Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
What books are you reading?
daddydave:
(Please don't ask me what I consider to be the the most dangerous books ever written. :nono2:)-40hz (August 29, 2012, 11:03 AM)
--- End quote ---
There's two of them, isn't there? (Perhaps three, if you consider the first book to consist of and old and a new part).
-f0dder (August 29, 2012, 11:16 AM)
--- End quote ---
Bibles don't kill people, people kill people...;)
40hz:
(Please don't ask me what I consider to be the the most dangerous books ever written. :nono2:)-40hz (August 29, 2012, 11:03 AM)
--- End quote ---
There's two of them, isn't there? (Perhaps three, if you consider the first book to consist of and old and a new part).
-f0dder (August 29, 2012, 11:16 AM)
--- End quote ---
Bibles don't kill people, people kill people...;)
-daddydave (August 30, 2012, 05:31 PM)
--- End quote ---
Exactly right. But most people don't kill without believing (or being taught to believe) there is an absolute justification - and possibly a requirement - to do so.
I have no intrinsic quarrel with the Bible, The Koran, or any of the other tomes that come out of the Judeo-Christian belief system. Nor do I have a quarrel with those who follow them. But a "live and let live" attitude is not always reciprocated. And in most cases, it's a line or paragraph from some holy book (often misinterpreted or taken completely out of context) that gets used as the justification for confrontation. Or worse. So I consider those books extremely dangerous - not so much for how they might be used - but rather for how they have been used. And continue to be used for that matter.
:)
NigelH:
..... I consider those books extremely dangerous ....
-40hz (August 30, 2012, 06:13 PM)
--- End quote ---
I've seen a number of like minded comments in other threads by other board members over the last few months but I've not said anything.
40hz, don't take this reply a personal affront, it is not specifically aimed at you.
Perhaps we need a new thread for this where things can be discussed civilly.
Not that there are not enough other discussion boards on this subject where one could have a field day, so perhaps not.
Much wrong is done in the name of "religion" when what was done has no relevance with regard to the fundamentals of the actual faith.
I'm speaking only of the Christian faith (religion is an obnoxious term, so I don't use it).
People are flawed - always have been, always will be.
We're all well aware of the depths of depravity to which people (anyone and everyone) could descend, right.
Even the most seemingly civilized person.
Perhaps you want to read something like this (Atheism and Mass Murder) when you refer to dangerous.
As for delusion, unfortunately Richard Dawkins at the end of his life will discover to his eternal horror how deluded he really was.
The same comment applies to those who believe similarly.
kyrathaba:
I happen to agree with your stance, NigelH, as seen here, but you will discover as I have that our metaphysical views are a distinct minority here. Still, I congratulate you for standing up for our faith. I attempt to do likewise.
If anyone is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels. - Luke 9:26
--- End quote ---
40hz:
@NigelH - no affront taken. But I think you might be misunderstanding what I'm actually saying here...
..... I consider those books extremely dangerous ....
-40hz (August 30, 2012, 06:13 PM)
--- End quote ---
I've seen a number of like minded comments in other threads by other board members over the last few months but I've not said anything.
40hz, don't take this reply a personal affront, it is not specifically aimed at you.
Perhaps we need a new thread for this where things can be discussed civilly.
Not that there are not enough other discussion boards on this subject where one could have a field day, so perhaps not.
Much wrong is done in the name of "religion" when what was done has no relevance with regard to the fundamentals of the actual faith.
-NigelH (August 30, 2012, 08:13 PM)
--- End quote ---
My point has nothing to do with the fundamentals of faith - or what constitutes the notion of "actual" in that regard.
Not being a trained theologian, I do not feel qualified to enter into that sort of discussion, despite sixteen years (eight with Jesuits) of what may be considered "religious education." If I have learned anything from that experience, I have learned that theology, as a science, is not a polite intellectual parlor game - or an excuse to indulge in wordplay. Theological discussion and debate, in actual practice, is something best left to professionals.
What I am talking about is human behavior and how it may be manipulated through the use of certain books which are held in especial regard, and afforded a high degree of credibility, because they are considered (by their adherent faiths) to be divinely inspired. And because these books, and the words they contain, are so frequently and successfully employed for dubious purposes, I therefor consider them - as books - to be dangerous.
As far as the underlying truths contained within them (or the lack thereof) you'll need to find someone far more academically qualified and spiritually gifted than I am to comment on them.
I hope that clarifies for you what I'm actually talking about. :)
I happen to agree with your stance, NigelH, as seen here, but you will discover as I have that our metaphysical views are a distinct minority here. Still, I congratulate you for standing up for our faith.
-kyrathaba (August 30, 2012, 08:45 PM)
--- End quote ---
@k - While it may be laudable to "stand up" for what one believes, in this particular thread I can't see where there was anything that needed to be stood up against considering nothing was being said that in any way challenged a belief, a faith, or some variety of revealed truth. (See my above comment to Nigel.) :)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version