Jehovah Witnesses
- Thread starter Dr. Jones
- Start date
I didnt see any anger in his post. I saw him accurately portraying your example as dumb.
MVP
Well-Known Member
Maybe misinformed but dumb? If I do not know about exceptions in islam when it comes to pork that does not make it dumb, sorry. They do not teach those things in Universities I attended. You see muslim terrorists in USA prisons complaining about violations of their rights and demanding halal meats - because according to them that they can't eat non halal beef so who would have though they are allowed to eat pork...
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
This.
Again, no anger. Just calling out your argument for what it is. You can call it 'misinformed' if that is what helps you sleep at night. Your willingness to think of anything to attack religion, or 'an [opiate] for the people' as you like to call it, clouds your objectivity.
But yes, feel free to continue to take the views and actions of muslim terrorists, and apply them to 1.5 billion other Muslims that are living on this planet.
Why u mad, bro?
How dare you insinuate something so disgusting in a religious thread.
The dumb part is spouting off about things you haven't researched or taken the time to understand. Did they teach that in the universities you attended?
1) Many of those prisoners turned out not to be terrorists
2) I'm sure many even chose to starve themselves, to make a political point. That doesn't mean the Quran commanded the starvation.
I happen to agree that religion acts like an opiate for people. I think that's no reason for a lack of objectivity.
Your way of saying 'there's no I in religious?'
MVP
Well-Known Member
well, you can call it attack if you want but you have to ask yourself a question why some people live just fine without any religion. Don't you think that restrictions in diet, clothing, grooming, etc makes religions less attractive? One tells you not to eat pork or meat on Fridays, other tells you not to work or watch basketball on Sunday, other says do not cut you hair and Jehovas tell you not to get blood transfusion... seriously why all these (pardon my word "silly, outdated, medieval" ) restrictions in 21 century? IMHO all religions would be much more attractive to people if they would not limit personal choices. Just my 2 cents.
But you're looking at religion as a product. Most religious people consider it the word of God, the ultimate truth even if we don't understand it. If your eternal afterlife is on the line you're gonna do what God says you've got to do to score the good afterlife as opposed to the bad afterlife. People having actual integrity in their religious beliefs is not a fault, in my opinion. If you're gonna be religious you might as well do it right and go whole hog.
MVP
Well-Known Member
Is that the only reason? Anyway, if I would be religious I would hate any restrictions. Just seems like violation of basic human rights to have a choice. Any religions for example which do not have restrictions?
What type of restrictions? Serious question. I am a non-denominational Christian .. not because there are no rules, but because I have no 'man' rules that inhibit my ability to know and trust God directly .. similarly to an earthly father.
Wow.
The only reason?!?! Eternity in hell or in heaven? I give religious people credit for believing what they say they believe. You don't think that if God gave you the gift of life, is omnipotent and omniscient, then provided you with a guide on how to best use the life he created from nothing that you would say, "man that's too restrictive" and shrug it off even if you believed it to be true? Well, I've got news for you, I have picked up the very strong sentiment from LDS people that they commonly believe that people leave the LDS church for exactly your reason. It's too restrictive. They don't have the moral character to live as God hath commanded them. I think it's a point of pride amongst LDS people that they ARE able to live as God wants them to live. You're certainly not going to score any points with believers by telling them that being religious is too hard, therefore you choose to not only not follow religious practices but work backwards from there to convince yourself that it isn't true in the first place.
And you're obviously not familiar with the LDS belief in "free agency," which they usually refer to simply as a person's "agency." The idea that God allows to to make your own decisions and your own mistakes and that other people shouldn't force you to follow God's will, that you must choose that path on your own.
Besides any religious belief, freedom of action has never meant freedom from consequences.
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
The crux of my statement for the lack of my objectivity was more of his religious attack, not my opiate statement specifically. How religion acts for people has nothing to do with his consistent attacks.
I'm not making an argument that religion is more attractive at all. I really don't care what other people are doing, as long as what their faith is has some sort of positive effect on their life, and they let me to freely practice my own faith as well.
Rep'd.
PS: PKM, I give your trolling a solid 1.7/10.
MVP
Well-Known Member
So in simple words - sacrifice what you know is real for something what is only imagination or nice dream. Again, I respect people who chose to do that but I feel sorry for them deep inside. As my good fishing friend once said, " if there is no fishing in heaven I would rather go to hell"
.
If it's a point of pride for them, aren't they committing the sin of pride?