This is always interesting to me because the most fanatical religious areas in America I've encountered are all protestant strongholds where the evangelical movement is the strongest. And generally, I think the evangelical far right religious movements in America, from tent revivals to the 70-80s tv preachers sprung out of American protestants. When I was younger I always viewed protestants as far more extreme and fanatical than other religions or variations of Christians.
Religion, what's the point?
- Thread starter TheRedFlag
- Start date
This is always interesting to me because the most fanatical religious areas in America I've encountered are all protestant strongholds where the evangelical movement is the strongest. And generally, I think the evangelical far right religious movements in America, from tent revivals to the 70-80s tv preachers sprung out of American protestants. When I was younger I always viewed protestants as far more extreme and fanatical than other religions or variations of Christians.
]Yep, that's true. That's also part of it. Catholicism is just by its very nature pretty stable. There are disagreements, and sects, and this and that, but there's just more of a shared idea of their religion than there is in protestantism. The Pope and the Vatican have always been a stabilizing factor, in that sense.
Wasn't anti-catholicism a large part of the KKK? The whole white supremacist movement too. Not that Catholics can't be white supremacists, of course.
Oh yes
Daily reminder that American Christians don’t believe in Christianity
It is expanding itself, not into anything.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expansion_of_the_universe
As far as I know (and I could be wrong, just my very humble point of view), it seems inconsistent to us simply because we have only the limited view of what is in front of us in the present, the present of one being a speck on the scale of time and the world. God being Spirit and Omniscient sees the bigger picture and acts accordingly for the greater good. Once again, as a believer, I don't claim to have all the answers. God alone does
I believe that we have evidence of God's power at work every single day. What a non-believer considers as coincidence or serendipity, a believer interprets as God's power at work.
About the bolded, He actually did that but His creation was corrupted by sin. He plans to make all things right once more and restore a perfect world for eternity.
If you take a step back and look at that objectively, can you see how convenient that is? Both for you because you can only view your god in a positive way, and for your god because he gets all the credit for good things, all while having the mother of all non-answers to give for why he allows those bad things. Claiming you're perfect and then not giving people the chance to think otherwise is a pretty good move.
As for paradise, if he wasn't successful with his first go then he's either incompetent, not all powerful or he wanted it to be a failure. The fact that free will stumped a perfect being from creating a perfect world to the point where it made him postpone the idea of it for thousands/millions of years to instead create an imperfect world that ends up with billions of people suffering and even more people being tortured for all eternity is pretty interesting.
Last edited:
Great faith to be born into. No confessing any sins so I can lead my life anyway way I want and as a pure atheist when I'm on my death bed I'll hedge my bets, say sorry and if by any chance there is something after then off I go. Certainly makes life a lot healthier without all those restrictions people like to live by in the name of religion.
The Bart Simpson line of thought..
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=b...ate=ive&vld=cid:39d4bd6f,vid:aKU3hMvD31w,st:0
I'm not sure healthier is the right word to use, perhaps liberated is better.
Vocabulary aside though, that's always been one of the great motivators or draws away from belief. But when sufficient numbers do so, it leads to inevitable social change (and the issues/problems that come with that) together with a much larger state.
Last edited:
Thanks for the link....but it's still a theory.
Btw, if the universe is infinite, then how can it be expanding if it's already maxed out?
Infinity is not a measurement, it's a concept.
That's a good way to put it. At least in the areas I've lived, that stability seems to have a somewhat moderating effect where most Catholics I've met have never been too extreme whereas some of the Protestants/evangelicals have been really, really far out there. Of course this isn't always the case but I think there is something to the notion that the Vatican/Pope helps prevent many Catholics from drifting to some of the extremes I've seen in Protestants.
Yes, and at the time there was a not-insignificant backlash against JFK because he was the first Catholic president and some spread the idea that he would be controlled by the Vatican.
Big, if true…
I find it highly unlikely that Jesus of all people was a redhead
Just like the theory of gravity?
Far from the weirdest belief they have, to be fair.
When he returns to earth, he will apparently keep a summer home in Missouri.
Bless them and their magic underpants.
Both. Gravity is a fact, but what it actually is remains theory.
This ignores the fact that the scientific use of the word “theory” is different from the lay use of the word.
Watch ‘Under the Banner of Heaven’ n Hulu.
Some infinities are greater than others. My son was explaining this to me when he was doing his maths degree but I honestly don't have the understanding to explain it like he does.
I think Buzz Lightyear had something to say about that as well.
Because it's not expanding into anything. Space itself is expanding, meaning the distances between everything get larger.
As for it being a theory, that's because everything in science is a theory. The expansion of the Universe is extremely well-documented.
Haha, very true indeed.
I want to ask why Missouri but maybe I don't want to know.
It's on my list!
The man's a clown obviously, but I don't see what a pic of some fringe American loon adds to the debate tbh.
This argument makes me smile. Taking gravity as the example
You had newtons books on gravity. It was accepted but found to be ultimately wrong by Einstein.
You had Einstein books on gravity. Accepted but now known to have holes.
Yet ultimately accepted as a phenomenon, and it's a scientific theory so basically a work in progress until we have all the evidences.
When it comes to religion we religious folk have to provide definitive answers to all the questions.
We discussed this before on here.
Apparently any loon who has some religious affiliation to any religion/religious/sect, no matter how much of a nutter, means all religion should be mocked by posting the meme or Twitter view etc.
I don’t know why it makes you smile that science has no issue with improving with new evidence instead of hiding behind “having faith” and whatnot.
It makes me smile because of this kind of post.
When speaking of science people post quotes from Einstein, Newton etc but when it comes to religion it's the local pastor/priest or the average Joe on an internet forum.
Or even worse some picture from a lunatic fringe is displayed as if it's representative of all religion.
"Having faith" is not something you would see religious scholars hiding behind. The "scientists" of religion if you will.
I wonder if you have heard of the term "taqleed". And no I don't mean the wiki definition (even though that maybe a good place to start). In short it means blind following. Which is what you have a lot today in religious communities. Church on Sunday or mosque on Friday and all's good the other 6 days. It's the equivalent of taking science advice off a kid who once bought a chemistry set from Argos.
Majority of folk, and I mean this with the greatest of respect, on here se to have arguments based on these "taqlidis" when it comes to religion but go into detail when looking at scientific arguments, as in researching actual scientists. Peer reviewed papers etc.
Kinda think you’re barking up the wrong tree on this… I’m more than happy to dig through the weeds of scripture. I’ve made more than a few folks upset by pointing out what their holy book actually says in comparison to what the common “believer” thinks.
You're right, we've all been too harsh on religions and set the bar too high.
Maybe just start with all the evidence you have and we'll go from there.
I was gonna ask a question on the universe and then deleted it because it legit gives me headaches.
Without passing judgement, non God believing folks how do you all cope with questions such as what was there beyond the big bang and so on? How can we ever get an answer.
Without passing judgement, non God believing folks how do you all cope with questions such as what was there beyond the big bang and so on? How can we ever get an answer.
Again with this bullshit fringe excuse.