Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Philosophy/religion

Join our Philosophy forum to discuss religion and spirituality.

insulting religions

989 replies

IneedAgoldenNickname · 07/01/2013 00:39

Hi, I've never posted on this topic before, I tend to hang out in aibu, but don't want to start a bun fight!

So, I am a liberal Christian. I firmly believe that everyone had to right to believe (or not) whatever they want, provided that belief doesn't hurt anyone else.

Earlier today I posted a lighthearted status on Facebook, which had led to me being called mindless, stupid, stuck up, thinking I'm better than everyone else. I've been told God is a c**t (sorry I hate that word so much I won't type it) and that the Bible is only God for loo roll!

I'm just really angry that people think its ok to insult me/my religion like that, when I haven't once preached or insulted others.

Obviously the easy solution would be to delete them off of Facebook, but they are people I get on with other wise.

Don't really know the point of my post, just hoping id feel better writing it down. Grin

OP posts:
headinhands · 13/01/2013 15:21

I think one of the psychological terms used to explain coincidences is confirmation bias? You see it clearly in the work of mediums and psychics although we all do it.

Avun, if you accept your coincidences as proof of your god meddling in your day to day life then you have to conclude that other people's coincidences are proof of their god/belief system too as they are a universal phenomenon.

amillionyears · 13/01/2013 15:25

Will be back when I can.
Been feeling unwell, off and on in the last couple of days.

EllieArroway · 13/01/2013 15:55

Sorry to hear that, Amillion. Hope you feel better soon Thanks

amillionyears · 13/01/2013 17:42

Thanks Ellie.
I am back for a bit hopefully.

Hope I make some sense.

happybubblebrain 00.39am
I think that is the crux of the problem.
What causes offence to some people doesnt cause offence to others.

I am very aware for instance that niminypiminy has left us.
Cant remember who caused her offence, but the same person didnt cause me offence as far as I can remember.
I did read elsewhere on MN that it should depend on whether the person causing offence meant it or not. Not sure whether I agree with that or not. I think I do.
This may be the point at which to comment on SolidGolds post. She reiterated something that DadOnIce partly or did take back. [re the dim and whatever stuff]. She said dim and gullible. I dont know whether she meant me, or all Christians, or Christians in the middle ages. Not sure if she was trying to see how far she could push it, or whether she didnt mean anything by it at all.
And that sort of is another point. A lot of Christians are not doormats, but some definitely, and I have to be careful how to put this, can find themselves in that position. I for one, dont think Christians are expected to be doormats, but neither should they be militant imo.

amillionyears · 13/01/2013 17:45

Avuncular, that sort of stuff happens to me often, once a week?

amillionyears · 13/01/2013 17:51

I would say, that, when you meet someone face to face, I for one react accordingly. Gentler to a shyer person, more jovial to a jovial person etc.
And make allowances. That is one thing that this internet thing lacks. We are talking online to people we have never met, who come from diverse backgrounds, we have no idea what mood they are currently in, or us for that matter, and all have different ways of conversing.
It would be lovely to try and say speak to Cote[and I only pick Cote because I know she lives in France] one way, and say SolidGold another. But it is nigh on impossible, for me at least, to be able to write like that, and convey everything in just the right way.
I sometimes feel the internet is a bit of a blunt instrument.

amillionyears · 13/01/2013 17:52

Will try and tackle the other stuff later, or even tomorrow.

DadOnIce · 13/01/2013 18:09

Derren Brown did a good illustration of selective perception when he did his programme on horse-race betting. The programme was structured to make it look as if the person they were following got it right every time.

It was a sort of allegory for homeopathy too - people seize on the time that appears to "work" and ignore the 1000s of other instances when it doesn't.

Avuncular · 13/01/2013 18:23

Where's Grimma gone?

Ellie I'm not cross at all, and grateful to you for that list of coincidences. Food for thought.
At the same time I'm chuckling slightly that you postulate the existence of a creator of the universe so that you can accuse him of not getting on with the job of curing child cancer. Memories of the film Bruce Almighty ?

Cote I don't think that whether or not anyone believes in God validates the existence of God, but I accumulate this sort of info to counter the idea that you can't possibly be a scientist and believe in God. The book I posted (haven't read it for a long time) gives some accounts from people about how they reconciled their work with their belief.

But most of all I was sitting in church this morning - visiting an evangelical church for a change rather than our usual CofE - (yes I did listen to the sermon too) and I found myself moved to thank you all for constructive contributions.

My faith has not yet been shaken, but it has been stirred, and I realise that during my final 20 years (hopefully) there are still quite a few things I need to get clearer in my mind. You're all helping ; thank you all

Avuncular · 13/01/2013 18:28

Well then million, as the Mikado would say, De-e-e-screibe it!. Please?
Do you make any more of it than, say, 'selective perception?'

headinhands · 13/01/2013 18:41

While 'god' was moving that book something unspeakable was happening to a child somewhere. How do you reconcile the two realities?

amillionyears · 13/01/2013 18:57

headinhands, you wont like some of the answers to that.
Some answers to it are easier to take than others.
Not sure I am personally up to tackling that one today.
I also think, though I could be worng, that you have been on these threads before, and have probably come across answers from Christians about it before.

Will just say though, that God is not limited to dealing with 1 person at a time.

amillionyears · 13/01/2013 18:59

Avuncular,another person on another thread made some of the points on this one, about coincidences. from my perspective, and after the said thread in about November, I personally monitored mine, and came to the conclusion that they happened waaay too often to just be put down to coincidences.

EllieArroway · 13/01/2013 19:15

Nobody on this thread is so stupid they think a scientist can't be religious. One of my favourite cosmology writers is Paul Davies - a Christian. The man chiefly responsible for sequencing the human genome is Francis Collins, an evangelical Christian. I've also read a few books by Kenneth Miller, a professor of Biology and expert in evolution & Darwin - and a Christian.

So you are trying to counteract a point that nobody has made or even tried to.

Oh, and btw, I didn't "accuse" your god of anything. That would be like me accusing Santa of not bring me enough presents.

If "God" wants to talk to you, Avuncular why doesn't he just appear in the corner of your living room and, you know, talk? Why does he use perfectly normal, common place events to spookily hint at his existence? You are indeed using confirmation bias and anything at all that happens to you that's even slightly out of the ordinary you are going to seize on as "God". You asked what we thought, and we told you - but you'd rather hear from the one person who you know is going to agree with you? That's honest enquiry? It's not and you know it.

Glad you're feeling better, Amillion :)

EllieArroway · 13/01/2013 19:30

I live next door to a young family (they're lovely so this is just an illustrative example). Imagine one night I heard them beating up their little girl. Imagine I could hear through the walls her screaming and pleading for them to stop.

What kind of immoral scumbag would I have to be to do nothing? To turn up the sound on my TV and say, "Yes, it's unfortunate that she's suffering - but it'll be OK in 50 years when she gets to Heaven".

No decent human being would consider me anything other than a monster for not trying to stop that child's pain.

But it's OK for god to do that - not once, not twice, but every minute of every day? He's too busy, I guess, curing someone's grandma of her bad back, or faffing around with books in someone's study.

And then we're told that we get our morals from this being? Hardly.

I am more moral than any god invented by humanity. We all are - and thank goodness for that, life would be unbearable for all of us if we took as our moral example a god who could behave like that.

And no - I am not "angry" at god (yada, yada, yada). I am a tad frustrated at people who look at the world we live in and all it's suffering and think that they, personally, are so important that god plays candid camera tricks on them Hmm.

amillionyears · 13/01/2013 19:37

Thanks Ellie.

I think at some point I am going to have to write some reasons why God doesnt do something, or not enough or whatever, but I think I will leave that little! conversation for tomorrow, or even the day after.
[unless everyone on the philosphy boards has heard it all before from me or someoneelse, in which case I would be wasting my time].
I would need to be more conherent than I am at present, and have very flameproof material on ,and a hard hat.

Avuncular · 13/01/2013 19:43

OP >I'm just really angry that people think its ok to insult me/my religion like that, when I haven't once preached or insulted others.<

Right. Back to basics. Off the top of my head :

I suppose we should be grateful to be in a country of ?free speech?, where anyone can within reason say anything. Though unkind things said to or about us is part of the price we pay for having the freedom to say what we want, too (whether or not we use it).

Insulting is a bit harsh, but making fun of others may be helpful, if done in the right spirit.

IMU Religion, as opposed to faith, is a man-made ( includes women, of course) system devised or imposed to bring some order to groups of people of a common faith, with regard to establishing common ground in what they believe and how they express it, in word and action. Most human activity of this nature or any other, because it is conducted by humans, is flawed.

Religion has much to answer for. Not just at the level of ridicule, but at the level of serious accusations of wrongdoing. So people are right to challenge it and hold religions to account.

However, 'being religious' is not the same as having faith or believing.

Outsiders see ?religion? and hear religious pronouncements, but less often do they encounter individual believers as people. (A bit like watching PMQs then meeting your own MP - they're often quite humanitarian on their own)

Jesus himself used irony and poked fun at times. As a young believer I did not realise this; indeed it came as rather a shock.

Others may suggest additional examples, but I just take Jesus saying it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into the kingdom of heaven.

IMU Jesus was talking to a group of people in sight of, or who would know of one of the gates of the city of Jerusalem, which was quite narrow and nicknamed ?the needle? but would from time to time be used by a merchant driving a heavily-laden camel train from the countryside in to he city markets.

There would be a struggle, and maybe the camels? loads had to be shed in order for the camel to get in. Jesus?s listeners would witness the situation, see the joke, and possibly take on the message in reference to their own attitude to wealth. Jesus was definitely a match for Ian Hislop.

Jesus was absolutely scathing about the established church ? the church he had actually been brought up in.

He called its leaders the Pharisees ?a brood of vipers? ? no innuendo there. And 'whitewashed sepulchres' i.e. stinking tombs with only a layer of white paint to counteract the smell.

He called them hypocrites. He accused them of oppressing the poor, and the ordinary people by imposing impossible religious burdens on them. He was no friend of the high priests. Hence their giving Judas a bribe to betray Jesus' whereabouts - so that they could have him killed. No CCTV cameras or Indentikit photos then. 'The man I kiss, he is the one.'

Now coming back to the FB ?insults?.

People attacked Jesus for two main reasons :
a) claiming, directly or indirectly, to be God himself.
(This was rightly forbidden by their Scriptures)

b) challenging their behaviour by making them realize that, if not absolutely ?wicked?, they were not as ?good? in their behaviour and attitudes as they knew they should be.

It made them uncomfortable, and they hoped that by killing him, chasing him away or just stopping their ears they could make the accusation vanish.

Obviously, none of us should set ourselves up for challenge a); nevertheless it is easy by our attitude to others to come over as too ?goody goody?, and of course people may attack us because of their perception of what a ?religious? person is, and is like.

When we are attacked for b) then surely that is what Jesus was getting at when he said Blessed are ye when ? etc. We continue to carry His cross, long after he has died.
It comes with the territory.

"Bless them that persecute you, and pray for them who despitefully use you"

headinhands · 13/01/2013 19:43

So how many answers are there to it amillion? I'm fascinated by the way believers justify the issue of suffering particularly when they claim their god is actively involved in their day to day life.

amillionyears · 13/01/2013 20:00

It will not be justification , it will be reasons, some of which, agreed, will be unpalatable to lots of people.

headinhands · 13/01/2013 20:13

Yes and it's the way people make the unpalatable palatable that I find utterly fascinating.

Avuncular · 13/01/2013 20:40

Ellie

Jan 13 20:57

"Avuncular You raise really interesting points and I, for one, would love to properly answer. But I can't right now, so will be back later if that's OK."

Please?


Avuncular · 13/01/2013 20:41

well i don't know what those funny symbols were after the please? - not me, officer; honest

Avuncular · 13/01/2013 21:33

I hate the suffering of others.

Here's a starter on the philosophy side

I'm not going to catalogue all the practical things I've done or tried to do to deal with it. Might be accused of boasting. But my current 'day job' involves trying to reduce the carnage on Britain's roads - 2,000 killed each year and ten times that with life-changing injuries. After Uni, though I'd have loved to go back on a permanent 'gap' year teaching underprivileged kids, I was forced by 'the system' to stay in this country. I worked in the water industry for a long time; public health engineering is often a much more cost-effective way of maintaining public health than curative medicine. I discovered that nobody knew the whereabouts or condition of the UK sewer network so worked with a team to sort this out and produce national guidance manuals for location and CCTV inspection. As a result of this and much of the other research and development work we did your water charges are a lot less than they might have been otherwise. I discovered that basic safety measures regarding the potential failure of some large engineering facilities (on the secret list at that time) had not been taken, and campaigned behind the scenes, putting my neck, and my job, on the line (now sorted). After 30 people were incinerated in the Paddington Rail Disaster, I was one of the few qualified people available to conduct an independent investigation into a particular aspect of the disaster, to avoid a repetition. I also helped as part of an international study to quantify the risks of power workers being electrocuted by a particular kind of fault which can occur in the operation of the solar panels which so many are now installing on their house roofs. We run a 'Fair Trade' scheme to help fund mums in Madagascar to pay for their children's' education and provide medical supplies to a hospital in Mandritsara (they've got a website - look it up - more contributions welcome). Oh - and brought up 4 DCs to the best of our ability. [Had a great life doing all this, BTW] And you want me to rush out and find a cure for children's cancer as well Ellie? Be reasonable! I'm only on this thread really to try if possible help a few people to realise that since human beings have messed up so much so badly, and there are so many natural disasters as well, so that we all ought to go out and do more about it. (I realise you want everybody to go out and do likewise, but I can only speak for the one Christian I know the best.) I do also have a working explanation (not justification or excuse) of why, if God exists and it's not all one immense delusion, these things might be allowed to happen in the world we live in.

There you are Ellie - rant over. Sorry I lost it. Probably 'outed' myself as well .....

SolidGoldFrankensteinandmurgh · 13/01/2013 23:58

Avuncular: the 'camel/eye of needle' myth is considered to be a mistranslation like the one about not suffering a witch to live. The ancient Hebrew words for 'witch' and 'poisoner' were very similar, and so were the words for 'camel' and 'very thick rope'. A fairly infallible stupidity-indictator in self-declared Christians is when they start shouting about every word in the Bible being 'true'. I usually congratulate them on their proficiency in ancient Hebrew, and if that doesn't reduce them to vacant open-mouthed silence I start quizzing them on the nastier bits of the old testament.

SolidGoldFrankensteinandmurgh · 14/01/2013 00:02

Another thing with stupid people claiming that various random incidents are evidence of the existence of their imaginary friend: the picture they give the rest of us of said imaginary friend isn't very nice. They describe an attention-seeking, arrogant, capricious shithead, who not only (as Ellie pointed out) prefers to spend his/her/its time moving books about instead of curing childhood cancer, but also appears to take an eeny-meeny-mino-mo approach to saving the life of one individual in a burning building where many others die. Like aliens, gods appear to favour stupid people, which suggests that if either gods or aliens were to exist they would either be stupid themselves or seriously malevolent.

Swipe left for the next trending thread