god either. Of course there was religion class, but I never payed much attention to it. I treated it more like a mythology class, never been much a believer myself. Helps when your parents are not religious, and never talk about religion.

 

[Air]

Maybe it was because I was raised by non serious religious parents, I basically was free my whole life, never told I was going to hell for doing drugs/partying/girls. Idk but I know my parents never forced religion on me and my sister.

Usually when one has a moderate experience, they won't go into either "All religions are evil, they must be destroyed" or "All atheists are evil they must be destroyed" mode. My folks let me decide, and emphasized the merits of education/science and religion. I talked about it in the atheism vs. theism topic, but I feel the two are molded quite nicely together for me.

It's interesting to me how so many people want religion, one of greatest forces for charity to be abolished, instead of fixed. I saw a video lecture a while ago, and the line that I remember most clearly was..."You don't fix bad science by getting rid of it, you fix it with good science, why than can we not fix bad religion with good religion?" Something along those lines anyway.

 

[njean777]

Usually when one has a moderate experience, they won't go into either "All religions are evil, they must be destroyed" or "All atheists are evil they must be destroyed" mode. My folks let me decide, and emphasized the merits of education/science and religion. I talked about it in the atheism vs. theism topic, but I feel the two are molded quite nicely together for me.

It's interesting to me how so many people want religion, one of greatest forces for charity to be abolished, instead of fixed. I saw a video lecture a while ago, and the line that I remember most clearly was..."You don't fix bad science by getting rid of it, you fix it with good science, why than can we not fix bad religion with good religion?" Something along those lines anyway.

People forget that part about religion. Its the same with celebrities/news/presidents we only remember the bad, never the good.

 

[Amir0x]

It's interesting to me how so many people want religion, one of greatest forces for charity to be abolished, instead of fixed. I saw a video lecture a while ago, and the line that I remember most clearly was..."You don't fix bad science by getting rid of it, you fix it with good science, why than can we not fix bad religion with good religion?" Something along those lines anyway.

What would good religion look like? I think good religion would not teach fairy tales, would not have any say in politics, would be unable to indoctrinate children, would have no pedophile priests or leaders endorsing the murder of innocents or hate speech directed at groups of people who think differently than you. Do you think such a religion will ever exist, given the holy books that define them?

The problem with most "moderate" religious types anyway isn't that they're moderate - I mean, that's fine. It's that even if they are moderate, they're moderate completely independently of the material that actually defines their religion. If they're in any Abrahamic religion, for example, the only source for Godly knowledge they have is the Qu'ran, Torah or New Testament. And all of them are absolutely repugnant on a moral level.

So to be "moderate" is to reject what your religion actually tells you, which is why it's interesting to me why you're able to do that much but not go to the next level and shed yourself of it entirely: after all if you don't believe what is in the holy books, why believe in an Abrahamic God at all? Your only source for belief in him is corrupted, disgusting books.

 

[Aristion]

Religion poisons everything. And it has nothing to do with my experience with religion that informs it, but my experience and knowledge of history.

But my religious experience wasn't even particularly bad at all - my parents were strict, it's true, but not in an overlyzealous way unbecoming of parents in general. They were strict about making me go to meetings and making sure I followed the moral guidelines of the religion, and I was extremely devout when I was under 9. Went to all the meetings, was a publisher, met nothing but nice people. But they were loving people, never abused me physically, never drank or smoke, went with me on school trips as a boy, packed little notes in with my lunch box to tell me they loved me when I was in 1st grade, etc. The few really bad notes they struck re: religion was AFTER I had already given religion up, not before, and that was clearly because the fucked up things that these religions teach made them desperate to try to 'save me' at any cost. In fact, being Jehovah's Witnesses, they didn't even believe in hell, which I have to imagine would be FAR worse for a child.

My experience with leaving my christian religion was related purely to a logical rejection of the material being taught, re: The book of Job setting a light bulb in my head as to the outrageously abhorrent moral standards of God and the idea that paradise or heaven is absolutely terrible rewards for doing good on this planet and I'd rather not go there if possible. Later logic regarding science came as I grew older, as well as the near endless string of contradictions, textual problems and additional moral conundrums as presented by the various Abrahamic Religions.

Just curious: Have you ever read the theodices (defenses of God allowing suffering) offered by philosophers such as Alvin Plantinga, William Lane Craig, J.P. Moreland et al?

You probably don't get this a lot, but there are no Jehovah's Witness biblical scholars or philosophers (or prominent scientists) in the academic world. Most of the are either Roman Catholic, Anglican, Evangelical or liberal. That's because many of the views held by Jehovah's Witnesses aren't considered to be biblically orthodox or philosophically coherent.

There's a huge renaissance in philosophy that has been overtaken by Christians (after having been dominated by atheists since the early 20th century), and it's certainly a breath of fresh-air to see Christians use logic and deductive reasons for several of their beliefs (anywhere from the mind-body problem to ethics and metaphysics).

 

[nib95]

My experience with life in general is that people will skew anything, rules and even religion as they see fit to suit personal or selfish gain. People will often distort moral guidelines to suit their desires, in the same way they will distort religious teachings. Religion is essentially just an extension of set moral guidelines and rules with a hopeful goal of adding extra incentive for people to adhere to them.

But it's not religion itself that is poison. The vast majority of the morals proposed are good and commendable things that are slowly being lost or are less prominent in today's less religious society. Family values, parental respect and obedience, an emphasis on charity and generosity, less materialism and more selflessness, helping one's neighbour, practising moderation etc etc.

Truth is, the poison is in mankind not religion. We as a species are flawed. Whether religion existed or not that wouldn't change. We'd just find new means to justify bad things. Manifest Destiny turns to Weapons of Mass Destruction. Both bullshit propaganda with an altogether more politically obvious agenda.

.

 

[The Technomancer]

I do agree with Amir0x about the point of "If you follow an Abrahamic religion and you already reject the literal truth of your book of faith and use it as a moral guide instead, why not go the whole way, reject the idea of God, and just keep the morals? Why only half?"

 

[Air]

People forget that part about religion. Its the same with celebrities/news/presidents we only remember the bad, never the good.

You know, I don't mind so much that people bring up the bad. I feel its necessary every once in a while. My only problem is (from my personal experiences) is that those who claim to be rational, only see the bad and can't take an objective stance and say, "Well there are bad things in this, but there are also good things."

I guess due to some of the experiences the people had they may only be willing to see what bad things something as large as religion has done, and I can empathize with that, but if you claim to be a rational adult, step out of your own experiences and try to see the whole of it as best and objective as you can.

 

[Amir0x]

As to religion being "one of the greatest sources of charity" - which is arguable - one has to wonder why there needs to be religion at all for charity to be at center. Is it better to set a foundation for believing in fairy tales, despite the net horror religion has caused to this world, because you might believe they give a little more at Christmas time?

I don't think so. But the evidence that religious people are more charitable than secular ones is also a myth. Secular organizations provide charity at an unprecedented scale, easily rivaling their religious counterparts and they do so without demand of return, like so many missionaries do in their disgusting work in developing countries.

So without religion we could still be plenty charitable, only we'd do it without the fairy tales.

Just curious: Have you ever read the theodices (defenses of God allowing suffering) offered by philosophers such as Alvin Plantinga, William Lane Craig, J.P. Moreland et al?

You probably don't get this a lot, but there are no Jehovah's Witness biblical scholars or philosophers (or prominent scientists) in the academic world. Most of the are either Roman Catholic, Anglican, Evangelical or liberal. That's because many of the views held by Jehovah's Witnesses aren't considered to be biblically orthodox or philosophically coherent.

There's a huge renaissance in philosophy that has been overtaken by Christians (after having been dominated by atheists since the early 20th century), and it's certainly a breath of fresh-air to see Christians use logic and deductive reasons for several of their beliefs (anywhere from the mind-body problem to ethics and metaphysics).

Oh yes. After leaving the Witnesses, and into adulthood, even though I stopped attending meetings and felt fairly certain God didn't exist, I went on a religious topical spree, studying prominent religious philosophy, reading the Qu'ran and Bible completely, wetting my feet over Hinduism and Buddhism.

Absolutely every bit of logic I've ever seen presented to try to explain away the horrors of the holy books have been nothing short of comical as far as I'm concerned. Like a contortionist who has bent so far from the original shape that he breaks his back or something.

 

[Salacious Crumb]

But it's not religion itself that is poison. The vast majority of the morals proposed are good and commendable things that are slowly being lost or are less prominent in today's less religious society. Family values, parental respect and obedience, an emphasis on charity and generosity, less materialism and more selflessness, helping one's neighbour, practising moderation etc etc.
.

And if you don't do these things you get buried up to your head and have stones thrown at you until you DIE. Especially if you're one of those immoral homos.

 

[njean777]

Can I ask you a question Amir0x, why is everything in the bible, Torah, etc all horrendous? Do you have to put an adjective every single time you mention them? It just seems to me you are very angry for a reason you will not explain. Just the way you describe them, you are making them out to be like aids.

What has made you so sour to the thought of religion ever being good?

 

[Amir0x]

My experience with life in general is that people will skew anything, rules and even religion as they see fit to suit personal or selfish gain. People will often distort moral guidelines to suit their desires, in the same way they will distort religious teachings. Religion is essentially just an extension of set moral guidelines and rules with a hopeful goal of adding extra incentive for people to adhere to them.

while this is true that "in general ... people will skew anything", it doesn't really change how damaging religion is as the major power it has always been throughout history and into modern times. Of course people will "skew" religion, because all religion is manmade. It was skewed to begin with since it's based on a manmade fairy tale, no different from belief in Zeus or Minerva or Thor.

If it's manmade, then we're already to the point we need to be. Because since there is no God and thus no Godly inspiration, we must understand that all the horrors caused by religion throughout history have been thoroughly human in nature. That is why the plight must be stopped. It must stop being used as justification for the vile hate, wars and general indoctrination that occurs throughout the planet in the name of their Gods.

But it's not religion itself that is poison. The vast majority of the morals proposed are good and commendable things that are slowly being lost or are less prominent in today's less religious society. Family values, parental respect and obedience, an emphasis on charity and generosity, less materialism and more selflessness, helping one's neighbour, practising moderation etc etc.

I'd object to that. The vast majority of the morals aren't even particularly commendable on the grand scheme of things. I mean, a popular example is the ten commandments. This is the TEN COMMANDMENTS, the most important thing in the Torah... the only laws handed down by God himself in stone.

Yet on the list is not "Thou shalt not commit rape." or "Thou shalt not abuse children physically or verbally."

No, it has shit like "THOU SHALT PUT NO IDOL BEFORE ME" and "DON'T USE MY FUCKIN' NAME IN VAIN, BRO" and "REMEMBER THE SABBATH."

This is handed down from God. GOD said this. It's not a metaphor, either. God said this shit, if you even remotely believe in the Bible. His most important commandments ever.

And the laws throughout the Bible endorsed by God have been variously deranged and absolutely outside the realm of modern morals.

He endorses slavery, suggests stoning ones entire family for the sins of one of the members committing rape, informs people not to cut their hair, the stoning of homosexuals, and talking back to your parents must be met with death.

And if you think the horror stops at the Old Testament, you'd be wrong.

Can I ask you a question Amir0x, why is everything in the bible, Torah, etc all horrendous? Do you have to put an adjective every single time you mention them? It just seems to me you are very angry for a reason you will not explain. Just the way you describe them, you are making them out to be like aids.

What has made you so sour to the thought of religion ever being good?

Read above for just a sample. Everything about the New Testament, the Torah and the Qu'ran IS horrendous. Morally, it's objectionable to me at such a profound level it is easy to get angry about. Because this shit is being taught to children, this is being used as a signpost and justification for genocide, political corruption, malignant influence in every aspect of modern society.

But let me put it in simpler terms.

Let's say there are "some" good scriptures in the Bible that occasionally have good advice. There's two main points to be made from this.

One, any advice that the Bible gives which is good is supremely obvious and would have been understood by any sane man through common sense. Golden rule. And two, all the bad advice and all the near endless factual inaccuracies, scientific falsehoods and abhorrent moral suggestions prove that

1. There is no Abrahamic God, or at least none of these books are holy and can be sourced to any God you can picture in your head. Therefore, if we know the holy books are false, then you can at least put aside the idea of an Abrahamic God. One cannot pick and choose what we want to be true.

2. The BAD moral suggestions are what are consistently destroying aspects of society, including all the bad shit I mentioned above. The net result is nothing but awful, awful influence on everything. Religion poisons everything it touches.

In summary, why are you picking and choosing what to believe? If you want to believe, one should be consistent. I can see no other reason logically you are ignoring all the bad stuff. If a book apparently inspired from or By God has so many problems, why can you ignore them to focus on the (very few) good parts?

 

[CornBurrito]

Can I ask you a question Amir0x, why is everything in the bible, Torah, etc all horrendous? Do you have to put an adjective every single time you mention them? It just seems to me you are very angry for a reason you will not explain. Just the way you describe them, you are making them out to be like aids.

To be fair the Torah is filled with a TON of horrendous stuff. Stoning gays, women, children. An eye for an eye philosophy. The message that it is ok to destroy entire civilizations if they happen to live on a piece of land you want. The idea that a woman is only valuable with her hymen intact. There's also the idea that god will reward you and your future progeny X generations if you do good deeds, but punish you and your progeny Y years for bad deeds. Why should children ever be punished for something their parents did? Why should grandchildren be punished for something their deceased grandfather did? And before you bring up slave reparations, I don't see them as fair either.

The Old Testament has a very different god than the New Testament.

 

[nib95]

As to religion being "one of the greatest sources of charity" - which is arguable - one has to wonder why there needs to be religion at all for charity to be at center. Is it better to set a foundation for believing in fairy tales, despite the net horror religion has caused to this world, because you might believe they give a little more at Christmas time?

I don't think so. But the evidence that religious people are more charitable than secular ones is also a myth. Secular organizations provide charity at an unprecedented scale, easily rivaling their religious counterparts and they do so without demand of return, like so many missionaries do in their disgusting work in developing countries.

Ami, out of curiosity how did you arrive at this conclusion? Is this just your own theory or do you have evidence to back it? I haven't looked in to the whole secular vs religious charitable giving thing, but based off what little I do know on the subject, evidence does suggest religious folk are more charitably generous than non religious people, and I'm not surprised at all by this.

Just to extend my point on the charity...

Concerning the issue of atheism and uncharitableness, the evidence indicates that per capita charitable giving by atheists and agnostics in America is significantly less than by theists, according to a study by the Barna Group:

“ The typical no-faith American donated just $200 in 2006, which is more than seven times less than the amount contributed by the prototypical active-faith adult ($1500). Even when church-based giving is subtracted from the equation, active-faith adults donated twice as many dollars last year as did atheists and agnostics. In fact, while just 7% of active-faith adults failed to contribute any personal funds in 2006, that compares with 22% among the no-faith adults.[76]”

A comprehensive study by Harvard University professor Robert Putnam found that religious people are more charitable than their irreligious counterparts.[77][78] The study revealed that forty percent of worship service attending Americans volunteer regularly to help the poor and elderly as opposed to 15% of Americans who never attend services.[79][80] Moreover, religious individuals are more likely than non-religious individuals to volunteer for school and youth programs (36% vs. 15%), a neighborhood or civic group (26% vs. 13%), and for health care (21% vs. 13%).[81][82]

Arthur C. Brooks wrote in Policy Review regarding data collected in the Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey (SCCBS) (data collected by in 2000 by researchers at universities throughout the United States and the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research):

“The differences in charity between secular and religious people are dramatic. Religious people are 25 percentage points more likely than secularists to donate money (91 percent to 66 percent) and 23 points more likely to volunteer time (67 percent to 44 percent). And, consistent with the findings of other writers, these data show that practicing a religion is more important than the actual religion itself in predicting charitable behavior. For example, among those who attend worship services regularly, 92 percent of Protestants give charitably, compared with 91 percent of Catholics, 91 percent of Jews, and 89 percent from other religions.[83]”

ABC News reported the following in respect to atheism:

“...the single biggest predictor of whether someone will be charitable is their religious participation.
Religious people are more likely to give to charity, and when they give, they give more money: four times as much. And Arthur Brooks told me that giving goes beyond their own religious organization:
"Actually, the truth is that they're giving to more than their churches," he says. "The religious Americans are more likely to give to every kind of cause and charity, including explicitly non-religious charities."[84]
”

Not the best source in the world but the links or studies used seem legit.
A quick Google suggests most studies and reports do find religious people are more charitable. However, since you think this is a 'myth', perhaps you could elaborate more on the subject since you seem to know so much and talk with such conviction on the matter.

 

[jaxword]

My experience with life in general is that people will skew anything, rules and even religion as they see fit to suit personal or selfish gain.

Like the way you were slandering Dawkins earlier?

And haven't provided the evidence when called out on it?

 

[HeadlessRoland]

Charity certainly isnt specific to religion. But only a fool is going to discount global entities based upon the concept of charity having a greater impact than piece meal personal charity. Communal reinforcement and social expectations to be charitable certainly is a huge factor in the religious donating.

Religion poisons everything. And it has nothing to do with my experience with religion that informs it, but my experience and knowledge of history.

Hahahah, oh you.

 

[nib95]

You mean, like the manner you were slandering Dawkins earlier?

And haven't provided the evidence when called out on it?

Huh, evidence for what? Maybe I missed something? And I didn't skew anything, I gave examples to back my opinions of Dawkins. In case you missed it there was at least two pages of discussion on it. You know his potentially misogynistic tact of telling Rebecca to shut up about her discomfort and opinions and then trying to justify it by mentioning unrelated anti-Islamic insensitive remarks. The outrageously arrogant quote from the OP of him essentially thinking he's a moral authority on dishing out who he considers to be an adequate member of society based their evolutionary beliefs...

That sort of thing.

 

[Air]

What would good religion look like? I think good religion would not teach fairy tales, would not have any say in politics, would be unable to indoctrinate children, would have no pedophile priests or leaders endorsing the murder of innocents or hate speech directed at groups of people who think differently than you. Do you think such a religion will ever exist, given the holy books that define them?

Well I will say that since you've made your mind up on the "fairy tale" matter, there is no use in debating that with you.

Most of the problems you seem to have is with how people bring their faith into the public circle, I can respect that. Its funny though, most of the things you stated, religious people should agree with (the pedophilia, the not murdering, and so on).

If I had to personally describe good religion, it would be to maximize the (good) potential of a person.

The problem with most "moderate" religious types anyway isn't that they're moderate - I mean, that's fine. It's that even if they are moderate, they're moderate completely independently of the material that actually defines their religion. If they're in any Abrahamic religion, for example, the only source for Godly knowledge they have is the Qu'ran, Torah or New Testament. And all of them are absolutely repugnant on a moral level. So to be "moderate" is to reject what your religion actually tells you, which is why it's interesting to me why you're able to do that much but not go to the next level and shed yourself of it entirely: after all if you don't believe what is in the holy books, why believe in an Abrahamic God at all? Your only source for belief in him is corrupted, disgusting books.

I don't believe being moderate is rejecting what the books tell you. Interpretations can change, especially when you understand the context and why it was written. You don't need to be a fundamentalist in order to believe. The books have core messages. They're mixed with plenty of things from poetry, to recollections of war and so on, so even if you'd want to take all of it literally, I don't believe you could. I think if you hold onto the core message, than you should be fine (moderate).

Sorry it took so long to post, I'm very tired.

Also for the record, I never said that you had to be religious to give to charity.

 

[Gr1mLock]

Can I ask you a question Amir0x, why is everything in the bible, Torah, etc all horrendous? Do you have to put an adjective every single time you mention them? It just seems to me you are very angry for a reason you will not explain. Just the way you describe them, you are making them out to be like aids.

What has made you so sour to the thought of religion ever being good?

This has been the response of almost every person who I've ever had a discussion about religion with. Just curious. Why are you NOT angry with the things you read in the Bible? The countless descriptions of cruelty, mass murder senseless barbarism, homophobia, racism etc. The reason why some (i'll speak for myself here) atheists are angry is because there are people out there making decisions that affect so many people, and this is the foundation upon which they make their conscious decisions. To me honestly this is FRIGHTENING. It makes me question their sanity.

 

[Amir0x]

Ami, out of curiosity how did you arrive at this conclusion? Is this just your own theory or do you have evidence to back it? I haven't looked in to the whole secular vs religious charitable giving thing, but based off what little I do know on the subject, evidence does suggest religious folk are more charitably generous than non religious people, and I'm not surprised at all by this.

Just to extend my point on the charity...


Not the best source in the world but the links or studies used seem legit.
A quick Google suggests most studies and reports do find religious people are more charitable. However, since you think this is a 'myth', perhaps you could elaborate more on the subject since you seem to know so much and talk with such conviction on the matter.

There are multiple levels to this distinction that it's a myth. One, atheists don't donate in the name of atheism. Religious people often vocalize their intent (because that's part of their do-gooding, self promoting way of getting into heaven), and religious charities are often labeled as religious charity. Because atheism is not an organized thing for the most part, it's much less likely you're going to be able to parse what donation is by a non-believer. Secular organizations, and there are many, make no distinction between who donates. Another is simply where atheists believe their charity is best aimed. Many atheists believe firmly that government welfare programs are a better source for charity, so money would be aimed more at such things. If you check out the list of the most atheistic countries, on average they give far more to foreign aid per dollar when compared to other countries. Denmark is a particularly shining example of how this plays out.

And of course, if you open up to book to anyone that doesn't follow organized religion and thus doesn't have any religious motivation for charity, some of the largest charity organizations in the world are secular. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, for example. Warren Buffet is one of the largest charitable individuals on Earth. The list goes on and on.

Now, it's certainly fair to say that in terms of giving money to charity, if that were the only form of charity, religious individuals have been supported by studies to have given more.

But as we see from the countless examples, charity has nothing to do with religion nor would charity suddenly drop off the face of the Earth if religion ceased to exist. Nor would there even be a particularly significant impact at all, I'd wager, since on top of the benefit of there simply being more non believers to donate now free from indoctrination, there'd be countless numbers saved and won't require charity thanks to no longer being subjected to religious wars and horrors.

 

[nib95]

Well I will say that since you've made your mind up on the "fairy tale" matter, there is no use in debating that with you.

Are you new to Ami's style of debating? The guy has one of the most infamous reputations with respect to debating/arguing on the GAF. I wouldn't expect to have a sensible debate with him on....well....anything...

Be it the 3DS, Heavy Rain OR Religion...evidently....especially religion lol.

(Sorry to be a dick Ami, but I had to get it off my chest. As mentioned in 'that' thread, I do still think you have a lot of useful stuff to offer as well, amidst all your noise and often nonsensical, overtly heavy handed criticising/condemning that is.)

 

[The Technomancer]

I don't believe being moderate is rejecting what the books tell you. Interpretations can change, especially when you understand the context and why it was written. You don't need to be a fundamentalist in order to believe. The books have core messages. They're mixed with plenty of things from poetry, to recollections of war and so on, so even if you'd want to take all of it literally, I don't believe you could. I think if you hold onto the core message, than you should be fine (moderate).

Sorry it took so long to post, I'm very tired.

Honest question: when you remove all the metaphor and "look at everything in context" what moral lessons and messages can be derived from the Bible that aren't just common sense like "don't be a dick to people"?

I mean, I am genuinely curious: what core messages are there that you think are worth learning from the Bible and not just from life?

 

[jaxword]

You know his potentially misogynistic tact of telling Rebecca to shut up about her discomfort and opinions and then trying to justify it by mentioning unrelated anti-Islamic insensitive remarks. The outrageously arrogant quote from the OP of him essentially thinking he's a moral authority on dishing out who he considers to be an adequate member of society based their evolutionary beliefs...

I'm always amazed at how you can condemn someone for doing the very thing you're doing. You are doing the SAME thing as Dawkins, claiming yourself as a moral authority over someone based upon their religious beliefs.

Just admit it--you hate Dawkins because he's not in favor of Islam. You mention his "anti-Islamic" remarks all the time.

 

[njean777]

while this is true that "in general ... people will skew anything", it doesn't really change how damaging religion is as the major power it has always been throughout history and into modern times. Of course people will "skew" religion, because all religion is manmade. It was skewed to begin with since it's based on a manmade fairy tale, no different from belief in Zeus or Minerva or Thor.

If it's manmade, then we're already to the point we need to be. Because since there is no God and thus no Godly inspiration, we must understand that all the horrors caused by religion throughout history have been thoroughly human in nature. That is why the plight must be stopped. It must stop being used as justification for the vile hate, wars and general indoctrination that occurs throughout the planet in the name of their Gods.



I'd object to that. The vast majority of the morals aren't even particularly commendable on the grand scheme of things. I mean, a popular example is the ten commandments. This is the TEN COMMANDMENTS, the most important thing in the Torah... the only laws handed down by God himself in stone.

Yet on the list is not "Thou shalt not commit rape." or "Thou shalt not abuse children physically or verbally."

No, it has shit like "THOU SHALT PUT NO IDOL BEFORE ME" and "DON'T USE MY FUCKIN' NAME IN VAIN, BRO" and "REMEMBER THE SABBATH."

This is handed down from God. GOD said this. It's not a metaphor, either. God said this shit, if you even remotely believe in the Bible. His most important commandments ever.

And the laws throughout the Bible endorsed by God have been variously deranged and absolutely outside the realm of modern morals.

He endorses slavery, suggests stoning ones entire family for the sins of one of the members committing rape, informs people not to cut their hair, the stoning of homosexuals, and talking back to your parents must be met with death.

And if you think the horror stops at the Old Testament, you'd be wrong.



Read above for just a sample. Everything about the New Testament, the Torah and the Qu'ran IS horrendous. Morally, it's objectionable to me at such a profound level it is easy to get angry about. Because this shit is being taught to children, this is being used as a signpost and justification for genocide, political corruption, malignant influence in every aspect of modern society.

But let me put it in simpler terms.

Let's say there are "some" good scriptures in the Bible that occasionally have good advice. There's two main points to be made from this.

One, any advice that the Bible gives which is good is supremely obvious and would have been understood by any sane man through common sense. Golden rule. And two, all the bad advice and all the near endless factual inaccuracies, scientific falsehoods and abhorrent moral suggestions prove that

1. There is no Abrahamic God, or at least none of these books are holy and can be sourced to any God you can picture in your head. Therefore, if we know the holy books are false, then you can at least put aside the idea of an Abrahamic God. One cannot pick and choose what we want to be true.

2. The BAD moral suggestions are what are consistently destroying aspects of society, including all the bad shit I mentioned above. The net result is nothing but awful, awful influence on everything. Religion poisons everything it touches.

In summary, why are you picking and choosing what to believe? If you want to believe, one should be consistent. I can see no other reason logically you are ignoring all the bad stuff. If a book apparently inspired from or By God has so many problems, why can you ignore them to focus on the (very few) good parts?

I believe because I just do, I don't think that is a problem. We also have to look at when the books were written and also, who wrote them. God, did not write the bible, man did. So in turn who knows what happened when they were writing the book. For all we know they could have put their own beliefs in the books as well as gods.

See you are already at a point where you are just ignoring the good part of religion. You think it is all horrendous, when in actuality their are a lot of good messages in the bible whether you want to believe it or not. You can not take the whole book literal.

Also you do not have to be a full fundamentalist in order to believe, I believe it is all up to interpretation, if you perceive it as something bad that is ok, but I may not do that. The bible has been translated so many times who knows if a lot of it is actually what was written in the first copy.

This has been the response of almost every person who I've ever had a discussion about religion with. Just curious. Why are you NOT angry with the things you read in the Bible? The countless descriptions of cruelty, mass murder senseless barbarism, homophobia, racism etc. The reason why some (i'll speak for myself here) atheists are angry is because there are people out there making decisions that affect so many people, and this is the foundation upon which they make their conscious decisions. To me honestly this is FRIGHTENING. It makes me question their sanity.

Who said I was never angry at what I have read? I never said everything in the bible is good, there is a lot of bad, but we also need to realize this was written so long ago. People back then may have been like that. Romans were a vicious bunch. FFS they had games where the whole objective was for them to slaughter each other. Its not only christianity that has slaughter.

 

[The Technomancer]

See you are already at a point where you are just ignoring the good part of religion. You think it is all horrendous, when in actuality their are a lot of good messages in the bible whether you want to believe it or not. You can not take the whole book literal.

I'll ask you the same question: what good messages are there in the Bible that are exclusive to the Bible? What moral code and direction does it give life that hasn't been independently invented by other civilizations? What, to put it bluntly, makes slogging through all the "metaphor" and all the "well when he said to kill people it was in a different context" worth it?

 

[Kalnos]

I believe because I just do, I don't think that is a problem.

Then why the Bible? Why Christianity? That's a bigger mystery.

 

[nib95]

I'm always amazed at how you can condemn someone for doing the very thing you're doing. You are doing the SAME thing as Dawkins, claiming yourself as a moral authority over someone based upon their religious beliefs.

Just admit it--you hate Dawkins because he's anti-Islam.

Again, what? I have never claimed to be better than anyone based off of religious beliefs. Quite the contrary, I don't believe religion or non religious beliefs make a man. I feel his actions do.

Your posts are just baffling jabs of tripe.


On a side note, that is not the reason I dislike Dawkins. But I certainly wouldn't go as far as to say I 'hate' him. I'd actually love to just sit down and have a cup of tea with him one day. Whether I agree with him or not, I'd still show him a level of respect, even just for his academic achievements. So long as he responded with equal politeness and good manner, I actually think we'd get on just fine irrespective of our differences.

.

 

[Kalnos]

Quite the contrary, I don't believe religion or non religious beliefs make a man. I feel his actions do.

Well, assuming you believe in an Abrahamic religion... your religion disagrees with you.

 

[jaxword]

Again, what? I have never claimed to be better than anyone based off of religious beliefs. Quite the contrary, I don't believe religion or non religious beliefs make a man. I feel his actions do.

Your posts are just baffling jabs of tripe.

No, I respond to what you have said. And when you constantly mention how "anti-Islamic" Dawkins is while condemning him for his arrogance, it's quite obvious what your real agenda is.

 

[Aristion]

Oh yes. After leaving the Witnesses, and into adulthood, even though I stopped attending meetings and felt fairly certain God didn't exist, I went on a religious topical spree, studying prominent religious philosophy, reading the Qu'ran and Bible completely, wetting my feet over Hinduism and Buddhism.

Absolutely every bit of logic I've ever seen presented to try to explain away the horrors of the holy books have been nothing short of comical as far as I'm concerned. Like a contortionist who has bent so far from the original shape that he breaks his back or something.

What contemporary philosophers specifically?

 

[Amir0x]

I don't believe being moderate is rejecting what the books tell you. Interpretations can change, especially when you understand the context and why it was written. You don't need to be a fundamentalist in order to believe. The books have core messages. They're mixed with plenty of things from poetry, to recollections of war and so on, so even if you'd want to take all of it literally, I don't believe you could. I think if you hold onto the core message, than you should be fine (moderate).

I just don't see how you can believe that if you've read the Bible. The "context" of why it was written was what? What context makes slavery ok? The stoning of rapists family for their own sin? The hate speech aimed at homosexuality? Remember, this is your only source for belief in God. So, two questions then.

1. Where do you determine what is a 'quaint stroll down history lane' and thus ignorable by moderate standards, and why would God inspire all those horrible laws? Indeed, why is it in the Bible at all?

2. What is the core message of the Bible? Genuine question. All the gospels feverishly outpace each other in the race to contradict one another. All of the Torah is a muddy malaise of genocide, murder and morally reprehensible standards. Jesus must have been supportive of slavery:

5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. 6 Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. 7 Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not people, 8 because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether they are slave or free.

9 And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him.

It's sort of quaint that he told Slave Masters to be nice to their slaves. Isn't that quaint?

1 All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that God’s name and our teaching may not be slandered. 2 Those who have believing masters should not show them disrespect just because they are fellow believers. Instead, they should serve them even better because their masters are dear to them as fellow believers and are devoted to the welfare[a] of their slaves.

But man beware if your masters don't believe in God 'cause then you should definitely be disrespectful!

Is this a product of its time? Wouldn't someone you base your entire moral system on be able to just fucking say Slavery is wrong?

Why is it that God is omnipotent and omniscient, but he cannot find the words to just fucking SAY what we all know is morally right? Why is it the Bible always provides nothing but evasive, highly interpretive bullshit for prophecies, when any God who actually had the answers would be able to be so specific as to render the Bible a joke? Why is it that GOD is a product of time too?

Shouldn't GOD be right no matter what time period he exists in?

 

[Amir0x]

God, did not write the bible, man did.

Ok, here's another simple logic problem. If man is the ONLY one responsible for the Bible, then by what standard do we then allow ourselves to be fooled into thinking that 2000 year old desert goat herders had the line on what God wants? What criteria do you have for ignoring some parts, and not others? Which version of the Bible do you believe in, and how do you choose?

Your idea of God and everything that you know about him in some form comes from one of these Abrahamic Texts, unless I am mistaken. But given that you know they're filled with near endless historical falsehoods, scientific falsehoods and morally abhorrent standards (you do, don't you?), why do you believe these goat herders ever even had a line on God? Clearly, if we both agree it's man made, then given this evidence we can also rightly assume it must be entirely fabricated?

In other words, if not the Bible, where did the source idea for the Abrahamic God come from and what do you use to determine what is the 'true' YHWH?

 

[njean777]

I'll ask you the same question: what good messages are there in the Bible that are exclusive to the Bible? What moral code and direction does it give life that hasn't been independently invented by other civilizations? What, to put it bluntly, makes slogging through all the "metaphor" and all the "well when he said to kill people it was in a different context" worth it?

Well the ten commandments are a good start, the loving one another is another, helping fellow man, sacrificing your life to save others, give charity, be humble, respectful. I mean lets look at the time this was written, today people obviously mostly act this way, but if it wasn't for the bible I don't know if we would have the same order we have today. It was a powerful book back then, people listened to it, followed it, feared it. So to be told not to kill, cheat, steal for most, from a higher power, may have scared them to not do these things. Which they may have passed on for generation after generation.

Ok, here's another simple logic problem. If man is the ONLY one responsible for the Bible, then by what standard do we then allow ourselves to be fooled into thinking that 2000 year old desert goat herders had the line on what God wants? What criteria do you have for ignoring some parts, and not others? Which version of the Bible do you believe in, and how do you choose?

Your idea of God and everything that you know about him in some form comes from one of these Abrahamic Texts, unless I am mistaken. But given that you know they're filled with near endless historical falsehoods, scientific falsehoods and morally abhorrent standards (you do, don't you?), why do you believe these goat herders ever even had a line on God? Clearly, if we both agree it's man made, then given this evidence we can also rightly assume it must be entirely fabricated?

In other words, if not the Bible, where did the source idea for the Abrahamic God come from and what do you use to determine what is the 'true' YHWH?

TBH I did not get my idea of god from a bible, Cuz I will be honest I have never finished the book. I know of it and what some of it says, but I have never personally read the thing. I got my version of god from most of the christian bands I listen to. If you want me to be truthful I am.

 

[Aristion]

BTW, anyone claiming that the God of the Old Testament is an atrociously immoral figure, I'd strongly recommend listening to this British radio program wonderfully uploaded to Youtube which broadcasted a debate between Paul Copan (Christian philosopher) and Norman Bacrac (Secular Humanist). Just listen to the debate, and figure out who was logically responding to the ethical dilemmas, and who was merely attacking the position.


BTW, Amir0x, you might find this debate between Bart Ehrman and Darrell Bock interesting.

 

[elrechazado]

Well, assuming you believe in an Abrahamic religion... your religion disagrees with you.

Did you just say that all abrahamic religions disregard works? Because that's just wrong as a matter of fact.

 

[Bit-Bit]

This has been the response of almost every person who I've ever had a discussion about religion with. Just curious. Why are you NOT angry with the things you read in the Bible? The countless descriptions of cruelty, mass murder senseless barbarism, homophobia, racism etc. The reason why some (i'll speak for myself here) atheists are angry is because there are people out there making decisions that affect so many people, and this is the foundation upon which they make their conscious decisions. To me honestly this is FRIGHTENING. It makes me question their sanity.

It's true to say that religious people have a veil over their eyes. They all pick and choose and that's why there's so many different types of christians. Some speak in tongues while others believe that speaking in tongues is crazy. Yet those same will think that demons and witches causes sickness. And guess what, they both have a justification for it somewhere in the bible.

As a kid, I was always curious and questioned everything. I went to Sunday School every Sunday and sang along and prayed like everyone else. But when I read the bible, I didn't look at it as some holy text that we can't question. Instead, I questioned the shit out of it and the answers I got were disappointing.

Literally, the first thing I ever asked in church(after summoning the courage to do so) was "What about Dinosaurs?". Even as a kid I knew that there was no way that man came six days after the creation of the Universe. Bill Nye and the Magic School Bus was telling me about plate tectonics and how they move, and how old fossils are and just how amazing the world really is. And all Sunday School taught me was "the magic man, done it". That's it? That's your grand answer for everything? It's insulting really.

I remember I was 12 when I had my first major discussion with my parents about going to church. I flat out told them that I can't take it seriously anymore. That so many things don't make sense to me and I wonder why people think God is so great when they have supposed proof to the contrary. I mean, do people even read the bible? God killed so many people just because he was either jealous, angry, or just plain bored. Why on earth would I want to spend an eternity with that guy?

 

[Air]

Are you new to Ami's style of debating? But the guy has one of the most infamous reputations with respect to debating/arguing on the GAF. I wouldn't expect to have a sensible debate with him on....well....anything...

Nah, I've lurked here for a while. Its ok though, sometimes I admit it gets frustrating, but I can say that he's very passionate about what he believes, and he seems to explain it as best he can. I understand, and I don't really mind too much. I've argued with much much worse.

Honest question: when you remove all the metaphor and "look at everything in context" what moral lessons and messages can be derived from the Bible that aren't just common sense like "don't be a dick to people"? I mean, I am genuinely curious: what core messages are there that you think are worth learning from the Bible and not just from life.

Well before I answer, I will say this: While "don't be a dick" sounds simple enough, most people still don't really get it. There was a link a while back to a panel for a skeptic's conference where the title to it was, guess what? "Don't be a dick".

The point is while life might be relentless, some people aren't prone to learning, and they'll make the mistakes over and over again. The thing is, you could go through life learning not to be a dick, and learn very late in life that you shouldn't be one. A poster said something earlier about learning from other people's work, or your ancestors. That's one of the reasons why keeping the morals close to you work, and why I feel religion can work. Those people probably learned not to be a jerk later on in life, which means that I don't have to spend my life learning the exact same lesson that guy did. It allows me to use my current time to push forward and do work so the next generation doesn't have to worry about the other petty stuff.

The second reason is that I do believe in a higher power. I'll try to explain it like so: I feel that the people, while jotting this all down were inspired by the universe, God and everything. I too am inspired by all this stuff. Like the other example, the book kind of gives me a stepping stone of sorts to work with.

I will be honest, I did not describe this as best as I wanted to, but I hope I did a good enough job where I satisfied your answer. It's enjoyable when thinking about it, and I usually don't express it to other people, so writing it down was a different experience. I don't feel I've done justice to what I feel, but I'll get better at it.

EDIT: I think this post contains the most times I've said the word "dick". lol

 

[Amir0x]

Well the ten commandments are a good start, the loving one another is another, helping fellow man, sacrificing your life to save others, give charity, be humble, respectful. I mean lets look at the time this was written, today people obviously mostly act this way, but if it wasn't for the bible I don't know if we would have the same order we have today. It was a powerful book back then, people listened to it, followed it, feared it. So to be told not to kill, cheat, steal for most, from a higher power, may have scared them to not do these things. Which they may have passed on for generation after generation.

Are the ten commandments a good start? You actually believe having no idols before him, not taking his name in vain and observing the sabbath are three of the most important laws mankind can have?

Why didn't God say 'thou shalt not rape' or 'thou shalt not abuse children sexually or physically?' Surely these are more important standards for people to live by? I could whip up a better list of commandments to live by in my sleep. And remember, the ten commandments were the holiest of all commandments, the only commandments engraved on stone by God himself.

It seems to me that you're not doubting God at all. I've never seen someone bend over harder to just believe.

 

[Kalnos]

Did you just say that all abrahamic religions disregard works? Because that's just wrong as a matter of fact.

They pretty much do, since I believe all them require faith/belief in God as the method to enter heaven.

 

[SuperBonk]

I'll ask you the same question: what good messages are there in the Bible that are exclusive to the Bible? What moral code and direction does it give life that hasn't been independently invented by other civilizations? What, to put it bluntly, makes slogging through all the "metaphor" and all the "well when he said to kill people it was in a different context" worth it?

Not only that, but there is a fundamental problem with the idea itself. If there are some "good" values in the Bible, and I agree that they are, they have to be good for a reason. This means that they create positive utility for society. We can measure this utility (charitable donations, kindness, etc.) and use it to promote the values without any need for a backstory involving a divine carpenter.

Good deeds can be advertised in the same way good hygiene is advertised.

 

[elrechazado]

They pretty much do, since I believe all them require faith/belief in God as the method to enter heaven.

That's not at all what you said or what I responded to, but...ok?

 

[jaxword]

TBH I did not get my idea of god from a bible, Cuz I will be honest I have never finished the book. I know of it and what some of it says, but I have never personally read the thing. I got my version of god from most of the christian bands I listen to. If you want me to be truthful I am.

This is the same with most Christians.


The majority of people who are part of a religion, any religion, have never actually read the book their religion is based upon, and just went with the parts someone told them about.