whay has the Christian myth got such a magnetic pull on some people?

[palbert]

The earth's magnetic poles have not shifted for a couple thousand years. Let's see if christianity survives the next polar shift. And that is the depth of your argument.

 

[ludolfo]

Perhaps not referring to it as "the Christian myth" would allow people to take you more seriously. Hard to get into a discussion with someone who is biased to the point of rolling your eyes.

Persecution for any reason has happened throughout history, even where religion was not involved. Why is that in many African countries, there is racism towards those who are darker than others? Hell, slavery was largely institutionalized with nary any mention of it being God's will (except from the fringe which both sides distanced themselves from).

By and large, the theme has always been that someone or some group wants to be the dominant force. Look towards animals who don't have the capacity for ego, exploitation, etc. Religion just adds an easy layer of explanation. You can easily dismiss the conversation so as to respect someone's beliefs or it can be used to incite those who believe it is their duty in life. It's much more socially acceptable to say "It's against my religion" than to say "I simply don't like you because of who you are." It's also much easier to get someone to join you when they think they're working for something bigger than themselves.

I have already said that I think Christianity is a mythology, but you believe I must censor myself from daring to say that. Why? I am not anti-mythology as such. I am anti toxic-mythology, and I include a mythology which denies it is a mythology and demands it is historical literalism.

If you want to go into the origins of racism and fear of dark skin it is true that this occurs long before the Christian Church comes to be established, but the Church is of course influenced by this fear of darkness and the unknown. It grows out of this presumption of reality. So what are its beginnings?
The patriarchy, and its psychological division between light and darkness where the former, light, is conceptualized to be superior, and the latter inferior, and from there they impose this prejudice even onto dark skin tone, and anything or body seen as inferior including of course women, and nature, and human natures. And we can very much see this prejudice in Christian scripture and writings. So we agree on this?
But this does not mean you ignore the Church's carrying on of this ignorance and violence, and presume it is 'human nature'. It is not human nature but a series of mythologies which influence each other and need exposing for what they do to the believers in them.

Are you suggesting that human nature is like this and so creates these myths?

In one sense it is in that the people who create these myths have human nature and choose to do so, but it is a misguided nature. A nature cut off from itself so to speak.
It is more like an elitist predatory section of the community will create these stories to have power over others. That is not ALL human nature is it? It's more certain groups of individuals who are control freaks, and they create stories which make it easier for them to keep control, because IF we believe we are sinful, etc etc, then we are divided against ourselves aren't we? We become our own control freak. See how it works?

 

[Laufey]

You haven't answered me yet.

 

[HoodedRat]

Okay, for the sake of argument....What if the Catholic Church is right after all, how will you deal with it?

Or, for the sake of argument, what if the the Muslims are 'right' after all
... or the Hindus ... or the Buddhists ... or the Pagans ... or the Taoists ... or the Seikhs ... or the Jews ... or the Rastafarians ... or the Gnostics ... or the Parsis ... or whatever?
How will you deal with it?

 

[ludolfo]

Exactly.
It is the nature of all things to find the easiest way to reach a destination. The water flows where it finds way to flow.
If there is no explanation to a phenomena, we are creating a simple and easily understandable explanation, which is comfortable to our minds, and later, over decades and centuries, we keep modifying it to serve our needs properly.

When you talk about water flowing etc that to me sounds a bit Taoist. I am not a Taoist or any 'thing' (I like to stay flexible like water lol), but I do like some of the stuff I have read in the Tao Te Ching.

IF it is human nature to hate and 'fear the other', how come I am against that as some others are in this thread and in the world. OR are you claiming I am of the same ilk? Don't worry about offending me by being honest. I am just trying to dig where your coming from with this conversation.

Can you not see that it is the stories you tell yourself about reality which influence you?

 

[ludolfo]

why do some kids grow up racists and others don't? You will see infants playing together, all colours of skin, yet when they get to a certain age some will find a group and then call other individuals and groups bad names and even attack them. Why?
Could it be that they hear things their parents say, that the TV says, both overtly and covertly, and what the school says, and supposed history and religion says and then is influenced by this do you think?

 

[Apollosfire]

I am really happy that on a forum site that hugely promotes sexual gratification, we have threads about religious,myths, and spiritus. It makes me wonder if sexual nature and love are so far from spiritual/quantum entanglements as some purist claim.
I will contest the OP and some of the comments first by stating my background because or makeup tends to influence our beliefs. nature. I am american, black, christian raised and gay/bi and consider myself educated and gnostic, occultist*occult as unseen knowledge * I believe science cannot explain our lives fully. But I do also believe christian doctrine, catholic or protestant is a creation myth, as many religions are. I don't think it is a simple story to explain the unknown as many here claim. These faiths, may attempt to explain nature but the adherents mostly find it away to explain their lives.
This christian myth has power because of its emotional influence over people, the history of people crusading and it being one of the first stories to go into written form. Thus for many years, those who considered themselves educated explored Christ,read and spread Christ.
I disagree that humans are hate the unknown and are natural phobic. There are obviously some be these tend a lot more cultural tradition and learning, humans tend to be pretty curious, sexually, intellectually and reach out. You have to tell children not to go running around, not to fiddle with everything, an not to speak to strangers, who to dislike as groups..obviously we have personal attractions but to say we are stick with our own traditional animal, no I think not. That is another reason I see religion and christianity having power it sets modes of behavior and limitations and impossible stakes. your soul, is a risk if you step out of line..thats pretty strong motivator.
My question/problems with it stem from the paradox of supreme being creating imperfect beings and requesting/asking them to be godlike. Why would a god request this seems kindof cruel. Either you create a universe and its so awesome humans look at it and say woah this is wonderful ..something grand must created it,and me...but im so horrible and must be imperfect..let me go against my god given drives...and act inhumane or the creator might be a little flawed. I tend to thank the latter and am always reminded of a art-history professor who told me of one artist "he thought the best reprensentation of the human spirit, was the human body, so perfectly imperfect, so varied so vulgar, and yet man to women, coal to ivory..we find ourselves in each other." There is something so familiar. My belief is christianity is western *myth of great magnetism because of the money,wars,and grand stakes it has evoked,heaven,hell, souls, and a promise of forgiveness if you happen to murder,steal, cheat or swindle..you can still be forgiven that type of hope galvanizes people.
Unfortunately all to often, people do cherry pick their beliefs, proclaim themselves, their families and people who they like and agree with 'saved', 'enlightenment', entitled' and damn everyone else savages, pagans, sinners etc.thus expendable.
*myths, this word is literary, referring to stories. Please people of faith don't get buthurt when someone refers to your book,with its dramas as such. Your own history may one day become a myth is your actions are so awesome or fearsome that others choose to tell it. You will have little control over embellishments,contradictions an complete miscarriages of your name..as it is with Christ and Buddhas of the world. As above and so bellow , as with me and you.

 

[Mariatenebre]

First off, Just being Gay is not a sin, it is acting on it that is known to be sinful in the eyes of the Church, and in the Bible.

Secondly, I do not pick and choose what to believe, I just struggle with issues and Pray for God's Guidance. I cannot separate my Spirituality from Catholicism, and I will not even attempt to separate it, because it is the Glue that holds all things together....just my opinion. Besides, God's will is 1000 times more important than my own feeble will, and NO, I am not self Hating as many of you like to call it.

Does those answer the third one you mentioned?

Again this shows the evil of your religion. The fact that it says that being gay is not a sin but acting on it is a sin is like someone saying that having blue eyes is not a sin but displaying them is. Denying gays the ability to have natural sexual relations is hateful and anyone who is gay but believes that they must deny their sexuality is a self hater. Expressing your sexuality is apart of being gay and hating gay relations is hating homosexuality and homosexuals because it is hating gays natural sexuality as expressed by their orientation. Plus as science shows there is nothing wrong with gay sex and it is not psychologically healthy for gays or anyone to live a life of sexual deprivation. The fact that your god and Church would have gays live miserable lives without sexual and romantic fulfillment again shows the evil nature of your religion. Next your god's will is not 1000 times more important then human will. Our will and happiness is just as important as any gods and we have the right to live happy and fulfilling lives. The fact that you think that your God's will is more important then human's will or well being is nothing more then an example of the dictatorial mindset that sets some dictator's will as more important then the will and happiness of the masses.

[Text: Removed]

 

[bankside]

As an atheist, I believe science has not explained our lives fully. Whether it can has yet to be claimed, never mind proven.

It is also apparent that religions have pretended to explain our lives fully, attributing, according to their imagination, purpose, origins, obligations, and any manner of other qualities which should properly be called "guesses" instead of "revelations" or "commandments" or "divine laws."

 

[zoltanspawn]

God does not approve Hatred, and God cannot sin, because if he did, then he would be called a liar. It is Mankind through its Fallen Nature that hates on others. Yes God is Love, and his Mercy and Justice cannot be separated from his Love.

Personally, I do not think that God is approving those who are in Violation of what is written in the middle of paragraph #2358 in the Catechism of the Catholic Church: They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.

Right, it's the just discrimination against us which is okay. Got it.

 

[ludolfo]

Re: Corruption and Opulance in the Church

Hmmm I am curious. How come the thread I started questioning the over-bearance of Christianity-ism on these boards and the myth in general is 'closed for review' and yet none of the other threads about Christianity are? And where Mikey Love--who has quite a dominant presence here-- will suggest that gay people should not have sex, that seems alright and accepted in a gay community (but don't get me wrong. I would never ever secretly contact JUB to have YOUR threads closed I assure you. I have always supported freedom of speech and questioning). Can someone explain?

Is it because Christian JUB supporters have been complaining to the mods here about the conversation of the subject I initiated and they have successfully closed the thread and censored any challenges to their beliefs by others who don't share them?

I am having to speculate because other members participating in the thread were not considered before the thread was closed. There was no announcement by the moderator for their reasons for it to be closed 'for review' or anything, and so we have just been silenced and that seems to be that!
This reminds me of how these belief systems operate. IF they don't have the power to burn you at the stake for contradicting their cherished beliefs, or house arrest you, they will find other means to shut you up.

 

[ludolfo]

Re: Corruption and Opulance in the Church

so what was the reason for the thread being

closed for preview

then in your opinion? We don't know because we weren't even told this was going to happen, or informed why it has happened, so do you know something we don't?

 

[HoodedRat]

Re: Corruption and Opulance in the Church

How come the thread I started questioning the over-bearance of Christianity-ism on these boards and the myth in general is 'closed for review' and yet none of the other threads about Christianity are?

Is it because Christian JUB supporters have been complaining to the mods here about the conversation of the subject I initiated and they have successfully closed the thread and censored any challenges to their beliefs by others who don't share them?

The mods on this sub-forum appear to be mainly of the Christian persuasion and easily take at offence at criticism of that particular belief-system.

They only ever seem to close a thread when it starts to get interesting. This tends to be when the critics of Christianity outweigh the supporters and/or the Christian posters are clearly failing in their arguments.

 

[opinterph]

Can someone explain?

The thread will be reopened mostly intact. There is a recurring problem of members taking discussions to a personal level, including the addition of insults that contravene the No-Flame designation of this sub-forum. It is entirely acceptable to disagree with the viewpoints expressed by other members; however, it is not okay to turn that into negative personal characterizations.

I don’t recall anyone reporting the thread, “whay has the Christian myth got such a magnetic pull on some people?,” though perhaps it was reported somewhere along the way. I read every post in this sub-forum and observe each thread as the discussion develops. I generally try to be lenient and avoid excessive intrusion.

The mods on this sub-forum appear to be mainly of the Christian persuasion and easily take at offence at criticism of that particular belief-system.

They only ever seem to close a thread when it starts to get interesting. This tends to be when the critics of Christianity outweigh the supporters and/or the Christian posters are clearly failing in their arguments.

The discussions here do not constitute some type of competition or contest. It is a place to exchange information and ideas, without the interpersonal flaming. Topics are not limited to religion, but may include spirituality that is not based on religious concepts, and various other matters of philosophy or reasoning. Perhaps we need a new sticky to better explain.

I think it may have something to do with me and Mariatennebrae.

Astute observation.

 

[Brian Smith]

To answer your question, it comes down to three things: location, location and location.

Many skeptics fail to understand how ancient the roots of Christianity are, and they don't fully appreciate how centrally and crucially located The Levant was in the ancient world. Geographically, The Levant was at a cultural cross-roads. Ugarit in particular was an important ancient Phoenician port. More important, though, was how Levantine culture contributed to the development of the modern written word known to the West.

Ancient Phoenician script was a crucial development in modern phonetic alphabets. Although it still contained hieroglyphic elements, as you would discover remain in Hebrew and other daughter scripts, it had the important quality of being capable of transcribing sounds. Please, try to appreciate the enormity of this. This was huge. The Greek alphabet, which is based on the Phoenician alphabet, has been used to write some of the most influential works in Western history.

Now, I have a theory that at least some of the works of the Old Testament might have originally been written in ancient Phoenician, though some of the writings, such as Proverbs, might actually go back to ancient Sumer. The Book of Proverbs does resemble ancient Sumerian wisdom literature, and it reads somewhat similarly to the Instructions of Shuruppak. In any case, it would not be far-fetched due to the references in the Book of Job and others to some ancient Ugaritic figures (Ugarit was an ancient Phoenician port in The Levant).

Equally important, though, is the heritage of the Book of Genesis, also known as the Bereshit. The Bereshit has figures and events in it that correspond with actual events in ancient times. For example, the flood story seems to correspond with the eruption at Thera in about the 1500's BCE. You must understand how much of a scar this eruption left on the ancient Levant. The flood would have been immense, and it would have wiped out entire civilizations. It took centuries for even the ancient Egyptians to recover from it, and their antediluvian zoomorphic gods were almost lost to our culture, which would have been a tragedy.

In any case, there might have been religions more ancient than those of the ancient Hebrews, but they were probably one of the earliest cultures to actually transcribe their records into this new form of writing. Therefore, they ended up being disproportionately influential in the ancient world and beyond due to the advantage that this gave them.

As for Christianity in particular, the Gospels actually have a particularly attractive message. If you have not read them, then I suggest that you do. Their contents are actually genuinely heartwarming.

On the other hand, I honestly don't know how the Pauline Epistles even survived. Paul was a total dick by all accounts. He was a priggish, sanctimonious ass. He was a horrible misogynist, particularly if First Timothy is anything to go by. The only significance that he really has is that he was an important leader in the early Church, and he probably helped organize the Christians into a unified political force. Without him, the Christians might never have gained very much political power. They would have most likely fractured more than they eventually did anyway. He was still a complete boner, though. If I could go back in time to give that guy a swift kick in the nuts, I would.

Anyway, the book that is apparently the strangest is Revelation, and the question that many have asked throughout history is just how in the hell the damn thing got there. Well, it was originally written in Greek pidgin, and it was probably extremely popular among early Greek evangelists trying to appeal to ignorant working-class youth and twenty-somethings. It has a perverse sex appeal, and it was probably the Twilight of its time. Although it is essentially stroke material, it is actually fairly good stroke material when you get right down to it.

In any case, Westerners are really a lot more Pagan than they are Christian, even today. They may go to Church on Sundays, but they spend the rest of the week reading Lord of the Rings, which Tolkein based on the Poetic Eddas, and Twilight, which is descended from a literary tradition that has roots in ancient Frankish culture. The Iliad and the Odyssey are required reading, not the Bible. By comparison, the influence of Christianity has been pretty weak, and even Christianity itself has, in practice, been infested with Pagan rituals. There is nothing about Yule in the Bible, after all. Our Pagan traditions have a much stronger influence on how we think of the world and ourselves. Therefore, to say that Christianity is disproportionately influential would actually be false.

Nevertheless, Christianity has incredibly ancient roots, and it warrants our respect.

 

[ludolfo]

Why, because you argue it has ancient roots? Why should we respect it if it promotes homophobia? I choose that specifically because most of us at these forums are gay, and various diverse forms of what that may mean.
You seem to be well read about your favorite religion--though I don't necessarily agree with all you say--so does this mean you are a practicing Christian? And/or do you have gay friends who are Christians?

 

[Brian Smith]

Why, because you argue it has ancient roots? Why should we respect it if it promotes homophobia? I choose that specifically because most of us at these forums are gay, and various diverse forms of what that may mean.
You seem to be well read about your favorite religion--though I don't necessarily agree with all you say--so does this mean you are a practicing Christian? And/or do you have gay friends who are Christians?

Actually, my favorite religion is that of ancient Ugarit.

As for the homophobia in Christianity, it is all Paul's fault. He was a misogynistic son of a bitch. If I could go back in time, I swear I would go back and kick that jerk in the nuts so hard....grrrrr. He was not even painted in an attractive light in the Bible. In every aspect of his character, he was an obscene prig and a jerk. If I could kick that guy's butt, I would pay money.

Anyway, Christianity did not create modern homophobia. People did. One of the earliest individuals to truly persecute gay people, in Christian Europe, was Theodosius I. That was the least of his crimes, but it did set a precedent that we are still untangling the consequences of today. Theodosius was not a nice man. St. Ambrose was generally appalled by him. However, Theodosius I ordered gay men to be sentenced to death by burning.

Earlier tyrants of Rome persecuted gay people, but some of those were not even clearly Christian. For example, Philip the Arab is considered by some thinkers to have been Christian, but this is really very dubious. One of his atrocities was the so-called "Secular Games," in which more than a thousand gladiators died as well as many ill-fated animals. One thing he tried to outlaw was male prostitution. He was not much of a Christian, though, even though Christianity was a very popular religion at the time.

No, I do not blame Christianity, per se, for homophobia. I blame evil men.

As for why I have respect for Christianity, I actually appreciate the fact that the Christians helped domesticate my Pagan ancestors. Although I am very proud of the traditions of my Pagan ancestors, their rituals involving human sacrifice had to go. Furthermore, Anglo-Saxon culture had annoying macho-ethics in which homosexuality was not unto itself an object of persecution, but the "receptive" partners were kicked around pretty badly and treated like dogs. As someone who is always the "receptive" partner in sex, I have a serious problem with that.

I find some present-day Christian sects to be utterly repulsive. That is different from my feelings about Christianity overall. Christianity is as divided about gay rights as society at large. And remember, because atheists are very much a minority, the majority of those who support gay rights are Christians, whether you like it or not.

But I am an atheist, just to be clear.

 

[Brian Smith]

This is an Atheist I can respect. How many Pagans/Neo-pagans can say the same thing this Atheist just stated. I have more respect for anyone who defends what they find good in all of Christianity, instead of trying to tear down an entire Institute for the wrong-doings of a few evil/sinful Leaders. The Church has had its Anti-Popes in History, even has had evil Bishops and Priests whose only concern is the gain of Temporal Powers. The Church did not have temporal powers til Pope Leo the Great (about 440 A.D.). I believe that the Church would have been very different today if it had not the Temporal Powers, though those powers are limited since the 1800's, also, the Church is not a Democracy.

Hey.

Take a look at Matthew 19, where Jesus speaks of Eunuchs in a positive light. In the culture your Jesus lived in, any man who was not potent with women was considered to be a eunuch, and this included many gay men. In fact, there were probably gay men among his followers. Furthermore, "sodomites" have, for most of history, been people who were rude and inhospitable to strangers. Your Jesus was not a homophobe by any stretch of the imagination.

And Paul the Apostle was a jerk. Seriously, I challenge you to sit down and read everything that man wrote. He was obviously tortured over whether or not he was genuine, and he was obviously a more-or-less well-meaning prig who was trying to do something decent. He was an imperfect man. If he could be summoned to our time, he would probably acknowledge that. He was literally the kind of person that you long to kick sand in his face, alright? This is not to say he did not do noble things in his lifetime.

Now, if you really read the Old Testament, you will eventually realize that many of the books in it, including the parts known in some traditions as the Pentateuch, are not entirely composed of wonderful ideas. For example, there is a place in Deuteronomy that suggests condemning people who were bastard children or descended from someone who was a bastard child, condemning a person for the sins not only of his parents but of his ancestors going back 10 generations. I will leave it to you to find where this is. If you have literacy in the Bible, it is plain that certain parts of it are ancient records that, although they were not laws uttered by a divine spirit, are a cultural treasure.

And that perspective is what distinguishes a secular humanist from someone who is merely an atheist.

 

[bankside]

If you would consider the proceedings of the Nuremberg Trials a "cultural treasure" then we agree on the vocabulary. The texts of christendom really do document the most terrible and gruesome conduct done in the name of the faith, and even unflinchingly give it a divine blush, attributing much of the cruelty to the actual hand of god.

In the sense that it records an ever-receding depravity of the human condition, it is a precious resource. But I might say I'm wary of it rather than respectful of it; the latter word is too likely to be taken as an indicator of esteem or as an endorsement.

 

[Brian Smith]

If you would consider the proceedings of the Nuremberg Trials a "cultural treasure" then we agree on the vocabulary. The texts of christendom really do document the most terrible and gruesome conduct done in the name of the faith, and even unflinchingly give it a divine blush, attributing much of the cruelty to the actual hand of god.

In the sense that it records an ever-receding depravity of the human condition, it is a precious resource. But I might say I'm wary of it rather than respectful of it; the latter word is too likely to be taken as an indicator of esteem or as an endorsement.

The Pentateuch is actually very interesting. I find it to be a lot more interesting than later writings, and I pay it a lot more attention.

Now, as to whether I would have people live their entire lives in accordance with the writings of the Pentateuch, let me give you this gem right here:

From Numbers 5...

11 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,

12 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man's wife go aside, and commit a trespass against him,

13 And a man lie with her carnally, and it be hid from the eyes of her husband, and be kept close, and she be defiled, and there be no witness against her, neither she be taken with the manner;

14 And the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be jealous of his wife, and she be defiled: or if the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be jealous of his wife, and she be not defiled:

15 Then shall the man bring his wife unto the priest, and he shall bring her offering for her, the tenth part of an ephah of barley meal; he shall pour no oil upon it, nor put frankincense thereon; for it is an offering of jealousy, an offering of memorial, bringing iniquity to remembrance.

16 And the priest shall bring her near, and set her before the Lord:

17 And the priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel; and of the dust that is in the floor of the tabernacle the priest shall take, and put it into the water:

18 And the priest shall set the woman before the Lord, and uncover the woman's head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering: and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causeth the curse:

19 And the priest shall charge her by an oath, and say unto the woman, If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of thy husband, be thou free from this bitter water that causeth the curse:

20 But if thou hast gone aside to another instead of thy husband, and if thou be defiled, and some man have lain with thee beside thine husband:

21 Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The Lord make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the Lord doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell;

22 And this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, to make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to rot: And the woman shall say, Amen, amen.

23 And the priest shall write these curses in a book, and he shall blot them out with the bitter water:

24 And he shall cause the woman to drink the bitter water that causeth the curse: and the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter.

25 Then the priest shall take the jealousy offering out of the woman's hand, and shall wave the offering before the Lord, and offer it upon the altar:

26 And the priest shall take an handful of the offering, even the memorial thereof, and burn it upon the altar, and afterward shall cause the woman to drink the water.

27 And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people.

28 And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed.

29 This is the law of jealousies, when a wife goeth aside to another instead of her husband, and is defiled;

30 Or when the spirit of jealousy cometh upon him, and he be jealous over his wife, and shall set the woman before the Lord, and the priest shall execute upon her all this law.

31 Then shall the man be guiltless from iniquity, and this woman shall bear her iniquity.

When I say that it is a cultural treasure, I do not mean that we ought to follow it as our law. I mean simply that it is a cultural treasure. There are pieces of history in it that can give us incredibly valuable insights as to who we are. My respect for this book is immense.

Forced abortion is an abomination in any culture.