10-17-2005, 03:25 AM #1
The two Main Reasons Religion was Created
1)To unify people of different beliefs, hence becoming the ultimate tool to conquer a people.
2)Put limits on an individuals personal conduct, so that nothing is done to excess, hence maintaining what was conquered.
In short, warfare thousands of years ago was on a greater scale in terms of number of wars than their were today. Everyone was fighting their neighbors. And why not? In the old world, there was only fire to light the way at night, people were filled with superstitions from medieval dragons to Greek Sirens. Spirits explained thunderstorms, eclipces, asteroids, the sun. Animals had mythical status to explain their, what was thought to be, unbelievable abilities, such as, flight.
There were no bureaucracies to keep society together and accountable outside the major civilizations, which had transient practices for the most part anyhow. There needed to be order to relative chaos. It is no coincidence that the the birth place of the three main monotheistic religions came out of the desert.
The ultimate sword was the pen. Organized monotheistic religion. One god, one ruler.
They preyed on people's fears; when will the end of the world come, is there life after death, what spirits are in the dark? Then they offered them salvation from these fears, in the form of, god knows everything.
Speaking more to the second point, self restraint. "No masterbation" says many churches, "no gambling", "no drinking". All of these things have been transformed into modern day sin. There are people who go out to gamble and cannot stop or have one drink and must finish everything behind the bar. This is obviously bad for society and society has a hard time monitoring these things, so there is said to be a god that can monitor it for society; that sees all, that condemns you and forgives you and that makes you punish you. Whether it is modern day sins or older sins, like adultery, it is has the same effect; if you can get enough people to believe it, it becomes truth.
I'd be interested in reading people's points of view on this, especially the points of view of the religious people on this forum.
10-17-2005, 02:17 PM #2
Do you mean conquering a people literally? Meaning physically, or can it be mentally?
10-17-2005, 02:47 PM #3Originally Posted by JasperJ
Your reasonings are well, I think I already pointed that out.
10-17-2005, 03:10 PM #4Originally Posted by JasperJ
Limits on conduct hence maintaining what was conquered??? Please give an example. Let me rephrase so you can understand... Please give an example and explain how the maintainance of conquered people via religious conduct limits has impacted that particular society. (I know... might be too much for ya, huh?)
10-17-2005, 04:19 PM #5
Well, religion is a pretty good way to control and motivate lots of people. Only thing is that you can't clue them in to the "real deal," else they'll mutiny.
10-17-2005, 04:45 PM #6Originally Posted by Tock
The most interesting part is, there's probably 2500 archaeological sites world wide. Yet they haven't proved the bible wrong yet, some have proved it to be true, when people said, a people or person didn't exist, that was in the Bible. Then low and behold, there's an archaeological find, that proves them wrong, do they admit they were wrong, no, they keep spreading their mythology, as it were the truth. Talk about not wanting to know the truth, but their reason going beyond wanting to know the truth, that's a smoke screen. It's about their life style, if the Bible is true, then they'll be judged for it, so they would rather play the ostrich. Sticking your head in the sand won't keep from getting run over by a truck
10-17-2005, 04:55 PM #7Originally Posted by JohnnyB
Now if you want opinions from eggheads who stay up late at night studying the historicity of the Bible, ya, that'll get ya going, for sure. On one hand, you've got the fundamentalists who start out with the notion that the Bible is the Word of God, and then they go looking for facts to support that notion. On the other hand, you've got independantly minded scholars who collect whatever facts are available, and then find a notion that fits those facts.
I dunno how you like your research done, but I know how I like mine . . .
10-17-2005, 05:58 PM #8Originally Posted by Tock
Atheistic ideology works much better.
10-17-2005, 06:03 PM #9Originally Posted by Tock
Tock Johnny B is right. I cant count number of highly educated people who have set out to prove the validity of the bible wrong. All have failed, the arguements for Judeo Christianity are stronger than ever today as more evidence comes to life.
10-17-2005, 06:45 PM #10Originally Posted by JohnnyB
10-17-2005, 10:34 PM #11Originally Posted by books555
Originally Posted by books555
Here's one of the reviewer's comments of the book from Amazon.com:
This real-life mystery story started when Sears was given a book containing a story about people who had eagerly awaited the return of Christ during the 19th century. Being a newspaper reporter he found in the archives accounts in the 1840s of people preparing for the sudden appearance of Christ. Some were filled with fear and panic; others called on the world to repent; others cashed in their bank accounts or gave away their worldly possessions. Why did they all expect Christ at that particular time? This is the mystery that Sears set out to solve.
Armed with the writings of Professor E.G. Browne of Pembroke College, Cambridge and Professor Jowett of Balliol College, Oxford, the author started by researching the period 1830-1850 in greater depth, finding that it was a period when a great comet with a tail 108 million miles long dominated discussion, when awesome shooting stars and halo-like rings around the sun fueled speculation about the second coming. Zeal reached its climax in 1844 because Christ said that he would return when three things came to pass:
- the Gospel would be preached everywhere on earth
- the Jews would return to Israel
- mankind would see the "abomination of desolation" foretold by the prophet Daniel.
Sears investigated each very carefully and confirmed to his own satisfaction - and he provides all the evidence - that each of these promises had been fulfilled in 1844.
It occurred to the author to apply a technique common in criminology that when evidence points to only one conclusion that proves false, you assume that the evidence is right but that you need to draw a different conclusion. Sears had a dozen different conclusions to check out and we accompany him as he investigates each of these - bringing us to the really exciting part of the book.
This book is well written, well researched, well documented and highly readable. He found that Jews were looking for a Jew, Christians for a Christian, blacks for a black, whites for a white, overlooking the clue given in the Bible that it would be a new religion. The Bible provided very clear prophecy regarding the coming of the Messiah, but the religious authorities at that time misinterpreted the information and crucified Jesus instead of welcoming him. History repeated itself as the religious authorities about 150 years ago misinterpreted the information and persecuted, exiled, and imprisoned the new savior.
This book has vast implications for us all. If in fact the author has found what all those people were seeking in 1844 and if you reach the same conclusions as the author, your life will never be the same again.
10-18-2005, 02:27 AM #12Originally Posted by Tock
10-18-2005, 05:07 AM #13Originally Posted by JohnnyB
10-18-2005, 11:08 AM #14Originally Posted by Mesomorphyl
I'm loving your responses. The're rude and pointless. You're not very smart, despite your interrogating tone, so calm down. I'm guessing you're a little premenstrual about the masterbating angels thread.
An Isrealis who practice JudAism, in this case, would be a Jew as would a Palestinian who practiced JudAism. You are confusing a person's nationality or ethnicity with their religion, which you can't even spell properly and is virtually irrelevant in the context I provided above. Once a person is converted to a paticular religion they lose much of their uniqueness. Often, they were able to keep their language, but more often their language was either incorporated into the language of their conquerors/converters. Look at the prevalance of Latin in the Roman empire or the fact that even today nearly every Islamic person in the Middle East can speak a form of Arabic. This also shows that religion often unifies written word. Again, whether it was Latin, the transition in the early mediterranean from Greek Lineaer A to Linear B or forms of Arabic.
Customs are also changed or incorporated into conquer peoples day to day lives. In catholicism it is not at all unusual for different countries/peoples to place more or less emphais on different saints, depending on which figures corresponded more closely with their prior conquerod religion. For example, the virigin mary is of particular importantance to many Brazilians, because when their Mestizo population was largely converted they had a female deity of great signifigance present. Holidays that exist in some catholic countries do not exist in others for the same reason. Nonetheless customs become greatly unified under people who share a religion.
Your only point seems to be that religion does not maintain order or unify people and that you are unable to discern meaning from context, such as my referring to medieval mysticism with other forms of mysticism. Are you not aware that religion evolves and that although christianity was created almost 2000 years ago, that translantions change and that things are ommited or added, or that entire languages disappear. Aristotle was lost for nearly 1500 years in Western Europe, thought to have been repressed for hundreds of years by the catholic church. It's reemergence help evolve christianity in the Renaissance.
Lastly, your post, which is simply an attack with silly questions around it, is ridiculous. Either calm down and learn how to debate and not freak like a little girl or end of discussion.
10-18-2005, 11:16 AM #15Originally Posted by JasperJ
Your statement was rediculous and that is why you do not have one of the non-religious guys backing your statements up... The question I asked you to answer was based on your statement. If you cannot back it up I and everyone else who reads this thread can definately understand. Calm down? Debate? Little girl? end the discussion? Wow, you have issues.
10-18-2005, 11:18 AM #16
Oh, and give an example. If you have the ability to answer it directly... So we do not get sidetacked with your obvious time frames of reference(you know the whole thousands of years thingy, lol). Here is the original request.
Please give an example and explain how the maintainance of conquered people via religious conduct limits has impacted that particular society.
Last edited by Mesomorphyl; 10-18-2005 at 11:21 AM.
10-18-2005, 11:30 AM #17Originally Posted by Mesomorphyl
Furthermore, I think his points are very valid. When he is referring to conquering the people, I think he means giving them 2 choices... our way or the highway. The highway is the one to hell.
In other words, they've taking liberties with the Bible in order to use it to their advantage. The government rules the church. The only way to Heaven is through God (or Jesus some claim) and the only way to them is through the church. This feeds on the facts that people inherently need something to believe in, they are afraid of life after death, and for the most part simply cannot think for themselves.
10-18-2005, 11:33 AM #18
Your tone is childish. You are acting like someone who has been emotionally hurt by an argument and is not finding error with the substance of the argument itself.
Spend time on arguing against my two main points instead of simply asking more questions. You have to show that you know something because as of now you're just wasting my time on what is clearly an emotionally based argument on your part. Participate. Don't just hurl immature insults and questions.
10-18-2005, 11:47 AM #19Originally Posted by JasperJ
I do not have to pick apart your two main points... You did that for me
If your thread is not based on fact, then prove it or shut it. Just one example of your points. "Please give an example and explain how the maintainance of conquered people via religious conduct limits has impacted that particular society."
10-18-2005, 12:02 PM #20
Come on jasperj... You have had plenty of time to think of an instance that would back up your long borish thread that does not have an ounce of validity.
Also, I noticed the only way you debate is by saying people only respond to you by emotion. When in fact it seems as if you are motivated by that very thing.
So this is your typical debate... Someone does not agree with you and then:
1)call them premenstrual and say it is emotion based on another thread
2)If someone asks you to prove something... call them silly little questions
3)Tell them to calm down as if they were the ones getting upset(we know its you)
4)call them a name like little girl or something similar
5)call them childish(before they figure out you are)
6)Talk about that person being emotionally hurt or have suffered(as a way to not answer a question)
7)Tell them their arguement is based on emotion
8)Do not admit on being wrong
9)Never prove a point
I think we just about have it.... It is about what you did the other day in the lounge... tsk tsk Have a backbone boy...
10-18-2005, 12:14 PM #21
meso damm you... why is it on somethings i completely agree with you and others im on the opposite end of the spectrum
10-18-2005, 12:15 PM #22Originally Posted by Decadbal
Could be he is only half full of shit......
10-18-2005, 12:16 PM #23Originally Posted by Bigen12
10-18-2005, 12:18 PM #24
LMAO @ bigen12 and decadbal... Hey guys you know the parts you do not agree with me on... you are wrong, right?
10-18-2005, 01:53 PM #25Originally Posted by JohnnyB
10-18-2005, 02:25 PM #26
Mesomorphyl, my discussion with you is over. You are ridiculous. Where did you think throwing insults around was going to lead? To pointless submissions which you have been entering nonstop and now I am partaking in. I'm a busy person. On the rare occasions I come to this forum, I come for a good debate. I asked you to calm down and debate, neither of which you are able to do. You can continue to grind your axe. It is without surprise that it is not easy to take a guy with avatar of another guy dancing with a lawnmower seriously. You've only proven that you are unknowledgeable in this subject and enjoy derailing threads to the inconvience of those who are trying to have a discussion. Truly pathetic.
10-18-2005, 02:35 PM #27Originally Posted by JasperJ
I didn't think you could accomplish this seemingly simple task. Its ok, but attacking the way you have throughout this thread makes it seem to prove you had nothing to say to begin with... I stated you sounded stupid... Now go back and read all the insults and look at who seems to be derailing, lol. It is you who not only is doing this but is the pathetic looser. If you would have at least tried to back up your claim I would have had some respect for you. That time has passed. Every one can see how you debate and discuss in my previous post. Maybe you should check it out.
10-19-2005, 01:24 AM #28Originally Posted by Tock
This is nonsense.
10-19-2005, 05:38 AM #29Originally Posted by JasperJ
To Thine Own Self Be True……
Originally Posted by JasperJ
Originally Posted by JasperJ
Originally Posted by JasperJ
10-19-2005, 06:20 AM #30
Man, this had potential to be an interesting conversation....oh well.
10-19-2005, 06:49 AM #31Originally Posted by co2boi
10-19-2005, 08:42 AM #32
Any form of organized religion is disgusting.....most of em(religious people) dont even know wut the hell their religion is about, They just follow it cuz their friends and family do , humans are intresting.....
10-19-2005, 08:59 AM #33Originally Posted by Bigen12
I smacked you down in the last thread where you where defending a policy were a guy was jailed for having f0ck on a t-shirt. Turned out you were a likely latent homosexual with kids, who was a bouncer at a fetish bar. You let out all that information by yourself. I let it go. Now you pop-up on a thread where there is a guy who doesn't want to debate my posts only ask more questions, so that that he appears like he knows something about the issue, so you can get in an personal attack. Again, pathetic. I stopped the discussion with you for the same reason I stopped the discussion with LawnmowerMan. Neither of you can distiguish between debating the issue and debating the person.
Of all the quotes you just sited from me, you have conviently left out that unlike Meso who has contributed absolutely nothing to backing up his argument, which is because he doesnt have one beyond the fact that he clearly wants to behave like an ass, I did backup some points with more evidence in a lengthy second post. He has offered nothing that shows that he has even basic comprhesion of the issue. You are here to simply add more chaos to chaos.
Both of you guys are really pathetic and deserve to take a 5 minute vacation from your post whoring on this website. As Co2boi said this could have been an interesting topic to debate and it could have if either of you were actually interested in debating the issue. I enjoy having it out with people in the AR lounge, but I don't come to this forum so you ladies can have your peroids on the computer screen.
I'll see you two on other threads and when I do I hope that your able to stick to the issue and actually offer up a debate.
10-19-2005, 09:09 AM #34Originally Posted by JasperJ
Next you have to present an issue to debate. You have not accomplished your portion of this simple task if you want to debate. You have to back up your point and not just say I think this so there...
You need to calm down. You are obviously still upset and emotional. So when you do calm down I will debate your points if you validate them. Such as "giving an example and explain how the maintainance of conquered people via religious conduct limits has impacted that particular society". Then and only then will this become a debate of proof instead of your feelings thread.
10-19-2005, 10:01 AM #35
Originally Posted by JasperJ
You were wrong, get over it.
Originally Posted by JasperJ
Originally Posted by JasperJ
I did point out that you are insulting others, all the while complaining about being insulted…….
If you had children, like most men, you would understand you’re behaving like the youngest child in a family, you call attention to those around you for doing something that you see as wrong, all the while you’re doing the exact same thing….
10-19-2005, 11:14 AM #36Originally Posted by Bigen12
10-19-2005, 07:45 PM #37Originally Posted by books555
And, of course your Christian fundamentalism is nonsense to most people, but it's not to you.
And the same could be said of anyone's religious belief . . . as they say, "One man's religion is another man's belly laugh."
10-20-2005, 06:26 AM #38Originally Posted by Tock
10-20-2005, 07:02 AM #39Originally Posted by co2boi
10-20-2005, 07:22 PM #40Originally Posted by Tock
The Bahai religion is a exclusive world view. It violates logic (LNC). It excludes the exclusivists. According to your thinking, the Bahai faith is narrow minded.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)