The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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:
It's your opinion in the end Little Hobbo, and I won't try to tarnish your thoughts on that. However, there are discrepancies in your beliefs that just don't seem to add up.
Insane Bartender wrote:
> Well, maybe he'll treat me like I deserve, and when I die, he'll leave
> me well alone!
God is impartial and will make you reap what you have sown, whether that be good or bad.
And how the heck did you reply so fast?
> Well, maybe he'll treat me like I deserve, and when I die, he'll leave
> me well alone!
God is impartial and will make you reap what you have sown, whether that be good or bad.
And how the heck did you reply so fast?
Well, maybe he'll treat me like I deserve, and when I die, he'll leave me well alone!
Unbeliever wrote:
> Yes, but you've then broken one of the ten commandments. Isn't that a
> sin and therefore punishable?
The bible, obviously enough, doesn't say what you should do in a situation like you quoted. However, unlike the legal system of this country, God is loving, merciful, reasonable and just. He gives us guidelines for us to live by, but in a circumstance like you mentioned he would treat it with proper justice, and determine who was truly bad and who wasn't.
People like you are used to hearing cases in this country where people are punished for breaking a law, but not actually doing anything wrong. The legal system is flawed that criminals can get away with huge scams and not be punished for it, yet minor offenders and even innocent people can be sentenced harshly.
Can't you understand that God is not like the legal system. Rather he shows true justice, and will treat all as they truly deserve.
> Yes, but you've then broken one of the ten commandments. Isn't that a
> sin and therefore punishable?
The bible, obviously enough, doesn't say what you should do in a situation like you quoted. However, unlike the legal system of this country, God is loving, merciful, reasonable and just. He gives us guidelines for us to live by, but in a circumstance like you mentioned he would treat it with proper justice, and determine who was truly bad and who wasn't.
People like you are used to hearing cases in this country where people are punished for breaking a law, but not actually doing anything wrong. The legal system is flawed that criminals can get away with huge scams and not be punished for it, yet minor offenders and even innocent people can be sentenced harshly.
Can't you understand that God is not like the legal system. Rather he shows true justice, and will treat all as they truly deserve.
Yes, but you've then broken one of the ten commandments. Isn't that a sin and therefore punishable?
Unbeliever wrote:
> Our morals laws are dictated by ourselves - we choose to view them as
> something divine and take words from the Bible into Law which in all
> probability are not true at all. If someone was about to kill you and
> your family, and by defending yourself, you kill him, will you not go
> to heaven because of the maxim, "Thou shall not kill"? even
> though you were defending your life and the life of your family. Or
> will you sit by, safe in the knowledge that when you're killed you'll
> go to heaven as a martyr?
In that situation I would indeed defend my family, but that wouldn't make me a bad person. You can find loopholes in any law, but the principle behind it remains.
> Our morals laws are dictated by ourselves - we choose to view them as
> something divine and take words from the Bible into Law which in all
> probability are not true at all. If someone was about to kill you and
> your family, and by defending yourself, you kill him, will you not go
> to heaven because of the maxim, "Thou shall not kill"? even
> though you were defending your life and the life of your family. Or
> will you sit by, safe in the knowledge that when you're killed you'll
> go to heaven as a martyr?
In that situation I would indeed defend my family, but that wouldn't make me a bad person. You can find loopholes in any law, but the principle behind it remains.
Little Hobbo wrote:
> Unbeliever wrote:
>
> Good cannot exist without evil or the implication of evil which is
> dictated by moral codes in religion. Therefore
> "wickedness"
> is just a definition of certain acts that are assumed to be evil.
> What
> I mean to say is, if there was no religious moral code, humans would
> be free to pursue the limits of their desire, be they right or
> wrong.
> Religion acts as muzzle on humans.
>
> Right, so I can go hold up a bank, viciously kill some innocent young
> children and rape someone. I think there is a clear definition there.
> But the point is - Our moral laws are determined by God not us.
Our morals laws are dictated by ourselves - we choose to view them as something divine and take words from the Bible into Law which in all probability are not true at all. If someone was about to kill you and your family, and by defending yourself, you kill him, will you not go to heaven because of the maxim, "Thou shall not kill"? even though you were defending your life and the life of your family. Or will you sit by, safe in the knowledge that when you're killed you'll go to heaven as a martyr?
> Unbeliever wrote:
>
> Good cannot exist without evil or the implication of evil which is
> dictated by moral codes in religion. Therefore
> "wickedness"
> is just a definition of certain acts that are assumed to be evil.
> What
> I mean to say is, if there was no religious moral code, humans would
> be free to pursue the limits of their desire, be they right or
> wrong.
> Religion acts as muzzle on humans.
>
> Right, so I can go hold up a bank, viciously kill some innocent young
> children and rape someone. I think there is a clear definition there.
> But the point is - Our moral laws are determined by God not us.
Our morals laws are dictated by ourselves - we choose to view them as something divine and take words from the Bible into Law which in all probability are not true at all. If someone was about to kill you and your family, and by defending yourself, you kill him, will you not go to heaven because of the maxim, "Thou shall not kill"? even though you were defending your life and the life of your family. Or will you sit by, safe in the knowledge that when you're killed you'll go to heaven as a martyr?
I agree with IB to a certain extent - where is God's hand in all the suffering on Earth and if it's to "test our resolves" then, fair enough, the innocent will suffer. But what about the innocent sinless people who haven't even heard of God or haven't been informed about God? Where does your religious code leave them?
Little Hobbo wrote:
> Like the rabbit asks it's owner why it must live in a cage and not in
> the house with him. We can't question the decisions made by our
> creator and owner, but we can be grateful for the gift of life in the
> first place.
No, the point is, why is heaven on earth and not, say, on Mars or Cappella or in some as yet undiscovered star system? It's here because it's the only place the people at the time could conceive of living in.
And as for being thankful for the gift of life. Heh, I could rant for hours about a statement as pompous and stupid as that. There are millions of people the world over for whom life is no gift but instead a curse that refuses to be broken. Rape, poverty, starvation, torture, slavery, disease. Some people live all of these at once every day of their lives. Is this what God intends of its children? If God expects people to be thankful for life, I expect he is to be greatly disappointed.
If God ever appeared to me and asked me to thank him for the gift of life, I'd spit on his feet and smakc him in the face, before demanding that he tell me exactly where he gets off demanding so much from those people who recieve so little.
Life is something that can be both a blessing and a curse. For the millions of people around the world diagnosed with fatal diseases, for people captured, used and abused as slaves, raped as unwilling prostitutes or tortured for crimes committed several generations past, life is no great gift.
It's all very well for people who lead ordinary lives to preach about Gods love, and the gift of life, but for those who are far less fortunate, you're basically laughing in their faces.
> Like the rabbit asks it's owner why it must live in a cage and not in
> the house with him. We can't question the decisions made by our
> creator and owner, but we can be grateful for the gift of life in the
> first place.
No, the point is, why is heaven on earth and not, say, on Mars or Cappella or in some as yet undiscovered star system? It's here because it's the only place the people at the time could conceive of living in.
And as for being thankful for the gift of life. Heh, I could rant for hours about a statement as pompous and stupid as that. There are millions of people the world over for whom life is no gift but instead a curse that refuses to be broken. Rape, poverty, starvation, torture, slavery, disease. Some people live all of these at once every day of their lives. Is this what God intends of its children? If God expects people to be thankful for life, I expect he is to be greatly disappointed.
If God ever appeared to me and asked me to thank him for the gift of life, I'd spit on his feet and smakc him in the face, before demanding that he tell me exactly where he gets off demanding so much from those people who recieve so little.
Life is something that can be both a blessing and a curse. For the millions of people around the world diagnosed with fatal diseases, for people captured, used and abused as slaves, raped as unwilling prostitutes or tortured for crimes committed several generations past, life is no great gift.
It's all very well for people who lead ordinary lives to preach about Gods love, and the gift of life, but for those who are far less fortunate, you're basically laughing in their faces.
I'm late for a lecture, be back later!!
Page: