The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I confess that I've been looking for an excuse to talk about this subject for some time and recently I have been given an opportunity. 1 night a week for the last 3 weeks I have invited two young gentlemen into the house where I live. They have stayed for about an hour and a half each time and when have gone, all three of us are left feeling tired and yet sated and satisfied. Yes, I'm talking about Mormons.
For anyone who doesn't know about the Mormons (or the Church of Jesus Christ and the Latter Day Saints to give them their full title), they are members of a church founded in America around about 1820 by a bloke called Joseph Smith. Their basic beliefs are that Joe was a prophet in the fine traditions of the Old Testament (no, he didn't go round causing plagues of locusts or smiting his enemies with holy fury; even if he had done, 19th Century America had more pressing issues such as wiping out the natives and stealing their land to notice any vaguely biblical disasters...). He also had possession of a set of gold plates. Whereas you or I may think "Hmmm...I could get a few quid for these", Joe said that the inscriptions on them were in fact books of the Bible that never actually made the final draft, and had been buried in America since then. These inscriptions formed the basis of the book of Mormon, which in turn is the basis of their religion. And that, aside from the fact that they're really good at tracing family trees so that they can baptise their ancestors (does this involve digging them up and baptising them? Surely a body is pretty much soluble after a couple of hundred years underground; would you let yourself get baptised in the same water as 3 dozen dead and dissolved relatives?), is pretty much all you need to know about the Mormons.
Like Jehovah's Witnesses, they also seem to feel the need to go door-to-door and preach the word of Moroni (the angel who enlightened Joe Smith). Unlike Jehovah's Witnesses, they are a fairly affable bunch with none of the hellfire and damnation (and, let's face it, pathological misery) of the Witnesses. I was very welcoming of them, which quite naturally scared the bejeezus out of them as they are used to having doors slammed in their face and abuse thrown at them. It was actually nice to have them round as the JW have quite possibly marked my house with a big black cross since their last visit (the poor woman is quite possibly still having to attend three prayer meetings a day to overcome the horrible memory of "...that satanic man who told me that the founder of our great church was a con- man with convictions for fraud!" Which he was by the way...)
Anyway, I won't presume to bore you with the details of the debates that have ensued from their visits. Needless to say that I'm enjoying being educated about their religion and they are having to put up with being educated about my views on life, the universe, and everything. What I will presume to bore you with is something that has been playing on my mind since their last visit. The two gentlemen who've been coming to argue with me are both polite and tolerant young men. They have listened attentively to my arguments and been respectful of my views despite the fact that are in flagrant breach of the rules that govern their lives, and because of this I have shown them the same courtesy when listening to their arguments.
So how come religion is one of the largest bastions of intolerance and ignorance in the known world? What causes it to develop from 2 polite young men talking reasonably to someone who doesn't accept their point of view to an autocratic institution that breeds ignorance and fear of any beliefs that differ from it's own? I really don't understand how it can happen.
What further confuses me is that despite the fact that religions have been schisming, spasming, and splitting pretty much since they began, literally billions of people choose to place their faith in them. Essentially, people are handing over a portion of their lives to an intangible concept which, even if you accept it's existence, has representatives on earth who act in their own self interest and not that of their followers. Now maybe it's just me, but I don't get it.
Take the Catholic Church as an example (oh, in case you're a Christian of any sort, I'm not being biased against you. The Muslim faith also split into two distinct branches, the Sunni and the Shi'a. I'm not going to go into detail about them as A: I don't know much about the differences between the two, and B: I'm not stupid enough to make the same mistake that Salman Rushdie did...). The Catholic Church as it is now is the result of 2000 years of infighting, backbiting, self-aggrandising politicking, and general unpleasantness and intolerance. You disagree? Okay, well let's take a look at a few examples...
Firstly, despite what you may have been taught, the church was not the sole source of spiritual enlightenment and comfort until some German anti-Semite nailed a piece of paper to a door and started the first of the many Protestant faiths (which have also split and proliferated like horny mice in a grain store). The first major split (not counting the power struggle between Paul and Jesus’ brother James that took place after Jesus’ death. Oh, and the numerous minor battles between different small sects of Christians) occurred way back in 313AD. It was called Arianism, and it led to the mutilation, maiming and murder of hundreds of thousands of people as both sides attempted to have their point of view accepted as the one true way. And can you guess what it was about? Was it perhaps an argument of whether Christ existed? Or about the nature of the relationship between God and the Devil (and maybe even Bob)?
Nope. It was about the word "and".
I'm serious. A holy war was waged over one of the most common words in the language. Catholics believed that there was the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost and they were three separate and distinct entities who existed simultaneously. Arians said that there was Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (notice that there is one less "and"). God is the main man, he sent his Holy Spirit from heaven and inhabited a man who was the son. In other words, the three cannot exist at the same time.
Frankly, if I'd died over something as trivial and inconsequential as that I daresay I would have been somewhat annoyed on getting to the pearly gates...
And it doesn't stop there. In the ninth century the church split once more into Eastern Orthodox and Western Catholic (and yes, the churches of the East have themselves split repeatedly). And lest anyone think that these holy wars are a relic of history, I would invite you to consider the Protestant-Catholic split in Ireland, the Christian-Islamic conflicts that are scarring Nigeria, the Sudan, and various parts of Africa, or the Hindu-Moslem tension in India. I'm sure it's not a revelation when I say that the biggest cause of worldwide strife is conflicts between religions that supposedly preach peace and brotherhood.
When we take these various splits into account, there is something like 50 major religions and countless minor cults that all claim to preach the true word of God. The only thing they seem to hate more than the works of the Devil are religions whose views differ from their own by about 3 words in paragraph 8 of page 106. AND PEOPLE ACTUALLY TRUST AND BELIEVE THEM!!
Apologies again if what I'm saying causes offence, but doesn't anyone else think that it's about time we consigned these outmoded and outdated methods of thought control to the dustbin of history? I accept that we do need some sort of receptacle for our faith (I've often commented on how mankind seems to have a God-shaped hole in their head; we all seem to need a religion to fill it) but could we not perhaps spend some time pondering our own individual thoughts on the nature of the universe rather than relying on a set of religions that seek to keep us from thinking for ourselves and serve no purpose other than their own glorification? At least then any future wars over religion will actually be down to something people genuinely believe in rather than principles that have been imposed on them by a church that is no longer relevant.
For anyone who doesn't know about the Mormons (or the Church of Jesus Christ and the Latter Day Saints to give them their full title), they are members of a church founded in America around about 1820 by a bloke called Joseph Smith. Their basic beliefs are that Joe was a prophet in the fine traditions of the Old Testament (no, he didn't go round causing plagues of locusts or smiting his enemies with holy fury; even if he had done, 19th Century America had more pressing issues such as wiping out the natives and stealing their land to notice any vaguely biblical disasters...). He also had possession of a set of gold plates. Whereas you or I may think "Hmmm...I could get a few quid for these", Joe said that the inscriptions on them were in fact books of the Bible that never actually made the final draft, and had been buried in America since then. These inscriptions formed the basis of the book of Mormon, which in turn is the basis of their religion. And that, aside from the fact that they're really good at tracing family trees so that they can baptise their ancestors (does this involve digging them up and baptising them? Surely a body is pretty much soluble after a couple of hundred years underground; would you let yourself get baptised in the same water as 3 dozen dead and dissolved relatives?), is pretty much all you need to know about the Mormons.
Like Jehovah's Witnesses, they also seem to feel the need to go door-to-door and preach the word of Moroni (the angel who enlightened Joe Smith). Unlike Jehovah's Witnesses, they are a fairly affable bunch with none of the hellfire and damnation (and, let's face it, pathological misery) of the Witnesses. I was very welcoming of them, which quite naturally scared the bejeezus out of them as they are used to having doors slammed in their face and abuse thrown at them. It was actually nice to have them round as the JW have quite possibly marked my house with a big black cross since their last visit (the poor woman is quite possibly still having to attend three prayer meetings a day to overcome the horrible memory of "...that satanic man who told me that the founder of our great church was a con- man with convictions for fraud!" Which he was by the way...)
Anyway, I won't presume to bore you with the details of the debates that have ensued from their visits. Needless to say that I'm enjoying being educated about their religion and they are having to put up with being educated about my views on life, the universe, and everything. What I will presume to bore you with is something that has been playing on my mind since their last visit. The two gentlemen who've been coming to argue with me are both polite and tolerant young men. They have listened attentively to my arguments and been respectful of my views despite the fact that are in flagrant breach of the rules that govern their lives, and because of this I have shown them the same courtesy when listening to their arguments.
So how come religion is one of the largest bastions of intolerance and ignorance in the known world? What causes it to develop from 2 polite young men talking reasonably to someone who doesn't accept their point of view to an autocratic institution that breeds ignorance and fear of any beliefs that differ from it's own? I really don't understand how it can happen.
What further confuses me is that despite the fact that religions have been schisming, spasming, and splitting pretty much since they began, literally billions of people choose to place their faith in them. Essentially, people are handing over a portion of their lives to an intangible concept which, even if you accept it's existence, has representatives on earth who act in their own self interest and not that of their followers. Now maybe it's just me, but I don't get it.
Take the Catholic Church as an example (oh, in case you're a Christian of any sort, I'm not being biased against you. The Muslim faith also split into two distinct branches, the Sunni and the Shi'a. I'm not going to go into detail about them as A: I don't know much about the differences between the two, and B: I'm not stupid enough to make the same mistake that Salman Rushdie did...). The Catholic Church as it is now is the result of 2000 years of infighting, backbiting, self-aggrandising politicking, and general unpleasantness and intolerance. You disagree? Okay, well let's take a look at a few examples...
Firstly, despite what you may have been taught, the church was not the sole source of spiritual enlightenment and comfort until some German anti-Semite nailed a piece of paper to a door and started the first of the many Protestant faiths (which have also split and proliferated like horny mice in a grain store). The first major split (not counting the power struggle between Paul and Jesus’ brother James that took place after Jesus’ death. Oh, and the numerous minor battles between different small sects of Christians) occurred way back in 313AD. It was called Arianism, and it led to the mutilation, maiming and murder of hundreds of thousands of people as both sides attempted to have their point of view accepted as the one true way. And can you guess what it was about? Was it perhaps an argument of whether Christ existed? Or about the nature of the relationship between God and the Devil (and maybe even Bob)?
Nope. It was about the word "and".
I'm serious. A holy war was waged over one of the most common words in the language. Catholics believed that there was the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost and they were three separate and distinct entities who existed simultaneously. Arians said that there was Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (notice that there is one less "and"). God is the main man, he sent his Holy Spirit from heaven and inhabited a man who was the son. In other words, the three cannot exist at the same time.
Frankly, if I'd died over something as trivial and inconsequential as that I daresay I would have been somewhat annoyed on getting to the pearly gates...
And it doesn't stop there. In the ninth century the church split once more into Eastern Orthodox and Western Catholic (and yes, the churches of the East have themselves split repeatedly). And lest anyone think that these holy wars are a relic of history, I would invite you to consider the Protestant-Catholic split in Ireland, the Christian-Islamic conflicts that are scarring Nigeria, the Sudan, and various parts of Africa, or the Hindu-Moslem tension in India. I'm sure it's not a revelation when I say that the biggest cause of worldwide strife is conflicts between religions that supposedly preach peace and brotherhood.
When we take these various splits into account, there is something like 50 major religions and countless minor cults that all claim to preach the true word of God. The only thing they seem to hate more than the works of the Devil are religions whose views differ from their own by about 3 words in paragraph 8 of page 106. AND PEOPLE ACTUALLY TRUST AND BELIEVE THEM!!
Apologies again if what I'm saying causes offence, but doesn't anyone else think that it's about time we consigned these outmoded and outdated methods of thought control to the dustbin of history? I accept that we do need some sort of receptacle for our faith (I've often commented on how mankind seems to have a God-shaped hole in their head; we all seem to need a religion to fill it) but could we not perhaps spend some time pondering our own individual thoughts on the nature of the universe rather than relying on a set of religions that seek to keep us from thinking for ourselves and serve no purpose other than their own glorification? At least then any future wars over religion will actually be down to something people genuinely believe in rather than principles that have been imposed on them by a church that is no longer relevant.
Page:
Why would I agree to a moral code which belongs to a religion I don't follow?
I have a code of ethics which I generally adhere to 99% of the time, it's called the Law. Anything beyond that is a combination of social consideration and personal desire.
I am at will to change my morals any time I wish. I will not be bound.
I have a code of ethics which I generally adhere to 99% of the time, it's called the Law. Anything beyond that is a combination of social consideration and personal desire.
I am at will to change my morals any time I wish. I will not be bound.
Insane Bartender wrote:
> I have no problem with JW's as long as they're not stood on my
> doorstep trying to convert me.
Um, you could call it converting, but it is basically trying to get across bible thoughts that we believe are very important. Meeting certain moral and mental standards, and then making a public promise that you wish to keep these is what you equate to conversion.
> I have no problem with JW's as long as they're not stood on my
> doorstep trying to convert me.
Um, you could call it converting, but it is basically trying to get across bible thoughts that we believe are very important. Meeting certain moral and mental standards, and then making a public promise that you wish to keep these is what you equate to conversion.
Little Hobbo wrote:
> Ouch!!
> I'm a JW you know. :-)
I have no problem with JW's as long as they're not stood on my doorstep trying to convert me.
> Ouch!!
> I'm a JW you know. :-)
I have no problem with JW's as long as they're not stood on my doorstep trying to convert me.
Insane Bartender wrote:
> The funniest effort from the JW's was to pretend they were just some
> people informing everyone of the dangers of impending chemical
> warfare.
Ouch!!
I'm a JW you know. :-)
> The funniest effort from the JW's was to pretend they were just some
> people informing everyone of the dangers of impending chemical
> warfare.
Ouch!!
I'm a JW you know. :-)
Rakuga wrote:
Again, I don't agree that they are the only two choices. The big bang could have been a random chemical reaction in something larger that what we know as the universe. All just theory of course, but it's no more or less valid than the idea of a creator.
Never really thought about the loop idea before though. An interesting one...
Again, I don't agree that they are the only two choices. The big bang could have been a random chemical reaction in something larger that what we know as the universe. All just theory of course, but it's no more or less valid than the idea of a creator.
Never really thought about the loop idea before though. An interesting one...
Unbeliever wrote:
>
> It was funny at the time....
Bwah ha ha!! It's funny now! Reminds of my friend Mugz's reaction to them; answer the door naked, with pentagrams drawn all over his body in red marker pen whilst chanting "Satan is Lord, Satan is Lord".
What was even funnier was that the marker pen didn't come off for weeks...
>
> It was funny at the time....
Bwah ha ha!! It's funny now! Reminds of my friend Mugz's reaction to them; answer the door naked, with pentagrams drawn all over his body in red marker pen whilst chanting "Satan is Lord, Satan is Lord".
What was even funnier was that the marker pen didn't come off for weeks...
Rakuga wrote:
> Yeh but in that situation what started the Big Bang, what made all
> these things exist in the first place. As I said before we're either
> in a loop with no beginning (which I really can't get my head round)
> or a superior being, entity of thing (God) caused it all to happen.
> Some might argue the Big Bang was God because it was the creator...
What I hate about arguments like this is who created God?
If matter can't exist without being created, than how can something the ability to make/unmake and manipulate such things exist without being created?
If God exists, something must have made him.
> Yeh but in that situation what started the Big Bang, what made all
> these things exist in the first place. As I said before we're either
> in a loop with no beginning (which I really can't get my head round)
> or a superior being, entity of thing (God) caused it all to happen.
> Some might argue the Big Bang was God because it was the creator...
What I hate about arguments like this is who created God?
If matter can't exist without being created, than how can something the ability to make/unmake and manipulate such things exist without being created?
If God exists, something must have made him.
Light wrote:
> Rakuga wrote:
>
> But there still has to be a God surely whatever conclusion you come
> to?
>
>
> Not necessarily; if you work on the assumption that the universe was
> created, then there does have to be some sort of higher being. But if
> you take the idea that the universe came into being by accident or
> some other non pre-ordained method (some people say the Big Bang can
> be taken as such) then there is no need for a Creator, and as such no
> need for God(s).
>
> To be honest though, the existence or otherwise of God doesn't really
> interest me; it's the structure of organised religion and faith that
> gets me simoultaneously bemused, angry, and fascinated.
Yeh but in that situation what started the Big Bang, what made all these things exist in the first place. As I said before we're either in a loop with no beginning (which I really can't get my head round) or a superior being, entity of thing (God) caused it all to happen. Some might argue the Big Bang was God because it was the creator...
> Rakuga wrote:
>
> But there still has to be a God surely whatever conclusion you come
> to?
>
>
> Not necessarily; if you work on the assumption that the universe was
> created, then there does have to be some sort of higher being. But if
> you take the idea that the universe came into being by accident or
> some other non pre-ordained method (some people say the Big Bang can
> be taken as such) then there is no need for a Creator, and as such no
> need for God(s).
>
> To be honest though, the existence or otherwise of God doesn't really
> interest me; it's the structure of organised religion and faith that
> gets me simoultaneously bemused, angry, and fascinated.
Yeh but in that situation what started the Big Bang, what made all these things exist in the first place. As I said before we're either in a loop with no beginning (which I really can't get my head round) or a superior being, entity of thing (God) caused it all to happen. Some might argue the Big Bang was God because it was the creator...
I popped round my old grandads once, and saw a couple of JW's knocking on his neighbours door. So when I went in, I warned him that they would be knocking soon.
Anyway, sure enough, they knocked on the door and I ended up answering it. Now I dont like being rude, so I was trying to get across to them that I wasnt interes**ted but they werent taking the hint. That is, until my Grandad, in his "Im old and dont give a sh*t anymore" way, shouted "If thats Jehovahs, tell them to P*SS orf". I didnt need to tell them as they'd heard quite clearly. So on that note, I said "We aint interes**ted" and closed the door in their shocked faces!
Anyway, sure enough, they knocked on the door and I ended up answering it. Now I dont like being rude, so I was trying to get across to them that I wasnt interes**ted but they werent taking the hint. That is, until my Grandad, in his "Im old and dont give a sh*t anymore" way, shouted "If thats Jehovahs, tell them to P*SS orf". I didnt need to tell them as they'd heard quite clearly. So on that note, I said "We aint interes**ted" and closed the door in their shocked faces!
There was a thing my local church put through the letterbox once, think I posted it here.
" FIND THE GODSWORD "
You can just guess what that will turn into
" FIND THE GODSWORD "
You can just guess what that will turn into
Page: