Discussion Thread from the Funny Anti-Religious Pictures thread.

[Kulindahr]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

I'd forgotten that Madison adopted the phrase -- it isn't "just Jefferson's opinion", as the well-meaning idiots who bother people leaving the bars here insist.

Thanks for this one!

 

[Kulindahr]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

Having just read a history of Mohammed's time in Medina, I have to say that the Prophet would rebuke the Muslims portrayed in that quadrant.

It suggests that one thing in common to religions is that after a few generations, they get hijacked.

 

[Kulindahr]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

If Kulindahr wishes to continue with his obviously religiously biased comments ....

You mean my comments in favor of correct statements about Islam?

Or the ones in favor or correct statements about Jews?


Posts are meant for discussion. Many of mine here are because the cartoons should make people think. But if you want to make people think, then they should be aware of the facts -- and without people saying that they are, then others who drop in are likely to presume that ignorance is the preferred position.

 

[dpnice]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

You mean my comments in favor of correct statements about Islam?

Or the ones in favor or correct statements about Jews?


Posts are meant for discussion. Many of mine here are because the cartoons should make people think. But if you want to make people think, then they should be aware of the facts -- and without people saying that they are, then others who drop in are likely to presume that ignorance is the preferred position.

I think it is obvious from my post that I meant all your comments which is why I used the term "religiously biased comments".

All your justifications for your position in this thread are personal, no other member seems to think they are necessary, nor do you have the right to assume that we don't know the "facts" behind a cartoon.

I don't understand why you feel it is your role to create such an unpleasant atmosphere in what was a lighthearted non-intellectual look at religion.

 

[Kulindahr]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

I think it is obvious from my post that I meant all your comments which is why I used the term "religiously biased comments".

The whole point of the thread is religious bias -- against it. My comments are fact-biased, because humor based on falsehoods or inaccuracies is only a joke on the one who passes it on.

All your justifications for your position in this thread are personal, no other member seems to think they are necessary, nor do you have the right to assume that we don't know the "facts" behind a cartoon.

If a preference for honest humor and against falsehood is "personal", sure.

And when there is no indication that a poster knows that there are errors, as a favor to that poster I want to point them out -- otherwise I am allowing that person to appear as a fool.

I don't understand why you feel it is your role to create such an unpleasant atmosphere in what was a lighthearted non-intellectual look at religion.

There was nothing "lighthearted" about this thread, nor is it "a look at religion" -- from the very title, the entire idea is to ridicule, insult, and degrade.

Besides which, if you put up with falsehood and error, it isn't a look at religion, it's a look at prejudice.

If the thread was "Funny Anti-Democrat Internet Pics", or "Funny Anti-Republican Internet Pics", I would have the same approach: correct error where I see it. It doesn't matter what the topic is; humor based on error is evidence of bigotry.

That prompts me to wonder what would happen if I started a thread called "Funny Anti-Black Internet Pics", or "Funny Anti-Arab Internet Pics", which engaged in as much slander as is celebrated here.

 

[Kulindahr]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

And a good number of theologians, for most of those, would answer, "The question is wrong because it's based on false assumptions".

And for number 9, an Eastern theologian would start by teaching you some math (that fascinated me the first time I encountered it -- Western theologians try to think of analogies, like the shamrock or a hot sword that is strong, sharp and glowing, but the East goes to math... made me fall in love with the Eastern approach).

 

[Kulindahr]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

Heh. Somebody didn't get the message -- most of the New Testament was finished before those forty years were up.

Though for the book of the Apocalypse, John overdid it -- a lot more than forty!

 

[Zeno Lorea]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

Heh. Somebody didn't get the message -- most of the New Testament was finished before those forty years were up.

Though for the book of the Apocalypse, John overdid it -- a lot more than forty!

Not true. Mark was written 35-40 years after the death of Jesus Christ, but everything else was written much later.

Also, one cannot repeat often enough that the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were not even written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. So it wasn't even eyewitnesses writing what they had seen 35-80 years before, it was followers of followers, and then their followers. That's not even hearsay anymore, that's a game of telephone.

 

[Zeno Lorea]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

There is some truth to this one: as an atheist who now spends most of his time in Morocco, I interact a lot with secular muslims, moderate muslims, modern muslims, muslim atheists, muslim scientists, or whatchamacallit, and they are truly horrified by the Western "regressive left" who demonizes them as "islamophobes" while giving a podium, a megaphone and a supportive audience to the most retrograde, bigoted, koran-thumbing far-right extremist fascist pigs imaginable...

I don't believe islamophobia exists. Almost everyone who was ever called islamophobe was either genuinely criticizing a totalitarian ideology, or spouting racist bile. One of these things is good, the other is bad, and lumping them together makes no sense.

 

[Jacquemar]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

Not true. Mark was written 35-40 years after the death of Jesus Christ, but everything else was written much later.

Also, one cannot repeat often enough that the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were not even written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. So it wasn't even eyewitnesses writing what they had seen 35-80 years before, it was followers of followers, and then their followers. That's not even hearsay anymore, that's a game of telephone.

This factual information has been swept under the rug and ignored several times by more than a few of the theists on JUB.

 

[Kulindahr]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

Not true. Mark was written 35-40 years after the death of Jesus Christ, but everything else was written much later.

Also, one cannot repeat often enough that the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were not even written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. So it wasn't even eyewitnesses writing what they had seen 35-80 years before, it was followers of followers, and then their followers. That's not even hearsay anymore, that's a game of telephone.

Nope.

Paul's letters, the majority of the New Testament, were written before 65.

Mark, Matthew, and Luke date equally early. John is the late one, around 90.

And the "telephone" comparison is for kindergartners... if you want them to grow up with a lie. Our culture is sloppy about memory, but that one wasn't. Rabbis employed the technique of using the same stories and lessons over and over precisely in order that everyone would hear them the same and would correct others when they got it wrong.


The late dates you give were arrived at by people who didn't know anything about actually dating documents, only about theories of transmission. They have been discredited as people who deal with materials, handwriting, and history have gotten into the game.

 

[Kulindahr]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

This factual information has been swept under the rug and ignored several times by more than a few of the theists on JUB.

It gets ignored because it has been disproven by scholarship.

 

[Kulindahr]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

Am I the only who noticed the "Shakira Law" mix-up?

Waka Waka lol.

I caught it, tried to figure out the depth of ignorance to make that mix-up, decided it had to be a purposeful joke.

I wouldn't have been surprised if they'd quoted Homer.... "evil donut...."

 

[Alistair]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

looking forward to reading some sources

Oh I'm sure you can find all kinds of source material, but just like the Bible, it will be a work of fiction.

 

[zoltanspawn]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

... as an atheist who now spends most of his time in Morocco, I interact a lot with secular muslims, moderate muslims, modern muslims, muslim atheists, muslim scientists, or whatchamacallit, and they are truly horrified by the Western "regressive left" who demonizes them as "islamophobes" ...

One major aspect of islamophobia is to not recognize what you just have: the seculars, moderates, moderns, atheists, scientists and whatchamacallits.

 

[Zeno Lorea]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

One major aspect of islamophobia is to not recognize what you just have: the seculars, moderates, moderns, atheists, scientists and whatchamacallits.

Most of the categories I just named actually consider themselves atheists or agnostic atheists, and only use the other terms as euphemisms, to keep the peace with their family, friends and co-workers.

So much for religion building stronger communities I guess.

BTW, I love the Jimmy Carter meme, Johan.

 

[HoodedRat]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

View attachment 1204586

That is the absolute core of the Abrahamic religions and why their particular version of 'God' is worthy of nothing but utter contempt.

 

[Kulindahr]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

Note that Jesus was in His Dad's house, so it's not much of a precedent.

Unless protestors are smashing things belonging to intruders in their own houses.

 

[Zeno Lorea]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

Note that Jesus was in His Dad's house, so it's not much of a precedent.

Unless protestors are smashing things belonging to intruders in their own houses.

Jesus was not "in his dad's house". He was in a place that was not his property.

There are no gods, no prophets and no messiahs, Kuli. Just con men who dupe idiots.

 

[Kulindahr]

Re: Funny anti-religious Internet pics

]View attachment 1204586

That is the absolute core of the Abrahamic religions and why their particular version of 'God' is worthy of nothing but utter contempt.

That's like saying that the absolute core of Sherlock Holmes is shooting up cocaine and playing the violin at all hours -- it comes from not reading the whole thing.