Is the Xian God A Predator? Are All Gods Predators?
October 1, 2018 at 3:53 pm #24238
The OED defines predator as a person who ruthlessly exploits others. The word’s Latin root is praedator, which means ‘plunderer’.October 2, 2018 at 3:40 pm #24244
Yes. An undeniable yes. It is the most perfect description of the monster and mobster of the old testament.
A more interesting question is: Was Jesus a predator? Is he now in whatever bizarre form he has in heaven…a predator?October 2, 2018 at 4:47 pm #24245
The men who invented those fictional characters were cultural predators.
Shower thought, rephrase the above for accuracy, albeit the following attempt at pith could also benefit from added context or qualification:
The men who fleshed out and promulgated as “true” those invented, fictional characters were cultural predators.
October 3, 2018 at 4:11 am #24247
- This reply was modified 4 months, 2 weeks ago by PopeBeanie. Reason: added pith, if that's not an oxymoron!?
The men who fleshed out and promulgated and as “true” those invented, fictional characters were cultural predators.
It does seem like this is true. Some religions are the direct result of a concerted conspiracy to control or prey on others. Mormonism and Xtian Scientism come to mind as obvious frauds. It’s harder to prove with the ancient fables but I’d bet they started the same way and they certainly are promulgated by unbelieving predators to this day.October 3, 2018 at 9:46 pm #24248
Jehovah Witnesses are predators. I have seen them lurking outside train stations, in retail parks, on the high street, looking all pious and friendly but all the while trying to lure their prey (pray?) with moronic answers to important scientific questions. Prime targets in the urban jungle for people like me who hunt alone 🙂October 3, 2018 at 10:34 pm #24249
It amazes me that they have absolutely no idea how ridiculous they sound to almost anyone not of their particular cult. Does any of this doorknocking actually work?
Theyre all ridiculous. Look at the Mormons. Magic underwear. I can’t….. I just can’t.
October 3, 2018 at 11:19 pm #24251October 3, 2018 at 11:20 pm #24252
- This reply was modified 4 months, 2 weeks ago by Strega.
History has been my weakest subject, for like… 50 years, actually, so recently I’ve been binge watching some dramatic series’ on Netflix as a quick summary on the past couple thousand years. I’ve mentioned here how the lack of a “reformation” explains a lot about why Islam is so far behind Christianity, but damn, I didn’t know until now how the reformists could be such monsters. I’m thinking now the importance of reformation was only part one, the break from Catholic papacy, while the equally important step two was separating church and state powers… which is what I need to learn more about now.
It was difficult to listen to all the “for God this, in God’s name that” spoken a dozen or two times per episode, the extreme arrogance of the different sects peacocking their differences to justify all kinds of beheadings, burning at the stake, tortures. At least the Scandanavian barbarians had the humility to hope a god was on their side, and not force everyone to worship a fully defined, characterized god that is also claimed to speak through an authoritative clergy quite regularly.October 4, 2018 at 8:48 pm #24255October 4, 2018 at 10:24 pm #24257
It’s implausible that someone gets either “heaven” or “hell”. People are never “all good” or “all bad”. What about people near the dividing line? Some people in heaven would be only marginally better than some people in hell, and that isn’t fair.
I think it would be more plausible that heaven or hell depends on a person’s conscience about the life they led: in a situation where they could no longer fix a misdemeanour, a bad conscience would feel very itchy.October 5, 2018 at 9:40 am #24258
Religious belief & the oppression of the golden rule.
“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” commonly known as “The Golden Rule,” is indeed a biblical principle. Luke 6:31 records Jesus saying
Seems on the first reading as a pretty good moral rule? It is almost universal in various religious scriptures.
The problem is in my opinion, what a religious person wants IS not what an atheist wants.
For example a Christian may want the whole world to convert to their religion, and they would be happy if others “ did that unto them”
Take the example of how the colonists reasoned, that it was OK to take over other countries. Their explanation was that it was in order to civilize the natives. That if they were in the situation of the native people they would like it. This is in my opinion highly debatable.
First Amendment to the United States Constitution separates religion from government.
If you do happen to be an atheist & have no beliefs in God or any supernatural phenomena.
Then all religions are a human construct, they only exist in the minds of the faithful, and culture. If you go out in the world looking for empirical evidence of God it will not be found.
It is not God that is a problem, because God does not exist. like I don’t have a problem with Santa Claus either.
What is problematic is the Belief in those things.
Which is as Richard Dawkins says it’s a God delusion.
Its problematic purely because those things are a delusion, they don’t really exist ( heaven & hell, God)
People should not be living their lives, controlling others, running government, fighting wars based on false beliefs.
The good thing in all of this is belief’s can be overturned, with reason & evidence. Humans do have the capacities to develop moral principles independent of nonexistent Gods. Humanist can then judge the usefulness of their rules by the outcomes with flexibility. Hopefully this is better than the fixed dogmatic beliefs of religion which cannot be changed even when they cause mass suffering
October 5, 2018 at 10:16 am #24260
- This reply was modified 4 months, 1 week ago by Clearsky. Reason: Spelling error
“what a religious person wants IS not what an atheist wants.”
– I think the Golden Rule is a good rule of thumb, but it depends on self-other equivalence, i.e. placing oneself or a loved one in the place of some other approved of person in similar need. So if European imperialists were trying to compare themselves to African tribespeople – they would have to be very careful.October 5, 2018 at 11:36 am #24261
The Golden Rule was known in pre-christian times and was not “invented” by Jesus as most Christians now claim. If Christianity never came to be, we would still have it.
October 5, 2018 at 7:52 pm #24263
- This reply was modified 4 months, 1 week ago by Strega.
I think the Golden Rule is human nature.October 5, 2018 at 8:07 pm #24264
Yes, it must have value as it a universal cultural meme that our evolving species has retained just like we kept about 2% of Neanderthal genes that protected us from flu’s. I like to think of it in these terms: Genes are to biological DNA as Memes are to our cultural DNA. So long as either remain beneficial to our survival they will be inherited. I would bet that all evolved apes reading this still like it when someone else scratches their back for them 🙂
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.