Jesus>Religion
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-01-2012, 02:44 PM
RE: Jesus>Religion
Always game eh?

(12-01-2012 12:12 PM)Sharks9 Wrote:  
(12-01-2012 08:29 AM)morondog Wrote:  So you're saying that as an act of charity I should believe in God so I'll do more good work 'cos I won't do it on my own?
No, you could do good works on your own, but on average people who don't believe in a God don't do as many good works.
So you say.

Quote:
Quote:That the fact that on average Christians do more good works means that on average God exists?
When did I say that?
Maybe I should have added /sarcasm.

Quote:
Quote:I have no interest in refuting your argument by reading reams of literature. So I'll give it to you, you can have it. Atheists are bad as proved by the unstoppable lotsalinks technique.
Never said they're bad, they still give to charity and that's a good thing.
Not as much a Christians though so that makes them worse human beings on average right?

Quote:
Quote:So other jokers than me have read this book and assert that it's BS.

So much for yr first link.

So if people disagree with something it makes it false? That makes sense.
Ooo. Sarky me right back. NO. But the quotes I gave show that this is not an uncontested study. I don't have any particular interest in reading it, so I rely on others opinion. He looks like *one* probably biased researcher reaching a conclusion that he *wants* to find.

Quote:
Quote:Yr second link. I can be bothered. Baseless assertion with no reference. Only ref is to the Brooks study you pulled out on your first link, so at most yr second link is as valid as yr first, which ain't valid.

It says in the first paragraph it's based off the Fraser Institute report of charitable giving.

Quote:Note how there's NO REFERENCE? Nice numbers but I can pull numbers out my ass too. Not sayin they came outta their ass, but where's the frikken ref to the study. If not there, then this link is just opinion dressed up to look academic. i.e. a pig in a wig.

The reference is there if you actually LOOKED. Right at the bottom of the page it says "Chart 2- 2000 Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey, Roper Center for Public Opinion Research."
Woo. If I LOOKED. Why's it *my* job to read reams of crap? Also, why does he not give the ref at the point where he makes the assertion. And this article was written by none other than our fantastic not-biased friend Mr Dopey from Link number 1.

Quote:
Quote:But anyway, maybe it is true that religious people give more to charity. I don't expect it though... maybe if you can find a more convincing set of links?

Or you could actually read the links.
You post three dubious links with shitloads of text and you want me to read all of them. Great debating technique.

Quote:In your first link the guy is basically angry that he doesn't talk about political moderates, who are apparently less generous than conservatives and liberals. "Generally, his otherwise strong analysis is weakened by focusing too little on what I have called the forgotten middle: moderates"

The second link is talking about his other book.

You're right, on closer look those links have nothing to do with this argument. My apologies.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2012, 03:47 PM
RE: Jesus>Religion
The problem is that Tithing and giving to church is considered charity,
That money could easily be utilised better, EVEN IF this study had any serious weight, which i doubt
And christians did give more to 'Charity' mainly to the church,
That just shows that christians arent that smart with their money and how the church screws them over
"a fool and his money are soon parted" that money could have done way more good
if it was donated to cancer reasearch (or any disease research fund) or an organisation such as Amnesty International
you know organisations that actually give a damn about helping.
and as far as i know most christian charities are drived by converting the needy and spreading the
so called "good news", they bring bibles instead of food or medicine in their missions, is that charitable?
when that money for all them bibles could be used much better (more food/medicine/utilities/new tools)

"Yeah, good idea. Make them buy your invisible apple. Insist that they do. Market it properly and don't stop until they pay for it." -Malleus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2012, 03:59 PM
RE: Jesus>Religion
Yeah I watched this video last night. It's very much touchy-feely Christianity. This video reminds me of how I felt as a Christian. But that Christianity still ultimately did not answer the questions, and it is fundamentally the same as any brand of Christianity.

As others have mentioned, it's separating themselves from the laws, or rules of "religion". I picture sitting in a stuffy "dead" church singing songs from a hymnal published in 1890- this is the image of "religion". Religion is rules, and norms, and standards, an inhuman- it's a declaration of sin and condemnation. I picture politicians using the Bible and church as a platform and stepping stone to power. I picture stoic congregations, stiff staunch priests and pastors, and all involved going home and remaining the same person they were before. That's the old church.

This video is to show people that that's not how the church is anymore. That's not what it's like to be a Christian today. It's like that saying, "I'm not religious, but I am spiritual." Or saying, "I'm not religious, but I walk with God"; or "I'm not religious, but I love Jesus and have a personal relationship with Him." In the end it's a desire to separate oneself from the perceived old church. The new church is a reinvented and more lively product, and this video is a professionally produced ad for the new adaptation. Jesus is life, and love, and human; not rules and penalties.

This sounds so good- it sounds delicious and fresh, like a fruit smoothie! On the surface, of course. Then you find out that the smoothie is loaded with sugar and fruit flavoring to make it taste sweeter and the smoothie itself has little or no nutrition. The same is true with stuff like this ad. You will find out that once this very tasty treat wears off you still have to obey the rules- you still need a real "meal". Notice how he says he still loves the church in the video. It's not about selling a "personal relationship". That's just to get you in the door. You're going to need more than that ultimately, and that's where the church steps in. To be a part of the church, you'll need to follow their brand of the rules- their interpretation. But at least it will feel less archaic, right?

I swear in my time at Master's Commission I've seen and heard this message over and over, but ultimately it breaks down to the same substance as religion. It is still religion. You still are religious- you still believe in and need the rituals (prayer, reading the Bible, going to church, taking communion, etc.). You still have to follow the rules and obey the Bible. It is still religion at the core. Repentance is still required. Worship is still required. Obedience is still required.

So my TLDR version is that it's a very fuzzy warm feeling ad, but it doesn't change anything. Sneaky religion is still religion. This message will no longer win me at an altar call. Sorry guys, I need more than that now. Give me some truth, with a side of reality, please.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like kineo's post
12-01-2012, 05:24 PM
RE: Jesus>Religion
(12-01-2012 02:44 PM)morondog Wrote:  Always game eh?
Of course Smile

Quote:So you say.
So the evidence says.

Quote:Not as much a Christians though so that makes them worse human beings on average right?
I wouldn't say worse, just less generous.

Quote:Ooo. Sarky me right back. NO. But the quotes I gave show that this is not an uncontested study. I don't have any particular interest in reading it, so I rely on others opinion. He looks like *one* probably biased researcher reaching a conclusion that he *wants* to find.
I think it would be tough to ever have an uncontested study on a topic like that. Probably biased? Why do you think that? He's apparently an Independent and I can't find anything on his religious views.

Quote:Woo. If I LOOKED. Why's it *my* job to read reams of crap? Also, why does he not give the ref at the point where he makes the assertion. And this article was written by none other than our fantastic not-biased friend Mr Dopey from Link number 1.

You want proof? Then you actually have to read the proofs. I'm not going to spoon feed you. Again, still looking for some evidence that shows he's biased.

Quote:You post three dubious links with shitloads of text and you want me to read all of them. Great debating technique.

Still don't have any reason to think they're dubious. You're disagreeing simply because you don't like what the results show.

Quote:You're right, on closer look those links have nothing to do with this argument. My apologies.

No problem.

James 1:27
"Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world"

"Atheists express their rage against God although in their view He does not exist." C.S. Lewis
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2012, 05:39 PM
RE: Jesus>Religion
Corral a bunch of people into a pen (or church, rather... not only will they feel guilty for leaving, they're convinced that they HAVE to be there, it's perfect!), get them feeling all emotional (sorry, "spiritual") through prayer and a worship service and then guilt them by feeding them a sob story and then play more emotional music while they take a collection... you'll get lots of donations! Happens all the time.

I honestly have no problem with the assertion that church-goers give more money. I do not believe that they are more charitable people. They are just in situations where they will be asked for more donations more frequently while being placed into a "guilty" mood so that generosity is the natural response.

No hard numbers on it doesn't mean it's not believable that church-goers give more on average. But that doesn't make them any more charitable. People don't go to church so that they can give money. They give money while they're at church because they have been made to feel like it's necessary for their own sake, or to relieve their own guilt. Sure other reasons too, but those are big reasons.

If you want to look at "who is more charitable" then you'd have to start trying to take motives into account and that's just not realistically possible.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kineo's post
12-01-2012, 06:32 PM
RE: Jesus>Religion
Kineo has already nailed it on a lot of points. It is a marketing ploy designed to make the church more palatable. A well-dressed, "hip" looking dude almost rapping about how he loves Jesus is a pure emotional plea.

At the end of the the day, you have to go back to the Bible, and see if that makes sense to you. Saying that you are in a "personal relationship" with Jesus is a great fantasy but does nothing. It makes Jesus seem like your bro, who you can just hang out with and he understands you and loves you. It's really interesting to notice how there isn't ONE mention of God in the whole video.

An insight that I had recently is that the New Testament creates this figure to justify the Old Testament as well as make it much less menacing than the vindictive Yahweh. It seems that to many people, Jesus has become the new "God", a very convenient way to dismiss all of the barbarism in the OT and think of Jesus as some hippie revolutionary. It's a very romantic notion, but also a wolf in sheep's clothing. As Kineo said, you still have to submit and obey, and with Jesus comes the concept of Hell. If you don't believe in Him you will be punished for eternity because you didn't accept his FREE gift of salvation! But it's your choice.....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bokononist87's post
12-01-2012, 10:09 PM
RE: Jesus>Religion


Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-01-2012, 09:49 AM
RE: Jesus>Religion
Hi Sharks.

Yeah I reread my post and yours (somehow I couldn't get on the forum earlier???) and ja, I'm being a jackass. I'm now going to annoy you and state that I'm satisfied in my own mind that the claim can be discounted (demo of a bit of FAITH praise ... er... nobody) but I don't care to argue it out... therefore to be fair I have to conceed victory to you.

In the end it seems like a minor point. Don't know why I got so heated over it Confused
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-01-2012, 10:28 AM
RE: Jesus>Religion
(12-01-2012 03:59 PM)kineo Wrote:  So my TLDR version is that it's a very fuzzy warm feeling ad, but it doesn't change anything. Sneaky religion is still religion. This message will no longer win me at an altar call. Sorry guys, I need more than that now. Give me some truth, with a side of reality, please.

I didn't feel it was TL;DR. Sure, I don't post that long for the same fear, but I know you're a very rational guy and so I tend to read your posts, and you hooked me in the first paragraph.

He does paint a good picture of "religion", and I also pictured a stuffy church full of people singing boring hymns. But he doesn't paint a picture of "Jesus"... those people in a stuffy church singing boring hymns also believe in Jesus. But when he uses it, he means something else antithetical, but he doesn't really say what.

So I totally agree. It smells of a re-branding of religion, not an actual change to religion.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-01-2012, 10:56 AM
RE: Jesus>Religion
(12-01-2012 10:09 PM)ElectricEthan Wrote:  Amazing Atheist

Wow, good stuff! I've only seen a couple of his videos, he makes some excellent points so I really need to sub to his YouTube channel. I'd love to sit at a party with this guy and listen to him rant about religion for a while. I'd be saying a lot of, "Yes, so fuckin' true, man!"

(13-01-2012 10:28 AM)Starcrash Wrote:  
(12-01-2012 03:59 PM)kineo Wrote:  So my TLDR version is that it's a very fuzzy warm feeling ad, but it doesn't change anything. Sneaky religion is still religion. This message will no longer win me at an altar call. Sorry guys, I need more than that now. Give me some truth, with a side of reality, please.

I didn't feel it was TL;DR. Sure, I don't post that long for the same fear, but I know you're a very rational guy and so I tend to read your posts, and you hooked me in the first paragraph.

He does paint a good picture of "religion", and I also pictured a stuffy church full of people singing boring hymns. But he doesn't paint a picture of "Jesus"... those people in a stuffy church singing boring hymns also believe in Jesus. But when he uses it, he means something else antithetical, but he doesn't really say what.

So I totally agree. It smells of a re-branding of religion, not an actual change to religion.

Thanks man, I feel the same about your posts. I think the Amazing Atheist video that ElectricEthan posted says it all much better, and in a much more entertaining way. Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: