• hydrashok@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    24 days ago

    So long as they’re not moving on to a new one, good. Religion is a plague on human society. We don’t need it holding us back.

      • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        21 days ago

        Ugh. They’re probably worse than a lot of them.

        Abducting extremely young children into their cult. Teaching them to suppress their emotions, telling them to cut all families ties.

        Someone ought to order their temples shut down to bring peace and stability to the galaxy world.

    • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      24 days ago

      Depends on the religion. But as a whole, what we thing of “religions”, are definitely a net negative with our knowledge of the world. We no longer need to rely on superstition to survive.

      Some religions are more a way of life rather than a structured creator being system with strict rules and exclusionary politics. Religions like Christianity/Judaism/Islam are quite different from Shinto or Buddhism for instance.

      • DashboTreeFrog@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        24 days ago

        There’s still some toxicity around Buddhism at least. Living in SEA I now know several people who are really turned off by the practices and beliefs of their family’s religion, Buddhism, from the way all troubles are explained away as karma to neurodiversity and Learning Differences being hidden because that would mean that person did something bad in their past life.

        I used to think Buddhism specifically was the “good” religion that’s more like philosophy, but spending more time with people who grew up deep in Buddhism has made me see there’s really more to the community and it’s beliefs and practices than I thought.

        • Ironfist@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          23 days ago

          There’s a lot of Buddhist teachings I agree with but do we really need all the supernatural baggage to teach people to be less materialistic and to be kind to each other?

          • CalipherJones@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            22 days ago

            I’ve found Zen Buddhist koans, essentially short stories to be contemplated over, to be deeply calming and insightful.

            My favorite one is this.

            "A man was walking through the jungle, when he spotted a tiger. The man immediately fled, but the tiger gave chase. Approaching a cliff, the man saw only one option… A hanging vine. He jumped off of the cliff and grabbed the vine, hanging on for dear life.

            The tiger came to the edge of the cliff, snarling.

            Just as the man thought he was in the clear, he noticed another tiger prowling below.

            And then, if things weren’t difficult enough, the man then saw two mice above him (one black, one white) gnawing away at the vine.

            In this state of impending doom, the man looked over his shoulder to the sight of a strawberry patch on a ledge, at arm’s length.

            The man reached over, plucked a strawberry and ate it. It was the best damn strawberry he ever had."

  • SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    23 days ago

    Religon is brain cancer.

    It’s a control mechanism from some of the earliest human societies, and today it is a dangerous tool that was just left lying around for any con man to take advantage of.

    • ThomasCrappersGhost@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      23 days ago

      I can’t find any sources for this now, but a while back I read an article that basically said in the 1500s (roughly) people were starting to turn against the rich holding the bulk of the wealth. So the rich met up with some priests over a tankard of mead and came up with the idea that the church should say the rich deserved their wealth.

      • Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        23 days ago

        That is weird to me because Jesus repeatedly condemned the rich. He even violently kicked them out of temples by whipping them and flipping tables. Jesus even said the wealthy will never enter into heaven. Jesus was essentially a proto-communist

        • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          23 days ago

          Former Christian here, I’m still very partial to this verse:

          Come now, you rich, weep and howl for your miseries that are coming upon you! Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are moth-eaten. Your gold and silver are corroded, and their corrosion will be a witness against you and will eat your flesh like fire. You have heaped up treasure in the last days. Indeed the wages of the laborers who mowed your fields, which you kept back by fraud, cry out; and the cries of the reapers have reached the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth. You have lived on the earth in pleasure and luxury; you have fattened your hearts as in a day of slaughter. You have condemned, you have murdered the just; he does not resist you.

        • Saleh@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 days ago

          Jesus also didn’t proclaim himself to be the literal son of God, nor a part of God. That was invented by the churches some 300 years later. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea

          Both Judaism and Christianity had their scriptures altered over time, serving political goals of the scholar’s class. This is why Islam puts such a strong focus preserving the Quran exactly as it was revealed.

          • Zxq@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            22 days ago

            Can you please expound upon that point, re: Jesus didn’t proclaim himself to be the literal son of God. Never heard that before.

            • Saleh@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              22 days ago

              Sure. So in Islam we believe that God and the creation are seperate. All Prophets (peace be upon them) are humans, who have been given prophethood for their virtuous character. Any powers outside the realm of human capacities were granted by God to aid their mission, but it wasn’t their inherent powers.

              For a longer read on this from an Islamic perspective i found this article: https://www.reviewofreligions.org/27744/jesus-son-of-god-historical-context-long-read/

              As for the development of the Christian idea that Jesus would be the son of God. This is a Greek/Roman idea that was pushed to dominance around the fourth century. Notable is the Council of Nicae, where it was agreed that the concept of Trinity (with Jesus as son of God and some abstract holy spirit) should be the used. As for the reason why, it is likely that the Trinity was chosen to make Christianity more palatable to Polytheists, despite the rejection of polytheism and embrace of monotheism being fundamental to the Abrahamic religions. This is also why the concept is strongly rejected by Jews and Muslims. However also Nontrinitarian Christians exist to this day.

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea#Outcomes
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nontrinitarian#History

      • TFO Winder@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        22 days ago

        Well that might explain christianity but what about other religions like Hindu, buddhism etc.

        The idea of religion is different there and it’s more of a way of life rather than believing in a supreme god.

  • HubertManne@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    24 days ago

    Whats funny is when they leave their childhood one and go to another. The new one seems better because they don’t know enough about it.

  • PunkRockSportsFan@fanaticus.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    22 days ago

    Religion is for three kinds of people:

    Fools

    Liars

    Disobedient children with fools or liars as parents

    Tolerance of religion is a paradox as every religion is intolerant of other religions.

    Yes Buddhism too.

    Respect is earned. Trust is earned.

    Religion deserves neither.

      • PunkRockSportsFan@fanaticus.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        22 days ago

        Greetings fellow lemming I’m new here and hope we can have a productive discussion.

        Please allow me to elucidate my perspective on this question: are all religions intolerant?

        I say yes, let me explain.

        Many have told me about “their god” and I take their word for it. I believe everything everyone has told me about “their god”. Powerful, all knowing, usually vindictive, often horny for human girls, etc.

        Resultantly I believe in all of “their gods”.

        And I drew a conclusion about that guy.

        I think “god” is a piece of shit unworthy of praise and we should seek to destroy and erase it. Those who worship it are dangerous and not to be trusted. At best they need psychiatric care, likely many of them should be incarcerated. The link between “piety” and “skeletons in the closet” is strong.

        I hate god and have no respect for god-fearing people and no tolerance for their “beliefs”

        Which supernatural make-believe system (read: religion ) is tolerant of my supernatural make-believe system?

        Please don’t mistake my anger at religions as anger at you.

        Cheers mate

        • WhatsTheHoldup@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 days ago

          Many have told me about “their god” and I take their word for it.

          Resultantly I believe in all of “their gods”.

          I’m following so far

          And I drew a conclusion about that guy.

          What do you mean “that guy”. I thought we just established these are multiple guys?

          I think “god” is a piece of shit unworthy of praise and we should seek to destroy and erase it.

          What do you mean “it”? Don’t you mean “them”?

          I hate god and have no respect for god-fearing people and no tolerance for their “beliefs”

          Why are you talking about a singular God here? It reads like you’re blaming Yahweh for Zeus’ sexual behaviour and you’re blaming Hanuman for the Great Flood.

          These aren’t the same character. Each “God” claim needs to be evaluated separately.

          For example why do you hate Persephene so much? Why is she a piece of shit. You claim to believe in her right Your reasons shouldn’t include examples from the Bible.

          Which supernatural make-believe system (read: religion ) is tolerant of my supernatural make-believe system?

          You might find company among the Satanic Temple or other Satanists.

          You said “Buddhism” was ruled out but you didn’t actually clarify so until you present your reasoning I’d say Buddhism, Taoism, Confucianism and Jainism all lacking God’s are partially compatible.

          I mean to be fair there’s not going to be a great answer because this isn’t a real question but a gotcha. And I say that as an atheist.

          You obviously don’t actually believe in all the gods, your earlier language shows you haven’t thought enough about what that means and force them all into the same one God.

          The Hittites believed in “all the gods” and absorbed every new God of neighbors they conquered. But they truly believed in these gods, not as a gotcha question but they really believed in the power of these entities.

          Regardless of personal moral views on their behavior, outwardly taunting that being seems silly in light of genuine faith.

  • spicy pancake@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    24 days ago

    my mom: “I just want a community to hang out with on Sundays and sing comforting hymns with. I don’t know why instead, everyone has to be weird about it.”

      • spicy pancake@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        23 days ago

        lol she’d make a great cleric

        cleric character who is fed up with corruption and bigotry in their church and goes on a divine quest to establish the Church of We Just Want To Hang Out and Sing Hymns Without Anyone Making It Weird

  • rosco385@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    22 days ago

    Monotheism was a mistake! The last save point was hermeticism, it’s going to take us ages to get to the enlightenment again. 😮‍💨