Religion and Literature

[Kenpachi]

OK, here's the thing.
I hate religion, but not religious people. I think the doctrines/strictures/whatever etc. of any religion are hilarious and stupid, but if you follow them, you will bare no hostility from me.
The only times religion will bare my hostility, is when they try to impose their views on others.
Especially in books.
Books are my haven, they're where I escape to when I'm annoyed, tired, sad, upset etc.
I love books.
So when Religion try to get books banned, it gives me the complete shits, as I think they should just leave books alone.
I.e. Harry Potter, The Northern Lights etc.
But, and I know this is going to sound bias, it doesn't work the other way around. Literature, and in particular the ones that religion target are fiction. Made Up. So Religion should get their facts straight and not think some awesome book about a girl and her ability to read a "truth-measure" and the end message of "lets kill God" is evil. Its a freakin' book!
Damn it!
And when they try to impose on other people.
I.e. Trying to get it banned in cinemas, schools etc.
Its called Freedom of Speech people.
I don't know about you Americans, but it shits me over here in Australia when they do that.

 

[Hera Ledro]

Before I start, I wonder if somebody could move this to the Religious Debate section. It seems to me to be more apropriate there

So when Religion try to get books banned, it gives me the complete shits, as I think they should just leave books alone.
I.e. Harry Potter, The Northern Lights etc.
But, and I know this is going to sound bias, it doesn't work the other way around. Literature, and in particular the ones that religion target are fiction. Made Up. So Religion should get their facts straight and not think some awesome book about a girl and her ability to read a "truth-measure" and the end message of "lets kill God" is evil. Its a freakin' book!

What is very entertaining is that the fictitious are banning the fiction. How so? The Bible is, to me, little more than historical fiction. It illustrates points and thoughts that are in no way possible. Jesus was historical, Moses was historical, it's POSSIBLE that the great flood is historical, but each of the stories behind these histories is FAR too surreal to be real. They are too exaggerated. So, how do they react to fiction other than their own? They condemn it, of course, especially if the fiction goes against some of their core teachings.

You probably know that witches and wizards, or those who were accused of being, were condemned to death for heresy and being servants of Satan in the Medieval ages. Do you honestly think that the Catholics gave up that notion after all these centuries? The Christian religions are obviously going to put a veto on books like Harry Potter; they place normalcy on the surreal, they place commonness on the impossible; they do, in short, what only God can do. Let us not forget that Dumbledore, easily one of the most popular characters in the Potter series, is gay. I can guarantee you that once the Christian gay-haters heard that, Harry Potter got banned for eternity. It's called intolerance, something religion is notorious for.

Its called Freedom of Speech people.
I don't know about you Americans, but it shits me over here in Australia when they do that.

Which is where religions are hypocrites. They claim the right to speak out for their religion, yet they condemn it when other people do it to them. Where is the logic and equity here, people? You want to advertise your religion, be my guest, but when somebody does it to you, piss off and let them do it. If you claim that right to advertise, and proselytise more often than not, then piss off and let others do it too.

 

[Dean Winchester]

Beforehand, I would like to firmly state that I, in now way, am putting in question the existence of God, (mainly because the theory of being created out of an explosion sounds way more retarded) regardless of what I say after this sentence. As a religious person, I do believe in most of what the Bible says, not all, because I believe that the Bible was edited years ago when the Catholic Church had this Ecumenical Council to say what was good, what was weird, and what shouldn't be said in the Bible, if my memory doesn't fails me (yay Humanities class proved to be useful at last). So, given to the fact that, regardless of being written by mortals inspired by God, the Bible was edited by others, and sometimes it was misunderstood when translated from the original books, tomes, letters, etc.

Religion was born out of the necessity of the humankind to believe we have a greater purpose aside from birth, life, and death. Humanity required to believe in something, fearing the fact that death is indeed the termination of all biological functions of the body, the memories, the very existence of a human being dies. Humanity needed to have a hope of overcoming death, the resting place of the dead were we "sleep" through all eternity known to Hebrews as Sheol (Seo'l), which is basically what we commonly call "the underworld", land of the dead, the "Hades" of greek mythology, in other words the same "hell" with different names. Humans had always feared the fact that they can't exist forever because the desire for "immortality" was placed deep within our mortal hearts, hence all of these legends, myths, tales, histories, et cetera.

Now we come to the concussion that most creations of human origin bear the curse of imperfection known as "sin" (now I realize that FFX seems to be the Final Fantasy game with the most religious influence...), therefore it is corruptible and will be flawed. Religious Intolerance is one of those flaws, but they abide to their rules and sometimes they just take it to drastic methods of "correction" to attempt to save these "infidels". To Religion, homosexuality, witchcraft and wizardry, satanism, and any thing that is against the religion is thus condemned, giving the fanatics (people who take religion way to seriously) the excuse to murder, butcher, torture and commit many horrible crimes that are supposed to be condemned by the Church, again, now we have hypocrisy. My religious beliefs state that those who break the laws put their souls in risk, but, I never judge or take justice in my hands for it is something that is not my job to do, and also my own flawed mortality and imperfection makes me unworthy of doing it, I am also a sinner just like each and every one of us in this community, in this world. I just believe concerning these issues; "is their life, their business, their happiness and problems. Let them be and allow them to use the free will we were granted on the day of our birth. I am NO ONE to judge them."

Sadly, not all of us are willing to allow them use their free will, and take this issues to the last consequences. Remember the Ku Klux Clan? They hunted African American, religious people, and gays, and basically anyone who they considered "unworthy", and they were one of the cruelest organizations to have ever existed (and they still exist by the way).

My point, no matter what we do humans always tend to screw everything, turning everything we can into an excuse to have wars, massacres, and senseless genocides.

Anyhow, I am tired, I'll type more later so discuss.

 

[der Astronom]

I have heard of such things, and it is ridiculous, although these people are willfully ignorant of the fact that their same book says the Earth is flat or 6000 years old when it clearly isn't, and are throwing stones from a glass house when they accuse fiction stories for being "offensive" just because it says things they don't like to hear. Granted, not every story you read is necessarily something you want to hear, and if it isn't, people shouldn't blame the author for writing what he/she did, nor should they tell other people what they can and can't read. Just because you don't like to hear it doesn't mean other people don't want to hear it, nor is it considered "evil" because "evil" is too subjective. If you think it's "evil" for your religion, then fine, go ahead and inform everyone in your religious community, and maybe discourage them from reading it, and while you're at it, explain why you think it's so bad, but there is one thing that you cannot do, which is to force people to read or not read the things you want (or don't want) them to read. Of course, if these people are to be so naive enough to think that banning certain books will force people to be unable to read them, they should reconsider--most of us are able to get our books through other people, or learn about them from people on the Internet, and buy them off of E-bay, Amazon or the Chapters website, and some texts might just be on the Internet anyways.

If humanity isn't amusing me with it's screw ups, it's sickening me.

Religion was born out of the necessity of the humankind to believe we have a greater purpose aside from birth, life, and death. Humanity required to believe in something, fearing the fact that death is indeed the termination of all biological functions of the body, the memories, the very existence of a human being dies. Humanity needed to have a hope of overcoming death, the resting place of the dead were we "sleep" through all eternity known to Hebrews as Sheol (Seo'l), which is basically what we commonly call "the underworld", land of the dead, the "Hades" of greek mythology, in other words the same "hell" with different names. Humans had always feared the fact that they can't exist forever because the desire for "immortality" was placed deep within our mortal hearts, hence all of these legends, myths, tales, histories, et cetera.

This is what I've never been able to understand. It simply just isn't rational.

Now we come to the concussion that most creations of human origin bear the curse of imperfection known as "sin" (now I realize that FFX seems to be the Final Fantasy game with the most religious influence...), therefore it is corruptible and will be flawed. Religious Intolerance is one of those flaws, but they abide to their rules and sometimes they just take it to drastic methods of "correction" to attempt to save these "infidels". To Religion, homosexuality, witchcraft and wizardry, satanism, and any thing that is against the religion is thus condemned, giving the fanatics (people who take religion way to seriously) the excuse to murder, butcher, torture and commit many horrible crimes that are supposed to be condemned by the Church, again, now we have hypocrisy. My religious beliefs state that those who break the laws put their souls in risk, but, I never judge or take justice in my hands for it is something that is not my job to do, and also my own flawed mortality and imperfection makes me unworthy of doing it, I am also a sinner just like each and every one of us in this community, in this world. I just believe concerning these issues; "is their life, their business, their happiness and problems. Let them be and allow them to use the free will we were granted on the day of our birth. I am NO ONE to judge them."

It's funny how the bible actually expects you to prosecute and torture these people for not believing the same things you do, and therefore, expect you to judge these people. Contradictory, isn't it?

 

[Dean Winchester]

It's funny how the bible actually expects you to prosecute and torture these people for not believing the same things you do, and therefore, expect you to judge these people. Contradictory, isn't it?

Yes, but most of our creations and beliefs are quite contradictory as well, hence why our civilization is so flawed. Humans fears what they can't understand, and everything that is considered as different to them is either considered as "heretics" or "evil". This is the perfect chance to quote the great Albert Einstein: "Only two things are infinite-the universe and human stupidity"

 

[Erythritol]

It's funny how the bible actually expects you to prosecute and torture these people for not believing the same things you do, and therefore, expect you to judge these people. Contradictory, isn't it?

Yeah, the OLD TESTAMENT. Which is, as the name might imply, old. Who actually regards the old testament as religious doctrine again? Oh that's right, the Jews. Last time I checked, I didn't have any Jews banging down my door, eager to torture me into converting. In fact, did they EVER do that? Usually they were the ones getting persecuted. Anywho, now to the New Testament. Remember Jesus, the guy who is the centerpiece of Christianity? Let's see what he has to say about torturing and converting...

“[The decision] must be answered from deep within the conscience of the individual involved, ... Those who seek counsel from the church on this subject are encouraged to review the advantages and disadvantages of doing so, to implore the Lord for inspiration and guidance, and then to take the course of action which would give them a feeling of peace and comfort.”

“Love the Lord your God with all your passion and prayer and intelligence. Love others as well as you love yourself.”

"Blessed are the Merciful, for they shall obtain mercy."

"Love one another"

...Wow, doesn't that guy sound like the biggest war-mongering douchebag? The New Testament is just FILLED with hatred towards others, don't you think?

I have just as many issues with the Bible as the next person-- namely when it comes to evolution-- but please, it is not just filled with hatred and violence.

 

[der Astronom]

Yeah, the OLD TESTAMENT. Which is, as the name might imply, old. Who actually regards the old testament as religious doctrine again? Oh that's right, the Jews. Last time I checked, I didn't have any Jews banging down my door, eager to torture me into converting. In fact, did they EVER do that? Usually they were the ones getting persecuted. Anywho, now to the New Testament. Remember Jesus, the guy who is the centerpiece of Christianity? Let's see what he has to say about torturing and converting...

That is your opinion if you choose to ignore the Old Testament, but there is nothing in the New Testament that says to ignore it. Not even Jesus condones it. If you can find such a passage, I'd like to see where he says that, and if he did, it would contradict something else he said. Furthermore, since you actively make the choice to ignore the Old Testament and not reading the bible as a whole, you are exerting your own judgment onto the bible, and in doing so, you make the entire thing look bad. A good book on its own needs no cherry picking.

“[The decision] must be answered from deep within the conscience of the individual involved, ... Those who seek counsel from the church on this subject are encouraged to review the advantages and disadvantages of doing so, to implore the Lord for inspiration and guidance, and then to take the course of action which would give them a feeling of peace and comfort.”

“Love the Lord your God with all your passion and prayer and intelligence. Love others as well as you love yourself.”

"Blessed are the Merciful, for they shall obtain mercy."

"Love one another"

...Wow, doesn't that guy sound like the biggest war-mongering douchebag? The New Testament is just FILLED with hatred towards others, don't you think?

Certain people think this all justifies the horrors and violence told in the Old Testament, but that's only if you take the New Testament on its own, but I guess I've already made that point. Even if you were to ignore the Old Testament and suggest that because it's "invalid", that there should be no contradictions between Jesus being loving, and not telling us to torture or kill others not of the same religion. Really? I don't think so.

"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to turn
" 'a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law -
36a man's enemies will be the members of his own household.'"

For God said, 'Honor your father and mother' and 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.' But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, 'Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,' 6he is not to 'honor his father' with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition.

(In other words, he's not saying anything different from what's already been established from the Old Testament.)

"That servant who knows his master's will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows."

None of this sounds particularly loving, nor is it comforting--nor would today's societies and standards accept this kind of behavior. It is obsolete, and it is only by cherry picking that you even give Jesus any credit for being "loving", when in fact, he does not admit to existing for the sake of peace. If I wanted to learn of someone who did preach loving others in all sincerity, I would not want such a person to contradict himself. That would be a hypocrite.

I have just as many issues with the Bible as the next person-- namely when it comes to evolution-- but please, it is not just filled with hatred and violence.

The fact that it speaks of loving humanity when it advocates this kind of violence and intolerance as well is a contradiction, and is inconsistent.

 

[Hera Ledro]

Yeah, the OLD TESTAMENT. Which is, as the name might imply, old. Who actually regards the old testament as religious doctrine again? Oh that's right, the Jews. Last time I checked, I didn't have any Jews banging down my door, eager to torture me into converting. In fact, did they EVER do that? Usually they were the ones getting persecuted. Anywho, now to the New Testament. Remember Jesus, the guy who is the centerpiece of Christianity? Let's see what he has to say about torturing and converting...

Alright, I will say it here and now: your knowledge of Christianity is woefully ignorant. They do not say to ignore or pay no heed to the Old Testament, they only demote it. In fact, they often cite things FROM the Old Testament, and not just that Noah's Ark and Adam and Eve stuff. Please, for all of our sanities, make sure that you know what you are talking about before you put it forward. If you do not know, do not assume. As Julius so rightfully says within his signature, "When you assume, you make an ass out of you and me."

Returning to my point, the majority of Jesus' teachings are based upon the morals of the Old Testament. Many of them are altered somewhat, but they are essentially the Old Testament. He actually says to spread the word. No, it wasn't him who said to torture and destroy to spread the word, but he did tel them to spread the word. He put too much faith in the 'good' side of humanity, and ignored the potential hazards. For a miracle-maker, he really doesn't seem to have much foresight.

Both Jewish and Christian religions have gone through major changes and denominations over the years. Yes, just as there are denominations of Christianity, there are also several denominations of Judaism. Judaism has gone through as many, if not MORE changes, than Christianity, particularly with Mysticism and overall rules of what is/is not Kosher, and what is/is not morally and religiously correct. References and examples available upon request.

 

[Dean Winchester]

Alright, I will say it here and now: your knowledge of Christianity is woefully ignorant. They do not say to ignore or pay no heed to the Old Testament, they only demote it. In fact, they often cite things FROM the Old Testament, and not just that Noah's Ark and Adam and Eve stuff. Please, for all of our sanities, make sure that you know what you are talking about before you put it forward. If you do not know, do not assume. As Julius so rightfully says within his signature, "When you assume, you make an ass out of you and me."

Returning to my point, the majority of Jesus' teachings are based upon the morals of the Old Testament. Many of them are altered somewhat, but they are essentially the Old Testament. He actually says to spread the word. No, it wasn't him who said to torture and destroy to spread the word, but he did tel them to spread the word. He put too much faith in the 'good' side of humanity, and ignored the potential hazards. For a miracle-maker, he really doesn't seem to have much foresight.

Both Jewish and Christian religions have gone through major changes and denominations over the years. Yes, just as there are denominations of Christianity, there are also several denominations of Judaism. Judaism has gone through as many, if not MORE changes, than Christianity, particularly with Mysticism and overall rules of what is/is not Kosher, and what is/is not morally and religiously correct. References and examples available upon request.

Yes, and how come people ignore his teachings yet they say they follow them?

Jesus said: "“Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you. This is the essence of all that is taught in the law and the prophets." Yet all I see in this world is people judging people, hatred being spread by the leaders of the different religions and the lack of leniency towards others.

Oh and people, as Hera mentioned before, do not assume. Assuming is bad....and you know what happens when people assume

 

[Erythritol]

Alright, I will say it here and now: your knowledge of Christianity is woefully ignorant. They do not say to ignore or pay no heed to the Old Testament, they only demote it. In fact, they often cite things FROM the Old Testament, and not just that Noah's Ark and Adam and Eve stuff. Please, for all of our sanities, make sure that you know what you are talking about before you put it forward. If you do not know, do not assume. As Julius so rightfully says within his signature, "When you assume, you make an ass out of you and me."

Returning to my point, the majority of Jesus' teachings are based upon the morals of the Old Testament. Many of them are altered somewhat, but they are essentially the Old Testament. He actually says to spread the word. No, it wasn't him who said to torture and destroy to spread the word, but he did tel them to spread the word. He put too much faith in the 'good' side of humanity, and ignored the potential hazards. For a miracle-maker, he really doesn't seem to have much foresight.

Both Jewish and Christian religions have gone through major changes and denominations over the years. Yes, just as there are denominations of Christianity, there are also several denominations of Judaism. Judaism has gone through as many, if not MORE changes, than Christianity, particularly with Mysticism and overall rules of what is/is not Kosher, and what is/is not morally and religiously correct. References and examples available upon request.

Yeah, okay. And you're definitely an authority. Many Chrisitians, actually, generally DO disregard the Old Testament. They cherrypick now and then, because yes, Judaism and Christianity are intimately linked. They worship the same God. However, the Christian religion is mostly centered on the New Testament and Jesus's teachings. I know what I'm talking about. Both of my parents had intense Catholic schoolings, I go to Catholic church, and my best friend is a Medieval studies major (hint hint, guess what was super popular back then). And for my sanity, stop using clichés. It's making the English geek inside of me want to puke.

I don't need some boring lecture about early Christianity. I know all about it. There were so many different ideas going on at that time, that it can only accurately be called early Christianities. Everyone had a different take on what had just happened. Anyway, I'm well aware that Jesus told his disciples to spread the word. Big deal. You're all acting like he was some megalomaniac who told his followers to rape, maim, kill, and convert as many people as possible. I'm just saying that for all of your ranting, you're completely ignoring the beautiful and pure parts of Christianity/The Bible. It's not all maiming and rape.

Jesus said: "“Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you. This is the essence of all that is taught in the law and the prophets." Yet all I see in this world is people judging people, hatred being spread by the leaders of the different religions and the lack of leniency towards others.

Uh-oh, you better get out your handy little quote and apply it to yourself. If you actually read my post, notice I don't say anything about the followers of Christianity? I'm weeeeell aware of history and how people over the years-- at to this day-- perverted the teachings of Jesus. I think it's rather shameful. However, there are some people who adhere to his teachings pretty well and are extremely lovely people.

The fact that it speaks of loving humanity when it advocates this kind of violence and intolerance as well is a contradiction, and is inconsistent.

A book (the New Testament) that was compiled over a hundred years and was written by many different people in different locations is a bit inconsistent? Really?! The Old Testament and New Testament are really inconsistent, I'll admit that. Then again, the Old Testament is more of a Jewish text, and the New Testament is a wholly Christian text. It's just like how the Quraan doesn't exactly match up with the Bible. They're like different biographies of the same person. They are going to have different ideas and concepts and stress different morals. Anywaaay, I could be wrong (I'm not exactly a Bible scholar or super religious), but I don't think the New Testament really advocates violence or intolerance on the same level that the Old Testament does. The teachings that Jesus is most known for are the "love everybody" teachings. The quotes you posted, yes, Jesus seems to get a little rough, however...

Matthew 10:34-37
34: Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
35: For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
36: And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
37: He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

I honestly think that it can be interpreted in a less violent way. The sword (according to a friend) can be a reference to combating Satan with the words of the Lord. It also seems more like he's interested in leading a type of religious revolution. He wants people to know that God should come before their families. I don't think it's necessarily violent or nasty. The Bible isn't written in completely straightfoward English. Like in many volumes of literature, there are certain 'hidden' meanings in words and passages. If it were that simple, we wouldn't need Bible scholars and the like.

Luke 12:41-47
41: Then Peter said unto him, Lord, speakest thou this parable unto us, or even to all?
42: And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season?
43: Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.
44: Of a truth I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all that he hath.
45: But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken;
46: The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.
47: And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

Yeah, taken out of context like you did there, it did look pretty bad. But actually IN context, it's basically saying, "don't be a douchebag, and God won't punish you." That's a pretty fair lesson, I'd say.

Anyway, I guess what I'm trying to do is emphasize that it's not 1485, and the Spanish Inquisition is over. Yes, Christianity did a lot of shitty things. But I don't know why you don't get that it WAS NOT THE TEACHINGS OF JESUS. If it hadn't been over religion, it would have been over something else. Never underestimate the violence that seems to be inherent in mankind. If we're not killing people in the name of God, we're committing genocide because someone has a different skin color than we do. It's human nature that committed those atrocities in the past. Religion was just the excuse of the day.

 

[Kenpachi]

I actually quite love how into this you all seem to be getting, and while discussing the Christian Literature (namely said; The Bible), that wasn't quite my point. However, keep the discussion going, I agree wholeheartedly on the side saying the Bible and Christianity today's interpretation of it is total shit (or at least, that's the new point I'm putting across if it hasn't been said)
My main point was, that religion (Christianity in particular) have an innate ability to be able to see things in books that they dislike, and impose their wills on those who don't see anything too offensive in them.
There is a site my sister found a while ago, a Christianity Propaganda Site, which has numerous "interviews" with children about books (namely Harry Potter) and is designed to influence those non-zealots to convert to Christianity and destroy the wicked!
Here's the link; http://godhatesgoths.com/godhatesharrypotter.html

This, I feel, is an example of the complete and utter bullshit bigotry that some people perpetuate within religions these days.
Where, oh where in the Bible does it say; "and thou shalt post anti-intellectualist bigotry against popular children's books, that have nothing at all to do with being anti-God"
NO F***ING WHERE!!!
What makes it even more hilarious in my opinion is that they are targeting Harry Potter.
Harry, f***ing Potter.
Has Christianity even heard of a book called The Northern Lights? Or the His Dark Materials Trilogy?
Those should come under so much more scrutiny (or they will when the next movie is released) as their message is a whole lot worse for religion.
They're trying to kill God.

 

[Rockman X]

I actually quite love how into this you all seem to be getting, and while discussing the Christian Literature (namely said; The Bible), that wasn't quite my point. However, keep the discussion going, I agree wholeheartedly on the side saying the Bible and Christianity today's interpretation of it is total shit (or at least, that's the new point I'm putting across if it hasn't been said)

K, yeah, first off: not everyone has the same interpretation. That's why people are generally picky about preachers and things of that nature.

My main point was, that religion (Christianity in particular) have an innate ability to be able to see things in books that they dislike, and impose their wills on those who don't see anything too offensive in them.

K, when was the last time you had a Christian tell you to convert or die? Hmmmm? Christians may preach at you with crap like "IF YOU LISTEN TO ROCK ULL GO TO HELL" but they in no way, shape or form actually force you to believe what they believe.

There is a site my sister found a while ago, a Christianity Propaganda Site, which has numerous "interviews" with children about books (namely Harry Potter) and is designed to influence those non-zealots to convert to Christianity and destroy the wicked!
Here's the link; http://godhatesgoths.com/godhatesharrypotter.html

This, I feel, is an example of the complete and utter bullshit bigotry that some people perpetuate within religions these days.

Well whoop-de-frigging-do. Guess what? It's NOT the majority. Most Christians couldn't give a shit about your precious Harry Potter.

Where, oh where in the Bible does it say; "and thou shalt post anti-intellectualist bigotry against popular children's books, that have nothing at all to do with being anti-God"
NO F***ING WHERE!!!
What makes it even more hilarious in my opinion is that they are targeting Harry Potter.
Harry, f***ing Potter.
Has Christianity even heard of a book called The Northern Lights? Or the His Dark Materials Trilogy?
Those should come under so much more scrutiny (or they will when the next movie is released) as their message is a whole lot worse for religion.
They're trying to kill God.

I'm going to impart a little bit of knowledge to you so you can know WHY Christians target things like Harry Potter. This is from Deuteronomy 18, verses 10 through 13:

(10) Let no one be found among you who sacrifices his son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, (11) or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. (12) Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD, and because of these detestable practices the LORD your God will drive out those nations before you. (13) You must be blameless before the LORD your God.

See that? Yeah, that's why Christians attack your Harry Potter. And in case you hadn't noticed, they haven't exactly succeeded in banning it from stores, so quit whining. If you want to talk about Christians bitching about something, talk about what they did over in England when Monty Python's Life of Brian came out.

 

[Erythritol]

I actually quite love how into this you all seem to be getting, and while discussing the Christian Literature (namely said; The Bible), that wasn't quite my point. However, keep the discussion going, I agree wholeheartedly on the side saying the Bible and Christianity today's interpretation of it is total shit (or at least, that's the new point I'm putting across if it hasn't been said)
My main point was, that religion (Christianity in particular) have an innate ability to be able to see things in books that they dislike, and impose their wills on those who don't see anything too offensive in them.
There is a site my sister found a while ago, a Christianity Propaganda Site, which has numerous "interviews" with children about books (namely Harry Potter) and is designed to influence those non-zealots to convert to Christianity and destroy the wicked!
Here's the link; http://godhatesgoths.com/godhatesharrypotter.html

This, I feel, is an example of the complete and utter bullshit bigotry that some people perpetuate within religions these days.
Where, oh where in the Bible does it say; "and thou shalt post anti-intellectualist bigotry against popular children's books, that have nothing at all to do with being anti-God"
NO F***ING WHERE!!!
What makes it even more hilarious in my opinion is that they are targeting Harry Potter.
Harry, f***ing Potter.
Has Christianity even heard of a book called The Northern Lights? Or the His Dark Materials Trilogy?
Those should come under so much more scrutiny (or they will when the next movie is released) as their message is a whole lot worse for religion.
They're trying to kill God.

Lulz. K, ever heard of the general area of the Middle East, by any chance? Why don't you take a pleasant trip over there so you can have some sort of understanding of what a religious state is? They aren't so much for the free speech; in fact, the state law is Sharia law. This means no separation of church and state. I'm not getting on the "LET'S ALL ATTACK ISLAM NOW!" bandwagon, but lay off of Christianity. You think they're that terrible about seeing things they don't agree with and bitching about it? There was recently a problem in Sudan with a British woman who was looking at jail time (and possibly worse) for allowing her students to name a class teddy bear Mohammed (the holy Islamic prophet). Oh, and let's not forget about the infamous case of the Swedish cartoons depicting the prophet Mohammed. People were rioting and calling for the DEATH of the cartoonists. So, yeah, let's talk about religious extremists.

Boo bloody hoo, some people in the Catholic Church don't like Harry Potter. Who cares? We have the lovely practice of separation of church and state. We also have free speech. You know what that means? J.K. Rowling can continue to make millions of dollars, the Catholic Church can bitch about it, and you can bitch about the Catholic Church. Ain't life grand?

 

[Kenpachi]

Snap.

K, yeah, first off: not everyone has the same interpretation. That's why people are generally picky about preachers and things of that nature.

Fair call Vengeful Ronin, but as you said, everyone has their own interpretation, and therefore I am allowed to say what I feel.

K, when was the last time you had a Christian tell you to convert or die? Hmmmm? Christians may preach at you with crap like "IF YOU LISTEN TO ROCK ULL GO TO HELL" but they in no way, shape or form actually force you to believe what they believe

Again, fair enough, but I have actually had some of my more fanatical Christian friends attempt to convert me, one of them did go as far saying I would die an earlier death if I didn't convert. She then went on to say it was a "scientifically proven fact."
Yeah, that's right. She cited science.

Well whoop-de-frigging-do. Guess what? It's NOT the majority. Most Christians couldn't give a shit about your precious Harry Potter.

I don't actually find Harry Potter great literature, I am simply using that as an example for the way some (read it, some) Christians attempt to push their beliefs across, and I find that morally reprehensible.

See that? Yeah, that's why Christians attack your Harry Potter. And in case you hadn't noticed, they haven't exactly succeeded in banning it from stores, so quit whining. If you want to talk about Christians bitching about something, talk about what they did over in England when Monty Python's Life of Brian came out.

Whining, I love that word.
Again, read above, I 'aint whining about Harry Potter, I am simply pointing out that the way some of the more fanatical Christians try to get their point across is, what I call, wrong.
And what exactly did happen in regards to Life of Brian? Seriously curious here, I love that movie.

I know that not all Christians are like that, and I respect those who believe in what they want and don't attempt to force it on others. I am saying the way that the more fanatical ones attempt to ban things or acts because it is "against the Bible" and whatnot is total bullshit.
The Bible was writtem by man, not God. It's what a man thought God said, did anyone have backup for each of their stories?
Again, serious question, I don't know.

EDIT:
Doubly Snap.

Yes, I know about the Middle East, and I'm not saying that they way they govern their way is wrong. But I'm not saying that it is wrong either. We don't know because we (I assume) don't live their. We are not of their faiths (again, assumption) and so we conduct our lives differently to there.
Again, read what I posted Erythritol and then you'll know what I'm saying.
I don't care how much they bitch, its when they try to change things for the people that aren't following their religion and try to impose on everyone else that I don't like.
And I'm not talking about the Middle East, I'm talking about Western Society.

And yes, life is grand.

 

[Rockman X]

Fair call Vengeful Ronin, but as you said, everyone has their own interpretation, and therefore I am allowed to say what I feel.

Quite true, and your interpretation is just as biased and uninformed as the very Christians you bash.

Again, fair enough, but I have actually had some of my more fanatical Christian friends attempt to convert me, one of them did go as far saying I would die an earlier death if I didn't convert. She then went on to say it was a "scientifically proven fact."
Yeah, that's right. She cited science.

Yes, they do like to use scare tactics when converting people. BELIEVE IN JESUS OR BURN IN HELL. Things like that. But that's all they can do. They can't tie you down and force you to believe. They can only bug you about it. And when they do that, all you have to do is start humping the nearest wall singing "hey there, shitty shitty bang bang shitty shitty bang bang how do you do?" and they'll leave you alone.

I don't actually find Harry Potter great literature, I am simply using that as an example for the way some (read it, some) Christians attempt to push their beliefs across, and I find that morally reprehensible.

Boo hoo. Let me impart some moar wisdom to you:

People have this thing where whenever someone says NO DONT DO THAT, they do it. I'm sure Freud thought of a name for it, but I'm no psychologist. It's human nature though. So generally, when any sort of group becomes outspoken against something, that merely brings it more attention.

Christian group: DONT WATCH THIS MOVIE IT R BAD

Everyone else: hmm...I think I'll go see it to see why they say it's bad

In the end, it only increases sales and popularity.

Whining, I love that word.
Again, read above, I 'aint whining about Harry Potter, I am simply pointing out that the way some of the more fanatical Christians try to get their point across is, what I call, wrong.
And what exactly did happen in regards to Life of Brian? Seriously curious here, I love that movie.

Wrong as it may be, fanatical Christians aren't the majority of the religion. They are however, the most vocal, which you should actually be thankful for. In being the most vocal, the fanatics make the religion quite unappealing to prospective converts, so Christianity's respect goes down and nobody pays attention if they dislike something.

As for Life of Brian, some crazy bitch in the church went all nuts saying it was heresy and got it banned due to her protests and such. I can't remember it all, I watched an interview with the Monty Python crew about it a few months ago. Should still be on youtube.

I know that not all Christians are like that, and I respect those who believe in what they want and don't attempt to force it on others. I am saying the way that the more fanatical ones attempt to ban things or acts because it is "against the Bible" and whatnot is total bullshit.
The Bible was writtem by man, not God. It's what a man thought God said, did anyone have backup for each of their stories?
Again, serious question, I don't know.

Bullshit or not, people have freedom of speech in this country so there's nothing you can do about it. On the flipside, there's nothing they can do but bitch about things, and the general populous pretty much ignores them, so it doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Kenpachi]

Fair enough Venegeful Ronin, your point is well made.

I am well aware however, of the fact that the fanatical Christians aren't the majority, I think they make up about the smallest minority (the totally crazy ones at any rate) and I respect the fact that most of the rest of the religion aren't like that.
Its those people I don't like.
And I am fully aware of free speech, doesn't mean I have to like it.

I am quite aware of the bias of my interpretation also, if someone would be kind enough to educate me otherwise, I would gladly listen.

As for the idea you suggested about getting rid of those weirder Christians, knowing the ones I know, they'd probably wait until I finished or passed out from boredom/exhaustion etc.

But I think that you are dismissing my point and bringing in some counter-argument to attempt to halt it further. My point is, why do the more fanatical Christians feel they need to badmouth and put down the literature which is really not aimed at them, or at destroying their beliefs.
That's all.

 

[Rockman X]

And I am fully aware of free speech, doesn't mean I have to like it.

No, it doesn't

I am quite aware of the bias of my interpretation also, if someone would be kind enough to educate me otherwise, I would gladly listen.

I'm just saying that it seems a little biased (or more accurately, hypocritical) that it's okay for you to hate a small group for complaining about books they don't like when it does absolutely no harm...yet it's wrong for them to complain about said books.

As for the idea you suggested about getting rid of those weirder Christians, knowing the ones I know, they'd probably wait until I finished or passed out from boredom/exhaustion etc.

Well in that case, either ignore them till they finally give up, say you're fine with going to hell and dying early, or file a restraining order on their asses.

But I think that you are dismissing my point and bringing in some counter-argument to attempt to halt it further. My point is, why do the more fanatical Christians feel they need to badmouth and put down the literature which is really not aimed at them, or at destroying their beliefs.
That's all.

Did you not read that passage from Deuteronomy I posted a while back? They badmouth it because it condones witchcraft, something which they feel is wrong and harmful to EVERYONE. See, believe it or not, it's not an entirely selfish act on their part. They truly feel that it is detrimental to society, or more specifically, to children growing up thinking that it's okay to be a witch/warlock. In their eyes, they are merely trying to help. Their perspective is way off, but they aren't attacking those things to piss off readers, they're doing it because they're concerned for the spiritual well-being of people.

And before the inevitable assumption is said, let me cut it off: no, I am not a Christian, and I don't like the religion.

 

[Kenpachi]

Hehe, fair enough, thank you for pointing those out to me.
I did read the Deuteronomy post earlier, guess I forgot it though
AndI was never going to ask are you a Christian, the way you were writing doesn't come across as if you are of the religion.

 

[Hera Ledro]

Yeah, okay. And you're definitely an authority. Many Chrisitians, actually, generally DO disregard the Old Testament. They cherrypick now and then, because yes, Judaism and Christianity are intimately linked. They worship the same God. However, the Christian religion is mostly centered on the New Testament and Jesus's teachings. I know what I'm talking about. Both of my parents had intense Catholic schoolings, I go to Catholic church, and my best friend is a Medieval studies major (hint hint, guess what was super popular back then). And for my sanity, stop using clichés. It's making the English geek inside of me want to puke.

Before I continue, I would like to point out that, though I am not some kind of theologist, my knowledge is not neglectful with Religion. I have taken, and am currently taking, religious studies in University. This doesn't make me some kind of uber-super-fantastic authority, but it does mean that I have an in-depth knowledge about what I talk about.

Anywho. Yes, Christianity is centred upon the New Testament, I do agree. However, with your delivery prior to that post, you made it sound like the Old Testament was negligible.

I don't mean to sound like an ass, and I apologise deeply if this is offensive, but the church teaches very little about religion. They teach you the doctrines and the worship. They ALWAYS skate over their misgivings and mistakes and misdoings. I'm not saying you are uneducated to this, nor ar they, but the Church has far less authority in religious histories and perceptions of religions than you seem to think.

And what's wrong with cliches Cliches are fun And they do get the point across.

I don't need some boring lecture about early Christianity. I know all about it. There were so many different ideas going on at that time, that it can only accurately be called early Christianities. Everyone had a different take on what had just happened. Anyway, I'm well aware that Jesus told his disciples to spread the word. Big deal. You're all acting like he was some megalomaniac who told his followers to rape, maim, kill, and convert as many people as possible. I'm just saying that for all of your ranting, you're completely ignoring the beautiful and pure parts of Christianity/The Bible. It's not all maiming and rape.

The parts of the Bible that are pure and beautiful are generally inconsistent. The few that aren't, and also including those that are, are completely unrealistic. Not only are they over-exaggerated, but they are almost completely impossible to explain. Even the Fire Storm, in Exodus where Moses and the Hebrews escaped Egypt, gave me a bit of trouble before I could come up with logical explanations besides a meteor shower. That being said, I am not the most logical person in the world, so my explanations may not make complete sense to people.

I also never said that Jesus told his disciples to spread the word the way they did. In fact, I specifically said that it wasn't he who told them to do it that way. As a matter of fact, that was Paul. He was completely unforgiving of those who did not follow Jesus. Once Constantine swore loyalty to the cross, the Catholics were set to destroy, pillage, rape, maim, and do whatever the hell they wanted to anybody they wished.

Also, a little thing about the way they converted. As I'm sure you all know, God gave the Hebrews instructions on how to deal with the people they conquered. He told them to kill all the men, and to use the women and children "as they please." This vague statement usually implies rape and slavery. To argue against Jesus, for once (ass opposed to Christianity), he was very well versed in the Old Testament (he was Jewish, after all). If he told his followers to spread the word, surely he must have realised that it would have been in the way sanctioned and directed by God? Why would they convert in any other way? Heresy was something that was invented several years later, but it was still in practice with Pagans long before its invention.

A book (the New Testament) that was compiled over a hundred years and was written by many different people in different locations is a bit inconsistent? Really?! The Old Testament and New Testament are really inconsistent, I'll admit that. Then again, the Old Testament is more of a Jewish text, and the New Testament is a wholly Christian text. It's just like how the Quraan doesn't exactly match up with the Bible. They're like different biographies of the same person. They are going to have different ideas and concepts and stress different morals. Anywaaay, I could be wrong (I'm not exactly a Bible scholar or super religious), but I don't think the New Testament really advocates violence or intolerance on the same level that the Old Testament does. The teachings that Jesus is most known for are the "love everybody" teachings. The quotes you posted, yes, Jesus seems to get a little rough, however...

Actually, the Old Testament is more consistent than the new Testament. This is odd, since the New Testament is basically an account of somebody's life. But, looking at it logically, it's not odd at all, since it was several accounts patched together, one of which was never even friendly with Jesus. It's not surprising, then, that with all these different accounts, the New Testament is far less consistent than the Old Testament. Just a little tidbit.

Yes, but Jesus' teachings are very heavily based upon the Old Testament. It only stands to reason, then, that the violence will have passed on down the grapevine, even if it was taught differently. Jesus is known most for his 'turn the other cheek' and filling a basket with bread, I do believe. However, while he advocates peace in many of his teachings, he rarely defies violence. Even if he did, the usual argument I hear is, "Well, I'm just a normal guy, I can't be expected to be like Jesus!" Bullshit.

In light of what I had said in my previous post, I would like to apologise if I seemed rude in calling you ignorant. I didn't mean to be offensive.

That being said, from what I can tell, you have posted aspects on religion that is incomplete. You are placing points forward, but withholding key aspects that aid their validity. It's nothing personal, but I just think you need to put out all of the info for your point before you put out any info.

 

[Erythritol]

Before I continue, I would like to point out that, though I am not some kind of theologist, my knowledge is not neglectful with Religion. I have taken, and am currently taking, religious studies in University. This doesn't make me some kind of uber-super-fantastic authority, but it does mean that I have an in-depth knowledge about what I talk about.

Anywho. Yes, Christianity is centred upon the New Testament, I do agree. However, with your delivery prior to that post, you made it sound like the Old Testament was negligible.

I don't mean to sound like an ass, and I apologise deeply if this is offensive, but the church teaches very little about religion. They teach you the doctrines and the worship. They ALWAYS skate over their misgivings and mistakes and misdoings. I'm not saying you are uneducated to this, nor ar they, but the Church has far less authority in religious histories and perceptions of religions than you seem to think.

And what's wrong with cliches Cliches are fun And they do get the point across.

I wasn't saying that I learned about Christianity from going to church. Because I didn't. I'm weeell aware that the Catholic Church isn't going to tell their followers all of their dirty little secrets. However, the Church DOES know what they worship, better than anyone else, I would believe. From the Church I did learn what parts of the Bible, as a religion, they find more important. I learned about Christianity's history in school. I also studied the Bible in University, but from more of a literary point of view. Of course, you can never study the Bible without getting into religion, so...I'm not ignorant either.

The parts of the Bible that are pure and beautiful are generally inconsistent. The few that aren't, and also including those that are, are completely unrealistic. Not only are they over-exaggerated, but they are almost completely impossible to explain. Even the Fire Storm, in Exodus where Moses and the Hebrews escaped Egypt, gave me a bit of trouble before I could come up with logical explanations besides a meteor shower. That being said, I am not the most logical person in the world, so my explanations may not make complete sense to people.

O....k. I don't think I quite follow here. The "beautiful" parts that I'm talking about are in the New Testament. I'm pretty much trying to focus on the New Testament here, since I think that all the angry ranting that's going on is directed towards Christianity. I wouldn't say they're inconsistent at all. I'm not even sure what you mean by that. I'm talking about the oft-quoted parts of the New Testament, where Jesus is constantly telling people to love each other, be kind to the poor, etc. I don't think Jesus's kindness is hard to explain. Throughout the Bible, I'd say he's actually consistently kind to everyone he encounters. Whether some of his concepts are derived from the Old Testament is sort of a moot point. His appearance marked the beginning of a completely new religion.

I also never said that Jesus told his disciples to spread the word the way they did. In fact, I specifically said that it wasn't he who told them to do it that way. As a matter of fact, that was Paul. He was completely unforgiving of those who did not follow Jesus. Once Constantine swore loyalty to the cross, the Catholics were set to destroy, pillage, rape, maim, and do whatever the hell they wanted to anybody they wished.

Yeah. Like I said, I don't think Christianity (read: The New Testament) is necessarily a violent religion. I stress the New Testament and Jesus because that is what Christianity is all about. If that were not true, there would BE no Christianity. If Christians mainly adhered to the Old Testament, they would be Jewish and there would have been no huge divergence from Judaism. His followers just took things too far, and Jesus wasn't around to say, "Hey, guys, chill out." That's human nature. You cannot blame the religion for that.

Also, a little thing about the way they converted. As I'm sure you all know, God gave the Hebrews instructions on how to deal with the people they conquered. He told them to kill all the men, and to use the women and children "as they please." This vague statement usually implies rape and slavery. To argue against Jesus, for once (ass opposed to Christianity), he was very well versed in the Old Testament (he was Jewish, after all). If he told his followers to spread the word, surely he must have realised that it would have been in the way sanctioned and directed by God? Why would they convert in any other way? Heresy was something that was invented several years later, but it was still in practice with Pagans long before its invention.

Not necessarily. To recall your earlier statement, one should never assume! So what if it said that in the Old Testament? Ever notice how radically different God is between the Old and New Testament? It's like he's bipolar. Jesus did say to spread the word, but with his preachings of love, I don't think he would have condoned violence as a way to spread Christianity. When he speaks of people who will not convert, he simply says, "They are not worthy of me."

Actually, the Old Testament is more consistent than the new Testament. This is odd, since the New Testament is basically an account of somebody's life. But, looking at it logically, it's not odd at all, since it was several accounts patched together, one of which was never even friendly with Jesus. It's not surprising, then, that with all these different accounts, the New Testament is far less consistent than the Old Testament. Just a little tidbit.

Yes, but Jesus' teachings are very heavily based upon the Old Testament. It only stands to reason, then, that the violence will have passed on down the grapevine, even if it was taught differently. Jesus is known most for his 'turn the other cheek' and filling a basket with bread, I do believe. However, while he advocates peace in many of his teachings, he rarely defies violence. Even if he did, the usual argument I hear is, "Well, I'm just a normal guy, I can't be expected to be like Jesus!" Bullshit.

I'm not sure if you misinterpreted what I said, but I just meant that the Old Testament and the New Testament are very different. It's as if God is completely different. In the Old Testament, he's extremely vindictive, and in the New, he's loving and forgiving.

Like I said, whether Jesus's teachings are based on the Old Testament is a moot point. Why is that relevant? Christianity is centered primarily around the New Testament and the teachings of Jesus. Jesus IS Christianity. Take away Jesus and his teachings, and you're left with Judaism (more or less). Jesus does not condone violence at all. He advises people who suffer from violence to turn the other cheek against their assailant. He tells people to be merciful. And guess what? According to Christianity, this is coming from God. Jesus is a piece of God. So there you have it, God is telling people to be kind, merciful, and forgiving. Whether people follow the teachings of Jesus incorrectly or not, it is not the Bible's doing. If someone says "I'm not Jesus! I can't be expected to do these things!" then it is that person's own personal weakness, not the Bible's.

In light of what I had said in my previous post, I would like to apologise if I seemed rude in calling you ignorant. I didn't mean to be offensive.

That being said, from what I can tell, you have posted aspects on religion that is incomplete. You are placing points forward, but withholding key aspects that aid their validity. It's nothing personal, but I just think you need to put out all of the info for your point before you put out any info.

I don't really care. I probably pissed you off. Anyway, my points on the Christian religion aren't incomplete at all. You're trying to shove history in with the discussion of the Bible, while I'm trying to discuss it in a historical vacuum, to be more accurate. Plain and simple: the New Testament does NOT condone violence, and it is not a violent piece of literature. It just isn't. Feel free to quote something (please, just not Revelation, because it is the biggest non-sequitar in the Bible, and I think everyone can agree that John of Patmos was most definitely on something when he wrote it) to prove me wrong. Whether some of it is a little inconsistent is irrelevent when arguing whether its a violent piece of literature. The Old Testament is not the New Testament. You keep trying arguing that Christianity is a violent religion and giving me examples from the old Testament or from what followers have done. That's all swell, but not what I'm talking about. Give me examples from the New Testament. YOU are the one having trouble with validity. The fact of the matter is that violent interpretations of the Bible have besmirched the name of Christianity and made people think it's a horrible violent religion. The same with Islam right now: You think that in the Quraan it says to blow people up in the name of God? No, of course it doesn't. It's just plain ignorant to think that. There will always be extremists in every religion, interpreting the religious texts in violent ways and giving bad press to the religion. It's a shame.